HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.02.17
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF EVANSTON, ILLINOIS
LORRAINE H. MORTON CIVIC CENTER
JAMES C. LYTLE COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Monday, October 2, 2017
5:30 p.m.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
(I) Roll Call – Begin with Alderman Braithwaite
(II) Mayor Public Announcements
(III) City Manager Public Announcements
(IV) Communications: City Clerk
(V) Public Comment
Members of the public are welcome to speak at City Council meetings. As part of the Council
agenda, a period for public comments shall be offered at the commencement of each regular
Council meeting. Public comments will be noted in the City Council Minutes and become part of
the official record. Those wishing to speak should sign their name and the agenda item or non-
agenda topic to be addressed on a designated participation sheet. If there are five or fewer
speakers, fifteen minutes shall be provided for Public Comment. If there are more than five
speakers, a period of forty-five minutes shall be provided for all comment, and no individual shall
speak longer than three minutes. The Mayor will allocate time among the speakers to ensure that
Public Comment does not exceed forty-five minutes. The business of the City Council shall
commence forty-five minutes after the beginning of Public Comment. Aldermen do not respond
during Public Comment. Public Comment is intended to foster dialogue in a respectful and civil
manner. Public comments are requested to be made with these guidelines in mind.
(VI) Special Orders of Business
(SP1) Downtown Evanston Plan
Staff will present overview of the adopted 2009 Downtown Plan and history of
the plan's development.
For Discussion
(VII) Executive Session
(VIII) Adjournment
Information is available about Evanston City Council meetings at: www.cityofevanston.org/citycouncil.
Questions can be directed to the City Manager’s Office at 847-866-2936. The City is committed to
ensuring accessibility for all citizens. If an accommodation is needed to participate in this meeting, please
contact the City Manager’s Office 48 hours in advance so that arrangements can be made for the
accommodation if possible.
1 of 144
For City Council meeting of October 2, 2017 Item SP1
For Discussion
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Johanna Leonard, Community Development Director
Subject: Downtown Plan Discussion
Date: September 28, 2017
Summary:
In preparation for the discussion on the 2009 Downtown Plan and its associated zoning,
staff prepared the attached PowerPoint. A copy of the Adopted 2009 Downtown Plan is
attached for reference, and can also be found here.
The planning for the Downtown Plan started in 2004 and supporting documents
associated with the planning process can be found here.
Attachments:
-Downtown Plan Summary (Powerpoint)
-Adopted 2009 Downtown Plan
Memorandum
2 of 144
Community Development
EVANSTON
October 2, 2017
Downtown Plan Review
Johanna Leonard, Director of Community Development
Scott Mangum, Planning and Zoning Administrator
Meagan Jones, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner
3 of 144
Community Development
DOWNTOWN PLAN REVIEW
What is a Downtown Plan?
Based on the premise of neighborhood plans:
•Provides specific design standards and guidelines regulating the development and use of the
property in a particular neighborhood.
•Guide the platting of remaining vacant parcels in a partially built-up neighborhood to make
reasonable use of all land, correlate street patterns, and provide adequate drainage.
• Part of the comprehensive plan of the city containing public policies relating to a specific
neighborhood.
-Taken from the American Planning Association (APA)’s A Planner’s Dictionary
4 of 144
Community Development
DOWNTOWN PLAN REVIEW
2009 Downtown Plan Timeline/History
DATE EVENT/ACTION
2006
Creation of a Downtown Plan Committee (DPC)
2007
April DPC creates Guiding Principles for Downtown Plan revision
April Downtown Evanston Building Condition Survey Preliminary Report
May City approves contract with Consulting Team lead by Duncan Associates for drafting Downtown Plan
June Community Meeting
June Council adopts Ordinance 57-O-07 – Moratorium on New Building Construction in the Downtown Area for 180 Days
July Community Meeting
July Downtown Design Charrette
July Planned Development Application for 708 Church Street submitted
October Draft Downtown Plan Released
November Council adopts Ordinance 103-O-07 Extending Moratorium on New Building Construction in the Downtown for 95 Days
2008
January Plan Commission begins review of the draft plan
October Plan Commission recommends approval of draft plan
2009
February City Council adopts Downtown Evanston Plan
5 of 144
Community Development
CURRENT DOWNTOWN ZONING
Existing Downtown Zoning
6 of 144
Community Development
2009 Downtown Plan
DOWNTOWN PLAN REVIEW
7 of 144
DOWNTOWN EVANSTON PLAN
A STRATEGIC UPDATE OF THE 1989 PLAN FOR DOWNTOWN EVANSTON
AS ADOPTED BY THE EVANSTON CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 9TH, 2009
8 of 144
Acknowledgements
CITY COUNCIL
Lorraine Morton, Mayor
Cheryl Wollin, 1st Ward
Lionel Jean-Baptiste, 2nd Ward
Melissa Wynne, 3rd Ward
Steven Bernstein, 4th Ward
Delores Holmes, 5th Ward
Edmund Moran, Jr., 6th Ward
Elizabeth Tisdahl, 7th Ward
Ann Rainey, 8th Ward
Anjana Hansen, 9th Ward
PLAN COMMISSION
Sharon Bowie (former member)
Coleen Burrus
Seth Freeman
David Galloway
Albert Hunter, Associate
Johanna Nyden
Stuart Opdycke, Vice Chair
Robin Schuldenfrei
Charles Staley
Lawrence Widmayer, Associate
James Woods, Chair
STAFF
Rolanda Russell, Interim City Manager
Dennis Marino, Interim Director for Community Development Department
Susan Guderley, Interim Assistant Director for Planning
Carlos Ruiz, Preservation Coordinator
Tracy Norfleet, AICP, General Planner
Bill Dunkley, Zoning Administrator
and the current and former staff of:
City Manager’s Office
Public Works Department
Parks/Forestry & Recreation Department
Police Department
Fire Department
Community Development Department
CONSULTANTS
Duncan Associates
The Lakota Group
180º Design Studio
Goodman Williams Group
KLOA, Inc.
The City of Evanston wishes to thank all those who contributed to the content and review of this Plan, especially
downtown residents, property owners, business owners and institutions.
City of Evanston
2100 Ridge Avenue
Evanston, Illinois 60201-2798
847-328-2100
9 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
i
CONTENTS
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................1
Downtown Planning and Zoning......................................................................................................................................................................2
Planning Mission..................................................................................................................................................................................................2
Plan Summary By Section...................................................................................................................................................................................2
Major Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................................4
SECTION 2: DOWNTOWN CONTEXT................................................................................................................7
Urban Form..........................................................................................................................................................................................................7
Historic and Architectural Resources...............................................................................................................................................................7
Physical Conditions.............................................................................................................................................................................................8
Activity Generators.............................................................................................................................................................................................9
The Evolution of Downtown Development...................................................................................................................................................9
The Plan for Downtown Evanston (1989)......................................................................................................................................................9
1993 Zoning Amendments ..............................................................................................................................................................................10
Recent Planning Initiatives...............................................................................................................................................................................12
SECTION 3: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ..............................................................................................................15
Community Meetings........................................................................................................................................................................................15
Downtown Design Charrette...........................................................................................................................................................................17
Charrette Calendar.............................................................................................................................................................................................17
Focus Groups.....................................................................................................................................................................................................19
SECTION 4: REAL ESTATE MARKET ..............................................................................................................23
Residential Market.............................................................................................................................................................................................24
Retail Market ......................................................................................................................................................................................................26
Office Market.....................................................................................................................................................................................................28
Summary of Development Potential and Market Value..............................................................................................................................30
SECTION 5: TRANSPORTATION AND BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE ..................................................................31
Transportation....................................................................................................................................................................................................31
Streets..................................................................................................................................................................................................................31
Rail.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................31
Bus.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................32
Bicycle..................................................................................................................................................................................................................32
Walking................................................................................................................................................................................................................32
Parking.................................................................................................................................................................................................................33
Infrastructure......................................................................................................................................................................................................34
Electric Service...................................................................................................................................................................................................35
Sanitary Sewer ....................................................................................................................................................................................................35
Water Service......................................................................................................................................................................................................36
Stormwater..........................................................................................................................................................................................................36
SECTION 6: MASTER PLAN ..............................................................................................................................37
Overview.............................................................................................................................................................................................................37
10 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council--February 9th, 2009)
ii
Future Vision......................................................................................................................................................................................................37
Objectives and Strategies..................................................................................................................................................................................38
Development Framework ................................................................................................................................................................................42
Illustrative Plan...................................................................................................................................................................................................50
Public Space........................................................................................................................................................................................................57
SECTION 7: ZONING CRITIQUE AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................65
Current Zoning Regulations Do Not Reflect an Urban Form...................................................................................................................65
The Research Park (RP) Zoning District is Out of Date............................................................................................................................67
Building Height and Scale Findings................................................................................................................................................................67
Downtown Parking Findings...........................................................................................................................................................................69
Planned Development Review Findings........................................................................................................................................................70
Development Allowances and Exceptions Findings....................................................................................................................................70
Planned Development Design Guidelines Findings.....................................................................................................................................71
SECTION 8: FORM-BASED ZONING FOR DOWNTOWN ...............................................................................73
11 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
1
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
Downtown Evanston is a success story. While the down-
towns of most inner-ring suburbs have struggled and suf-
fered decline, Evanston’s has battled back.
The evidence of this success can be found around nearly
every corner. According to research conducted by Good-
man Williams Group, 25 new retail shops opened in down-
town Evanston between 2004 and 2007, and nearly all of the
152,000 square feet of retail space in Sherman Plaza (opened
in 2006) has been absorbed. They also report that the num-
ber of downtown restaurants has nearly doubled since 1990, from 46 to 87.
Downtown Evanston has become a widely recognized shopping, entertainment, and cultural destination for resi-
dents of Chicago’s north side and suburban North Shore communities. The Chicago Tribune describes downtown
Evanston as the “dining and entertainment capital of the North Shore.”
Probably the most dramatic change in downtown Evanston’s recent history has been its emergence as a new, ur-
ban residential neighborhood. Since the mid-1990s, more than 1,700 new housing units have been built downtown.
The new residential and mixed-use buildings offer downtown residents urban amenities more commonly found in
much larger cities, including convenient access to shopping, goods, services, entertainment, restaurants, cultural
facilities, jobs, and world-class educational opportunities.
Downtown also offers a compact, pedestrian- and transit-
oriented environment—accommodating a lifestyle that is
not dependent on the automobile. From the center of
downtown, Fountain Square, nearly all that downtown has
to offer—shops, restaurants, and entertainment—is with-
in a 5-minute walk. This compact, walkable, and mixed-
use environment has proven attractive to condominium
buyers, more than 30 percent of whom, studies show,
previously owned homes in other Evanston neighbor-
hoods.
Although this tremendous success is the envy of many
communities seeking to spark their own urban renais-
sance, it has sparked vigorous local debate over the future
of downtown. In the last 10 years, the Evanston Plan Commission and City Council have spent months and
months debating more than 12 major downtown development projects. Many developers have made substantial
changes to their plans in order to secure development approval from the Evanston City Council. Others have seen
their projects denied outright because of concerns over building scale and development intensity.
12 of 144
Section 1: Introduction
Downtown Planning and Zoning
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
2
D OWNTOWN P LANNING AND Z ONING
The city’s downtown plan was adopted in 1989 and the zoning ordinance in 1993. The plan and ordinance have
never been effectively coordinated and both are out-of-date. Residents of Evanston have repeatedly asked city of-
ficials for greater certainty in development rules and much more clarity regarding the city’s long-term development
plans.
This plan is a response to those concerns.
P LANNING M ISSION
In early summer 2007, the City of Evanston assembled
a team of consultants to formulate a plan and set of
development guidelines for downtown Evanston. The
city had multiple objectives for the plan and required a
team that brought different types of expertise to the
project. The city expressed the need for consultants to
study and make findings regarding:
• Existing market conditions for commercial, office,
and residential land uses within the downtown.
• Existing infrastructure downtown in terms of po-
tential issues or infrastructure limitations in sup-
porting new downtown development.
• Transportation issues, in particular, an analysis of the city’s parking code in terms of “balancing” the need for
off-street parking with the city’s desire to promote a compact and walkable downtown.
• Development strategies that would establish a planning basis for downtown development. The city asked the
consultants to analyze trends in downtown development, to assess the area’s strengths, weaknesses and oppor-
tunities, and to plan for future growth in a way that would maximize use of existing assets and strengths.
• Development strategies that would emphasize a rational urban form for downtown. The city’s existing devel-
opment policies do not constitute an overall strategy for the ‘form” of downtown. Consultants were asked to
formulate a plan where downtown form would recognize the area’s excellent transit access, its pedestrian char-
acter, its position as an employment center, and its central place as a shopping, entertainment, and cultural
destination.
• Existing zoning rules that created an unpredictable process for development review. The city wanted to iden-
tify rules that created barriers to the higher-quality development it seeks to encourage. The city also asked the
consultants to recommend changes to current zoning policies that would create a more predictable, uniform,
and clear set of development rules.
P LAN S UMMARY B Y S ECTION
This development plan is the result of a collaborative effort. The ideas, concepts, and strategies presented here
reflect ideas suggested at a series of public meetings and at the week long planning charrette. It also reflects input
of city staff, members of the Downtown Planning Committee (DPC) and recommendations from the joint meet-
13 of 144
Section 1: Introduction
Plan Summary By Section
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
3
ing of the Evanston Plan Commission and the Evanston City Council. Finally, the report reflects ideas and rec-
ommendations from a consulting team that included urban designers, city planners, traffic and parking experts, real
estate specialists, and zoning and form-based code experts.
Section 2 describes the current downtown context, that is, a statement about the area’s existing form, in terms of
building height and scale, roadway, transit and sidewalk conditions, and land use. In its assessment of downtown
form and character, the consulting team became convinced that the direction of downtown development was posi-
tive. The consulting team also concluded that the city’s priorities for downtown should be to maintain the diversity
of land uses; reinforce downtown’s pedestrian character; encourage density to support healthy and viable down-
town businesses; and establish standards that maintain the compact, walkable, and attractive form of the down-
town.
Section 3 of this development plan summarizes the public participation process through which input was gener-
ated. For example, the proposed form-based code embodies strong requirements and incentives for builders to
seek LEED certification for new buildings. In addition, the code contains new design standards that will raise the
bar for downtown architecture, which is in response to numerous participants at the public forums expressing con-
cerns about the quality of architecture and design.
Section 4 describes the real-estate market in downtown Evanston. It analyzes supply and demand issues for the
residential, retail, and office markets downtown. Generally, real-estate markets are healthy. Residential demand is
growing and is expected to continue. The retail market analysis reflects a vibrant and diverse downtown. It also
demonstrates downtown Evanston’s remarkable success in capturing a market share in the face of stiff competi-
tion from suburban shopping malls. In addition, this section highlights the growing imbalance between the de-
mand and supply within the downtown office market.
Section 5 analyzes the existing infrastructure within the downtown. This section describes downtown’s assets in
terms of transit accessibility, centralized public parking, and public right-of-way improvements. It provides data on
the status of basic services such as water, sewer, and electric power. It includes estimates about the traffic impact
of future residential growth and summarizes of a survey of the downtown parking demand of new residential
buildings. The survey suggests that the city is currently requiring too much parking for residential buildings down-
town.
Section 6 incorporates the consultant’s recommendations for future downtown development. These are expressed
as a series of character areas and subareas therein that embody the existing and potential form of each area. It ana-
lyzes the development opportunity sites downtown. It examines opportunities for improving public space and
public facilities downtown. This section illustrates many of the urban design concepts and design recommenda-
tions for public spaces, blocks, and various properties that came out of the downtown planning charrette.
Section 7 includes a critical review of the city’s existing zoning policies downtown and concludes that that current
zoning that was adopted nearly 15 years ago is out of date. We recommend revising downtown zoning to match
the recommendations that came out of the downtown planning charrette, in particular, the city should revise its
development policies and approval procedures to ensure that development projects and public improvements meet
community standards for form, urban design, and quality architecture.
14 of 144
Section 1: Introduction
Major Recommendations
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
4
Finally, Section 8 is a draft of a form-based code for downtown Evanston. The form-based code incorporates
standards and criteria that reflect modern concerns of Evanstonians. The code emphasizes concern for how new
buildings address the street. It requires new buildings to make a positive contribution to pedestrian character of
downtown streets. It suggests a higher standard for new buildings. The form-based code also incorporates a bonus
system that allows for a taller building when the
city gets significant public amenities in return.
The form-based code offers a balanced approach
to growth by preserving and protecting tradi-
tional districts while allowing for growth and
development in the downtown core. The draft
code reflects the conclusion of the plan update
that downtown Evanston is the “best” location
within the city to accommodate new growth be-
cause of its exceptional transportation infrastruc-
ture, its diverse mix of uses, and its central loca-
tion relative to goods, services, cultural facilities,
and jobs.
M AJOR R ECOMMENDATIONS
1. City development policies should be revised to protect the downtown’s compact, walkable, mixed-used,
and transit-oriented character.
2. City development policies should elevate the importance of urban design and architectural standards for
both public and private investments in downtown. A form-based code will help maintain the human scale
and attractiveness of downtown’s traditional areas and it should guide new context-sensitive, larger devel-
opment in the core.
3. The city should continue to lead through example in the design of public works improvements, landscap-
ing and infrastructure. City streetscape improvements and civic architecture should reflect an excellence in
design and landscaping and should reflect a commitment to sustainability through use of native and
drought-tolerant plant species that help conserve vital water resources. Downtown infrastructure should
be maintained in order to promote the efficient movement of vehicles, bicyclists, commuters, and pedes-
trians to and through downtown.
4. Downtown should continue as the economic engine of Evanston. Downtown businesses and downtown
development should continue as the major source of sales and property tax revenues in order to help mi-
tigate the tax burdens on Evanston homeowners. City policies should foster downtown’s role as the
shopping and entertainment center of Evanston and nearby communities.
5. Development policies should establish standards that promote sustainability and environmentally respon-
sible development. City policy should facilitate rehabilitation of existing structures. The City should use
incentives to encourage new buildings meeting higher standards for efficient resource utilization, energy
conservation, and environmental protection.
15 of 144
Section 1: Introduction
Major Recommendations
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
5
6. The city should maximize the benefits of civic and cultural uses, facilities, programs, and activities located
downtown in order to meet the needs of a growing downtown population, The attractiveness of down-
town parks, open spaces, libraries, health facilities is an important part of retaining and attracting new
downtown residents.
7. The city should pursue a more predictable and understandable development pattern, using this plan and
form-based code. Use the form-based code to establish a higher standard for urban design. Use the form-
based code to establish a balance between the demand for new growth and development and the desire to
preserve and protect “traditional” pedestrian shopping districts downtown.
8. The city should take a more active role in state and regional governance issues related to mass transit ser-
vices. Maintaining excellent mass transit service is critical to the health and viability of downtown and is
equally important to neighborhood residents who rely on bus and train services.
16 of 144
17 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
7
SECTION 2: DOWNTOWN CONTEXT
U RBAN F ORM
Downtown Evanston is a remarkable place. Virtually everything anyone ever needs can be found within a five-
minute walking distance of the center of the city, which is formed by the intersection of Davis Street and Sherman
Avenue. There are 87 restaurants, an 18-screen movie theater complex, bookstores, a major grocery store, a public
library and post office, numerous specialty shops with rare and handcrafted goods, a world-class university and all
of the personal services downtown residents need. (See Figure 2A: Area Context.)
The pedestrian areas rival those on European boulevards—many downtown sidewalks are 25-feet wide; portions
of the pedestrian shopping street sidewalks (e.g., Davis and Sherman) are 15- to 20-feet wide. (Most downtown
sidewalks in American cities are at most 10 feet wide; many are six feet wide.)
Downtown Evanston is very well served by public transportation, with a Metra rail station between Davis and
Church Streets and a CTA station at Davis Street. According to 2000 U.S. Census figures, 18.4 percent of workers
in Evanston use public transportation for their trip to work, compared to 12.3 percent in Highland Park, and 18.7
in Wilmette. Every point in downtown is within a quarter-mile walking distance of transit. (See Figure 2B: Quar-
ter-Mile Walking Zone.)
All these attributes add up to one thing: people! Downtown Evanston is home to approximately 7,200 residents.
