Tag: housing shortage

Okay, 2026 should be the year Illinois lawmakers do something about the housing shortage

Governor JB Pritzker announced his plan to address the state’s housing shortage in 2026. This is the third year in a row I’ve written about proposed legislation to unlock new housing in Illinois, and this should be the year – the governor and General Assembly leadership are fully aligned since they, together, introduced bills cover six major land use, zoning, and housing development reforms.

Pritzker’s budget address on Wednesday covered a wide range of housing issues in four minutes:

  • the size of the shortage (227,000 new homes are needed by 2030 to keep up with demand)
  • everything is too damned expensive! rent is too high!
  • not enough homes are being built
  • redlining played a role in housing being built less often in certain areas
  • regulations inhibit new homes and small homes from getting built
  • bureaucratic red tape
  • parking mandates require too much parking that are unused and expensive

Watch the full 4-minute housing speech, part of his hourlong budget address.

I propose some non-exhaustive reasons why the average Illinoisan might want to support these reforms:

  • There are 6% year-over-year rent increases which is making it hard for Illinois to be a competitive place to maintain its population and its services. Population loss results in higher costs for everyone because services and pensions are paid for by fewer people.
  • I want Illinois to lose as few Congressional seats as possible in 2030.
  • It encourages new development which spreads the tax burden onto more taxpayers and lowers it for any given taxpayer.

It’s a whole set of reforms to lower housing costs

To resolve these issues, Gov. Pritzker is working with legislative leaders in the Illinois House and Illinois Senate to adopt a package of bills:

Third Party Review (SB 4063, Ellman)

In cases where a municipality cannot review a building permit quickly enough an applicant could hire a third-party reviewer. The municipality would have to complete its initial plan review within 15 business days for a one or two-family house, and within 30 business days for “any multifamily, mixed-use, or commercial project”. Each subsequent review cycle would need to be completed within 10 business days.

Additionally, the bill would set inspection standards, specifically requiring a municipality to perform inspections within two business days of the request. Applicants could also use third-party inspector if the municipality does not meet the standard. Municipalities cannot charge additional fees if an applicant exercises this right, and qualified third-party reviewers and inspectors would not be permitted to charge more than the municipality’s fee.

Finally, the bill sets qualification, conflict of interest, and auditing standards, and the bill would also apply to home rule municipalities.

Legalizing Middle Housing (SB 4060, Hunter)

This is a big deal and is the key to unlock the solution to the housing shortage in Illinois. It would allow multifamily housing as of right on all lots that have a minimum area of 2,500 s.f. (To give some context the most common residential lot size in Chicago is 3,125 s.f. and in Oak Park the average residential lot ranges between 4,000 s.f. and 13,000 s.f. depending on the zoning district.)

The bill would permit between two and eight units of housing per lot in a residential zoning district, depending on the size of the lot. It would also permit new housing types that most municipalities ban:

  • Duplexes (a.k.a. two-flats)
  • Triplexes
  • Fourplexes
  • Cottage clusters
  • Townhouses
  • Stacked-flat plexes
  • Attached courtyard housing
  • Detached courtyard housing. This would allow a front house and an equal size rear house, which Chicago has vintage examples of and some architecture firms have proposed as part of the Missing Middle Infill Housing initiative, but the Chicago zoning code does not permit)
Future Firm, a design studio based in Chicago, created this concept that places two detached houses on a single property in Chicago. The current zoning code there does not permit more than one principal building per zoning lot, so if this were to get built the two houses would have to share some part of their structures.

What are some potential impacts?

In Chicago, there are 14,148 vacant lots that are zoned in a way that bans multi-family housing. If 5 percent of those were developed each year with a two-flat that would reduce the city’s housing shortage by 1,415 homes annually. (Chicago has seen an average of 4,357 new homes permitted from 2023-2025.) These zoning districts are pretty broadly distributed in Chicago, and overlap with all kinds of school attendance boundaries and near all kinds of amenities.

In Naperville, there are 35,449 (57 percent of the parcels in the city and 86 percent of parcels that allow residential uses) lots that ban multi-family housing. A minority of those would be improved to have two-family houses which would go a long way to increasing opportunity for Illinoisans (while also increase Naperville’s property tax revenues).

That’s almost too simplistic (and perhaps a bit optimistic) because the bill would permit more housing types than Chicago currently allows, like the detached courtyard housing – these new options would respond to the desire for lower-cost detached housing, increasing or maintaining the density on blocks where deconversions and teardowns are common.

