MPC testified before the City Council's Committee on Zoning concerning the proposed zoning text governing Chicago's downtown. This module represents the last chapter of the zoning ordinance to be considered by the Committee. Once released by the Mayor's Z
By Guest Author- March 4, 2004
Metropolitan Planning Council Testimony to the City of Chicago Committee on Zoning
The Metropolitan Planning Council thanks Chairman Banks and the rest of the Committee for this opportunity to comment on Module 5 of the Chicago Zoning Ordinance today. Module 5 is critical to the zoning reform process as its regulations govern the Central Area, the economic, cultural, governmental, entertainment, and increasingly residential heart of the City. Notably, the Central Area also benefits from a recent comprehensive planning process, which defined the principles upon which Module 5 is based. MPC congratulates the Mayor’s Zoning Reform Commission on its thorough attention to the details of this section and has only one major addition and three minor suggestions to make to this module.
Parking Ratios
MPC supports the Commission’s proposal to count accessory parking against FAR above a maximum accessory limit of 1.1,1.5, or 2.0, depending on the district. (Each parking space above the maximum will be counted as 350 sq. ft. of floor area.) Given that Census auto-ownership data show that 30–50 percent of Central Area residents do not own cars, lower maximums make sense. Lower maximums also represent a partial solution to bigger, bulkier, less urban design sensitive buildings. These ratios can be adjusted through the planned development process, enforcing the maximums where parking is scarce or decreasing the ratio where auto-ownership and transit connections warrant fewer spaces.
Planned Development Thresholds and Decision-Making Criteria
MPC supports the Commission’s philosophy that large development projects that have the potential for adverse impacts due to intensity, scale, or added traffic warrant increased scrutiny through planned development review. Recognizing that this will add to the number of planned developments the Department of Planning and Development is responsible for reviewing, MPC recommends that projects that use the bonus system to achieve up to 49 percent of base FAR be allowed to proceed with only zoning administrator review, provided that they do not trigger any other planned development thresholds.
Additionally, as an update to Section 8.5-8 of the current code, MPC recommends an alteration to the language in the Decision-Making Criteria component in the Floor Area Bonuses section of the proposed code. MPC suggests the following language for section 17-4-0903-C 2:
2. Approval of floor area bonuses may not be unreasonably withheld. Proposals that do not require planned development review and meet the Criteria set forth in section 17-4-0903-C 1 shall be approved. Any reasons for denial of Floor Area Bonuses must be provided to the applicant in writing.
Namely, if a project complies with the purpose and intent of the Floor Area Bonus standards (17-4-901), the purpose and intent of the entire zoning ordinance (17-1-0500), and adheres to the “Guide to the Zoning Bonus Ordinance,” that project shall be approved. This provision would provide a measure of consistency and certainty to the zoning bonus process and reserve more stringent review for those projects that meet the planned development thresholds.
Affordable Housing Bonus
MPC lauds the Commission’s efforts to include an affordable housing bonus to the menu of density bonuses available to downtown developers. This bonus introduces into the land-use decision-making process an important economic feature. Accordingly, the bonus should be structured with the marketplace in mind and with a view to making it a workable and desirable option for developers. Given the affordable housing deficit of at least 50,000 units, the City has taken a positive step toward ensuring the Central Area welcomes residents at a variety of income levels. Chicago’s Affordable Housing Opportunity Trust Fund has proven to be a very effective program for the creation of new housing in Chicago. Based on a 1997 study of the fund, MPC concluded that more money would be well spent if directed to the fund. MPC recommends that the affordable housing bonus extend to the non-residential buildings in the lower FAR categories of 5 and 7. Non-residential buildings will add employees to the downtown, thus creating the nexus and need for more housing. Developers could contribute to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund rather than providing them on-site, thereby increasing the overall funding available to produce affordable units.
MPC further recommends that housing developers be permitted to use funds they generate to develop off-site units. If, for example, a developer was planning a residential tower in the Central Area, that developer would be allowed to receive a Floor Area Bonus, make a required contribution to the Housing Opportunity Trust Fund, and have that money earmarked for another project elsewhere in the city at the same time. This may encourage developers who are in the business of affordable housing development to be more inclined to take advantage of the bonus.
On-Site Open Space
While MPC supports the addition of open space as an amenity in new development projects, the on-site open space requirement in the draft text is cause for concern. Depending on the size of the lot and FAR allowed, it may be extremely difficult to achieve at least 36 sq. ft. of useable on-site open space per dwelling unit in the higher intensity downtown districts without turning to balconies to achieve it. The proliferation of balconies on residential buildings raises safety, design, and cost concerns to the Council. MPC encourages the Commission to reconsider this provision or require it on a sliding scale in proportion to each district’s FAR requirements.
Pedestrian Streets/Mobility Streets
Pedestrian walkability is just as important in the downtown area as it is in Chicago’s neighborhoods. MPC strongly supports the proposal to designate the Central Area’s main shopping streets as pedestrian-oriented to maintain the character and viability of downtown retail. Limited curb cuts preserve the character of shopping districts and protect pedestrian traffic on streets like Michigan Avenue, as well as allow auto traffic to flow efficiently on feeder streets like Congress.
The Mobility Street designation is also an important new feature of the ordinance to promote the efficient flow of pedestrian traffic to major transportation nodes. Likewise, the new text proposes restricting curb cuts and driveway access on a limited number of the busiest pedestrian streets.
Landmark Buildings and Transit
MPC strongly supports the draft text’s parking exemptions that promote redevelopment and reuse of downtown buildings, including the off-street parking and loading exemption for rehabilitation or reuse of Chicago Landmark buildings or buildings within an official Chicago Landmark District. MPC also supports the Commission’s 50 percent reduction of minimum off-street parking ratios for rehabilitation and reuse of existing structures within B, C, or D districts located within 600 feet of a Chicago Transit Authority or Metra rail station.
The Metropolitan Planning Council wishes once again to applaud the Mayor’s Zoning Reform Commission on its work to date. We look forward to the final Zoning Committee hearing on the entire text, at which point we will address a few outstanding concerns.
Sincerely,
Peter Skosey, Vice President of External Relations