Northwestern University has 14,000 students and 3,000 faculty and staff. The university, office buildings, restau-
rants, and stores provide employment for more than 19,000 people. The late urban theorist Jane Jacobs described
places like Evanston as having “an intricate and close-grained diversity of uses that give each other constant mutual
support, both economically and socially.” The current form of downtown Evanston meets all of her criteria for a
thriving “urban village.” She describes a successful urban form as including “mix of uses” making for lively and
interesting streets; “short blocks” that offer alternate routes and greater opportunities for neighborhood encoun-
ters; “varied buildings” reflecting both the community’s past and future; and a “density or concentration” of peo-
ple that make city streets safer, more lively, and more attractive to business and commerce.
H ISTORIC AND A RCHITECTURAL R ESOURCES
Evanston is well known and highly regarded for its rich and historic architecture, which includes buildings de-
signed by several of the most well-known 19th and 20th Century architects. With 28 locally designated historic
landmarks, downtown is no exception. (See Appendix A) In addition to these architecturally and historically signifi-
cant structures and sites, the Preservation Commission has identified (Downtown Evanston Building Condition Survey
Preliminary Report, April 2007) several additional buildings as candidates for landmark designation.
18 of 144
19 of 144
20 of 144
21 of 144
Section 2: Downtown Context
Physical Conditions
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
8
P HYSICAL C ONDITIONS
The physical appearance of a community is important in maintaining property values, attracting new businesses
and residents, and providing a high quality of life. While there is a need to “clean-up” and “green-up” parts of
Downtown, the overall condition of buildings, streetscape, and infrastructure is good.
Most of the buildings within downtown are well maintained and in good condition. Older structures and new de-
velopments are generally of higher-quality materials, relate well to the streetscape, and have appropriate signage.
The area has an eclectic mix of traditional and modern architecture. However, there are some storefronts that have
a dated appearance and are in need of a fresh look.
The city has made significant investments in downtown’s streetscape, which is in primarily good condition. Most
blocks feature paver sidewalks, street trees in tree grates, raised plant-
ers, and pedestrian-scale lighting. Many of the sidewalks are wide, al-
lowing for comfortable and enjoyable walking conditions.
Streetscape in the eastern and western edges of downtown is in fair to
poor condition, with plain concrete sidewalks (no paver banding or
corners), limited landscape beyond street trees, and occasional pedes-
trian scaled lighting. Overall downtown is lacking standard style trash-
cans and public benches. Viaducts along the Metra line are narrow,
dark and unattractive, which negatively affects east/west pedestrian
movement through downtown.
Most open space in the area is provided in the form of small, urban
plazas located in important civic locations or as part of private devel-
opments. These spaces are generally well maintained, provide a range
of activities and features, and are located throughout downtown. How-
ever, Fountain Square, downtown’s central and symbolic open space, is
too small, deteriorated, and is generally ineffective as a plaza for public
assembly. It has oversized planters, limited landscaping, and deteriorat-
ing materials. Way-finding and signage are a concern throughout down-
town, in regards to both the condition and lack of directional and iden-
tity signage.
Examples of well-maintained, high-quality, vintage and contemporary downtown buildings.
Viaduct in poor condition.
Deteriorated landscaping and maintenance condi-
tions in Fountain Square.
22 of 144
Section 2: Downtown Context
Activity Generators
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
9
A CTIVITY G ENERATORS
In addition to its market position regarding regional demographics and location, downtown Evanston has a large
number of activity generators that attract employees, residents, and visitors to the area on a regular basis. (See
Figure 2C: Downtown Activity Generators)
T HE E VOLUTION OF D OWNTOWN D EVELOPMENT
Since its early establishment as a central business district for Evanston, downtown has experienced several growth
cycles. It was a regional retail center prior to the proliferation of large shopping centers, an office headquarters for
large corporations, a moribund commercial district for several decades, a planned research and technology park,
and, currently a very active mixed-use urban center. The city has a long history of planning initiatives aimed at
countering negative business trends and building upon the area strengths. As the next section explains, Evanston
has taken a proactive approach to shaping the future of downtown. (See Figure 2D: New Development since
1997 and Figure 2H: Downtown Context)
Figure 2D: New Development since 1997 – Perspective View – Looking Northwest.
T HE P LAN FOR D OWNTOWN E VANSTON (1989)
In 1989, the city adopted a downtown plan that called for fostering a more pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use envi-
ronment that would help to ensure high levels of activity 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The plan’s vision dis-
cussed an economically vital downtown, with an attractive center, offering diverse services, outstanding physical
attributes and convenience. The plan had seven key themes:
23 of 144
Section 2: Downtown Context
1993 Zoning Amendments
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
10
• Economic growth that increases downtown’s revenue contribution to the community and increases its com-
petitive edge over other sub-regional economic centers.
• A development context in which new building can occur.
• A human scale that retains a strong pedestrian orientation and physical amenities.
• A livable environment that attracts shoppers, businesses and residents.
• Circulation that works, enabling people to get from one destination to another with ease.
• Downtown as a people place bustling with activity.
• Cooperative spirit and energy that will enable the community to realize its vision.
The 1989 plan marked a pivotal point in the history of downtown and a reversal of its economic fortunes. Since its
adoption, a dramatic increase in residential and entertainment uses, along with substantial improvements in public
infrastructure have created an environment with variety of retail uses, office buildings, residential products, and an
impressive collection of restaurants and entertainment venues.
1993 Z ONING A MENDMENTS
In 1993, Evanston revised its downtown zoning regulations based on the 1989 Plan. Four new districts—D1, D2,
D3, and D4—were created to encourage mixed-use development and allow for greater height and intensity
through the use of “planned development” review procedures. Residential, Office, and Open Space districts, along
with a Research Park (RP) district, were mapped on the periphery of downtown (See Figure 2E: Downtown
Zoning Districts.)
Figure 2E: Downtown Zoning Districts
24 of 144
Section 2: Downtown Context
1993 Zoning Amendments
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
11
The following issues related to zoning were discussed during the 2004 visioning workshops and later by the Down-
town Planning Committee:
• While the existing districts have accommodated a range of uses, they do not reflect the actual building heights
and densities that have been approved by the city through the planned development process.
• The planned development process had become “unpredictable” and the city staff, Plan Commission, and City
Council had to negotiate on a site-by-site basis to achieve downtown goals without clear direction.
• There are too many zoning districts, they do not match actual development trends and are not specifically
guiding the shape and design of downtown based on the character of its subareas.
A key component of the current planning process is the re-evaluation of these districts to make them more rele-
vant to development that has occurred since 1989 and to change them to better reflect the desired physical form
and activity of downtown through a “form-based” approach. The allowable bulk and height of each district is indi-
cated in Figure 2F: Zoning Heights: Perspective View. In comparison, the actual density that has occurred
through planned developments is shown in Figure 2G: Planned Developments: Perspective View.
A strategy for updating and changing downtown’s zoning districts and requirements as presented in Section 7:
Zoning Critique and Recommendations.
Figure 2F: Zoning Heights: Perspective View. The illustration shows the “base” heights (heights without development allowances) that can be achieved in the
downtown planning district.
25 of 144
Section 2: Downtown Context
Recent Planning Initiatives
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
12
Figure 2G: Planned Developments: Perspective View
R ECENT P LANNING I NITIATIVES
The city’s downtown planning activities have continued to evolve since the 1989 plan. The following is a summary
of these activities.
Zoning Ordinance Amendments (1993)
Downtown was divided into several zoning districts, which encouraged mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented devel-
opment, and allowed for greater building heights through a planned development process. The Research Park Dis-
trict provided a regulatory framework for a mixed-use business park setting concentrated on the north side of
downtown.
Comprehensive Plan (2000)
The 2000 Comprehensive General Plan examined the city’s strengths within the context of regional change. A se-
ries of long-range planning goals were created, including a mixed-use, attractive, convenient, and economically vi-
brant downtown. Objectives encouraged a compatible mix of land uses and preservation and enhancement of ac-
cess and ambience through downtown capital improvements.
Entertainment District Development Plan
In December, 1997 the city selected Arthur Hill and Company to develop the Church Street Plaza a large planned
development project that would eventually include: an 18 screen movie theater seating 3,400; a 180 room hotel; a
new corporate headquarters building (McDougal Littell and Company); a new Borders Books and Music; a 28 story
207 unit Optima Views building; and a city constructed 1,450 space parking garage in a central location to all the
new businesses. This initiative caused a significant shift in the development direction of downtown, from a tradi-
tional business environment to bustling mixed-use district that included entertainment.
26 of 144
27 of 144
Section 2: Downtown Context
Recent Planning Initiatives
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
13
Downtown Visioning (2004)
Visioning workshops were held in 2004 that brought
together civic organizations and stakeholders to discuss
the development status and future direction of down-
town. Significant enthusiasm and support was expressed
for progress since 1989. Issues were identified regarding
physical conditions, parking, business environment, and
retail mix. Recommendations included creating a traffic
and parking plan; creating a retail market-
ing/merchandising plan; starting physical planning and
design initiatives; revising development standards with
more emphasis on building form and appearance; and
exploring the potential for increased cultural/arts uses
and activities.
Through this visioning process, the main goal for downtown defined in the 2000 Comprehensive Plan was up-
dated to: “A mixed-use central business district that is attractive, convenient, livable, accessible, and economically vibrant.”
Downtown Traffic Model (2004 and 2007 update)
The city followed up the visioning sessions by creating a comprehensive traffic model of downtown that addressed
each intersection and street segment based on the amount of development that was present in 2004. This model
indicated that intersections and streets were operating at an efficient level with capacity for new development.
The model was recently updated with planned development projects approved through October, 2007 and the
preliminary analysis of the model does not indicate any major changes in street operations since 2004. Further
analysis is pending.
Downtown Retail Strategy (2004)
In 2004, the city completed a retail market analysis and strategy for downtown. The study quantified the amount of
additional supportable retail space and identified types of tenants that could be attracted to the area. Marketing
recommendations and strategies to maximize retail development opportunities were included.
Design Guidelines for Planned Developments (2005)
In 2005, the city prepared design guidelines that created minimum thresholds for decision makers and citizens to
review and comment on proposed development projects. In 2006, planned development requirements were
amended to require planned development applications to address how a proposed project relates to the new design
guidelines.
Strategic Plan (2006)
To revisit and sharpen its Comprehensive Plan goals, the city developed a Strategic Plan in 2006 aimed at improv-
ing Evanston’s overall quality of life and providing high-quality, cost effective municipal services. Major objectives
of the Plan include increased downtown development and attraction of entrepreneurial, technological, and creative
New entertainment-related uses along Maple Avenue.
28 of 144
Section 2: Downtown Context
Recent Planning Initiatives
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
14
oriented companies. The strategic plan also calls for improved livability, increased sustainability, and greater envi-
ronmental stewardship on the part of the city and city residents.
Guiding Principles (2007)
In 2006, the City Council created a Downtown Plan Committee (DPC) to focus on the planning initiatives of the
past five years and to incorporate these efforts into a full revision of the 1989 Plan. The DPC recommended:
• Redrawing downtown boundaries to more accurately reflect the planning district.
• Addressing three subareas – Core, Traditional, and Transitional defined on the basis of form and scale rather
than land use.
• Encouraging adaptive reuse of existing buildings and encouraging green/LEED certified buildings.
• Retain and enhance jobs downtown.
• Promote mixed-use development.
• Maintain a balance between retail and service uses and between regional and national chains.
• Encourage mass transit use.
• Promote active use of downtown public spaces.
• Promote installation of public art at appropriate locations.
• Promote cultural and recreational programming downtown.
29 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
15
SECTION 3: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
At the outset of the downtown planning process, the city and the consultant team launched an extensive, multi-
part effort to get input from Evanstonians and others who visit downtown regularly on the range of issues the plan
would address. This outreach effort included community-wide meetings, neighborhood meetings, a week-long
downtown design charrette, and a series of focus groups.
C OMMUNITY M EETINGS
The goals and objectives of the downtown plan update
were first introduced on June 7th at a joint meeting of the
City Council and the Plan Commission. The first commu-
nity-wide meeting was held on June 21st at the Civic Cen-
ter. Two concurrent meetings were held on July 12 at the
Levy Senior Center and the Fleetwood-Jourdain Commu-
nity Center. More than 350 people participated in those
meetings (approximately 150 at the June 21st session, and
150 at Levy and 50 at Fleetwood-Jourdain, respectively).
The purpose of these initial meetings was to provide any-
one and everyone with an interest or stake in downtown Evanston with an opportunity to hear about the project
and to bring the city and consultant team’s attention to what they each regard as the strengths, weaknesses, and
opportunities that currently exist in downtown Evanston. The format and questions presented to citizens at all
three of these kickoff meetings was the same. Specifically, the people were asked for feedback on the following
four questions:
• To identify downtown’s greatest strengths or most positive attributes.
• To identify downtown’s greatest problems or challenges.
• To evaluate the DPC’s guiding principles for downtown.
• To comment on the DPC’s proposed maps depicting three subareas within downtown—core, traditional, and
transitional—each with its own form and character.
To ensure each participant had an opportunity to be
heard, participants at these meetings divided into groups
of 10 to 12. Each table was assigned a facilitator and given
an oversized aerial photo of the downtown area to enable
participants to target their comments about specific
blocks and buildings. All comments in these and subse-
quent meetings were collected and synthesized by staff
and the consulting team.
Citizens discussing plan concepts at the kickoff meeting.
Open for business: The Charrette Studio on Orrington Avenue.
30 of 144
Section 3: Public Participation
Community Meetings
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
16
Community Feedback
Greatest Strengths
Evanstonians showed no hesitation in extolling the virtues of downtown. In the words of one respondent
downtown Evanston is “hopping.” Many people said they like the overall size of downtown and they value
the smaller scale of buildings on the city’s traditional downtown shopping streets. Many consider downtown
to be attractive, lively, and walkable and they appreciate that the library and post office are centrally located.
They like the many choices of restaurants, as well as the movie theater, cultural activities, and the shopping,
and the fact that people are out on downtown streets at all hours. Finally participants unanimously regarded
public transit accessibility to be excellent.
Problems and Challenges
The most common concern among participants, however, was the issue of whether rising rents downtown
might result in the loss of local businesses over time. Residents were concerned that local businesses may
eventually be displaced by national chains. Participants enjoy the current mix of local businesses and na-
tional chains and they want the city to develop policies that will help maintain existing independent busi-
nesses. The participants expressed concern about vacancies in downtown storefronts, most notably the old
Borders bookstore on Sherman Avenue. They see the need to expand shopping opportunities; in particular,
they noted a shortage of clothing store options for anyone other than teens and young adults. Several people
mentioned specifically that there is nowhere to buy clothing basics, like underwear, in downtown. At the
same time, respondents felt there were too many banks downtown.
In addition to the concerns over the retail in downtown Evanston, respondents raised the following issues
as major concerns: Many participants expressed concerns over the scale, height, and architecture of new
buildings downtown, particularly the proposed high-rise tower being debated for the Fountain Square block.
Some people felt that there is no policy direction regarding height and scale for downtown development and
they complained about the ad-hoc nature of the development approval process for new downtown devel-
opment. Residents complained of the lack of certainty and predictability in the development review process;
they argued for greater public amenities including facilities for pedestrian and cyclists. Participants expressed
concerns about building scale and height, in particular the effect of very tall buildings on sky views, sunlight,
congestion, and wind gusts at street level.
Participants indicated that the city could do more to encourage bike use downtown noting the lack of bike
lanes and shortage of bike parking. They also expressed concern over pedestrian safety downtown, specifi-
cally, the competition between cars and pedestrians on streets like Sherman downtown. They expressed
concerns that the proposed new tower at Fountain Square was out of scale with the rest of downtown and
that added towers would create a canyon effect downtown.
Many respondents bemoaned bulky, concrete parking garages like that associated with the Best Western ho-
tel downtown. They also critiqued the modernist style of new buildings finding it incompatible with the
downtown’s turn of the century buildings.
31 of 144
Section 3: Public Participation
Downtown Design Charrette
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
17
Downtown Planning Committee’s Guiding Principles
Most participants supported the DPC’s guiding principles. Participants supported keeping all of the commit-
tees draft goals. Most of the critique and comments were about the need to strengthen the language of the
principles especially to assert the need for greater certainty in the development review process and to ex-
press a commitment to green buildings and high-quality architecture.
Map of Traditional, Transitional, and Core Areas
Most participants said they agreed with the concept of core, transitional, and traditional subareas suggested
by the DPC. However, many respondents were critical of the boundaries of downtown as a whole and of
the subareas. Several participants recommended reducing the size of the downtown core areas and asked for
clarification on what the city regards as appropriate building heights in the core.
D OWNTOWN D ESIGN C HARRETTE
The next major event to engage the public was a 5-day community charrette, which operated out of a temporary
design studio located in a storefront in downtown Evanston. More than 500 people participated in the charrette at
various points throughout the week.
The charrette was led by a design team of architects, urban designers, landscape architects, and planners whose job
it was to translate the community’s input about downtown into illustrations and maps that show what ideas and
policy options would look like on the ground. The downtown design team created more than 50 maps and illustra-
tions, including three options for the redesign of Fountain Square, three options for the redesign of the North-
western University pedestrian gateway and crossing at Clark Street and Sherman Avenue, and maps showing major
activity generators, the evolution of downtown development in the last decade, and the sites of new projects cur-
rently under review by the city. The maps and illustrations of those concepts created during the charrette are inter-
spersed throughout this plan.
The following calendar summarizes the charrette events and the opportunities for citizen participation in the for-
mulation of the plan.
C HARRETTE C ALENDAR
Date Summary of Activities
Monday, July 16th, 2007 Opening presentation and public participation session at the Civic Center at 7 pm.
Focus group meetings with city staff from the city managers office and the departments of community devel-
opment, public works, parks, police, fire, and others.
Tuesday, July 17th, 2007 Charrette Studio opened for business at 8:30 am at 1630-32 Orrington Avenue
Focus group meeting for downtown residents at the public library at 7 pm.
Focus group meeting for design professionals at the studio offices at 7 pm.
32 of 144
Section 3: Public Participation
Charrette Calendar
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
18
Date Summary of Activities
Wednesday, July 18th, 2007 Focus group meeting for downtown developers at the studio offices at 10 am.
Focus group meeting with participants in the summer youth employment program at noon in the Civic Center.
Focus group meeting for commercial property owners in the EV Mark conference room at 2 pm.
Night meeting in the studio open to the public to review initial drawings, ask questions of the designers, and
provide feedback on the design concepts as works-in-progress.
Thursday, July 19th, 2007 All staff meeting with consultants at 10 am.
Focus group meeting with office tenants in the EV Mark conference room at 10 am.
Focus group meeting with young professionals in the studio at 5:30 pm.
Studio open house illustrating design concepts and preferred solutions.
Friday, July 20th, 2007 All day drop-in open house at the studio with design concepts and plans becoming final and being posted
throughout the day.
Saturday, July 21st, 2007 Public meeting and final presentation at the Civic Center at 9 am.
A concept illustration of a re-imagined Bookman’s Alley.
33 of 144
Section 3: Public Participation
Focus Groups
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
19
F OCUS G ROUPS
During the charrette week seven focus groups were conducted to get more targeted feedback from key stake-
holders. Approximately 150 people participated in the groups, altogether. The format and questions for each were
written specifically to draw upon their expertise and were intended to glean input on specific issues rather than the
broader themes that had been posed in the community-wide meetings.
Downtown Residents
This meeting was held in the public library on July 17th and was attended by more than 75 people. Seventy percent
of the participants have lived there for four years or less. The participants were divided into small groups and
asked why they chose to live downtown, what they liked best and least about downtown, what new development
they hoped to see, and what physical and other improvements they think are needed. As at the community meet-
ings, downtown residents were asked to comment on the DPC’s guiding principles and map of character areas.
Feedback
There were five main reasons that people had moved downtown: The desire to live in an urban environ-
ment; the convenience of good transit to jobs in downtown Chicago; the unique, pedestrian character of
downtown Evanston; the educated population of Evanston; and the proximity of downtown to Lake Michi-
gan.
