Talking to our neighbors in a changing city.
by Jesse Miller, Oct 9, 2024
“The quality of life in cities has much to do with systems of transport, which are often a source of much suffering for those who use them. Many cars, used by one or more people, circulate in cities, causing traffic congestion, raising the level of pollution, and consuming enormous quantities of non-renewable energy. This makes it necessary to build more roads and parking areas which spoil the urban landscape” -Pope Francis, Laudato Si’ 153
Parking Meter Fiasco
In 2008, the City of Chicago agreed to a 75-year lease to have a company manage the city’s parking meters. The City got $1 billion for it, so it seemed like a good deal at first.
Except, it soon became clear that the meters were worth much more than that, maybe more like $2 billion.
To make matters worse, if they want to put in a bike lane, the City has to pay the company for what they would have made in meter revenue.
Parking seems like a boring topic, but ignoring it can be disastrous. It turns out, when you look closer, parking affects all sorts of things we care about, like climate, affordable housing, and street safety. How we deal with parking is a moral issue, a matter of how we relate to our neighbors.
Parking Reform
No one likes to circle around looking for a parking spot. It’s especially nerve wracking when you’re looking for a space and you have to get to work on time or make an appointment. That stress sticks with people and if you’ve ever been to a city development meeting, you’ve probably heard someone speak passionately for preserving or adding parking spaces.
Yet, it’s relatively recent that cities have prioritized cars. In a guest essay for the Roundtable, Aaron Rosen describes how Evanston developed with an orientation around rail. Unlike some suburbs, we’ve mostly retained our walkable neighborhood layout since we are boxed in by other cities and the lake, and we don’t have room to sprawl out. However, we still do dedicate a lot of space to automobiles that could be used otherwise.1
Evanston is coming up with a new zoning code and comprehensive plan with a process called Envision Evanston. This gives us a chance to determine what our city will look like in the future. What’s at stake, as Rosen puts it, is “who belongs here and who has a say here.” Do we want to live in a car-centric suburb or a walkable city? Should we house people or house cars?
The Parking Reform Network lists three reasons we need to rethink parking: “climate action, housing affordability, and safer streets.” I’ll elaborate on those.
First, parking is terrible from a climate and environmental perspective. The more space we dedicate to parking, the more our cities sprawl out, making it harder to walk or bike to get anywhere. A good portion of global emissions is due to urban sprawl. Additionally, impermeable surfaces channel water into the sewer too quickly, carrying pollutants into our rivers and lakes.
Second, there is no such thing as free parking. The cost is always paid for by your rent, wages, or taxes. Requiring onsite parking for new residential developments significantly raises the cost of a project. If we want more affordable housing, we should not require new parking and maybe even put a cap on it.
And third, we need parking reform to make streets safer. We can use a curbside for many things instead of just car storage. We could install protected bike lanes, dedicated bus lanes, or outdoor eating spaces like the Main Street Oasis that emerged in our neighborhood during the pandemic. These other uses can slow cars down and make streets safer for all.
Eliminating parking requirements for new buildings is one of the proposals in the still-developing Envision Evanston. But, it is definitely getting pushback. City staff brought the idea to a Land Use Commission meeting, and they were “somewhat receptive to Envision Evanston’s key parking initiative,” according to a Roundtable article.2 They are right to be hesitant, because they know that when there is a new development, like the one on Chicago Ave and Dempster, residents voice their concern about the lack of parking. I think the momentum is for reform, but there are strong opinions on both sides.
Yelling, Telling, and Selling
How do we approach this city conflict at Reba Place Church, where we aim to be a “relational, peace-making, Christ-centered community”?
I’ve been learning about the work of psychologist Renee Lertzman who helps train leaders to guide others in climate action. Lertzman says that too often climate activists take the approach of “yelling, telling, and selling.” We want others to care more, to share the facts with them, and to get them on board with the solutions.3 But often we fail to get the response we want and just get frustrated.
Instead, Lertzman offers three A’s: Anxiety, Ambivalence, and Aspiration. We can’t be everyone’s therapist, but if we want to help people change their behavior, we have to consider what’s blocking them from action. We have to start where people are. Let me explain by looking at how these A’s might relate to city zoning and parking issues.
People feel anxiety about potential change. What if idealistic plans go wrong and make things worse? What if everyone in a new, large building does want to own a car, and there is not enough space? What if the city changes into something we don’t like?4
Many of us feel ambivalent about transportation options. We have mixed feelings. We might be all for biking and walking in theory, but we also enjoy driving a car. Our family owns a car, and some days, it’s my preferred mode of transportation. That might change if infrastructure and alternative options improve, but let’s be honest that a car can feel comfortable and convenient.
After we give voice to anxiety and ambivalence, we can address our aspirations. What is our vision for our city? What have other cities done that works well? What creative solutions might work?
Is this helpful for thinking about our city parking and zoning conflicts? I think it might be. We don’t really need to have everyone on the same page to pass legislation, but I think this approach might help us have more productive conversations with neighbors, and help us see the complexity of the issue. To learn more, check out Lertzman’s Project InsideOut website. There’s a lot more to it than what I summarized here.
A few more things:
As I write, Hurricane Milton is approaching the coast.
Asheville was considered a “climate haven,” but Hurrican Helene left it in ruins.
Bill McKibben writes that while we have good reason to avoid “fear-mongering and doom-saying” it is okay, honest, and useful to let our fear show.
This six minute video from Vox is a good starting point for thinking about parking. It features Donald Shoup, author of The High Cost of Free Parking.
I also recommend this audio interview with Henry Grabar, author of Paved Paradise: How Parking Explains the World, from The Brake podcast.
A great way to add density to a community is to utilize accessory dwelling units. Thankfully, Evanston has amended its zoning code to allow for these.
An early version of this post featured some of the theology of Sallie McFague. I decided it wasn’t a good fit for what I was writing, but I do recommend this interview with her by Tripp Fuller.
Help plant trees in Evanston for Oaktober.
Whether you have kids or not, I recommend the Radio Lab for Kids podcast Terrestrials. So fun!
Occasionally, I’ll listen to the Green Lectionary Podcast. I especially liked this one with Norman Wirzba and Wilson Dickinson.
We have a few female gingko trees in our neighborhood. Most people would describe their fruit as stinky, but it must have appealed to some creature in the deep past of evolutionary history.
References:
1
In another Roundtable guest essay, Alan K. Cubbage focuses on how we prioritize cars in downtown Evanston. For more on how cities got to be like they are now, read or listen to this 99 Percent Invisible episode on the term “jaywalking.”
2
I’m highly skeptical of claims that a more car-centric urban design is better for the seniors or people with disabilities, as implied by one Land Use commissioner at the meeting. Sure, a bike or scooter might not be an option for all, but what if a senior wants to cross the street without getting hit? What if someone wants to get around with a wheelchair? Or what about someone who is blind? See “The Accessible City” in Curbing Traffic, or this article from Streetsblog USA.
3
I guess that’s kind of what I’ve been doing so far in this post!
4
Some residents in the sixth and seventh ward think the proposed zoning changes are too “drastic.”
Comments