Envision Evanston 2045 Opponents Accidentally Propose Allowing 60ft Apartment Building In All Neighborhoods

An apartment building coming soon to Cambridge, Massachusetts,

I wrote my first pass at this in a rush and somewhat angry. As such it’s not tremendously approachable to a general audience that hasn’t been involved in a comp plan process or zoning. If you’re a planning nerd or an EE2045 regular you should still find it readable and can read it here.

Evanston has been going through it’s second comprehensive planning process (“Envision Evanston 2045”), and the process has not been smooth, exactly. The last election, in many districts, largely boiled down to how residents felt about the proposed comprehensive plan, which is attempting to lay out a vision for how Evanston government should work to create a better future for the city. The plan touches on many elements, but by far the most contentious is housing.

Many people have come out to public comment, both in favor and opposed to the plan, which calls for allowing small multifamily (perhaps duplexes, perhaps three or four flats, tbd) everywhere in Evanston to help address Evanston’s housing shortage. Some people are not reacting well to this idea, including, to borrow a dear-leaderism, “a great many people who in many instances have absolutely no clue what they are doing.”

The latest buzzword at the last meeting was “by right.” Folks were very opposed to “by right” multifamily. To define “by right,” first lets define a zoning code.

A zoning code consists primarily of two things:

1. Definitions of different “zones” and the types of development allowed in them. This will often be lists of different types of housing, businesses, etc, and also things like height maximums and other elements that define how the buildings can look and take up space. For example, here is what is allowed in Evanston’s lowest density residential district (R1). Some are allowed anywhere in R1 (provided they meet the various dimensional requirements like height, setback, and lot coverage), some are subject to other requirements or additional approvals. Those allowed anywhere are referred to as by-right uses.

2. A map that displays what each particular property is “zoned” as.

Changes in zoning can be done 3 ways:

1. Redefine the requirements for a zone, for example allowing more height, less density, or new types of “uses” (eg, a zone that previously only allowed single family might be changed to allow duplexes)
2. Rezoning an individual parcel, or a collection of parcels. Perhaps the owner of an old warehouse (zoned for “Light Industrial”) wants to redevelop it into housing. They might seek a rezoning to change the zoning of the building to a multifamily residential district (like R6)
3. A zoning code overhaul that creates new zones, eliminates zones, merges zones, changes requirements for zones, and/or rezones parcels.

Evanston is proposing the 3rd option, and among the effects would be converting all zones that currently only allow single family homes (the most expensive homes) to allow small multifamily as well. This is important because single family zoned land currently represents 75% of all residential land in Evanston. Solving a housing crisis means you can’t overlook 75% of your potential solution space, especially the least utilized portion.

As mentioned earlier, most things allowed by zoning codes, in whatever zones they are allowed in, are allowed “by right” (with no special hearings). Some things, often either sensitive uses (daycares) or controversial uses (liquor stores), may require special hearings. “By right” development is one of the defining features of American (and many other) zoning systems.

However, that didn’t stop many commenters, who seemed to have just learned the term in the last week or so, to protest it. Some of them didn’t even protest the “small multifamily by right” portion, they just dislike “by right,” apparently, which again, is just how American zoning works, and how Evanston’s zoning code works. Saying Evanston should not change to allow by right development makes no sense, given — as pointed out by Councilmember Nieuwsma — it already does so extensively.

“A great many people have, in many instances, have absolutely no clue what they are doing.”

By far the funniest “person does not understand what they were talking about” instance, however, was someone who presented “evidence” that upzoning didn’t work. Kiera Kelly, who previously opposed an affordable housing development, took the mic and mostly referenced an article by Patrick Condon. Condon is an architect (notably not a housing economist or urban planner) who wrote about Vancouver(which did not do a blanket upzoning at the time) to say Evanston’s blanket upzoning wouldn’t work.

Notably saying Evanston’s plan won’t work because it didn’t work in Vancouver (where it wasn’t tried) doesn’t make a lot sense.

She, like the article, then argued that cities should take other approaches to achieve affordable housing (which she previously opposed). She specifically named Cambridge. I was curious, I like doing anything that works, upzoning is a big part of making housing affordable, but it’s far from the only option. If places are having success doing other things, those things should be replicated (in addition to other things, like upzoning.) So. What has Cambridge done?

• Abolish all single family zoning, replacing it with a form-based code that allows up to 4 stories, 45ft, in the lowest density zoning code. It only goes (literally) up from there.
• Offer hefty density bonuses in the form of increased height, “Floor Area Ratio,” and other changes. A 20% affordable building in the lowest density zone can build up an additional two stories, hitting 6 stories. Again, this is the lowest density district. Others allow far more.
• Eliminated parking minimums.

One has to wonder how someone who believes quadplexes are too extreme would propose 6 story buildings as an alternative, and unfortunately I have to conclude that many people, in many instances, have absolutely no clue what they’re doing. Despite the strong feelings and strong proclamations about how things do or do not work from opponents of Envision Evanston 2045, they do not seem to care to do something as basic as look up “what did Cambridge do” before recommending Evanston do what Cambridge has done.

As a kicker?

Vancouver did eliminate single family zoning in favor of three/four flats everywhere in 2023, as well as eliminate public hearings for rezonings where 50% of units are affordable. Since then its housing prices have been declining.