Participants indicated that parking and traffic are the biggest challenges they face living downtown. They al-
so felt the downtown needed more public spaces like plazas, outdoor seating areas, and sidewalk cafes. They
noted the need for repairs to some sidewalks, enhancements to bicycle facilities, and general roadway and al-
leyway improvements that could make it easier for pedestrian to move about downtown. Finally, the partici-
pants recommended that there be greater efforts toward filling vacant storefronts with a more diverse mix
of stores. Many people want at least one additional grocery store downtown.
Most of the participants were not familiar with the DPC’s guiding principles. Those who had read them
recommended they be expressed more emphatically and include stronger statements about the importance
of LEED certification for new buildings.
Evanston Design Professionals
This session, held on July 17th in the design studio, was attended by 15 design professionals and the discussion ran
more than two hours. The comments of the group fall in the following categories:
Architectural review
The group agreed that the city needs guidelines and zoning amendments for residential towers. If large
buildings are to continue, the city should have more sophisticated, less discretionary policies and procedures
including a design review board or commission
Fountain Square block
This block needs to maintain a strong retail frontage and pedestrian orientation according to this panel.
Most of the design professionals had a favorable opinion of the proposed tower for the north end of the
34 of 144
Section 3: Public Participation
Focus Groups
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
20
block, but also suggested that if it is constructed then loading dock access and curb cuts should be kept off
Orrington.
Planning
The group expressed concerns regarding affordability of rents in all sectors, and suggested that new mixed-
use developments include an office component.
Alleys
Most participants agreed with the idea that some alleys in downtown could be redesigned for retail use and
pedestrian shopping.
Design
The participants advocated the use of public art to mark view corridors and to mark the terminus of impor-
tant view corridors downtown. They also recommended deemphasizing private parking downtown with
more emphasis on shared or common parking areas.
Skyline
Participants expressed a preference for tall and slender buildings instead of short and bulky structures.
Downtown Developers
This session on July 18th was attended by 10 builders, developers and their consultants.
This group of participants considers downtown a great success overall and regard future downtown residential
development as a significant benefit because it brings shoppers and customers to downtown businesses without
added traffic congestion.
Most participants expressed some frustration with the development approval process. They noted that virtually all
downtown development projects require some zoning relief, and obtaining it is time consuming, the approval time-
line is unpredictable, all of which chips away at their bottom lines. Participants said city staff should have a strong-
er voice in the review and approval of new development downtown. And the group would like to see the city re-
ward builders who do the right things in terms of urban design and architecture.
They also reported that the city’s high property taxes make it difficult to attract and retain certain retail businesses.
Attendees felt the city administration had not done enough to explain the property tax benefits of new develop-
ment, which has allowed the perception held by some residents who are opposed to new development to argue,
without merit, that the new construction has not generated tax revenue for the city.
On the topic of parking one participant felt that the city’s traffic enforcement program was discouraging shopping
downtown due to the aggressiveness with which they issue parking citations and collect fines. The participant re-
ported that no one is ticketed for parking too long at Old Orchard or other shopping malls. Participants also noted
that they expected the forthcoming survey of the occupancy rates of downtown parking to show that a significant
number of parking spaces go unused.
35 of 144
Section 3: Public Participation
Focus Groups
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
21
Commercial Property Owners
This session was held in the offices of EV Mark and was attended by eight representatives including representa-
tives of Northwestern University, the Orrington Hotel, several major office buildings, a restaurant owner, a down-
town builder, and the owner of downtown retail space. All of the attendees believe the downtown is highly suc-
cessful and they recommend the city continue building on its successes by closely considering the following needs
and issues:
• More student housing is needed to alleviate current problems of overcrowded, unkempt apartment buildings.
• More stores selling soft goods such as apparel and home furnishings are needed.
• The fact that the strength of downtown restaurants is dependent on keeping a large number of downtown
office workers.
• There is a shortage of office space in the downtown (with the exception of the Research Park property).
• Visitors to downtown are a growing and important part of the economy.
Downtown Commercial Tenants and Property Managers
This session was held in the EV Mark offices and was attended by six representatives of downtown office build-
ings (i.e., tenants and property managers). Companies represented included technology firms; banking, finance and
real-estate; and non-profits groups. The issues identified included:
• The potential for a shared parking arrangement between the city and office buildings in municipal parking lots.
• The continuing loss of Class B office space and the problem of very expensive Class A space, which has
priced out not-for-profits.
• Concerns about the reliability of power given the status of Com-Ed infrastructure.
Youth Group
A youth focus group was held on July 18th in a public works building near the Evanston Civic Center. More than
50 teens who were working for the city as part of its summer youth employment program participated. The issues
raised by the young people included:
Positive Impressions of Downtown
The participant’s favorite things in downtown are the movie theater and the wide choice of restaurants with
prices they can afford. They would also like to see downtown become a place where all residents and visitors
can come together and feel comfortable, regardless of age or race.
Problems with Downtown
The most common opinion expressed by the participants was that few teens go downtown because there
isn’t a lot there for them to do other than eat and go to the movies. One person said he feels like he’s being
watched and that the overall attitude of the police and business is very “anti-teen.” Some teens noted the
lack of part-time job opportunities downtown.
36 of 144
Section 3: Public Participation
Focus Groups
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
22
Wish List of New Teen-Friendly Destinations
o A teen center where students could work on homework and class assignments on computers. The
center could have math and foreign language tutors and counselors to help them learn about colleges
and financial aid (to supplement what is available at ETHS).
o A recreation center that is open and welcoming to kids between 14-18 years old
o Bowling alley/ skating rink/ miniature golf
o A non-alcoholic, dancing club
o Affordable shopping including the following brands, Foot Locker, Guitar Center, Marshalls/TJ
Maxx, Discount Music/CD stores, ESPN Zone, an arcade such as Dave & Busters or Nickel City.
o Cultural events, e.g., poetry slams, karaoke, dancing
o YMCA hours should be longer and host a teen party on Fridays and Saturdays
o Evanston should host a carnival as does Skokie and Morton Grove
Young Professionals
A focus group with young professionals was held at the charrette studio on July 19th, with approximately 25 per-
sons in attendance. The attendees included people who live in or near downtown, several who work downtown,
and Northwestern students. All participants said they visit downtown for entertainment.
Positive Aspects of Downtown
The group’s favorite aspects of downtown included its walkability, restaurants, outdoor seating, wide side-
walks, entertainment and culture, diversity and density.
Items in Need of Attention in Downtown
The young professionals group bemoaned the loss of unique shops and proliferation of chain stores in
downtown. They regard the new developments as “nice,” but very “plain vanilla” in appearance. They per-
ceive downtown parking to be expensive and think signage and information about parking could be im-
proved.
This group said they’d like to see the city create a new town square or central gathering place, possibly clos-
ing off one street to all but very limited traffic either permanently or every Saturday night. They also see the
need for more entertainment options for people in their age group, such as live theater or a comedy club. As
with commercial tenants and property managers, this group noted the loss of affordable office space. They
also would like to see the city install more bike racks and dedicated bike lanes. Finally participants expressed
the need for greater involvement by Northwestern University in planning for downtown since students, fac-
ulty, and staff are such an important part of the downtown population.
37 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
23
SECTION 4: REAL ESTATE MARKET
Downtown Evanston is evolving. The corporate and association headquarters that once filled downtown’s office
buildings have largely been replaced with smaller professional and knowledge-based businesses. The retail sector
has responded to competition from Westfield Old Orchard with a variety of local and national specialty stores.
Full- and limited-service restaurants have multiplied, patronized by students, workers, visitors, movie-goers, and
residents from the north side of Chicago and the North Shore. And perhaps most dramatically, downtown Evans-
ton itself has become a sought-after residential location, with new condominiums and rental buildings. The com-
ponents are in place for downtown to continue to grow and thrive as the economic engine of the larger Evanston
community.
This section assesses the competitive position of downtown Evanston, focusing on opportunities for the residen-
tial, retail, and office sectors in the next 10 years. (See Table 4A) During that timeframe, market conditions within
each of these sectors will fluctuate, with periods of heightened or depressed demand for particular uses. For this
reason, the downtown plan must be flexible to allow developers to respond to market shifts and opportunities. At
the same time, the plan must balance what is feasible given the realities of the marketplace with the desires of the
community. The following table summarizes the competitive position of the various real estate sectors and offers a
recommended course of action.
Table 4A: Competitive Position of Downtown Evanston Real Estate Sectors
Land Use Advantages Disadvantages Recommendations
Residential Excellent Metra and CTA transit service
in attractive downtown location; prox-
imity to Lakefront and NU
None Embrace a variety of residential
opportunities to enhance vibrant
urban environment
Retail High retail expenditure potential in mar-
ket area and growing base of downtown
households. NU students.
Within coverage areas of
retailers in Old Orchard
Support downtown’s position as
specialty retail center while expand-
ing offerings to local households
Restaurants and Enter-
tainment
Access to transit; demand from Evans-
ton households and NU students
Locations are not on major
arterials
Increase day-time population and
expand entertainment choices
Office Access to knowledge-based workforce;
excellent transit; mixed-use environ-
ment; connections to NU
Poor access to O’Hare and
Edens Expressway; high
Cook County taxes
Encourage reinvestment in existing
commercial buildings and develop-
ment of new space in mixed- and
single-use buildings
Hotel Demand generated by NU visitors and
needs of Evanston households
Not competitive with airport-
oriented locations
Maintain choices for range of de-
mand segments
Source: Goodman Williams Group
The following pages assess current supply and demand conditions for the major real estate sectors in downtown
Evanston and offer recommendations that have informed the plan. Additional background research and documen-
tation is contained in a separate document.
38 of 144
Section 4: Real Estate Market
Residential Market
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
24
R ESIDENTIAL M ARKET
Supply Trends
In the period from 1997 through 2008, when buildings currently under construction are completed, 1,753 new
housing units will have been added to the downtown, an annual average of 146 units. Since 2002, the annual aver-
age addition has been higher, at 206 units. The 13 rental and condominium developments included in this new
residential inventory are listed on the Table 4B below.
Table 4B: Downtown Evanston Residential Projects, 1997 - 2008
Date of completion Project Address Character Zone Stories Units
1997 Park Evanston 1630 Chicago E/W Core 24 283
1998 Ivy Court (Townhomes) 1889 Maple Edge 4 30
2002 Optima Tower 1580 Sherman Core 13 103
2002 Church Street Station 1640 Maple E/W Core 17 105
2003 Optima Views 1720 Maple Core 28 204
2004 Optima Horizons 800 Elgin Core 16 246
2004 Maple Avenue 1572 Maple E/W Core 8 28
2004 The Reserve (rental) 1930 Ridge (North of Emerson) Edge 4 193
2006 Sherman Plaza 807 Davis Core 26 253
2006 Sienna Court I and II 1720-1740 Oak Edge 8 111
2007 Grand Bend at Green Bay 1228 Emerson Edge 6 49
2007 1800 Ridge (Adaptive use) 1800 Ridge Edge 4 34
2008 Winthrop Club Condominiums 1567 Maple Edge 15 110
Total Units Completed/ To Be Completed by 2008 1,753
Annual Average 1997-2008 146
Annual Average 2002-2008 206
Source: Goodman Williams Group
39 of 144
Section 4: Real Estate Market
Residential Market
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
25
Another four developments with a total of 659 units have been approved or are awaiting approval. The largest
building is Fountain Square Tower with 218 units, proposed for a Core site. Two approved projects with Edge
zone locations are Carroll Place at 1881 Oak (172 units) and 1890 Maple (152 units). The third and fourth build-
ings at Sienna Court will add another 117 units. Other activity includes redevelopment of senior housing properties
for the expanding Mather Lifeways Continuing Care Residential Community.
If this pace of residential development were to continue for the next 10 years, downtown Evanston would have an
estimated 6,700 housing units and a population of about 11,600. While the downtown population grew by about 3
percent a year on average from 1990-2000, the rate since then has been about 6 percent per year. With 200 new
units per year, the increase going forward would be about 4 percent every year—a healthy and manageable rate of
growth.
Demand Trends
The following factors will contribute to ongoing demand for housing in downtown Evanston:
• The number of households age 55-64, the category that includes the leading edge of Baby Boomers, is grow-
ing. According to recent survey, this age cohort represents 21 percent of downtown newcomers.
• Evanston is the only North Shore community with a significant level of condominium development activity,
keeping competition at a minimum. More than half of downtown newcomers are from Evanston or another
North Shore suburb.
• Evanstonians represent about one-third of the buyers of new downtown condominiums. According to current
estimates, roughly 15,000 Evanston households have the income necessary to afford the typical unit being
built downtown. Prices of existing homes are strong, providing many households, particularly empty-nesters,
with equity for a new downtown home. A very small penetration rate of less than half of one percent would be
needed to continue to support development at the current pace.
• Typical condominium prices for new product in downtown Evanston compare favorably with prices in Chi-
cago’s central area.
Residential Conclusions
The factors that have given rise to the downtown housing
boom are likely to continue. Excellent public transit ser-
vice and access to and views of the Lakefront are the pri-
mary assets of the location, and proximity to Northwest-
ern adds another dimension. For most newcomers, the
sustainable, vibrant environment was the added factor
that brought them to the downtown.
The plan includes new residential as a likely and appropri-
ate potential use for many of the opportunity sites. New
40 of 144
Section 4: Real Estate Market
Retail Market
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
26
rental apartments and condominiums will help Evanston to reach its overarching economic development goals by:
• Enhancing the value of existing residential properties. Continued public and private-sector investment, ex-
panded residential amenities, and added vitality will enhance Evanston’s stature as a desirable place to live.
• Expanding the property tax base by an estimated $600 to $800 million over the next 10 years.
• Supporting existing retailers and service providers, creating demand for more retail property, and increasing
local sales taxes. Estimates of local capture of consumer spending by the new downtown households indicate
support for roughly 35,000 square feet of new retail space over the next 10 years.
R ETAIL M ARKET
Supply Trends
Downtown Evanston has seen a steady expansion of its ground floor commercial space since 2004, with an in-
crease of 25 new businesses over the past three years. (See Table 4C) Much of the new space is in the Sherman
Plaza development, which added 152,000 square feet of retail floor area to the downtown. As shown in the table
below, there are more storefronts in downtown Evanston today than there were in 1990, although the mix of store
types is different.
Table 4C: Number of Ground Floor Businesses in Downtown Evanston: 1990, 2004, and 2007
Select Categories 1990 2004 2007 Changes 2004-2007
Apparel & Accessory 41 22 30 8
Food & Drug 25 11 10 -1
Home Decor 31 16 23 7
Lifestyle 35 46 37 -9
Restaurants 46 79 87 8
Service 114 107 119 12
Total Businesses 292 281 306 25
Vacancies 28 21 24 3
Total Storefronts 320 302 330 28
Sources: Goodman Williams Group and City of Evanston.
Most of the businesses that have opened recently are in the Apparel & Accessory, Home Decor, Restaurant, and
Service categories. New entrants such as Ann Taylor Loft, The North Face, The Levi’s Store and Blu Sushi Lounge
are targeting a relatively young, affluent demographic. While many of the new stores are national retailers, inde-
pendent stores, restaurants, and service businesses still represent approximately 70% of the total inventory in
Downtown Evanston.
Two major new mixed-use developments have been proposed would add close to 70,000 additional square feet of
retail space. They include:
41 of 144
Section 4: Real Estate Market
Retail Market
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
27
• The Fountain Square building with one or two floors of retail space (up to 28,650 square feet on two floors).
• 1890 Maple, where a grocery store has signed a letter of intent to occupy a portion of the proposed 40,000
square feet of ground floor commercial space.
Other existing buildings and infill sites are also likely to attract future retail development, including the former
Border’s and Barnes & Noble spaces.
Demand Trends
Demand for retail space in downtown Evanston comes from a number of sources. Area residents form the pri-
mary source of demand and include households with a wide variation in age and income.
• Downtown residents. The addition of 150 to 200 new residential units per year will increase demand for
goods and services in a number of categories, including food, health and personal care, restaurants, apparel,
and housewares. These new households could support about 35,000 square feet of new retail space over the
next ten years.
• Other Evanston households. Downtown Evanston attracts buyers and renters from throughout the com-
munity. Of Evanston’s estimated 65,570 residents, approximately 88 percent live in neighborhoods outside the
downtown. This component of the trade area is not projected to grow significantly in the next decade.
• The secondary market. The shopper intercept survey completed in 2004 provided evidence of the extent to
which downtown Evanston is attracting patrons from both the north side of the City of Chicago as well as
from proximate North Shore suburbs. More than 350,000 people live in the north side neighborhoods that
have convenient access to downtown Evanston. If Evanston can increase its capture rate of expenditures from
these north side households, more retail space can be supported.
• Northwestern students. Approximately 14,000 students are enrolled at Northwestern University, attending
classes on the Evanston campus. Of that total, 5,833 are graduate students. While this demand segment is not
forecast to grow significantly, it is an important source of demand for a variety of goods and services.
Two other categories support downtown Evanston’s commercial base: downtown workers and overnight visitors.
More than 19,000 employees work in downtown Evanston. This daytime population provides critical support to
area restaurants for their lunch-time trade as well as to local retailers. Moving the Civic Center to downtown and
other steps to increase the office-based population would be a boost to the downtown business community. Simi-
larly, the approximately 600 hotel rooms currently located in downtown Evanston provide important support to
area businesses. Future additions to the inventory of hotel rooms should be encouraged.
An analysis of expenditure patterns for Evanston households shows that dollars are being spent outside the com-
munity in the following categories: general merchandise (i.e., department stores), motor vehicles, and gas stations.
Downtown Evanston cannot directly compete in these categories with Westfield Old Orchard and other auto-
oriented locations along the major commercial arteries. Downtown Evanston is, however, attracting dollars from
outside the community in the following categories: sporting goods, hobby, books, music, and food service and
drinking places.
42 of 144
Section 4: Real Estate Market
Office Market
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
28
Retail Conclusions
Investors have expressed confidence in downtown Evanston’s retail sector. In 2006, a London-based firm pur-
chased an interest in Church Street Plaza, and more recently Inland American Real Estate Trust purchased the
retail portion of Sherman Plaza, both for prices reportedly in excess of $300 per square foot.
Currently, about 70,000 square feet of retail space are proposed in new developments. This amount of space could
satisfy demand over the next five years. Longer term, demand for an additional 30,000 to 50,000 square feet of
space is likely if downtown residential development continues at the projected pace and Evanston maintains or
slightly expands its ability to attract shoppers from the north side of Chicago and the North Shore. Thus, over a
10-year period downtown Evanston could expand its retail base by 100,000 to 120,000 square feet. The strongest
categories are likely to be food, restaurants, apparel and accessories, and home décor. Downtown Evanston could
also potentially support additional entertainment venues such as bowling alleys, billiard halls, or video arcades.
Ground floor retail should be concentrated on key pedestrian-oriented streets in the downtown. In addition to new
construction, the city should encourage the preservation and renovation of older retail spaces that could be afford-
able to independent retailers. A mix of local merchants and national retail tenants is important to the distinctive
character and ongoing vitality of downtown Evanston.
O FFICE M ARKET
Supply Trends
Downtown Evanston has an inventory of approximately 2.2 million square feet of office space. The overall size of
the inventory has not changed appreciably over the past two decades, although a number of older buildings have
been demolished and new ones have been built. The 1989 plan estimated 2.3 million square feet of office space in
the downtown.
Office space is typically divided into three classes based on the rent and quality of the building and finishes. (See
Table 4D) The following table shows limited space available, particularly in A and C buildings. It should be noted
that 1890 Maple is included in the Class B inventory despite the fact that the building is empty and slated for de-
molition. If the space in this building were removed from the inventory, the vacancy rate in Class B buildings
would drop to 8.4 percent. Interviews with tenants that have recently been looking for space in downtown build-
ings confirm that the options are limited in all classes of space.
Table 4D: Summary of Downtown Evanston Office Market
Class of Space Number of Buildings Rentable Area (sq. ft.) Vacant Area (sq. ft.) Percent Vacant
Class A 7 1,337,719 106,771 8.0
Class B 12 509,776 83,179 16.3
Class C 23 328,520 17,244 5.2
Total 42 2,176,015 207,194 9.5
Sources: CoStar July 2007 and Goodman Williams Group.
43 of 144
Section 4: Real Estate Market
Office Market
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
29
No major new office buildings are proposed in downtown Evanston, and new buildings are not likely in the fore-
seeable future for a number of reasons:
• Evanston has a limited number of large tenants that could anchor a new building.
