Vacant Lot One Pager

Chicago Vacant Lots: Policy and Problems

The city of Chicago is home to over 30,000 vacant lots, especially concentrated in the South and West Sides, which have contributed to a variety of economic and social issues. The city owns around 10,000 of these lots, mostly acquired in the 1980s. Chicago’s main response has been in the form of the Large Lots program, which has seen mixed results. In order to ameliorate the negative effects of vacant lots, Chicago could reform zoning laws or introduce alternative development models, such as Transit-Oriented Development or Community Land Trusts. The housing boom of the late 1990s allowed for predatory lenders to offer subprime mortgages on urban properties. These mortgages resulted in an influx of foreclosures in the mid to late 2000s. During this crisis, banks forced families out of their homes without resolving the property. Many absentee landlords were also increasingly susceptible to these foreclosures, and some flat-out abandoned their properties to avoid a bank-ordered foreclosure. Vacant lots are self-perpetuating and self-reinforcing. Vacant properties, in essence, result from the bank, lenders, or the government billing owners more than they’re able to pay for the property, making poverty the driving force contributing to the creation of vacant properties. Vacant lots attract vandals, increasing the crime rate and decreasing the property value of the area, leading to reinforcement of the poverty/class divide, which perpetuates the cycle of abandonment and foreclosure of properties.

Zoning and Vacant Lots

Zoning law restrictions are a driving cause of vacant lots. Zoning laws regulate land use and divide areas into residential, industrial, or commercial categories. These laws intend to create a balanced city environment; however, as they dictate what land is permissible to occupy, and often become the reason for the creation of vacant lots. Businesses influence the division of land, which results in over-zoning for commercial use and the creation of vacant lots between the areas of commercial parcels. Numerous policies were developed in communities to prevent “spot-zoning,” or individual manipulation of the land partitioning. However, this can lead to cementation of zoning, making future regulations challenging. Additionally, the minimum sizes of residential parcels established by the zoning regulations are inefficient. On one hand, the land becomes unaffordable due to its size, contributing to vacant land appearance by contributing to its unaffordability. On the other hand, land, bought with agreement to the minimal size regulations, is often divided into other lots that are later sold separately, contributing to housing sprawl. Therefore, zoning laws should be changed to prevent further spread of vacant lots. However, the policies that could be used to replace current zoning regulations are limited.

Economic decline has been a major cause of the appearance of large lots, but their presence is also a major contributor to economic decline. Vacant lots cause a drop in economic capital for citizens and the city by decreasing the value of all nearby properties.16 Large lots also spike crime and decrease social cohesion, furthering economic decline. In addition, vacant lots drastically lower the greater city’s property tax revenue; vacant lots are estimated to cost the city $20 - $34,000 per property, offsetting funds that can be repurposed.16 Studies have shown that a high concentration of vacant lots near transit stations is correlated with reduced walkability and safety, a higher exposure to environmental hazards, and lower property values. This contributes to a broader sense of social isolation and disinvestment.17 Vacancy is a label that applies to certain conditions within an interrelated ecosystem of property distress. Tax and mortgage delinquency can lead to foreclosure and/or property abandonment, as well as properties that have no clear owner or title, also called zombie properties. In healthy real estate markets, private capital will see opportunity in these conditions, and a new owner will restore the property to productive use. In weaker markets, however, structures frequently remain vacant for extended periods of time, generating dangerous conditions as they begin to decompose. Land vacancy—the final step in the disinvestment cycle—is often achieved through intentional demolition financed with public dollars on properties that have fallen into local government control.

The Large Lots Program was a 2014-2019 initiative that allowed qualifying property-owning residents to purchase an eligible vacant lot on their block for $1 in an effort to return land to the community. The city has since replaced this pilot with the ChiBlockBuilder program, which implements waves of vacant lot purchases. The Large Lots program was largely viewed as a success. Sales reduced crime on the block by 3.5%, rising to 6.8% for purchasers who are confirmed to live on the block. On a 7-point scale measuring vacant lot condition-care, a sample of purchased vacant lots improved by around .9 points from 2014-2018, while a sample of similar but unpurchased lots lost around .1 points in the same time period.

However, the Large Lots program was not without flaws. While it aimed to sell lots to existing local homeowners knowledgeable of local needs, these homeowners didn’t actually always live in the area, and renters were excluded. Moreover, a lack of specific use requirements after purchase meant that not all lots were transformed into productive spaces.

Chicago Policies

Policy Solutions

Transit-oriented development has proven to develop vacant lots within a radius of transit stops. The North Side has fewer vacant lots and also the highest concentration of TOD within the city. Considering that many of the vacant lots in Chicago are within a small radius of transit stops, it becomes clear that TOD would encourage the development of these vacant lots. Another alternative to the private sale of vacant lots is the creation of “Community Land Trusts,” or CLTs. Run by residents and representatives, CLTs own land and determine the conditions for leasing and development. Transferring vacant lots to new CLTs would prevent speculative real-estate investments and facilitate democratic efforts to redevelop vacant lots in line with community goals. There are already some significant CLTs in Chicago that have shown success. NeighborSpace, which controls 115 pieces of land, develops vacant lots into community gardens, engaging neighborhoods and creating jobs. Here to Stay focuses on redeveloping vacant lots into affordable housing, intending to combat the gentrification of minority neighborhoods in Chicago. Following these examples, the introduction of new CLTs in the areas of Chicago with the most vacant lots would allow for Chicagoans themselves to directly and democratically determine the future of development in their communities.

Conclusions