The need for housing extends beyond Chicago and Oak Park. I ran this exercise here because it’s where I have the easiest access to high quality property and zoning data. Every town needs additional housing and additional housing types – for its existing residents and for future residents. Every town with transit service especially needs more housing, because more people should be allowed to take advantage of that service and that public investment.

Parking Reform (SB 4064, Cervantes)

A municipality would not be allowed to require more than 0.5 automobile parking spaces per multifamily dwelling unit or more than one automobile parking space per single-family home.

And parking mandates would be eliminated for several uses:

  • individual dwelling units that have an area smaller than 1,500 s.f.
  • affordable housing developments
  • assisted living developments
  • ground floor non-residential uses in mixed-use buildings
  • when converting a building from non-residential to residential use

The standards would also apply in home rule communities.

Single Stair Reform (SB 4061, Feigenholtz)

Residential buildings up to six stories, with a maximum of four dwelling units per floor, an automatic sprinkler system, and automatic door closers, would be permitted to have a single interior exit stairway (“single stair”). Small multifamily buildings with a single means of egress are as safe or safer than those with more than one.

A typical new apartment building in Illinois has a “double loaded corridor” layout, which has a high apartment per stair ratio. The smart stair option in the center, not currently permitted, has a much lower apartment per stair ratio. The graphic on the right shows that a single stair building can have more variation in unit layouts and sizes (number of bedrooms).

The benefits improve quality of life by making it easier to design multi-bedroom and family-size homes with additional windows for more natural light, and inset porches (allowing for cross-breezes!) because space isn’t needed for a corridor to connect every unit to a second stair way. Homes are closer to the exit in these buildings.

Further reading:

ADUs (bill number forthcoming)

Do I even have to say what this is about? The bill would permit accessory dwelling units in all zoning districts that permit residential uses. The state ADU bill, as written in HB5626, could possibly invalidate the labor requirements for coach houses in Chicago (emphasis added):

(1) Each municipality shall permit accessory dwelling units in all zoning districts that permit single-family dwellings without additional requirements for lot size, setbacks, aesthetic requirements, design review requirements, frontage, space limitations, or other controls beyond those required for single-family dwelling units without an accessory dwelling unit.

Impact Fee Modernization (SB 4062, Castro)

The state would create formulas that set maximum impact fees, relative to the impact (i.e. number of students, domestic water and sewer, etc.) and incorporate certain unique contexts, to establish certainty for home builders. Municipalities, include those with home rule authority, would have to adopt the formulas within 30 months after the bill’s effective date.

The House has this package in a single omnibus bill: HB 5626.

Abundant Housing Illinois volunteers were in Springfield yesterday to listen to Governor Pritzker’s budget speech and to push for bold housing solutions to reduce the housing shortage – evident by continually rising prices – that persists across the state.

The new bills that Governor Pritzker’s office announced today – collectively called BUILD – will have a big impact on permitting new starter homes and allowing multi-family housing all over the state, among other changes to speed up housing construction. These bills will have the biggest effect on reducing housing costs when passed collectively.

Join Abundant Housing Illinois for the next lobby day.

Read another observation in A City That Works.

Guest post: Chicago has multiple crises that more housing could mitigate

Chicago currently faces a dire financial crisis that could leave the city with a $1.2 billion budget deficit in 2026 and a potentially higher deficit in 2027. One way the city can attempt to chip away at this deficit is by expanding access to affordable and abundant residential housing across the city. This article by Joshua Chodor focuses on the communities impacted by Chicago’s shortage of affordable residential housing, why more home choices will be needed and the potential strategies that can create housing abundance.

In his 1999 book Homeland Earth, French philosopher and sociologist Edgar Morin developed a term that would encapsulate the interconnectivity and complexity of modern crises across the world. Spurred by growing fears of global warming, resource depletion and environmental destruction leading to novel diseases, Morin defined his concerns through the term “polycrisis“. 

As Morin projected, today’s modern polycrisis is defined by the convergence of climate change, international migration and humanitarian crises, the increasing rise of authoritarian governments and misinformation driving civil and social unrest globally. To call Chicago’s myriad issues a polycrisis may diminish the word’s more complex meaning. However, when identifying Chicago’s critical issues – a budget crisis, a housing crisis, a cost of living crisis and the political target that the current presidential administration has set on the city – polycrisis emerges as a valid description of the situation.

Chicago must follow a common sense agenda that creates an abundance of housing at all price points in order to alleviate these intertwined crises.