• Taxes and occupancy costs in Cook County are high compared to north suburban communities in Lake Coun-
ty, creating a competitive disadvantage.
• Expressway-oriented sites that offer more convenient access to O’Hare Airport are plentiful in the northern
suburbs.
Demand Trends
An analysis of CoStar’s database of tenants in downtown Evanston reveals that medical and personal services are
the largest categories, constituting half of the tenants in the database. Business services, computers/data process-
ing, and law firms, are the next largest categories.
Tenants in downtown Evanston tend to be small in size. Fully 70 percent of firms in the database occupy fewer
than 2,500 square feet. These small tenants occupy all classes of space, not just Class B and C. Within the Class A
segment of the inventory, 84.5 percent of tenants occupy fewer than 10,000 square feet.
In the greater north suburban market, of which Evanston is a small part, demand for office space has rebounded
to pre-2001 levels. Projections of the growth in office-using employment suggest that demand will continue to be
strong over the next 10 years, averaging about 475,000 square feet annually. This demand will be enough to fill
several new buildings per year on average. New buildings will be anchored by comparatively large corporate ten-
ants, and will likely choose available sites farther north along I-94.
Office Conclusions
The combination of low vacancy rates, no new development on the horizon, and a stable base of professional ser-
vice and business tenants have resulted in strong investor interest in existing downtown Evanston office buildings.
In recent years, several Class A office buildings have been sold, including 500 Davis and 1007 Church Street. The
building at 909 Davis, completed in 2002, is currently on the market.
Downtown Evanston has a number of factors that will continue to make it attractive to professional and knowl-
edge-based businesses that can take advantage of the amenities it offers. In particular, the availability of mass tran-
sit, the proximity of a highly educated work force, and the vibrancy of the downtown will maintain Evanston’s
appeal to select segments of the office market. Evanston would be well served by increasing the inventory of office
space in the downtown. Office buildings not only contribute to the tax rolls, but also provide services and the day-
time population critical to support local retailers and restaurants. Existing occupied office buildings should be
maintained and upgraded, as appropriate, and new buildings or office space should be added to the inventory
where possible. Recommendations call for:
• Including office space in new mixed-use buildings provided they have separate entrances and elevator banks.
The second floor of the proposed Fountain Square building, for example, could be finished for office uses.
44 of 144
Section 4: Real Estate Market
Summary of Development Potential and Market Value
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
30
• Rehabbing older office buildings or upgrading second floors to provide functional, affordable Class B or C
space. The Chandler building is an excellent example of a quality rehab (with new construction next to it). The
second floor of the former Barnes and Noble building on Sherman is an example of an existing space that
could be rehabbed for office use.
A new office building anchored by a larger tenant is a long-shot, but one that should not be ruled out. The parking
lot currently owned by Northwestern University on the south side of University Place (behind the Hilton Garden
Inn), for example, could accommodate a 50,000 square foot office building. Other sites within the downtown and
perhaps on the west side of Ridge Avenue would be suitable for future office development, either as part of
mixed-use or single-use buildings. In the next 10 years, we project demand for additional office space to be be-
tween 50,000 and 100,000 square feet.
S UMMARY OF D EVELOPMENT P OTENTIAL AND M ARKET V ALUE
Table 4E summarizes the annual and 10-year growth potential by sector in downtown Evanston and compares the
development potential to the capacity in the opportunity sites identified in the plan. Both base-case and opportu-
nity scenarios are shown to provide a range of estimated demand.
Table 4E: Summary of 10-Year Development Potential and Capacity, Downtown Evanston
Estimated Annual Demand Estimated 10-Year Total
Sector Base Opportunity Base Opportunity Capacity in Opportunity Sites
Retail 10,000 – 12,000 SF 100,000 – 120,000 SF Up to approximately 120,000 SF in ground floor
space of mixed-use buildings
Office 5,000 – 10,000 SF 50,000 – 100,000 SF 50,000 SF could be on NU parking lot site, other
opportunity sites
Residential 150 – 200 Units 1,500 – 2,000 Units Approximately 1,370 to 2,200 units
Source: Goodman Williams Group and Lakota Group
Finally, Table 4F gives a sense of the order of magnitude value of the potential development in the retail, office,
and residential sectors. The levels of development envisioned in this plan over the next ten years would add prop-
erty with market values estimated to be in the range of $640 million to $856 million.
Table 4F: Estimated Market Value of 10-Year Development Potential by Sector
New Development Total Market Value
Sector Base Opportunity Average Per SF/Unit Base Opportunity
Retail 100,000 – 120,000 SF $300 $30,000,000 – $36,000,000
Office 50,000 – 100,000 SF $200 $10,000,000 – $20,000,000
Residential 1,500 – 2,000 Units $400,000 $600,000,000 – $800,000,000
Total $640,000,000 $856,000,000
Source: Goodman Williams Group
45 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
31
SECTION 5: TRANSPORTATION AND BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE
T RANSPORTATION
Downtown Evanston is well served by its extensive transportation system, which includes streets, two commuter
rail lines, several bus routes, and three large city parking garages. Its grid network of streets allows for high levels of
connectivity within the area, providing capacity for pedestrians, automobiles, and bicyclists.
S TREETS
Downtown Evanston has a grid network of streets that generally run east-west and north-south. In the western
part of downtown, the grid is interrupted by the Metra and CTA rail viaducts that transect the area.
Most of the existing streets are two-way. Several of downtown’s main streets function as one-way systems. Church
and Davis Streets comprise a one-way system that moves traffic east-west through the area. Sherman and Orring-
ton Avenues function as a north-south one-way system.
While the one-way system efficiently moves traffic through downtown, drivers do sometimes have difficulty mov-
ing from block to block to get to a desired destination or parking location. Changing this one-way system to a two-
way system to facilitate the movement of shoppers and visitors within the area will be studied further by city staff
to determine if such a change is feasible.
Most streets within downtown are in fair to good condition. In most locations, street widths provide ample room
for lanes of traffic, on-street parking, and bus stops.
In 2004, the city created a comprehensive Downtown Traffic Model that addressed each intersection and street
segment based on the amount of development that was present at the time. The model indicated that intersections
and streets were operating at an efficient level of service with capacity for new development.
City staff recently updated the baseline traffic model to include new and proposed development through 2007.
Downtown intersections continued to operate efficiently, except Emerson Street at Ridge Road. Improvements to
Emerson are currently underway, including establishing it as a roadway with four through travel lanes without on-
street parking. City staff will update the model further in 2008, to include the potential ten year development of the
opportunity sties noted in the illustrative plan. This work will be done as part of the city’s city-wide transportation
plan initiative in 2008.
R AIL
Downtown Evanston is served by two major rail lines that connect the city to region, including providing direct
access to Chicago. This is a key strength of downtown Evanston. Two commuter rail stations serve downtown,
and much of the downtown district lies within a comfortable quarter-mile walk of these facilities. Metra’s Union
Pacific District North Line provides commuter rail service to Chicago’s Loop (and points north, terminating in
Kenosha, Wisconsin). The Chicago Transit Authority’s Purple Line station has seven stations in Evanston includ-
ing the Davis station downtown and weekday express service to the Loop.
46 of 144
Section 5: Transportation and Basic Infrastructure
Bus
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9, 2009)
32
B US
Downtown is currently served by both CTA and PACE bus routes with weekday, weekend, and some late night
service. Routes generally connect downtown with major regional malls and activity generators. The routes are:
• CTA Route 93 – California/Dodge: Provides weekday and Saturday service between downtown Evanston
and the Kimball terminal of the CTA Brown Line in Chicago.
• CTA Route 201 – Central/Ridge: Provides weekday, weekend, and late-night service between Chicago’s
Howard Station, downtown Evanston, and Old Orchard Mall.
• CTA Route 205 – Chicago/Golf: Provides weekday service between the Howard Street CTA Red Line ter-
minal, downtown Evanston, Old Orchard Shopping Mall, and the Cook County Courthouse.
• CTA Route 206 – Evanston Circulator: Provides weekday service between Howard Station, downtown
Evanston, and Central Street/Gross Point Road.
• PACE Route 208 – Golf Road: Provides weekday and weekend service between downtown’s Metra Davis
Street station and Woodfield Mall in Schaumburg.
• PACE Route 213 – Green Bay Road: Provides weekday and Saturday service between downtown’s Metra
Davis Street station and Northbrook Court Mall in Northbrook.
• PACE Route 250 – Dempster Street: Provides weekday and Saturday service between downtown Evanston
and the Des Plaines Metra Station.
Overall bus service appears to be good and is serving the downtown well. Bus shelters and signage are needed in
some locations along the streetscape.
B ICYCLE
Currently, there are no bicycle lanes or bicycle route markings in downtown. Although limited in supply, bike racks
are provided in several locations, including at the Metra and CTA stations.
The city is in near completion of a Bicycle System Improvement Plan. Striped bicycle lanes are proposed for sev-
eral downtown streets, including parts of Church, Davis, and Lake Streets. Marked bicycle routes are proposed for
Emerson Street, Clark Street, Elgin Road, Maple Avenue, Chicago Avenue, Hinman Avenue, and portions of
Church, Davis, and Lake Streets.
W ALKING
The existing grid network of streets provides good accessibility for pedestrians. Additional pedestrian paths are
provided by some alleys that are used as shortcuts within longer blocks.
The elevated train right-of-way viaducts present visual barriers that affect pedestrian connectivity. Although several
viaducts have been replaced in recent years, others are dark, narrow, and unattractive. The width and orientation of
some streets, particularly those that comprise the one-way systems, may discourage pedestrian crossings at certain
intersections.
Downtown is compact and almost of downtown is within a quarter-mile walking distance. Streetscape conditions
are generally good and encourage and enhance downtown’s active pedestrian experience. Most blocks feature ele-
47 of 144
Section 5: Transportation and Basic Infrastructure
Parking
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
33
ments that encourage walkability, including wide sidewalks with decorative pavers, street trees in tree grates, raised
planters, and pedestrian-scale lighting. Such streetscape elements, while common in downtown’s core, are less
common in the eastern and western edges of downtown, where the lack of landscaping and plain concrete side-
walks are more common.
Several streets are particularly important pedestrian pathways and have more vibrant street life. These streets are
often characterized by their orientation to the transit stations or major activity generators, presence of retail stores
or entertainment venues, and presence of attractive streetscapes. Major pedestrian streets include:
• Church Street between Maple and Chicago Avenues.
• Davis Street between Oak and Hinman Avenues.
• Grove Street between Sherman and Hinman Avenues.
• Maple Avenue between Church and Clark Streets.
• Benson Avenue between Church and Davis Streets.
• Sherman Avenue between Grove and Clark Streets.
• Orrington Avenue between Church Street and Elgin Road.
• Chicago Avenue between Grove and Church Streets.
P ARKING
Although the lack of accessible and convenient parking has been cited as an issue in downtown during previous
studies, there is now a large supply of public parking through the combination of on-street parking and three large
public parking decks. There are approximately 2,300 metered on-street spaces in downtown and a significant num-
ber of non-metered spaces strategically located throughout the area. The parking decks include:
• Sherman Plaza parking deck (1,282 public spaces)
• Maple Avenue and Clark Street (1,340 public spaces)
• Chicago Avenue and Church Street (593 public spaces)
Recent residential developments have been designed in accordance with zoning code and constructed to accom-
modate owner parking on site. The requirements apply to rental or owned properties. The city code requirements
for parking at multi-family dwellings are as follows:
• Dwelling units one bedroom or less: 1.25 spaces per dwelling unit
• Dwelling units with two bedrooms: 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit
• Dwelling units with three or more bedrooms: 2.0 spaces per dwelling unit
In recent years, the residents of downtown Evanston appear to be trending towards less auto usage and ownership.
This is ostensibly a result of proximity to mass transit, a reasonable amount of students, and the fact that nearly 40
percent of the residents responding were over the age of 55. A recent survey of new downtown residents in which
265 households responded indicated that nearly two thirds of the respondents owned only one or no autos. Only
48 of 144
Section 5: Transportation and Basic Infrastructure
Infrastructure
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9, 2009)
34
43 percent drove to work, and 36 percent were one-person households. The average auto ownership per house-
hold was 1.38.
Residential Parking Demand
An onsite survey of actual parking occupancy was conducted at the six most recently constructed residential devel-
opments (all built since the year 2000). Additionally, interviews and written surveys were performed with develop-
ers and current condominium presidents or their representatives. These interviews included a focus group and
numerous telephone and e-mail conversations. The properties and their actual parking demand rates (expressed in
spaces per dwelling unit) are shown below. A complete tabulation of on-site characteristics and results can be
found in Appendix B.
Table 5A: Actual Parking Demand
Building # of units Ratio
800 Elgin 248 dwelling units 0.93/du
1720 Maple 204 dwelling units 0.98/du
1640 maple 105 dwelling units 0.97/du
1572 Maple 28 dwelling units 1.18/du
1580 Sherman 103 dwelling units 1.06/du
807 Davis 253 dwelling units 0.83/du
Additionally, there are more than 3,200 spaces in public garages open to guests of units in the downtown area. Me-
tered parking (predominantly 2 hour) is also found adjacent to the dwellings. Recent city surveys indicate nearly 80
percent occupancy of these spaces well into the evening hours. The survey results along with other parking data
and opportunities clearly indicate opportunity for adjustment to the zoning code’s parking requirements.
It is recommended that parking requirements for multi-family housing be established on a square footage basis
instead of the “bedroom” variable as follows: 1 space per dwelling units up to 800 square feet; 1.25 spaces for
dwelling units up to 1,500 square feet; and 1.5 spaces for dwelling units larger than 1,500 square feet.
I NFRASTRUCTURE
Downtown Evanston’s infrastructure system consists of electric/power service, sanitary sewers, water filtration
and supply, and bridges/streets/sidewalks/rail lines. Maintaining and upgrading this system is critical to the future
of the area both for its current use and new development.
Following is a summary of each infrastructure component regarding existing conditions and capacity for develop-
ment. The information has been provided by City of Evanston public works and engineering staff and does not
represent a detailed engineering analysis.
49 of 144
Section 5: Transportation and Basic Infrastructure
Electric Service
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
35
E LECTRIC S ERVICE
ComEd is the electrical supplier for Evanston and provides service to over 3.7 million customers in Northern Illi-
nois. The city’s electrical franchise was renewed in July 2007 for a three-year period.
The ComEd distribution system serving Evanston includes multiple feeder lines with a loop circuit located in
downtown. The only other loop circuits in the region are located in downtown Chicago and at O’Hare Airport.
The City of Evanston, through its Energy Commission and Technical Review Group, monitors ComEd’s per-
formance, including reliability, outage analysis, capacity loading of feeders, substation reliability, infrastructure pro-
jects and power supply. In response to growing demand as a result of new development in downtown, ComEd
added a new feeder line to the distribution system, which originates in a transmission facility located on Emerson
Street. This facility has the capacity to supply multiple new feeders in the future if needed to serve downtown
growth.
ComEd is responsible for supplying reliable electric service to Evanston, including the construction of any new
infrastructure necessary to serve growing demand. The city’s Energy Commission and Technical Review Group
will continue to monitor ComEd’s reliability, capacity, and future infrastructure projects.
Businesses and developers are encouraged to incorporate wherever feasible, energy efficient design into building
rehabilitation, new construction, and site improvements.
S ANITARY S EWER
Evanston’s sewer system consists of approximately 142 miles of combined sewer main and 26 miles of relief sew-
ers. The system conveys sanitary and storm sewage to the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) facil-
ity in Chicago for treatment. The city is currently implementing a Long Range Sewer Improvement Program that
will reduce basement sewage backups and street flooding during periods of heavy rain.
Downtown’s large capacity sewers include:
• Former Research Park area
• Emerson corridor at Sherman
• Davis and Maple intersection
• MWRD sewer (tunnel) under Orrington from the Clark to Lake Street
Areas to be evaluated for new development include local streets such as Church from Ridge to Judson and Grove
from Ridge to Judson where the sewer is 12-inch diameter. This type of sewer will need to be upgraded to serve
significant new construction on opportunity sites in this area. The brick sewer at Davis and Maple also needs to be
evaluated and programmed for possible future improvement, especially lining. This is an older structure completed
in early 1900s. These and other aspects of the downtown sewer system will be evaluated through a recommended
long term engineering study. The potential need for possible expansion of relief sewers should also be evaluated.
City staff indicated that downtown sewer system has substantial overall capacity that is necessary to serve current,
approved, and future development with appropriate developer responsibility for interconnection expense and oth-
er costs. Upgrading of the system over the past 25 years has been substantial.
50 of 144
Section 5: Transportation and Basic Infrastructure
Water Service
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9, 2009)
36
W ATER S ERVICE
Water is supplied to downtown from the Evanston Water Treatment Plant located at Lake Michigan. The munici-
pal-owned facility draws water directly from the Lake and has the capacity to supply up to 108 million gallons of
water per day. The facility provides service to approximately 350,000 residents in Northern Illinois.
City staff indicated that the plant and its water distribution system have capacity to support the new development
defined in the master plan for fire suppression and domestic supply. Connections to existing water mains to new
development sites are at the developer’s expense. The city continues to monitor and evaluate its older water main
system, especially the 30-inch diameter main serving downtown.
S TORMWATER
As noted earlier, the city is completing its Long Range Sewer Improvement Program which will help mitigate
flooding during periods of heavy rain. Once completed, staff indicated that the combined sewers would have the
capacity to better accommodate stormwater from downtown.
New developments will need to provide detention in accordance with the city’s Stormwater Control Ordinance
(65-0-7) at developer expense.
Most of downtown is already “hardscape,” i.e. roofs, sidewalks, plazas, and streets, and a goal of the master plan is
to reduce these impervious surfaces through sustainable design. The plan also defines several improvements to
existing open spaces and expanded or new spaces that will add more green to downtown and help reduce storm-
water run-off. Also several buildings that have been recently constructed or planned for the area have “green
roofs” that will further decrease impervious surfaces.
51 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the Evanston City Council –February 9th, 2009)
37
SECTION 6: MASTER PLAN
O VERVIEW
This master plan provides a vision for how downtown Evanston can continue to grow and change in the future. It
continues much of the direction first set out in the 1989 Plan for Downtown, while incorporating more specific
recommendations regarding the physical form, shape, and character of the area. The future vision is also based on
the community’s strong desire to take further advantage of downtown’s many positive attributes and more effec-
tively guide its improvement and development.
In many respects, the challenges Evanston is facing as it charts a course for the future form of downtown are envi-
able. Downtown already incorporates many “smart growth” principles that other cities and particularly suburbs are
trying to achieve. These principles center on controlling urban sprawl by maximizing the use of existing infrastruc-
ture; reducing dependence on cars by creating walkable, bikeable, transit-served environments; mixing residential,
retail, and office uses; and overall, creating and maintaining a high quality of life.
The following smart growth attributes are present in downtown Evanston and contribute to making it one of the
most livable cities in America. These positive strengths of downtown will serve as building blocks for the next 10
years of development:
• There is a critical mass of activities and mix of uses concentrated in a central location.
• The area has several large activity generators that bring people in on a regular basis, including Northwestern
University.
• Most locations in downtown are within a quarter-mile walking distance of two major transit stations and sev-
eral bus routes.
• It is a compact walkable area in which people can do multiple things, including grocery/convenience/specialty
shopping, dining, movies, education, employment, and office services, without having to drive or move their
car once they have arrived.
• Wide sidewalks and an interconnected grid street system facilitate the movement of pedestrians and autos.
• The strategic location of three large city parking garages with 3,215 spaces along with more than 2,300 on-
street spaces provides the area with significant parking opportunities. The parking garages are able to absorb
demand for parking generated by new larger buildings and their design and location within and behind build-
ings has not negatively affected the urban form of the area, as surface parking lots and basic parking garages
did in the past.
• The area is in the midst of a sustained level of new commercial and residential development.
F UTURE V ISION
The following overarching goal of the master plan is a reaffirmation of what was originally put forth in the 1989
Plan for Downtown Evanston and revised in 2004:
A mixed-use central business district that is attractive, convenient, livable, sustainable, accessi-
ble, and economically vibrant for residents, businesses, and visitors…it’s everyone’s downtown.
