Read on Twitter
Accessory Dwelling Unit hearing is about to get underway.
Watch live:
https://livestream.com/accounts/28669066/events/8800236 https://twitter.com/erin_hegarty/status/1338921246596222977
Watch live:
https://livestream.com/accounts/28669066/events/8800236 https://twitter.com/erin_hegarty/status/1338921246596222977
The meeting is underway, and the substitute ordinance about to be considered still hasn't been posted publicly. But the latest version has been shared with me, and as far as I can tell it looks about the same as the draft we reported about on Friday: https://twitter.com/AlexNitkin/status/1337426510878281730
In public comment, Diane Limas of @CommsUnited calls on the city to include equity measures & a robust education campaign to make sure everyone gets a "fair chance to participate and build wealth with the help of this ordinance." Says city shld work toward a citywide program.
Homebuilders lobbyist Paul Colgan says the ordinance "falls far short" of what @UrbanLandInst recommended by including various restrictions. "I realize small steps must be required to get started, but you could do so much more with this first step."
Swasti Shah of @UrbanLandInst endorses the ordinance, but warns few ADUs will be built if the process is "too complex or too expensive." Says "regulatory flexibility and streamlined approvals" will be key.
Sarah Brune of @NHSChicago speaks in support, calls ADUs an "important wealth-building resource for many of the homeowners we serve." Also stresses importance of education/subsidies, says NHS is putting together a "comprehensive manual" on ADUs for homeowners.
I'm playing the spot-the-difference game between the latest sub and the version from last week, and I found one: city officials are now required to present results/recommendations on the ADU program by 5/31/24, instead of 5/31/22, as was in there previously.
Patrick Murphey of @ChicagoDPD summarizes changes to the ordinance since the original May version: it now "provides affordability provisions specific to CHA, incorporates districts, caps and associated rules and restricts zoning allowances" in the pilot areas.
Comm. @marisa_novara of @ChicagoDOH says "we have seen cities taking steps ahead of us" on legalizing ADUs. "Many times they've started small, made changes and evolved over time."
Novara: "One of our solutions to the problem of scarcity of affordable housing...is to stop making id difficult, and in the case of coach houses, impossible, for property owners to create below-market rental units at a low density neighborhood scale."
Restrictions on ADUs would be tighter in S/W zones than in N/NW zones because housing officials "heard very different concerns" in diff parts of the city, Novara says. "The point of a pilot is to try different things and learn different things."
On pilot areas, @DanielKayHertz says DOH was "aiming to have a representative sample of all the different kinds of neighborhood contexts that may affect the way that this policy plays out on the ground in real life." Variety of building types & market conditions.
Close-ups (sort of) of the ADU pilot areas:
Something else in the substitute I hadn't caught: it now caps new conversion units at 33% of the building's original unit count.
Like the original, it does not allow unit conversions in buildings that are less than 20 yrs old.
Like the original, it does not allow unit conversions in buildings that are less than 20 yrs old.
A point Novara has repeated: DOH "will not wait 3 years to report to the City Council" on ADUs. Will make quarterly reports to Housing Committee, but is due in 2024 for a final/overall review. This in response to @JamesCappleman urging expansion, says "time is of the essence."
Like Cappleman, @AldermanLaSpata says he's in favor of the ADU pilot, calls it a "strong first step" he hopes to later expand, hopefully by adding more density in B/C zones near transit.
Now @ByronSigcho, who opposed original ADU ordinance saying it lacked in affordability provisions, says he's "cautiously optimistic." Restates some affordability concerns but asks about the possibility of adding future pilot zones.
Novara opens the door to more pilot zones being added before the 3-year pilot is up. "If we come back in a year and there's an interest and someone says they're ready to try it out, then that's a conversation we're open to having."
. @AldMattMartin and @Andrefor40th also voice support. Both their wards are entirely inside the North ADU pilot zone. Martin says it could be "transformational" in his ward. Vasquez says he lives in a coach house, shown in his Zoom background here.
Ald. Burnett, a co-sponsor of the ordinance whom Tunney calls "the dean of the city's affordable housing" programs, says coach houses can help grow city population and "can really make alleys feel safe."
No aldermen have voiced opposition so far.
No aldermen have voiced opposition so far.
Ald. Rodriguez, whose ward is partially inside a pilot zone, says legalizing ADUs "can save lives" by stopping illegal conversions.
@RLopez15thWard asks how legal ADUs are less dangerous than illegal conversions.
Grant Ulrich of @ChicagoDOB says it allows city to inspect/permit.
@RLopez15thWard asks how legal ADUs are less dangerous than illegal conversions.
Grant Ulrich of @ChicagoDOB says it allows city to inspect/permit.
Lopez, who notes his ward is "thankfully" not in a pilot zone, says he worries ADU legalization could give property owners "free rein" to have illegal conversions declared lega and "rented to the hilt."
. @CDRosa supports, says it aligns with feedback he's gotten from constituents. Says only allowing conversions in buildings >20 yrs old will aid preservation. Says he wanted his whole ward included in pilot zone, but only 80% of his ward will be included following dept guidance.
Now @ChiAlderwoman, a cosponsor of the original ADU ordinance, says she's "nervous to have different requirements in different geographies, knowing we're in a deeply segregated city that has a history of different requirements for different areas." Her ward is not in a pilot zone
Novara responds that S/W zones have added restrictions because of local concerns that outside/corporate interests could take over ADU process.
Now @AldPatDowell3rd and Ald. David Moore, who were both critical of the original ordinance, say they support the latest version. Dowell says original was "very broad and overreaching," thanks @ChicagoDOH for paring it back.
City Council Housing/Zoning Committee votes 22-1 to legalize coach houses and apartment conversions in five pilot areas around the city.
@RLopez15thWard casts the sole dissenting vote.
@RLopez15thWard casts the sole dissenting vote.
