A property owner in Ravenswood/Lincoln Square received a permit last week to tear down a garage and replace it with an Additional Dwelling Unit in a coach house. Ambala Holding LLC, which has owned the two-story, multi-unit building at 2203 West Giddings Street since purchasing it in 2019, got permission on April 17 for the ADU.
The permit, which comes with a reported cost of $120,000, calls for a coach house with one residential unit and three parking spaces. Though not specified, it is presumed this will be a two-story structure, with the residence occupying the second level. Paul Ozga of New Space Architects in Kenilworth, IL is named as the architect of record, and Sterling Group Inc is the general c0ntractor.
2203 West Giddings is a multi-unit building erected in 1915. Photo by Daniel Schell
The front of the garage in the back. Photo by Daniel Schell
The new three-car frame garage replaces a two-space structure, also of frame construction, on the alley in back off Leavitt, and will keep the one-to-one parking-to-residence ratio intact. While the permit indicates this is a two-unit building, there are three mailboxes at the front entrance, and real estate listings for the inactive property denote three units. No work is authorized to be done on the 1915-built masonry residence, which occupies the southwest corner of Giddings and North Leavitt Streets.
Nearby transit options, via Google Maps
For transit needs, 2203 West Giddings lies equidistant to the Damen Brown Line platform to the east and the Western platform to the west. Route 81 buses stop one block north at Lawrence Avenue, where there is also a Divvy bike rack. North-south buses are available within three-block walks west to Western Avenue and east to Damen Avenue.
Subscribe to YIMBY’s daily e-mail
Follow YIMBYgram for real-time photo updates
Like YIMBY on Facebook
Follow YIMBY’s Twitter for the latest in YIMBYnews
im gonna say something controversial here and say that an adu shouldn’t be newsworthy in this city but unfortunately i suppose it is
This is a highly newsworthy and topical story because the city ordinance that allows “by-right” construction of ADUs across the city just went into effect on April 1, 2026. This is small piece of the housing shortage puzzle.
I agree it shouldn’t be but it is great news to see developers doing this. As JK said, this just became legal, and it takes some to plan these things and get to the permit stage, so hopefully this is just one of many and this news can ideally encourage more developers to do the same. It may seem small but if this becomes a trend, that trend will bring hundreds of new units in some of the country’s best neighborhoods.
Also maybe this goes without saying, but ADUs used to be a lot more common in this city which is part of why it’s a big deal
I think this small story is a good start to a welcome change. These small infill developments could have a much greater impact on housing in this city than high rises downtown. Of course, I’d love to see both, along with lots of development of various scales between. The goal would be that so many of these are happening that it no longer becomes a news story.
In Oak Park, you see a lot of ADU-looking garages on these corner lots. (I saw ADU-looking because it’s not clear if the owners are rich and want another living space, or if it’s an actual ADU or an in-law suite). it’s really a perfect place for it. adds a tiny bit more density along the outer part of a block. would love to see more of this in the city too!
I would love to hear if they can/ do and ADU for $120k. I was quoted 3x as much and would love a follow up story on what average costs for these spaces are. thanks!
Agree that seemed very low cost for entire ADU unit.
I never assume the Reported Cost on a permit reflects the actual cost of a project.
An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is only that, accessory, if it is accessory to the main dwelling unit on the property. That’s only if it is occupied by a member of the family of the main DU. I.e a granny flat for the grandma, that prob does not have her own car and is otherwise a very quite neighbor. Otherwise, it’s just a second DU. Once that’s understood, then you can debate where to allow a 2nd dwelling unit on a block of single family homes, which lot on a block, how big, and is it in a separate building from the main one. In proper urban design only corner lots should have more than one dwelling unit. A corner lot could even have a 3-unit bldg or a quad depending on its proximity to an urban center. Historically, corner lot used to be mixed-use bldg with a corner grocery store on the ground floor. But, interior lots on a block should only have true ADUs, structures that are much smaller than the main house and occupied by a family member. Who would want to raise their family with kids in a small ADU in someone’s backyard? What kind of quality of life is that for everyone involved?
Additional dwelling units/density should be encouraged along arterial roadways that carry bus lines/tram lines and near transit stops in midrise buildings that offer a variety of units at economies of scale. Such densification should lead to more public transit use and less cars. Otherwise if one allows sprinkling of density all over, it’s just going to result in more cars and more congestion. US built environment cant support any roadway widening. We’ll traffic choke ourselves to death.
Sure, but we’re in a housing crisis. Any new housing is good. You’re talking about quality of life and raising a family in an ADU when tons of people are already raising kids in small apartments, sharing apartments and houses with relatives, roommates etc
No, unfortunately not. Any new housing is not good. Poor planning and poor design can lead to very bad consequences. Think of public housing projects of the past.
No one will disagree we need more housing, and therefore housing has become unaffordable. You are missing the point. Allowing a second dwelling unit on every single-family-zoned lot is a bad approach. More housing should be incentivized in right locations. Not like the current BUILD Act, that would allow, among other things, a 2nd DU on every lot. It is flawed beyond comprehension. But, that’s what happens when politicians get involved in something they know nothing about.