52 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Objectives and Strategies
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
38
The central objective of this plan is to focus specifically on the existing and future form of downtown and to de-
vise development regulations—including form-based standards—that will help the city achieve this broader, long-
standing goal of creating a livable, vibrant, sustainable downtown.
Based on this goal, downtown Evanston in 10 years will be:
• A significant economic engine for the City of Evanston and the North Shore. A wide variety of uses, including
retail, office, residential, and institutional uses, will ensure that the area remains active and competitive.
• Defined in part by its mix of character-giving older buildings and new buildings that befit its rich legacy of
high-quality architecture.
• A leader in the area of green building design and a model of public leadership on green policies and sustain-
ability.
• A location that retains its appeal and provides opportunities to a wide range of people, including existing resi-
dents, students, workers, young professionals, empty nesters, retirees, and families.
• A vibrant, “hip,” “happening” place with a variety of quality restaurants, sidewalk cafes, theaters, cultural and
educational activities, shopping opportunities, and unique public spaces
• The entertainment hub for residents of Evanston, the North Shore, and Chicago’s North Side.
• A civic and cultural center that draws visitors and incorporates public art and cultural activities into civic im-
provements wherever feasible.
• A location that is highly accessible, navigable, and walkable for persons of all ages, where high-quality, well-
designed streetscapes and public spaces offer an engaging pedestrian experience.
• Home to an efficient, multi-modal transportation system, where pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles move
safely and co-exist throughout downtown. New development will be transit oriented and foster the continued
and increased use of transit.
O BJECTIVES AND S TRATEGIES
The following additional objectives, policies, and strategies provide further direction to all planning, design, and
zoning decisions in downtown Evanston:
Objective 1: Optimize Economic Development
Take full advantage of the potential of downtown as a mixed-use pedestrian and transit-oriented urban
center that is located adjacent to a renowned university.
Strategies:
• Base future development and redevelopment decisions for vacant and underused properties on the new form-
based code approach for downtown.
• Maintain and accommodate a wide mix of uses and businesses, including local and national companies.
• Encourage new developments and rehabilitated buildings to offer a range of retail floor areas (sizes) and leas-
ing price points to promote independently owned retail and service businesses, which will, in turn, help to
maintain downtown Evanston’s unique “local” flavor.
53 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Objectives and Strategies
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
39
• Encourage use of small underutilized spaces, including alleyways, for use as affordable retail and office space.
• Maintain and enhance the commercial vibrancy of downtown with additional shops, restaurants, and enter-
tainment activities that will reinforce its “single trip, multiple activity” opportunities.
• Use marketing, property owner outreach, and development incentives to retain and develop new office space
for professional services and entrepreneurial, knowledge-based businesses with high growth potential.
• Explore new types of and locations for affordable rental and for-purchase housing, such as in rehabilitated
buildings in “traditional areas,” in order to attract households representing a wide range of incomes, age
groups, and mobility levels.
• Facilitate and market the use of public parking garages via a new way-finding plan and signage system.
• Assess the costs and benefits of changing downtown streets from a one-way to a two-way system.
• Support the continuation of Evmark and the Special Service Area.
• Consider locating Evanston’s Civic Center (City Hall) downtown based on consideration of building and site
costs, tax base impacts, and accessibility. Downtown should be given equal consideration to other locations in
the City.
Objective 2: Protect and Rehabilitate Character-giving Buildings, Structures and Sites
Promote the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of buildings and sites that provide historical and architec-
tural context to the downtown.
The 1989 Downtown Plan highlighted the need to foster adaptive reuse and rehabilitation of aging, yet significant
downtown buildings not only from a preservation standpoint, but as a means of continuing to support and en-
courage small (local, independent) businesses. Drawing from the 1989 Plan, Objective 2 continues to promote
rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of those buildings and sites that contribute to the architectural and historic fabric
of the downtown.
Strategies:
• Establish a Downtown Federal/Conservation Historic District that would enable property owners to apply for
federal historic preservation tax credits for rehabilitation. This proposed district should coincide as closely as
possible with the Downtown Plan’s designated Traditional Zones and establish additional design and architec-
tural review guidelines for those areas that make the greatest contribution to downtown’s overall historical and
architectural character.
• Encourage and promote the designation of additional local landmarks from those properties identified in the
Preservation Commission’s Downtown Evanston Building Condition Survey Preliminary Report.
• Establish a Rehabilitation/Adaptive Reuse Fund from funds generated by the public benefit (FAR) bonus
system. The proposed Rehabilitation/Adaptive Reuse Fund would provide matching funds for building own-
ers who desire to rehabilitate and/or adaptively reuse existing structures and sites. Proposed administrative
rules should be established after review and recommendations from the Plan Commission and Preservation
Commission.
• Establish a façade retention program for downtown buildings.
• Promote the use of existing local and federal façade retention programs.
54 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Objectives and Strategies
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
40
• Expand public education efforts to foster greater awareness of preservation and rehabilitation benefits, tools,
techniques and programs.
Objective 3: Improve the Quality of Physical Environment
Raise the bar for the design quality of all private developments and public improvements to maintain the
human scale and attractiveness of downtown in ways that contribute to the overall livability of Evanston.
Strategies:
• Strive for great architecture and public space design through enhanced development oversight and codes.
• Rather than a “one height fits all” approach, use form-based criteria, drawing on downtown’s eclectic architec-
ture, varied building heights and roof forms, and shopping street walls when crafting new building massing,
height, and design requirements.
• Rethink the use and physical character of the existing public realm.
• Enhance the pedestrian experience along each block and within each public space, including alleys, viaducts,
street crossings, sidewalk cafes, architecture, and signage through targeted capital improvements.
• Create new public spaces and focal points, and include public art and special features.
• Examine opportunities to incorporate publicly accessible open space into all new developments.
• Redesign Fountain Square and coordinate its design with the surrounding corners of Davis Street, Sherman
Avenue, and Orrington Avenue.
• Evaluate all publicly owned property for potential use as park sites.
• Create a more attractive and safer entry point to downtown from the Northwestern campus with the added
goals of improving pedestrian circulation and enhancing the sense of connectedness between the areas.
• Reduce the use of surface parking lots.
• Revisit and change the downtown way-finding system, incorporating new signage throughout Evanston where
needed to guide people to parking areas, transit, civic and historic sites, and the University.
Objective 4: Promote Sustainable “Green” Buildings
Facilitate rehabilitation of existing structures and development of new buildings and spaces that are envi-
ronmentally smart, health conscious, and energy efficient.
Strategies:
• Incorporate U.S. Green Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles
into the new approach for downtown zoning.
• Increase the awareness of property owners, business owners, and developers of the need for and benefit of
green buildings, resource reuse, and other sustainable practices
• Facilitate the understanding of sustainable technologies and products by people making building decisions.
• Reduce the impact of stormwater and add greenery to existing and future public spaces and private properties
where feasible.
55 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Objectives and Strategies
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
41
Objective 5: Maintain a Strong Multi-Modal Transportation System
Maintain and improve the movement of vehicles, bicyclists, commuters, and pedestrians to and through
downtown.
Strategies:
• Encourage more residents and visitors to use transit to and from downtown, including possibly changing park-
ing ratios for new development near the train stations.
• Maintain and enhance vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation throughout the area.
• Make navigating downtown streets and parking areas less confusing by implementing a new way-finding plan
and signage system
• Consider realigning the Orrington/Clark intersection and Orrington/Davis intersection to better manage traf-
fic flow and create new open space opportunities.
• Consider the feasibility of changing streets to two-way direction.
• Implement the city’s new bike plan, accommodate bicycle travel, and increase bicycle parking opportunities.
• Improve sidewalk conditions where needed to make walking a more comfortable and enjoyable experience.
• Lobby for the continuance and maintenance of high-quality, convenient transit services.
• Enforce existing traffic laws…for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists.
• Explore the possibility of a downtown circulator—a light rail or comparable system for shoppers and workers.
Objective 6: Provide Enhanced Arts and Cultural Opportunities
Rethink how civic and cultural uses, facilities, programs, and activities located downtown add to Evans-
ton’s rich diversity and quality of life.
Strategies:
• Consider additional civic and cultural uses and activities that could add to downtown’s vibrancy and identity as
Evanston’s “civic heart.”
• Embrace and promote the city’s cultural diversity within downtown.
• Install public art throughout the public realm and on private properties. Support the Public Art Committee in
its efforts to develop a Public Art Master Plan. Once developed, use the Public Art Master plan to guide pub-
lic art installation decisions.
• Enhance and market arts and culture in a more prominent and active manner.
• Encourage restoration of the Varsity Theater as a performing arts venue.
• Actively encourage public-private partnerships to support arts and culture.
• Encourage participation by Evanston artists in all publicly supported arts programs.
Objective 7: Establish Predictable and Sensible Development Controls
Establish a more predictable and understandable development pattern using the new form-based down-
town master plan, and reduce or eliminate the use of planned developments.
56 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Development Framework
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
42
Strategies:
• Create new zoning districts that reflect the proposed downtown character areas.
• Simplify and streamline all development regulations.
• Adopt a “form-based” approach to downtown zoning that defines the physical shape of new buildings and
their relationship to the public realm.
• Consider a zoning “bonus program” that includes floor area and density incentives for:
o Underground parking or loading
o Whole-building sustainability (e.g. Gold/Platinum LEED certification or equivalent) design
o On-site affordable housing (in excess of the city’s minimum requirements)
o Affordable office space
o Financial contributions to public parks/open space improvements
o Above-grade parking wrapped by habitable floor area
o Landmarks preservation (adopt-a-landmark)
o Streetscape and alley improvements
o Public Plazas
o Façade Improvements
• Establish a transparent, predictable procedure for review of major projects
• Consider amending the zoning regulations to permit re-establishment of nonconforming buildings that are
accidently damaged or destroyed.
D EVELOPMENT F RAMEWORK
Historically downtown Evanston has been a regional business center or hub that included dense and tall depart-
ment stores, banks, and office buildings. Since the 1989 Plan for Downtown was adopted, the area has experienced
development of several mid-rise residential and mixed-use buildings that have significantly contributed to its vital-
ity by bringing more people to the area, extending its activity range to 18 hours, and attracting shopping and enter-
tainment uses that have added new life to its commercial base.
Downtown, like Northwestern University, functions as an economic engine for the city. Therefore its development
needs to be carefully planned in order to accommodate newer and larger developments, while maintaining and
enhancing the special pedestrian character of its busy street life. New buildings should reflect an excellence in ar-
chitecture and urban design.
Downtown is well suited for taller and denser development with a mix of uses based on the smart growth factors
discussed earlier and its traditional role as an urban core rather than a low-rise shopping center or small town main
street. As noted, much of the area is located within a quarter-mile walking distance of the CTA and Metra stations,
and “transit oriented development” is recommended within this travel distance. Taking full advantage of transit
facilities, such development fosters a mix of uses, denser buildings, increased pedestrian activity, enhanced public
spaces and streetscape, and decreased auto use. Downtown now has the critical mass of buildings, uses, and activi-
ties that should allow it to sustain additional planned growth near the train stations in the future.
57 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Development Framework
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
43
Within this mixed-use, multi-purpose environment there are several subareas or zones that because of their geo-
graphic location, land use, pedestrian activity, and building scale have a distinct character or ambiance. Each of
these zones contributes to the development framework of this master plan, providing specific direction regarding
land use, building scale, and open space.
Because of the significant potential for new development, maintaining downtown’s cherished character demands
an approach that balances old and new. The 1989 Downtown Plan highlighted the need to foster adaptive reuse and
rehabilitation of aging, yet significant downtown buildings not only from a preservation standpoint, but as a means
of continuing to support and encourage smaller business owners. The ‘89 plan cited, among other things, the suc-
cessful adaptive reuse of the former Marshall Field’s building (now condominiums and retail), Bookman’s Alley,
and the building now occupied by First Trust Bank Evanston, at the corner of Church and Benson. A recent ex-
ample of highly successful adaptive reuse project is the former Chandler’s building, which is nearly universally
praised for its contribution to architectural legacy and its pedestrian-oriented character.
Drawing from the prior plan, “Objective 2” seeks to extend and expand on this concept to actively promote reha-
bilitation and adaptive reuse of those buildings and sites that contribute to the architectural and historic fabric of
downtown. It calls for incentives to be offered to building owners who want to restore their properties, but lack
the financial capability to do so. The plan also suggests the creation of a conservation zoning district for possible
use in Traditional Zones. Such a zoning overlay district could be used to add additional architectural guidelines and
controls to preserve the distinctive character of these (and other) areas. In addition, continuing attention should be
given to all buildings that contribute to downtown character in terms of their architectural design, building materi-
als, height, scale and pedestrian friendly facades. A façade retention program should be established to provide
matching funds to building owners who work with staff, the Plan Commission and the Preservation Commission
to preserve and enhance character-giving building facades.
Using the subareas initially identified by the Downtown Planning Committee, the development framework defines
three zones—Core, Edge, and Traditional (See Figure 6A: Development Framework) and makes land use rec-
ommendations oriented toward their existing character and development potential. These recommendations are
intended to guide development of locations identified as “opportunity sites” or sites susceptible to change within
the next ten years.
Examples of buildings in the Core Zones
58 of 144
59 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Development Framework
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
44
Following is a description of the character and recommended development approach for each zone.
Core Zones
West Core:
These blocks are located along the Metra tracks adjacent to the transit stations. They include large office and
residential buildings, and a new 15-story building under construction on Maple Street north of Grove Street.
Mixed-use buildings between 165 and 198 feet in height (approximately 15 to 18 stories) should be accom-
modated in this zone, similar in scale to the overall core density.
A small public plaza and pocket park are recommended in the vicinity of Maple and Grove to add open
space to downtown west of the tracks. Such open spaces would provide amenities for local residents and
shoppers as well as visitors to the YMCA.
Small convenience-level shops should also be considered at the ground floor of buildings on the northwest
and northeast corners of Maple Avenue and Grove Street to add support shopping and services for resi-
dents and employees in this zone.
East Core:
The East Core includes blocks developed with denser or larger buildings like the Evanston Public Library
and 21-story modern Chase Bank Building. Mixed-use buildings between 165 and 198 feet in height (ap-
proximately 15 to 18 stories) with retail space at the ground floor are recommended for future development
in this zone. New retail space will be especially important on the east side of Orrington Avenue between
Church Street and Davis Street to fill in the gap in the shopping “street wall” created by the Chase Bank of-
fice complex.
Realignment of the street and sidewalk along the east side of Orrington Avenue should be considered when
vacant or underutilized sites are redeveloped. Elimination of the long access drive leading to the parking ga-
rage under the Chase site will allow a more attractive and inviting streetscape to be established along with
new on-street parking.
Core:
The Core Zone, which is surrounded and buffered by the Edge transitional zones, is where most new de-
velopment in downtown has occurred. Recent developments have included several large sites with new mul-
ti-story buildings reaching heights of 28 stories.
The Core blocks are closest to the train stations and large parking decks, as well as the newly established en-
tertainment corridor along Maple Avenue. To take full advantage of the denser development near the sta-
tions and the increased activity occurring there, mixed-use development between 165 and 275 feet in height
(approximately 15 to 25 stories) with ground floor retail is recommended. This zone could also be a location
for a larger entertainment use such as an entertainment/recreation center with bowling and billiards and/or
a teen center.
60 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Development Framework
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
45
Central Core:
The block bordered by Sherman Avenue, Orrington Avenue, and Church Street can and should be consid-
ered the center or heart of downtown Evanston. It has a narrow triangular shape that was formed where the
area’s grid street system converges and changes course along Church and Davis east of Sherman.
It is highly visible along Church and Davis Streets from the east and west and Sherman and Orrington Ave-
nues from the north and south, which are major driving and walking routes serving the area. It is also very
visible from the two rail lines located a block to the west.
This Central Core block is also located along Sherman Avenue, which is downtown’s main shopping corri-
dor and includes Fountain Square, its central open space.
Similar to the other potential development sites in the area, this block presents an opportunity to develop a
taller and slimmer, rather than a wider and bulkier building that could be a physical and symbolic center-
piece for downtown. Recent development interest has expressed this potential, and the concept of an iconic
or focal building with high quality architecture and special lighting should be embraced.
This location should accommodate the tallest building in downtown, with a building height in the range of
275 to 385 feet in height (approximately 25 to 35 stories) recommended. This range would be higher than
the 275 foot maximum height recommended in the surrounding core area and the Central Core would be
capped at 385 feet, which is approximately 25 percent higher than the tallest building in the surrounding
core zone. The building should include a mix of uses, with consideration of lower floor office uses that
serve the city’s growing entrepreneurial/technology-oriented business base.
Ground floor retail should be incorporated along the perimeter of the overall block to maintain the shop-
ping strength of Sherman Avenue as well as increase and enhance retail activity along Orrington Avenue.
Reconstruction of the dated and deteriorated Fountain Square plaza should also be part of the redevelop-
ment of this block to reestablish the plaza as the central and symbolic open space for downtown.
61 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Development Framework
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
46
Edge Zones
The Edge Zones are located on the fringe or perimeter of downtown, which includes mostly dense multi-family
housing with varied architecture, building height, and density. These blocks provide a “bridge” or transition be-
tween downtown’s denser, active core and its adjacent residential neighborhoods and Northwestern University.
Northern Edge:
Downtown, south of Emerson along Maple Avenue, has recently experienced significant new development
activity, including modern mid-rise buildings with residential, office, hotel, and entertainment uses. A 15-
story residential building is currently under construction along Emerson and a similar building with ground
floor retail has recently been approved for the southwest corner of Emerson Street and Maple Avenue.
Denser multi-family housing is located across the street on the north side of Emerson Street and to the west
and east along Ridge Avenue, Green Bay Road, and Sherman Avenue. The north side of the street is zoned
R6, which allows a building height of 88 feet (approximately 8 stories).
Downtown’s Northern Edge along Emerson Street is envisioned as a predominately residential setting with
retail uses near Maple Avenue and a building height of 88 to 165 feet (approximately 8 to 15 stories) is ap-
propriate.
Northwestern Edge:
The Northwestern Edge is mostly located along busy Ridge Avenue, which like Emerson Street provides ar-
terial road access to the area. Several large city blocks, located west of Ridge Avenue, include multi-family
housing and institutional uses such as the YWCA and Methodist Pension Board national headquarters.
Wrapped around the downtown core and extending south along the railroad tracks and Oak Avenue, , the
Northwestern Edge includes mostly dense residential developments and some new condominiums being
constructed near the intersection of Ridge Avenue and Clark Street.
This subarea is seen as continuing to be predominately residential as small sites and blocks redevelop in the
future. A building height of 66 to 110 feet (approximately 6 to 10 stories) is recommended, similar to its ex-
isting building context.
Examples of buildings in the Edge Zones.
62 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Development Framework
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
47
Western Link:
A Western Link zone is located along the eastern edge of Ridge Avenue extending from the alley located
north of Church Street to the right-of-way line of Grove Avenue on the south. This district is characterized
by residential and institutional buildings. The residential buildings are older, multi-story structures with
courtyards and traditional yard areas.
The Western Link is intended to promote a building scale and form that is compatible with the scale and
form of buildings on the west side of Ridge Avenue. The buildings on the west side of Ridge Avenue are
predominantly residential and institutional. Some of the existing institutional buildings are 3 to 4 stories
while the residential buildings are typically 2 and 3 stories in height.
The Western Link is an appropriate area for new residential development with buildings 66 to 88 feet in
height (approximately 6 to 8 stories).
Southern Edge:
The Southern Edge zone is centered on the intersections of Grove Street and Oak Avenue and extends
south around the intersection of Lake Street and Maple Avenue. This edge district includes important civic
buildings such as the YMCA, the Masonic Temple, and the police and fire station.
The YMCA generates a significant amount of pedestrian and vehicle traffic. The master plan recommends
that the recreational programs of the YMCA be complimented with the addition of public open space in the
immediate vicinity. One possible open space is represented on the plan for the property immediately west of
the YMCA building. This open space should be created if the property can be acquired and the existing
parking relocated. Even a small open space would provide significant benefits to the YMCA’s daycare and
other programs.
The Southern Edge is an appropriate area for new residential development with buildings 66 to 88 feet in
height (approximately 6 to 8 stories)
Eastern Edge:
The Eastern Edge extends mostly along Chicago Avenue to Northwestern University from Lake Street.
