Highland Park council debates bike-parking, connectivity requirements; directs staff to update public-benefit list

The Highland Park City Council held an extended discussion about whether to require bicycle parking and pedestrian/bike connectivity for new commercial and multifamily developments, and directed staff to update the city's public-benefit list rather than change the zoning code.

City planning staff presented survey results from 13 nearby municipalities and examples from recent local developments. The survey found seven municipalities require by code bike parking for new commercial development and seven require it for new multifamily development; the numeric requirements varied widely (for example, between one bicycle space per three dwelling units and one per 25 vehicle parking spaces). Staff noted those differences make direct comparisons difficult.

Director Fontaine, who led the presentation, said the earlier May omnibus zoning package had included provisions to require bike parking and require planned developments to connect to adjacent or planned trails, but those two elements failed at that time. "The package also recommended requiring bike parking as part of new commercial and multifamily developments," Fontaine said, summarizing the earlier proposal and the follow-up research the staff conducted.

Council members described two lines of view. Council member Littlerwer (participating electronically) praised treating bike infrastructure as a public-benefit negotiation with developers rather than a rigid code change: "I would strongly like to see this put, first and foremost as a, as a push for public development when they're a benefit when a developer comes to us." Several other council members agreed that flexibility for different project types (townhouses, apartments, indoor parking, etc.) argues against a one-size-fits-all zoning requirement. Council member Ross asked practical questions about how recent developments have provided bike storage; staff described a range of implementations from dedicated bike rooms to informal garage storage.

Council members Center and Brockman said they preferred not to impose a new zoning requirement but to continue encouraging bike parking and connectivity through development negotiations. Council member Tapia and one other member expressed support for mandatory standards, saying such requirements are comparable to mandated sidewalks or sprinkler systems for certain buildings.

After discussion, the council did not reopen the May vote to change the code. Instead the council instructed staff to update the city's public-benefit list so future planned-development approvals can explicitly include bicycle parking and connectivity features as public-benefit items.

Staff also noted examples of how prior developments addressed bike facilities: a $10,000 public benefit from one developer funded a bike shelter and racks in the Ravinia District; another project provided a repair station and parklet bike racks; several multifamily projects used shared garage or lower-level bike storage of varying sizes.

The council's direction is procedural rather than legislative: staff will revise the public-benefit list used in negotiations with developers. No formal code amendment was proposed or adopted at this meeting.