Village staff propose zoning changes that fall short, literally

Village staff will present zoning options to the board during the July 23rd meeting. They put forth the following 'strategic vision':

Modify Oak Park’s Zoning Ordinance to Allow “Missing
Middle Housing”:

1. Build consensus on intended goals of missing middle
   housing and zoning changes necessary to achieve these
   goals. (Zoning Reform Advisory Task Force)
2. Factor affordability goals into regulations chosen. (Evaluate
   parking requirements, building size, types of housing)
3. Determine where to implement missing middle housing
   reform. (Pilot area or broader area or ¼ mile from transit stations)

Sounds great right? They explore a few options, and then recommend 'Option 1' (here called 'Alternative 1')

In order to achieve, at a minimum, more housing options in
our current single-family residential zoning districts, the
following must occur (Alternative 1):

1. Eliminate the single-family-only zoning classification,
2. Allow two-family and three-family dwellings in historically
   zoned single-family districts,
3. Allow four-family dwellings within ¼ mile of transit in
   historically zoned single-family districts, and
4. Allow ADUs on lots with two-family dwellings, in addition to
   single-family dwelling parcels.

This all sounds wonderful. They've taken a page from YIMBY 101, learned the lessons of the dozens of other municipalities that have implemented zoning reform, and set Oak Park on a truly progressive path of housing reform. Right?

Nope. When you look at the details this is purely an exercise is word play. 'Single family' is removed from the code, and most districts are nominally allowed to build two-family and three-family dwellings. But nothing else was changed.

What else needs to change? The complicated and restrictive building envelope limits, which are called 'Bulk Standards' in the code. They specify maximum height, lot size minimums, maximum lot coverage and lot line setbacks. Over the years, with each successive re-zoning of Oak Park, these have grown more and more restrictive. The singular goal of these restrictions it to prevent multi-family housing. That's it, that's all. There's no scientific, health or other rationale for such restrictive standards. They just prevent dense housing.

And they still will prevent denser housing, because they've not changed, at all. You can say 'You are allowed to build a three-family dwelling on this plot', but if it's got to be at most 2.5 stories, set back 8+ feet from every lot line, and can only cover 60% of the lot, you aren't going to end up with an economical project.

Most of the existing two-family and three-family homes are currently non-compliant with these 'Bulk Standards'. So, if you think these new zoning rules will allow building anything like the existing examples of 'missing middle', think again. They are still illegal.

Option 1 is a performative exercise. Passing it would allow the board to say they that they are addressing the missing middle, adding density and providing for more abundant housing, while resting assured that the final outcome will be no different than staff's 'status quo' option.