Chicago Avenue is a main route leading into and through the area. Similar to the west, the Eastern Edge has
a predominantly residential character, but also includes small shops, large churches, and abuts the large
Raymond Park at Lake Street. The mixed-use character of downtown starts to become evident along Chi-
cago Avenue, which provides transition to the dense residential uses east along Hinman Avenue.
Mixed-use development with residential and ground floor retail or office space is recommended for this
zone in buildings of 66 to 110 feet in height (approximately 6 to 10 stories), similar to its existing context. A
reorganization of the functional areas and landscaping of Raymond Park is also recommended to adapt this
great open space to the current needs of downtown residents and visitors.
63 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Development Framework
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
48
University Link:
The northern most edge or transition zone of downtown is located along Clark Street, and provides a direct
link to the Northwestern campus. These two blocks flank Orrington Avenue, where a significant number of
pedestrians cross to and from the campus to visit, work, or live in downtown.
Currently this edge does not provide an attractive portal or bridge between the bustling mixed-use district
and renowned campus. South along Clark Street, several properties are underdeveloped, while campus
buildings to the north are set back a wide distance from the sidewalk. The intersection of Clark Street and
Elgin Road with Orrington Avenue, which is a main north/south route leading to the campus, is confusing,
with pedestrians having to cross two streets to reach downtown. These conditions along with dense vegeta-
tion on both sides of the street create a physical gap between the campus and mixed-use district.
The realignment of Elgin Road and the closing of a short portion of Clark Street along the Northern Edge
should be considered to:
o Reduce the number of lanes and overall pavement width that pedestrians must cross.
o Minimize confusion for motorists traveling through the Orrington Avenue intersection.
o Extend Oldberg Park closer to the existing shops along Clark Street and Sherman Avenue.
o Provide a larger and grander downtown open space at the front door of the university.
To better frame this gateway intersection, the southwest and southeast corners of Clark Street and Orring-
ton Avenue should be redeveloped with mixed-use “focal” buildings that include shops, restaurants, and
outdoor cafes on the ground floor and residential or office above
Building heights in this zone should be 66 to 88 feet in height (approximately 6 to 8 stories) to transition be-
tween the large, predominantly older university structures and Orrington Hotel located south of Clark Street
along Orrington Avenue.
Traditional Zones
There are three subareas of downtown that have a more traditional shopping street character with smaller build-
ings and shops. These zones provide a special function, acting both as “downtown” shopping streets with specialty
merchants and restaurants, and “neighborhood” convenience centers serving the daily shopping and service needs
of the area’s growing residential population.
Smaller scaled, mixed-use buildings are recommended for these zones to reinforce their traditional character and
accommodate a wide range of retail and service businesses. The appropriate height and scale of buildings in these
traditional districts are described below.
64 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Development Framework
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
49
The traditional scale and character of the buildings in these zones should be conserved where feasible through
adaptive reuse and façade improvements. Upper floors of existing and new buildings should especially be consid-
ered for small professional service or entrepreneurial businesses.
West Traditional:
Davis Street, from the first alley east of Ridge Avenue to the Metra tracks, is a two-sided shopping street
that has significant pedestrian activity. It is highly recognized by Evanston residents for its local stores and
green, sustainable buildings. The Post Office, YMCA, and train stations are major activity generators that
surround and activate this two-block stretch. Maintaining its scale and eclectic character is recommended.
The West Traditional district should allow buildings in the range of 42 to 88 feet (approximately 4 to 8 sto-
ries).
North Traditional:
To the north along Sherman, near the main “port of entry” for Northwestern University is another tradi-
tional Evanston shopping block that should be maintained. This block is very active, especially with restau-
rants. It has a large vacant storefront at the northeast corner of Sherman Avenue and Church Street that
creates a north/south gap in shopping activity along Sherman and an east/west gap along Church where the
Orrington Hotel and Library are located.
A new commercial use or redevelopment of this corner with a mixed-use building is recommended to close
the gap and bring additional activity to the core. This corner would also be a good location for office uses
on the upper floors of existing and new buildings.
The alley leading from Sherman Avenue to the small unique shops on the west side of this block along Ben-
son, “Bookman’s Alley,” should be enhanced to facilitate pedestrian movement to the shops and create an-
other special public space within downtown.
The North Traditional district should allow buildings in the range of 38 to 60 feet in height (approximately 3
to 5 stories). .
Examples of buildings in the Traditional Zones.
65 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Illustrative Plan
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
50
South Traditional:
There are three blocks of traditional commercial buildings along Sherman Avenue and Davis Street at the
south end of downtown. Several active restaurants and pubs are located there as are small office businesses
located on upper floors. A popular public plaza at the southeast corner of Orrington Avenue and Davis
Street in front of the Chandler building, anchors this zone.
While it is an active pedestrian place, this zone
lacks a two-side shopping street experience due
to the large unattractive parking deck on the
east side of Sherman Avenue at Lake Street,
and the lack of commercial buildings on the
north side of Davis Street east of Orrington
Avenue. With the increased activity and density
in the adjacent downtown core blocks, these
blocks should be targeted for mixed-use devel-
opment that reinforces Sherman Avenue and
Davis Street with new shopping street walls.
Open glass storefronts with new uses across
from the established shops and restaurants,
would strengthen these retail locations and ex-
pand commercial activity on two main streets
leading into the Core.
The South Traditional district should allow buildings in the range of 38 feet to 60 feet in height (approxi-
mately 3 to 5 stories).
I LLUSTRATIVE P LAN
Based on the development framework recommendations, an illustrative plan was prepared to conceptually define
potential building massing, site layouts, and open space design for the identified development opportunity sites
(See Figures 6B, 6C, 6D, 6E, 6F: Illustrative Plan). Adoption of this Plan does not constitute a commitment
on behalf of the city to pursue any specific concept, but rather to illustrate a range of concepts that may be appro-
priate for further study. It is recognized that there may be other concepts that are consistent with the overall goals
and objectives of this Plan and that these additional concepts may prove more suitable as the implementation of
this Plan moves forward.
The illustrated concepts are intended to convey potential development scenarios. Actual building locations,
heights, and densities, as well as landscaping/parking layouts will vary as property owners, businesses, and devel-
opers generate more detailed plans. The potential physical form of downtown is highlighted further in Figures
6G, 6H, 6I, 6J: Illustrative Plan - Perspective Views. The location of individual opportunity sites within sub-
areas is shown in Figure 6K: Development Framework/Sites Composite.
The illustrative plan defines mixed-use development concepts that in the next 10 years could accommodate ap-
proximately 1,000 to 1,300 units of housing and approximately 135,000 square feet of retail space. The concepts
indicate that downtown can physically accommodate the 10-year land use projections discussed in Section 5: Real
Estate Market:
Sherman Avenue Traditional Infill Concept looking north on Sherman (corner of
Church and Sherman)
66 of 144
67 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Illustrative Plan
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
51
• Potential new housing: 2,000 units (200 units per year)
• Potential new retail space: 100,000 to 120,000 square feet
• Potential new office space: 50,000 to 100,000 square feet
Figure 6C: Illustrative Plan
68 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Illustrative Plan
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
52
Figure 6D: Illustrative Plan
69 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Illustrative Plan
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
53
Figure 6E: Illustrative Plan
70 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Illustrative Plan
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
54
Figure 6F: Illustrative Plan
71 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Illustrative Plan
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
55
Figure 6G: Illustrative Plan: Perspective View: Looking Northwest
Figure 6H: Illustrative Plan: Perspective View: Looking Southwest
72 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Illustrative Plan
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
56
Figure 6I: Illustrative Plan: Perspective View: Looking Southeast
Figure 6J: Illustrative Plan: Perspective View: Looking Northeast
73 of 144
74 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Public Space
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
57
P UBLIC S PACE
The development framework and illustrative plan also make recommendations for enhancing existing open spaces
and creating new spaces that better contribute to downtown’s human scale, lively pedestrian character and public
amenities. Following is a description of the concepts for each space:
Northern Plaza: (Enhanced)
The open space between the Optima Horizons residential building
and Northwestern University’s office building on the south side of
Elgin Road currently has a somewhat hidden water feature, little seat-
ing, and limited access from the sidewalk along Elgin. The illustrative
plan highlights how this park could be enhanced to make people
more aware of its presence as a public space and to increase its use
(See Figure 6L: Northern Plaza Concept). The concept shows the
following potential changes:
• Organized, intimate gathering spaces and seating areas.
• New landscaping in raised planters, site furniture (benches, trash
receptacles, etc.), and paved walks and surfaces.
• More convenient and visible pedestrian access.
• A central location for public art, visible from Elgin Road.
Chicago Avenue Park (New)
Chicago Avenue generally has an active, retail character at street level, but lacks open space on the northern edge
of downtown. The illustrative plan recognizes an opportunity for a new public park at the site of an existing sur-
face parking lot north of Church Street and the Women’s Club of Evanston (See Figure 6M: Chicago Avenue
Park Concept).
A short-term option for this parking lot would be to add landscape
buffering and decorative fencing to visually screen the parking area.
All new and enhanced landscape treatments should utilize drought-
tolerant, native plants.
Over the long term, this site has potential for a number of activities
and amenities due to its proximity to the library, shops, the university,
and multifamily housing. These could include a reading garden, a play-
ground, a sculpture display, garden plots, open space for active recrea-
tion, and intimate gathering spaces with seating. Another option that
should be consider by the city is to seek outside (government or foun-
dation) funding for development of a woman’s-themed park at this
location to take advantage of the site’s proximity to the Woman’s Club
and the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union.
Figure 6L: Northern Plaza Concept
Figure 6M: Chicago Avenue Park Concept
75 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Public Space
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
58
Whatever the plan, strong consideration should be given to placing easily accessible, user-friendly parking under
the new green space. Such parking should be made available “after-hours” for use by downtown visitors and busi-
ness patrons.
Oldberg Park: (Enhanced/Expanded)
The half-acre Oldberg Park serves as a visual green
buffer at the north edge of downtown at the front
door to the Northwestern campus. Surrounded by
busy streets on all sides, the space is underutilized
due to a lack of seating and organized gathering
areas, and the predominance of its mounded lawn
area.
The concept shows the following potential changes
(See Figure 6N: Oldberg Park Concept):
• Expanding the Park by eliminating a small por-
tion of Clark Street and parking to the south
and turning it into a pedestrian space, with
outdoor cafés and seating pockets.
• Providing a stronger/safer pedestrian connection to and from the campus.
• Incorporating more organized gathering spaces/seating areas.
• Consider improving alleys to serve as alternate pedestrian routes and usable amenities
• Defining the edges and buffering the busy streets with new landscaping and/or decorative fencing.
• Adding new site furniture including benches, lighting, and trash receptacles.
To make up for parking taken out
along Clark Street, the concept
shows parallel parking on the east
side of Sherman Avenue from the
intersection of Elgin Road to the
alley on the south, as well as on
both sides of Elgin Road. Also,
there could be surface parking lo-
cated behind the new development
on the southwest corner of Clark
and Orrington with a pedestrian
connection to the shops and Old-
berg Park.
Figure 6N: Oldberg Park Concept
Oldberg Park Concept looking east across Sherman.
76 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Public Space
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
59
Bookman’s Alley: (Enhanced)
This unique multi-use alley serves not only as a functional ser-
vice drive, but also as a pedestrian connection between Benson
Street and Sherman Avenue. A courtyard space, located at the
rear of the buildings lining Sherman Avenue, is used as the en-
trance to Bookman’s Alley and Frame Shop.
The plan shows how the alley could be upgraded with special
paving, pervious pavers, signage, gateway features, landscaping,
and overhead lighting to attract pedestrians, increase opportuni-
ties for day and night activities, and connect two active retail
streets (See Figure 6O: Bookman’s Alley Concept). Green
streetscape elements could also be incorporated into the court-
yard to form an outdoor reading garden with additional land-
scaping, moveable tables and chairs, benches, and a focal point
sculpture or water feature. See also Varsity Theater strategy (Objective 6, p. 41).
Bookman’s Alley Concept showing new paving, landscaping and signage/banners.
Figure 6O: Bookman’s Alley Concept
77 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Public Space
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
60
Fountain Square: (Enhanced/Expanded)
Fountain Square has historically been recognized as the “center” of downtown, as well as its main plaza and events
space. The plaza has been deteriorating, its planters are overgrown and too large and high, and residents rarely use
it as a gathering/public space. The design and implementation program for Fountain Square must be approached
in a comprehensive manner that addresses all intersections and gives due consideration to all relevant plan objec-
tives.
The illustrative plan highlights significant enhancement of the space, including possibly expanding its design ap-
proach throughout the Davis Street, Sherman Avenue, and Orrington Avenue intersection to form a larger, more
visible “civic heart” space for downtown.
78 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Public Space
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
61
The Fountain Square Concept A shows the following potential changes:
Spaces
• Closing Orrington Avenue between Grove and Davis Streets to extend the Chandler building plaza at the
southeast corner of the intersection.
• Adding a rectangular public space to the northeast corner of the intersection at grade level, to “mirror” an
expanded Chandler plaza.
• Incorporating the Sherman Plaza corner as well as the southwest corner of Davis and Sherman into the de-
sign.
Features
• A larger focal point water feature in the expanded Chandler plaza on center with Orrington Avenue that
would be visible from Davis, Sherman and Orrington.
• Maintain and enhance the war memorials. Consider—with participation by veterans groups—options that
would increase the memorials’ visibility and prominence.
• Upgrading all spaces with new planters, benches, water features, special features, signage, and landscaping.
• Unifying the entire intersection with the same brick pavers and site furniture.
• Providing clearer, logical pedestrian crossings throughout the intersection.
• Adding public art in all the
spaces.
• Adding outdoor cafés for the
restaurants along Sherman be-
tween Davis and Grove.
• Making façade improvements
to the 1600 Orrington building
overlooking the existing Foun-
tain Square space.
Any alteration of street right-of-way
including the closing of Orrington
Avenue should only be considered
in light of detailed traffic studies
and only after completion of the
city’s Multi-modal Transportation
Study.
Raymond Park: (Enhanced)
The 1.8-acre Raymond Park is the
largest park/open space in downtown. The Plan recognizes that some improvements of Raymond Park are cur-
rently underway (e.g. the addition of sculpture to the park) and it suggests other ideas for updating and reorganiz-
ing the park, allowing for more activity by a wider range of people.
The landscaping, benches, and fountain of Fountain Square should be upgraded.
79 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Public Space
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
62
The concept shows the following potential changes (See Figure 6P: Raymond Park Concept):
• Relocating the playground to the Park’s east side
away from the more heavily traveled Chicago
Avenue.
• Redesigning the pedestrian paths to provide a
larger central lawn area for active or passive use.
• Incorporating a gazebo or shelter within a cen-
tral paved area for seating/gathering and super-
vising the playground.
• Buffering the edges and highlighting the en-
trances of the park with new trees and landscap-
ing.
• Adding new site furniture including benches,
lighting, signage, and trash receptacles.
• Adding a concrete sidewalk along the southern edge on Lake Street.
• Added studies and more detailed analysis of the improvement options are needed.
Maple/Grove Plaza: (New)
Downtown west of the Metra/CTA tracks is underserved
by open space. The illustrative plan shows a new
park/plaza located on the north side of Grove, between
Maple and Oak Avenues (See Figure 6Q: Maple/Grove
Plaza). This space could be a corner plaza as shown in
the concept or a center plaza depending on whether the
partial or full block is redeveloped in the future. Such a
plaza could include site amenities such as landscaping,
seating, public art, a water feature, and possibly a tot lot.
The YMCA building’s massing should be considered in
the design of any corner plaza.
Grove Street Park: (New)
The illustrative plan shows another potential location for a new downtown
public space replacing an existing surface parking lot mid-block on Grove
Street between Maple and Oak Streets (See Figure 6R: Grove Street Park).
This park would provide residents with a place for active recreation and gath-
ering. Some of the amenities could include landscaping, public art, open lawn
space, garden plots, and seating. An interim option for this parking lot would
be to add landscape buffering and green elements to the parking area.
Figure 6P: Raymond Park Concept
Figure 6Q: Maple/Grove Plaza
Figure 6R: Grove Street Park
80 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Public Space
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
63
Library Plaza: (Enhanced)
The plaza in front of the Library along Church Street has overgrown multi-stem trees leaning toward its front wall.
Removing those that have become too large for the spaces and replanting this area with single-stem deciduous
trees and low shrubs/perennials has potential to open up the views to this public landmark.
Oak/Church Plaza: (Enhanced)
The plaza in front of the office building on the northeast corner of Oak and Church currently is underutilized. The
plan recommends adding new planting, seating and paving for lunchtime visitors.
Streetscape:
As noted earlier, the city has made significant improvements to the
downtown streetscape since 1989 that have contributed positively to
its pedestrian character and “green” image. Most sidewalks are an
appropriate width and in good condition. Most streets have trees in
grates, trees in lawn parkways, or raised planters with landscaping.
Most sidewalks and plazas in the Core have brick pavers, while the
sidewalks in the residential areas are concrete.
Adding new street trees every 25 to 35 feet on all downtown streets
where feasible and maintaining or fixing all brick paver and concrete
sidewalks in disrepair would reinforce the area’s image and feel as a
pedestrian friendly environment. Several sidewalks should be en-
hanced with new paving, landscaping, and/or lighting, primarily on the east and west edges of downtown.
The following streetscape changes or reconfigurations should also be considered where feasible:
• Consistency of streetscape elements, such as lighting, signage, bicycle racks and street furnishings;
• “London-style” bollards at appropriate locations to better separate traffic from pedestrians and enhance safety;
• Interim physical and appearance-related improvements to viaducts; and
• At corners and crosswalks limit traffic signs, newspaper vending machines (which should be in the form of
consolidated newspaper “corrals”), utility poles, mail boxes, and street light control boxes so as to create “clear
zones” that enhance pedestrian safety and traffic flow.
Maple Avenue from Church to University Place –
The sidewalk widths along Maple are narrow, especially in front of the parking garage and movie theater.
Narrowing the street lanes, widening the sidewalks, creating a large bumped-out pedestrian area at the movie
theater entrance, and adding street trees in grates.
Orrington Avenue from Davis to Church –
Eliminating and relocating the existing parking ramp, adding new diagonal parking on the east side, creating
a more continuous sidewalk, and adding street trees and landscaping in planters.
Many Downtown streetscapes contribute to its “green” character.
81 of 144
Section 6: Master Plan
Public Space
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
64
Benson Avenue from Church to Clark –
Potentially narrowing the street width, widening the
west sidewalk adjacent to the diagonal parking, and
creating small paved areas for retail vendors could
enhance and activate this block. This block should
also be evaluated as a possible site for a new farmer’s
market.
“Benson Avenue Market” concept from the charrette.
82 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the Evanston City Council –February 9th, 2009)
65
SECTION 7: ZONING CRITIQUE AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The existing zoning regulations in downtown Evanston were adopted in 1993. There are currently 11 different
zoning classifications within the planning boundaries of downtown Evanston. These classifications include R5 and
R6 residential districts; an O1, office district; the C1 and C2, Commercial Districts; an OS, open space district; D1,
D2, D3, and D4, downtown districts, and the RP, research park district.
The current zoning rules are often rigid, confusing, and impractical in the face of real estate market trends. For
example, more than one-third of all property in the downtown zoning classifications is subject to a 42-foot height
limit, which equals a three or three and one-half story structure, depending on the building’s architecture. This
height limit is more typical of a suburban downtown on the outer edge of the Chicago metropolitan area but is out
of sync with the vibrant, walkable downtown that Evanston has always had.
In practice, the height limit has not functioned as a restriction so much as a starting point for negotiations between
developers and the city about a project’s height and overall size. In granting these planned development allowances
from the zoning ordinance height limits, the city has helped accommodate market demand for office, commercial,
and more recently residential space. However, the routine grant of such allowances by the city has left members of
the public with the perception that the current rules are meaningless and that all decisions are strictly “ad-hoc” and
the results unpredictable.
The purpose of this current effort is to update city development standards and shift the focus of future regulations
from the business, commercial, and residential land use regulations to a designed-centered approach that will ad-
dress building orientation and location relative to the street, the shape and function of the public realm (that is, the
streets, sidewalks, streets, and open spaces), the scale of buildings in both height and mass, and the relationships of
adjacent buildings and downtown blocks to one another.