Chicago is only now seeing positive population growth after years of decline, but the stagnant pace of development has left residents with few affordable home choices within the communities they live and work. Monthly rents are reaching new highs and continued inflation contributes to a cost of living crisis impacting everyone. Rising rents with a minimal volume of new unit development not only inhibits those seeking to move into Chicago from elsewhere, but also may price existing residents out. This cycle could potentially displace long-time Chicagoans without mitigating the severe housing shortage that currently exists. 

To make Chicago a more affordable place to live for its current and future residents – and untangle this polycrisis – the city must be laser-focused on creating housing abundance. Building more housing is directly linked to the migration of new residents into the city, specifically from political migration, climate migration and international migration

1. Political Migration

As Republican-led states legislate against LGBTQ+ rights, attack marginalized communities and dismantle abortion and women’s healthcare access, at-risk groups and individuals will increasingly seek refuge in “blue” areas that offer them the rights and dignities that they deserve everywhere. Governor J.B. Pritzker has ensured that Illinois remains safe and welcoming to those communities unfairly targeted by an arbitrary and capricious war against anything considered “woke” – a catch-all pejorative used as an insult toward those seeking social justice. Chicago – and Illinois as a whole – must show it supports individuals of all backgrounds by expanding opportunities for new housing. In addition, as some state public health services are refuting science-backed advancements in healthcare such as the removal of fluoride from drinking water, Chicago is in a prime position to benefit from a potential influx of red state transplants for reasons related to their health and welfare. 

2. Climate Migration

After years of residential growth, sun belt states face glaring climate concerns related to extreme heat and water access. Climate change is worsening storms, floods and hurricanes, and the current presidential administration has all but asserted that it does not see this as an issue. With extreme weather and the dismantling of NOAA, FEMA and other protective agencies, many areas of the country will increasingly become unlivable – at least, for those who don’t have the means to move elsewhere. Natural disasters have become more intense, potentially jeopardizing residents’ access to clean drinking water, a situation which will drive migration out of the most threatened areas. The Great Lakes region will, in all expectation, grow in population as a direct and indirect result of unstable weather in other regions. Chicagoland will be a primary destination as one of the largest markets that can sustain a sizable population influx. Without additional housing, the climate-based migration of wealthier families and individuals could price out existing marginalized communities from their homes; Chicago must be ready for this increase of potential new residents.

3. International & Humanitarian Migration

When discussing the topic of immigration, the conversation inevitably focuses on the southern border and the law enforcement actions which target and demonize those attempting to legally migrate into the country. A clear example of this is in Texas, where razor wire has been installed on floating buoys to dissuade migration, an inhumane strategy that has led to an increase in drowning-related deaths. Some states actively dehumanize immigrants through legislation meant to instill fear in already vulnerable communities. The consequences of this crisis in Illinois magnify a noticeable difference between policies in Chicagoland compared to the rest of the state. While Chicago has strengthened its “sanctuary” protections over recent months, more than a dozen Illinois counties enacted “non-sanctuary” laws or regulations designed to antagonize immigrant communities. It is clear why international migrants, if given the opportunity, would go to a place that offers them more protection compared to the cruelty that other locations seem to enjoy inflicting. This problem will remain pervasive and, until states no longer enact dehumanizing and cruel immigration-related laws, the Chicagoland region must create more affordable and safe housing options for vulnerable immigrant communities.

Chicago must prioritize expanding its housing supply and residential development in the city and surrounding areas in order to not only mitigate existing financial concerns, but also proactively prepare for an influx of new residents. Policies, both implicit (aldermanic prerogative) and explicit (segregationist zoning codes) have created a set of individual yet interconnected crises that have stymied housing growth, worsening Chicago’s budget shortfall while maintaining racial and ethnic divisions through the denial of critical new affordable housing options. This uncertainty will continue to leave residents – both current and prospective – stuck with fewer affordable and viable housing options. 

Chicago must address its intertwined issues holistically, as its current piecemeal approach has severely hindered the city’s ability to be a desirable and affordable place to call home. In a future post, I will identify short- and long-term actions and suggest solutions toward alleviating Chicago’s housing shortage, such as expanding the city’s accessory dwelling units (ADU) ordinance, allowing 4-flats by right, removing parking mandates, and enacting a land value tax, among other ideas. 

Fortunately, a number of volunteer organizations are focusing on addressing Chicago’s housing shortage, such as Abundant Housing Illinois and Strong Towns Chicago. That these groups have grown drastically in size over the past year is a clear sign that city residents will no longer sit back and wait for City Hall to unravel the threads of Chicago’s polycrisis.  

Josh Chodor is a master’s student in the University of Illinois Chicago’s Urban Planning and Policy program as well as a member of Abundant Housing Illinois and Strong Towns Chicago.