This section critiques seven aspects of the existing zoning regulations and provides recommendations for revising
downtown zoning policies to achieve the community’s goals for a desirable urban form.
C URRENT Z ONING R EGULATIONS D O N OT R EFLECT AN U RBAN
F ORM
Evanston’s Downtown Planning Committee (DPC) has recommended form-based development policies (i.e., the
committee’s description of traditional districts is one such policy). The recent downtown planning charrette made
similar recommendations by calling for the city to establish “build-to” lines and form-based restrictions on new
development.
An analysis of existing zoning highlights the “disconnect” between current zoning policies and downtown urban
form:
• Some downtown zoning districts extend beyond the boundaries of the downtown planning area.
• Height limits established by downtown zoning are inconsistent. For example, the current zoning map shows
that along the southern edge of downtown, which the DPC describes as a transitional district, three distinct
height limits apply. Along the north side of Lake Street between Chicago and Maple Avenues some properties
are allowed up to 85 feet as-of-right while others are limited to 42 feet and yet still others could achieve a
83 of 144
Section 7: Zoning Critique and Recommendations
Current Zoning Regulations Do Not Reflect an Urban Form
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
66
height of 165 feet with the grant of development allowances. Developers are expected to demonstrate a public
benefit before the grant of development allowances but this requirement has been loosely administered.
• In the D2, D3, and D4 downtown zoning districts the vast majority of buildings abut the sidewalk. But despite
this being the rule rather than the exception, the zoning administrator is currently required to make a case–by-
case determination as to whether the zero setback is in “context” with surrounding properties, with the single
criteria being whether the “street facing facades or other principal buildings form a substantially continuous
setback along the public right-of-way.”
• Many of the city’s urban design standards in the Design Guidelines for Planned Developments that relate to building
location and ground floor retail should be part of the zoning code and should apply to all development.
Urban Form Recommendations
The zoning code should define character areas consistent with the recommendations of the downtown planning
charrette. The downtown planning charrette suggested character districts that, if implemented, would result in a
downtown with a clear and pronounced urban form. The character map produced during the charrette suggested
various “core” districts; several “traditional” districts; “edge” districts; and a “university link” district.
These suggested districts would establish a more defined and refined urban form for downtown Evanston. The
core areas would allow for high-density, high-rise construction. Table 7A below presents the types of zoning con-
trols that would implement the charrette’s recommendations for downtown urban form.
The plan and map includes three groups of “character districts”: 1) low-rise, low-density traditional districts where
the city has small-scale shopping districts; 2) “edge” districts that would allow for a transition from the higher den-
sity core to the residential districts outside of downtown; and 3) a high-density, high-rise core for the downtown.
Table 7A: Zoning for Urban Form
Maximum Height (feet) Maximum Floor Area Ratio Character Districts
Base w/Bonuses Base w/Bonuses
North Edge 88 165 3.5 6
West Edge 66 110 3 5
East Edge 66 110 3 5
South Edge 66 110 3 5
University Link 66 88 2.75 4
West Link 66 88 2.75 4
West Core 165 198 5 6
East Core 165 198 5 6
Core 165 275 5 10
Central Core 275 385 7.5 12
West Traditional 42 88 3 4.5
South Traditional 38 60 3 4.5
North Traditional 38 60 3 4.5
84 of 144
Section 7: Zoning Critique and Recommendations
The Research Park (RP) Zoning District is Out of Date
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
67
T HE R ESEARCH P ARK (RP) Z ONING D ISTRICT IS O UT OF D ATE
In the early 1980s the city developed a plan for a high-tech research park within the downtown and adopted zon-
ing consistent with this plan. The research/ business park zoning classification for a major portion of downtown
would reserve this area for “applied research and high technology firms” and for “light industry, processing, and
distribution facilities”. By the mid-1990s it was clear that this was no longer realistic. This type of development did
not occur. The current RP zoning district continues to be problematic because it is so closely tied to a plan the city
is no longer pursuing. The problems raised by this out-of-date zoning include:
• The zoning ordinance ties approvals for planned developments, approvals for planned development allow-
ances, and site plan approvals to representations and conclusions that a proposed project implements the goals
and objectives of the Research Park master plan.
• The RP zoning requires certain properties on Maple Avenue to have 13- to 15-foot setbacks and some build-
ings have already been built to meet that standard. This is contrary to the recommendations from the down-
town planning charrette where the charrette designers illustrated how buildings on this portion of Maple Ave-
nue should be brought closer to the street.
Research Park Zoning Recommendations
Much of the existing RP district should be incorporated into the new “core” zoning classification. Tall buildings
like “Optima Views” (1720 Maple) have already been successfully located within the RP district. This tall building
is not out of place.
The existing RP district is compatible with the “core” classification in that it currently hosts bulky, high-traffic ge-
nerating land uses. Relatively new uses within the RP district include a parking garage, hotel, and a movie theater
that are also compatible and appropriate for a “core” zoning classification.
The construction of the new movie theaters within the RP district established this area as downtown’s central loca-
tion for entertainment and night life. The new “core” zoning would continue to foster the development of this
area as an entertainment district.
B UILDING H EIGHT AND S CALE F INDINGS
• Decisions about building scale and height appear to be ad-hoc and not based on policy. Despite that, many of
the larger, taller projects that have gone up in the last decade are of high quality and have made downtown
more vital. Shortcomings of the current zoning regulations with respect to height and scale include the follow-
ing: Exceptions and modifications to downtown height and FAR regulations appear to be the rule rather than
an exception. No one with a stake in downtown zoning—including landowners, developers, citizens, ap-
pointed and elected officials—are able to predict with any certainty the size and scale of any future project.
• Existing zoning bears little relationship to the changes in scale and density that have already occurred in down-
town during the last 10 years.
• There have been at least 10 buildings approved in the last decade with a height of 100 feet or more. Several
buildings, including the Park Evanston (1630 Chicago), Sherman Plaza (807 Davis), and Optima Views (1720
Maple) range from 220 to 260 feet in height. On the whole all of these buildings have enhanced the downtown
skyline and the residents of these buildings have brought a vibrancy and economic vitality to downtown. This
85 of 144
Section 7: Zoning Critique and Recommendations
Building Height and Scale Findings
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
68
supports a finding that downtown is an appropriate location for larger buildings than are permitted under cur-
rent zoning.
• A compact, dense, and high-rise downtown is appropriate for a central location with excellent mass transit
service, a strong employment base, and a high level of amenity in terms of shopping, restaurants, entertain-
ment, and culture. At the same time, one of the key things that makes downtown Evanston truly special is the
fact that higher intensity development exists in a setting that also includes lower intensity “traditional” areas.
These traditional areas provide a marked contrast to the mid- and high-rise buildings that have emerged in re-
cent years. The sense of balance provided by this mix of building heights and development intensities is a
positive, defining feature of downtown and one of the key features of this plan. If downtown development
had been built according to a strict application of the existing rules, the vibrant, eclectic character of down-
town Evanston would not have emerged.
Building Height and Scale Recommendations
• The scale and height of buildings downtown should reflect the fact that downtown is the central place within
the City of Evanston.
• The scale and height of buildings downtown should reflect that downtown is an appropriate location for high-
rise, high-density, and mixed-use development.
• The density, height, and scale of buildings downtown should reflect the city’s desire for a compact and walk-
able environment that supports and strengthens the pedestrian character of downtown streets. The density
permitted downtown should be compatible with goals of making downtown a transit-oriented environment
that facilitates access to and use of public transit.
• The scale and height of buildings permitted downtown should reflect the fact that downtown has the follow-
ing advantages as a place for tall and dense buildings:
o Transit access
o Strong employment base
o Existing pattern of tall buildings
o Excellent infrastructure and utilities
o Excellent public services
The contrasting scale and intensity of development among downtown subareas is a defining characteristic of downtown Evanston.
86 of 144
Section 7: Zoning Critique and Recommendations
Downtown Parking Findings
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
69
D OWNTOWN P ARKING F INDINGS
An onsite survey of actual parking occupancy was conducted at the six most recently constructed downtown resi-
dential and mixed-use buildings (all built since the year 2000). Additionally, interviews and written surveys were
performed with developers and condominium presidents or their representatives. These interviews included a fo-
cus group and numerous telephone and e-mail conversations. The properties and their actual parking demand rates
(expressed in spaces per dwelling unit) are described on page 33. A complete tabulation of on-site characteristics
and results can be found in Appendix B.
According to the parking demand research conducted as part of this planning effort, existing residential parking
requirements are too high. Requiring the provision of excess parking may work against the city’s goals for a peo-
ple-centered, pedestrian-oriented and transit-supportive downtown. Downtown’s compact form and the proximity
of shops, restaurants, schools, religious institutions, jobs, to mass transit and residential areas in and around down-
town have combined to reduce the demand for parking in
the downtown. Preliminary findings from downtown
parking demand studies indicate that residential buildings
do not need as much parking as is currently required.
• Downtown parking requirements may be a barrier to
creating new jobs and the establishment of new busi-
nesses downtown. There are many small lots and
small buildings downtown that could be redeveloped
or expanded, but the current parking requirements
are impossible to achieve at these locations nor do
necessarily they reflect actual demand for parking for
the potential new uses.
• The City of Evanston has constructed more than 3,300 parking spaces in garages downtown. There is ample
on-street parking available too. These public parking areas reduce the need for individual businesses to pro-
vide separate and exclusive parking for their businesses.
Downtown Parking Recommendations
• Downtown parking requirements should be more flexible and residential parking requirements should reflect
survey findings regarding the use of parking in new buildings.
• Downtown parking regulations should raise the parking exemption for businesses under 3,000 to an exemp-
tion that applies to businesses under 4,000 square feet in floor area. A more generous exemption is appropri-
ate and the higher exemption would help support the types of local, independent businesses least likely to be
able to provide on-site parking. Relaxing the parking requirements for small businesses will support city goal
of encouraging a compact and walkable downtown.
• Parking should not be required in the proposed traditional districts. These are pedestrian-scale shopping dis-
tricts that would be adversely affected by the addition of parking lots.
• Residential parking requirements should be revised on the basis of the 2007 survey of parking demand within
downtown residential buildings. The results of that research suggest that the following minimum parking ra-
tios are appropriate: 1 space for dwelling units up to 800 square feet; 1.25 for dwellings up to 1,500 square
feet; and 1.5 spaces for dwellings over 1,500 square feet.
Centrally-located public parking has worked well in Evanston.
87 of 144
Section 7: Zoning Critique and Recommendations
Planned Development Review Findings
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
70
P LANNED D EVELOPMENT R EVIEW F INDINGS
Current zoning relies too heavily on planned development review. Requiring such review for buildings with as few
as 24 dwelling units and as little as 20,000 square feet is too strict. These low thresholds may discourage investors
from building smaller projects in the downtown.
The requirement that all planned developments conduct a market study and traffic impact study is too costly for
smaller projects in the downtown.
Planned Development Review Recommendations
A form-based code will eliminate the need for most planned development reviews and approvals. However, pro-
jects seeking floor area and building height above the base limitations should be subject to a downtown bonus re-
view process. In addition, larger buildings (i.e. building’s that exceed a floor area ratio of 3 or a height of 110 feet)
within the “core areas” of downtown should be subject to major project review focusing on issues of urban design,
site planning, and appearance review.
Most of the public review (versus administrative review) for downtown buildings should apply to projects asking
to go above the “base” floor area ratios and building height limitations through the use of public amenity bonuses.
The standards and requirements currently enforced through planned development review should be incorporated
into the form-based zoning ordinance and should be self-executing standards. The city’s Site Plan and Appearance
Review Committee (SPAARC) should be responsible for the administration of these site planning, urban design,
and appearance standards. As part of the adoption of a form-based code, the authority of the Site Plan and Ap-
pearance Review Committee to enforce appearance standards should be strengthened and its membership ex-
panded to include representatives of the Plan Commission and others deemed appropriate because of their back-
ground and/or expertise.
D EVELOPMENT A LLOWANCES AND E XCEPTIONS F INDINGS
The allowance and exception process that is commonly used in approving planned development projects is not
working. Such allowances and exceptions have lowered people’s confidence in the planned development process.
Residents of Evanston see downtown development review as an ad-hoc, case-by-case assessment where decisions
are made by City Council without sufficient consideration of the principals of comprehensive planning and the
tenets of good urban form.
Current development allowances are permitted when the plan commission and city council find that a project in-
corporates public benefits as described in Section 6-3-6-3. However, the public benefits listed there are vague and
general. In recent planned development cases, the purported public benefits developers offered in exchange for
allowances include “the payment of taxes,” the “redevelopment of vacant land,” and “the creation of jobs.” These
benefits are not unique or specific to a development project and do not relate to the immediate impacts on the
neighborhood.
Development Allowances and Exceptions Recommendations
The process of “allowances” and “exceptions” should be eliminated.
88 of 144
Section 7: Zoning Critique and Recommendations
Planned Development Design Guidelines Findings
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
71
The city should allow as-of-right development that is consistent with the recommendations embodied in the pro-
posed character districts. However, above a certain height or square footage threshold, the city should require that
builders earn bonuses for added floor area or density. The available bonuses should reflect the city goals for down-
town and citywide development. A list of possible bonuses would include:
• Underground parking or loading
• Whole-building sustainability (e.g. Gold/Platinum LEED certification or equivalent) design
• On-site affordable housing (in excess of the city’s minimum requirements)
• Affordable office space
• Financial contributions to public parks/open space improvements
• Above-grade parking wrapped by habitable floor area
• Landmarks preservation (adopt-a-landmark)
• Streetscape and alley improvements
• Public Plazas
• Façade Improvements
P LANNED D EVELOPMENT D ESIGN G UIDELINES F INDINGS
Much of what the city would like to require of developers in the downtown is currently expressed as design guide-
lines for planned developments. In the future, smaller properties along Davis Street and Sherman Avenue will be
redeveloped and these projects will not be subject to planned development review or the planned development
guidelines.
Planned Development Design Guidelines Recommendations
The standards and site planning criteria embodied in the planned development design guidelines should be
adopted as part of a form-based code for downtown. If these standards and criteria are adopted as part of the
form-based code then the planned development design guidelines will not be needed.
New downtown zoning should include a variety of form-based standards, including the following:
Activating Ground Floor Spaces
The first floor retail spaces should include store windows and prominent entrances that enhance the pedes-
trian shopping environment. Design standards should encourage display and shop windows that help acti-
vate streets and create interest for shoppers and pedestrians.
Upper-Story Setback Requirements
After reaching a maximum street wall height, the code would establish some minimum required setback.
The height or level of upper story setbacks would vary by zoning classification.
89 of 144
Section 7: Zoning Critique and Recommendations
Planned Development Design Guidelines Findings
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
72
Apply Build-to Lines
Build-to lines would be tied to a base zoning map or a regulating plan. These regulations would require that
new buildings be constructed out to the edge of the public right-of-way or, in the proposed transitional dis-
tricts, to be in line with the pattern of existing buildings on the block.
Conceal Above-grade Parking in New Developments
Parking structures would be required to be concealed and separated from the street by residential, office, or
retail floor space.
90 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council—February 9th, 2009)
73
SECTION 8: FORM-BASED ZONING FOR DOWNTOWN
This section, which begins on the following page, contains a concept draft of an alternative zoning approach for
downtown Evanston. These concepts build upon the work of the Downtown Planning Committee and the master
plan recommendations in Section 6 of this report. 180° Design Studio has prepared massing and bulk diagrams
designed to help assess the proposed zoning approach for edge, traditional, and core areas of the downtown.
91 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (Plan Commission Revised Draft–October 27, 2008)
76
FORM-BASED ZONING FOR DOWNTOWN: CONCEPTUAL STRATEGY
1. ZONING DISTRICTS ........................................................................................................................79
2. RD, RESIDENTIAL-DOWNTOWN TRANSITION DISTRICT...........................................................................81
2.1. Description.....................................................................................................................................................81
2.2. Building Placement..........................................................................................................................................81
2.3. Building Profile................................................................................................................................................81
2.4. Parking..........................................................................................................................................................83
2.5. Use...............................................................................................................................................................85
2.6. Floor Area......................................................................................................................................................85
3. DT, DOWNTOWN TRADITIONAL DISTRICT ............................................................................................87
3.1. Description.....................................................................................................................................................87
3.2. Building Placement..........................................................................................................................................87
3.3. Building Profile................................................................................................................................................87
3.4. Parking..........................................................................................................................................................90
3.5. Use...............................................................................................................................................................91
3.6. Floor Area......................................................................................................................................................91
4. DC, DOWNTOWN CORE DISTRICT......................................................................................................93
4.1. Description.....................................................................................................................................................93
4.2. Building Placement..........................................................................................................................................93
4.3. Building Profile................................................................................................................................................93
4.4. Parking..........................................................................................................................................................96
4.5. Use...............................................................................................................................................................98
4.6. Floor Area......................................................................................................................................................98
5. PUBLIC BENEFIT BONUSES ............................................................................................................101
5.1. Intent...........................................................................................................................................................101
5.2. Bonus Threshold...........................................................................................................................................101
5.3. Features Eligible for Public Benefits Bonus.........................................................................................................101
5.4. Public Benefits Summary Table .......................................................................................................................102
5.5. Underground Parking and Loading...................................................................................................................102
5.6. Whole-building Sustainability...........................................................................................................................103
5.7. Affordable Housing........................................................................................................................................104
5.8. Affordable Office Space..................................................................................................................................105
5.9. Public Park/Open Space Improvements............................................................................................................105
5.10. Above-Grade Parking Concealed by Habitable Floor Space..................................................................................106
5.11. Landmark Preservation...................................................................................................................................107
5.12. Streetscape or Alley Improvements..................................................................................................................108
5.13. Public Plazas................................................................................................................................................109
5.14. Façade Improvements....................................................................................................................................110
92 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
A Plan and Form-based Code for Downtown Evanston
77
6. ADMINISTRATION.........................................................................................................................111
6.1. Review and Approval.....................................................................................................................................111
6.2. Decision-making Criteria.................................................................................................................................112
6.3. Submittal Requirements..................................................................................................................................112
6.4. Elimination or Reduction of Bonus Features.......................................................................................................112
7. DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES .............................................................................................115
7.1. Intent...........................................................................................................................................................115
7.2. Applicability..................................................................................................................................................115
7.3. General Standards.........................................................................................................................................115
7.4. Sustainable Design........................................................................................................................................116
7.5. Articulation...................................................................................................................................................116
7.6. Fenestration..................................................................................................................................................116
7.7. Entries.........................................................................................................................................................117
7.8. Utilities and Service Areas...............................................................................................................................117
7.9. Parking........................................................................................................................................................117
7.10. Lighting .......................................................................................................................................................118
7.11. Administration...............................................................................................................................................118
93 of 144
94 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
1. Zoning Districts
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
79
1. Zoning Districts
1.1. Downtown Evanston is classified into the following zoning districts:
1.1.1. RD, Residential-Downtown Transition (see Sec. 2, p. 81)
1.1.2. DT, Downtown Traditional (see Sec. 3, p. 87)
1.1.3. DC, Downtown Core (see Sec. 4, p. 93)
1.2. The boundaries of these zoning classifications are shown in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1
95 of 144
96 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
2. RD, Residential-Downtown Transition District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
81
2. RD, Residential-Downtown Transition District
2.1. Description
The RD, Residential-Downtown Transition district is primarily intended to ac-
commodate residential and mixed-use development on the edges of down-
town. The RD district allows new development that is generally in keeping
with the size and scale of buildings that currently exist in the R6, R5 and
other non-downtown zoning districts found around the periphery of down-
town. RD zoning generally corresponds to the downtown plan’s University
Link and “edge” character districts.
2.2. Building Placement
2.2.1. Regulations governing where buildings may be placed on a lot
help ensure that new construction in RD districts will match
the established development pattern in downtown edge areas.
2.2.2. The outer perimeter of buildings must be placed within the
“build-to zone” (dark shaded area) shown in Figure 2.1, ex-
cept as otherwise expressly provided in this chapter.
Editor’s note: Because of the varying development patterns that exist in edge areas, it may be
necessary to devise different standards for different blocks, or establish building “frontage”
standards for different building types (e.g., houses, courtyard buildings, apartment buildings,
commercial buildings, etc.,
A. Building setback abutting street right-of-way: 15’ min./25’
max.
B. Building setback abutting interior side property line: 3’ min.;
none required if building on abutting lot has 0’ interior side
setback
C. Building setback abutting rear property line: 0’ min.
2.3. Building Profile
2.3.1. Height
A. Building height limits are established to ensure reasonable,
predictable limits on maximum building height and help en-
sure that the height of new buildings is in keeping with the
established character of downtown transition areas.
B. Two building height limits are established for the subareas
that makeup the larger RD district: (1) a maximum (as-of-
right) “base” height and (2) a maximum “public benefits”
height. The base height limit applies to all buildings; it is the
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
97 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
2. RD, Residential-Downtown Transition District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
82
maximum height allowed as-of-right for any building. Only
projects that provide extraordinary public benefits, in accor-
dance with Sec. 5 (Public Benefits), are eligible for the
“public benefits” building height limit. Maximum height lim-
its, expressed in feet are as follows:
District Maximum Base
Height (feet)
Max. Public Benefit
Height (feet)
RD-1 66 88
RD-2 66 110
RD-3 88 165
C. Any above-grade parking floor is counted for the purpose
of measuring building height.
D. Architectural features or rooftop accessory structures, such
as heating and ventilation equipment and antennas are not
counted as stories, nor are parapets or architectural fea-
tures that are designed to screen such equipment. All heat-
ing, ventilation, and similar rooftop equipment must be
screened and enclosed and such enclosure may not ex-
ceed 20 feet in height. Any such enclosure must be set-
back a distance of at least 10 feet from any front or side
building wall, however, for buildings 4 stories or less the
front wall setback must be equal to 10% of the building
depth and the side wall setback must be equal to 10% of
buildings width.
2.3.2. Upper-story Step-backs
Upper-story building step-backs help mitigate the visual im-
pact of taller buildings (as viewed from street level). All floors
above the 4th must be set back a minimum of 10 feet from
building lines adjacent to street rights-of-way.
Editor’s Note: As an alternative to a “fixed” step-back dimension, the minimum step-back
could be tied to lot depth (e.g., all floors above the 4th floor must be setback X% of the lot
depth (not to exceed 30 feet) from the front building wall…
Figure 2.3
98 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
2. RD, Residential-Downtown Transition District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
83
2.3.3. Upper-story Building Coverage
A. Limits on upper-story building coverage help mitigate the
visual impacts that taller buildings can have when located
near neighborhood areas with a lower-intensity (smaller
building) character. They also promote slender building
profiles on upper floors and thereby help preserve views.
B. In the RD district, no floor above the 4th floor may cover an
area in excess of 65% of the lot area. (See Figure 2.2–
Figure 2.4)
2.3.4. Building Frontage
Building frontage standards address the ground-floor profile of
buildings. Such standards work with building placement stan-
dards to help ensure an appropriate relationship between
buildings and the sidewalk, which in turn, helps create a safe
and pleasant pedestrian experience. To address the range of
contexts and frontage patterns found in the RD district, differ-
ent frontage standards are established for different building
types as follows:
Editor’s note:: Because of the varying development patterns that exist in edge ar-
eas, it may be necessary to devise different standards for different blocks, or estab-
lish building “frontage” standards for different building types (e.g., houses, courtyard
buildings, apartment buildings, commercial buildings, etc.,) General concepts for
such standards follow:
A. All buildings must be oriented to street with street-facing
windows and doors
B. Commercial building: allow (1) storefront design with build-
ing frontage standards similar to DT and DC; or (2) stoop
or porch design
C. House: stoop or porch design; windows/door+15%+; ga-
rage orientation stands
D. Rowhouse: stoop or porch design;
E. Apartment building: stoop or porch design;
2.4. Parking
2.4.1. Spaces Required
A. Bicycle: Minimum one bicycle parking space per 10 vehi-
cle parking spaces provided.
Figure 2.4
99 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
2. RD, Residential-Downtown Transition District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
84
B. Residential: Minimum 1 parking space per dwelling unit
(0–800 sq. ft.); 1.25 per unit (801–1,500 sq. ft.); 1.5
per unit for dwelling units over 1,500 square feet.
C. Nonresidential: Same as otherwise required by zoning ordi-
nance, expect that no parking is required for nonresidential
uses located on the ground-floor of a building unless such
uses occupy more than 4,000 square feet of floor area
(gross). Ground-floor uses that occupy more than 4,000
square feet (gross) must provide parking in accordance
with zoning ordinance standards.
D. Minimum off-street parking requirements are reduced for
projects that provide reserved parking spaces for carshar-
ing services. For projects that require from 5 to 10 off-
street parking spaces, a reduction of one space is allowed
for providing a reserved carsharing parking space. For pro-
jects that require more than 10 off-street parking spaces, a
parking reduction of 10% is allowed for providing a re-
served carsharing parking space. The Zoning Administrator
may grant a parking reduction consistent with this Section
provided that the applicant has submitted a long-term
lease/ agreement demonstrating that the reserved spaces
are for the exclusive use of carshare vehicles.
2.4.2. Above-grade Parking
For buildings constructed after [insert effective date of revised
downtown zoning regulations], all off-street parking and circu-
lation areas provided above the 2nd story of a building must be
counted as floor area for the purpose of floor area ratio calcu-
lations.
2.4.3. Parking Placement
Off-street parking, loading and other vehicular use areas may
be located only in the shaded areas shown in Figure 2.5,
unless located underground or concealed from view by habit-
able residential or commercial floor space with a minimum
depth of 50 feet at ground level. Parking facilities must be
accessed from alleys, but driveways may extend beyond the
boundaries of the shaded area in Figure 2.5 to the extent
necessary to accommodate safe access to allowed parking
and vehicular use areas as determined by the Site Plan and
Appearance Review Committee.
Figure 2.5
100 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
2. RD, Residential-Downtown Transition District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
85
A. Minimum setback abutting front property line: 50 feet at
ground level; no setback is required above ground level if
the parking area is fully enclosed and has an architectural
treatment (including building materials) that is consistent
with the architecture and materials used in the remainder of
the building.
B. Minimum setback abutting side/rear street property line: 25
feet at ground level; no setback is required above ground
level if the parking area is fully enclosed and has an archi-
tectural treatment (including building materials) that is con-
sistent with the architecture and materials used in the re-
mainder of the building.
C. Minimum setback abutting other property lines: 0 feet
2.4.4. Driveways may not exceed 28 feet in width, and no driveway
may be located within 100 feet of another driveway or inter-
section unless the Site Plan and Appearance Review Commit-
tee determines that no reasonable alternative exists that would
provide safe and adequate vehicle access.
2.5. Use
Editor’s Note: The new code’s use regulations should be tailored to recognize the existing
character of the transition/edge area and allow a range of land uses consistent with the area’s
existing character and zoning.
2.5.1. Ground Floor
Residential, retail sales, service uses and entertainment uses
(e.g., eating and drinking establishments) may be located on
the ground floor of buildings in the RD district.
2.5.2. Above the Ground Floor
Only office or residential uses is allowed above the ground
floor.
2.6. Floor Area
Floor area limits are imposed to ensure reasonable, predictable limits on
overall building intensity, which is critical for service and facility planning pur-
poses. Floor area is controlled by establishing maximum floor-area to lot-area
ratios, or FAR. As with building height, two FAR limits are established for each
district: (1) a maximum (as-of-right) “base” FAR and (2) a maximum “public
benefits” FAR. The maximum “base” FAR applies to all buildings. Only pro-
jects that provide extraordinary public benefits, in accordance with the provi-
sions of Sec. 5, may be authorized to build up to the “public benefits” FAR
limit. Maximum FAR limits are as follows:
Figure 2.6
101 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
2. RD, Residential-Downtown Transition District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
86
District Maximum Base FAR Max. Public Benefit
FAR
RD-1 2.75 4
RD-2 3 5
RD-3 3.5 6
102 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
3. DT, Downtown Traditional District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
87
3. DT, Downtown Traditional District
3.1. Description
The DT, Downtown Traditional district is intended to protect the character of
downtown Evanston’s traditional pedestrian shopping streets (i.e., the east
and west ends of Davis Street and the north and south ends of Sherman
Avenue). These areas are characterized by relatively low-scale buildings on
smaller lots, with retail sales and service uses that “activate’ the street-level
pedestrian environment. The DT district is intended to conserve the character
of designated traditional areas and to accommodate redevelopment that is in
keeping with that well-regarded character in terms of height, scale and func-
tion.
3.2. Building Placement
3.2.1. Requiring that buildings be placed close to the sidewalk helps
“frame” the street and sidewalk and activates the ground-level
pedestrian experience. This type of urban storefront building
placement is one of the key characteristics of downtown
Evanston, particularly in designated “traditional” areas.
3.2.2. The outer perimeter of buildings must be placed within the
“build-to zone” (dark shaded area) shown in Figure 3.1, ex-
cept as otherwise expressly provided in this chapter.
A. Building setback abutting street right-of-way: 0’ min./5’
max. (buildings may be set back more than 5 feet if addi-
tional setback is used to ensure minimum 15-foot sidewalk
and parkway width)
B. Building setback abutting other property lines: 0’ min.
C. In order to enhance pedestrian movement, safety and
comfort, all new development must allow for a minimum
15- foot wide sidewalk and parkway. Generally, the width
of sidewalks and parkways must be consistent with adjoin-
ing properties, however, the total combined sidewalk and
parkway width must be not less than 15 feet and not more
20 feet in width.
3.3. Building Profile
3.3.1. Height
A. Building height limits are established to ensure reasonable,
predictable limits on maximum building height and to pre-
serve the low-rise pedestrian shopping street character of
designated “traditional” areas. The maximum allowed (as-
Figure 3.1
103 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
3. DT, Downtown Traditional District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
88
of-right) “base” building height in the DT1 district is 38
feet. Projects that provide extraordinary public benefits in
accordance with Sec. 5 (Public Benefits) may be author-
ized to build up to 60 feet in height. The maximum al-
lowed (as-of-right) “base” height in the DT2 district is
42 feet. Projects that provide extraordinary public
benefits in accordance with Section 5 may be author-
ized to build up to 88 feet in height. (See Figure 3.2)
B. The first floor of a building in the DT district must have a
minimum floor to ceiling height of 15 feet and a maximum
floor-to-ceiling height of 20 feet.
C. Each above-grade parking floor is counted for the purpose
of measuring building height.
D. Architectural features or rooftop accessory structures, such
as heating and ventilation equipment and antennas are not
counted as stories. All heating, ventilation, and similar roof-
top equipment must be screened and enclosed and such
enclosure may not exceed 20 feet in height. Any such en-
closure must be setback a distance of at least 10 feet from
any front or side building wall, however, for buildings 4 sto-
ries or less the front wall setback must be equal to 10% of
the building depth and the side wall setback must be equal
to 10% of buildings width.
3.3.2. Upper-story Step-backs
Upper-story building step-backs help mitigate the visual im-
pact of taller buildings (as viewed from street level) in desig-
nated traditional areas. All floors above the 4th must be set
back a minimum of 10 feet from building lines adjacent to
street rights-of-way. (See Figure 3.2).
Editor’s Note: As an alternative to a “fixed” step-back dimension, the minimum step-
back could be tied to lot depth (e.g., all floors above the 4th floor must be setback
X% of the lot depth (not to exceed 30 feet) from the front building wall…
3.3.3. Building Frontage
Building frontage standards address the ground-floor profile of
buildings. Such standards work with building placement stan-
dards to help ensure an appropriate relationship between
buildings and the sidewalk, which in turn, helps create a safe
and pleasant pedestrian experience and preserve the charac-
ter of designated traditional areas of downtown. (See Figure
3.3)
Figure 3.2
104 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
3. DT, Downtown Traditional District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
89
A. A minimum of 75% of the street-facing building façade be-
tween 2 feet and 8 feet in height (above the sidewalk) must
consist of clear, non-reflective windows that allow views of
indoor areas. Buildings that abut alleys that have been im-
proved with pedestrian amenities (e.g. special pavers,
landscaping, benches, lighting), must provide the window
treatment required by this section along the alley frontage
for a minimum depth of 20 feet. The bottom of any win-
dow used to satisfy this requirement may not be more than
4.5 feet above the adjacent sidewalk or alley. (See Figure
3.3)
B. Buildings must have a public entrance facing the street
(sidewalk). Building entrances must occur at a rate of at
least one per 50 feet of street frontage. If a lot abuts two
streets, the required pedestrian entrances must face the
street (sidewalk) with the highest pedestrian volumes. Lots
that front on more than two streets must have at least one
public entrance on at least two street frontages. The depth
and width of recessed building entries may not exceed 8
feet.
C. The building’s ground floor elevation must be between zero
and one foot above the sidewalk.
D. The façade of all buildings exceeding 50 feet in width must
be vertically divided into bays or other segments no more
than 30 feet in width. (See Figure 3.3)
Figure 3.3
105 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
3. DT, Downtown Traditional District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
90
3.4. Parking
3.4.1. Spaces Required
A. Bicycle: Minimum one bicycle parking space per 10 vehi-
cle parking spaces provided.
B. Residential: Minimum 1 parking space per dwelling unit
(0–800 sq. ft.); 1.25 per unit (801–1,500 sq. ft.); 1.5
per unit for dwelling units over 1,500 square feet.
C. Nonresidential: Same as otherwise required by zoning ordi-
nance, expect that no parking is required for nonresidential
uses located on the ground-floor of a building unless such
uses occupy more than 4,000 square feet of floor area
(gross). Ground-floor uses that occupy more than 4,000
square feet (gross) must provide parking in accordance
with zoning ordinance standards.
D. Minimum off-street parking requirements are reduced for
projects that provide reserved parking for carsharing ser-
vices. For projects that require from 5 to 10 off-street
parking spaces, a reduction of one space is allowed for
providing a reserved carsharing parking space. For projects
that require more than 10 off-street parking spaces, a
parking reduction of 10% is allowed for providing a re-
served carsharing parking space. The Zoning Administra-
tor may grant a parking reduction consistent with this Sec-
tion provided that the applicant has submitted a long-term
lease/agreement demonstrating that the reserved spaces
are for the exclusive use of carshare vehicles.
3.4.2. Above-grade Parking
For buildings constructed after [insert effective date of revised
downtown zoning regulations], all off-street parking and circu-
lation areas provided above the 1st floor of a building must be
counted as floor area for the purpose of floor area ratio calcu-
lations.
3.4.3. Parking Placement
The placement of parking, loading and other vehicular use ar-
eas greatly affects the appearance, function and safety of the
pedestrian environment. In recognition of this fact, off-street
parking, loading and other vehicular use areas may be located
only in the shaded areas shown in Figure 3.4, unless located
underground or concealed from view by habitable residential
or commercial floor space that has a minimum depth of 50
Figure 3.4
106 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
3. DT, Downtown Traditional District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
91
feet at the ground level. Parking facilities must be accessed
from alleys, but driveways may extend beyond the boundaries
of the shaded area in Figure 3.4 to the extent necessary to
accommodate safe access to allowed parking and vehicular
use areas as determined by the Site Plan and Appearance
Review Committee.
A. Setback abutting front property line: min. 50 feet at ground
level; no setback is required above ground level if the park-
ing area is fully enclosed and has an architectural treatment
(including building materials) that is consistent with the ar-
chitecture and materials used in the remainder of the build-
ing.
B. Setback abutting side/rear street property line: 25 feet at
ground level; no setback is required above the ground level
if the parking area is fully enclosed and has an architectural
treatment (including building materials) that is consistent
with the architecture and materials used in the remainder of
the building.’
C. Setback abutting other property lines: 0’ min.
3.4.4. Driveways may not exceed 28 feet in width, and no driveway
may be located within 100 feet of another driveway or inter-
section unless the Site Plan and Appearance Review Commit-
tee determines that no reasonable alternative exists that would
provide safe and adequate vehicle access.
3.5. Use
Editor’s Note: The new code’s use regulations should be tailored to recognize the existing
character of the traditional area and allow a range of land uses consistent with the area’s
existing character and zoning.
3.5.1. Ground Floor
Only retail sales and service uses and entertainment uses
(e.g., eating and drinking establishments) may be located on
the ground floor of buildings in the DT district.
3.5.2. Above the Ground Floor
Any combination of allowed retail, commercial, personal ser-
vice or residential use is allowed above the ground floor.
3.6. Floor Area
Floor area limits are imposed to ensure reasonable, predictable limits on
overall building intensity, which is important for service and facility planning
Figure 3.5
107 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
3. DT, Downtown Traditional District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
92
purposes. Floor area is controlled by establishing maximum floor-area to lot-
area ratios, or FAR. Two FAR limits are established for each district: (1) a
maximum (as-of-right) “base” FAR and (2) a maximum “public benefits” FAR.
The “base” FAR limit applies to all buildings; it is the maximum “as-of-right”
FAR allowed. The “public benefits” FAR is, in effect, bonus FAR that that may
be authorized only for projects that provide Public Benefits in accordance with
the provisions of Sec. 5. The maximum “base” FAR in the DT district is 3.0.
The maximum FAR that is attainable by providing public benefits is 4.5.
108 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
4. DC, Downtown Core District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
93
4. DC, Downtown Core District
4.1. Description
The DC, Downtown Core district is intended to accommodate moderate- to
high-intensity office, retail, and mixed-use development within the central
core area of downtown Evanston. The Downtown Core is intended to permit a
wide variety of land uses including uses such as research labs and research
and development facilities that were previously authorized by the City’s eco-
nomic development plans including the plan for a downtown research park.
4.2. Building Placement
4.2.1. Requiring that buildings be placed close to the sidewalk helps
“frame” the street and sidewalk and activates the ground-level
pedestrian experience. This type of urban storefront building
placement is one of the key characteristics of downtown
Evanston.
4.2.2. The outer perimeter of buildings must be placed within the
“build-to zone” (dark shaded area) shown in Figure 4.1, ex-
cept as otherwise expressly provided in this chapter.
A. Setback abutting street right-of-way: 0’ min./5’ max.
(buildings may be set back more than 5 feet if additional
setback is used to ensure minimum 15-foot sidewalk and
parkway width)
B. Setback abutting other property lines: 0’ min.
C. In order to enhance pedestrian movement, safety and
comfort, all new development must allow for a minimum
15-foot wide sidewalk and parkway. Generally, the width of
sidewalks and parkways must be consistent with adjoining
properties, however, the total combined sidewalk and
parkway width must be not be less than 15 feet and not
more than 20 feet in width.
4.3. Building Profile
4.3.1. Height
A. Building height limits are established to ensure reasonable,
predictable limits on vertical building scale. Different height
limits are established for different areas within the DC dis-
trict in recognition of the varying character of the larger
core area and as a means of promoting a sculptured sky-
line that rises from the outer edges of downtown.
Figure 4.1
109 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
4. DC, Downtown Core District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
94
B. Three building height limits are established for the subareas
that makeup the larger DC district: (1) a maximum (as-of-
right) “base” height and (2) a maximum “public benefits”
height. The base height limit applies to all buildings; it is the
maximum height allowed as-of-right for any building. Only
projects that provide extraordinary public benefits, in accor-
dance with Sec. 5 (Public Benefits), are eligible for the
“public benefits” building height limit. Maximum height lim-
its, expressed in feet , are as follows:
Zoning Dis-
trict
Maximum Base
Height (feet)
Max. Public
Benefit Height
DC1 165 198
DC2 165 275
DC3 275 385
Figure
4.2
C. Each above-grade parking floor is counted for the purpose
of measuring building height.
D. Architectural features or rooftop accessory structures, such
as heating and ventilation equipment and antennas are not
counted as stories. All heating, ventilation, and similar roof-
top equipment must be screened and enclosed and such
enclosure may not exceed 20 feet in height. Any such en-
closure must be setback a distance of at least 10 feet from
any front or side building wall.
110 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
4. DC, Downtown Core District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
95
4.3.2. Upper-story Step-backs
Upper-story building step-backs help mitigate the visual im-
pact of taller buildings (as viewed from street level). All floors
above the 4th must be set back a minimum of 10 feet from
building lines adjacent to street rights-of-way.
Editor’s Note: As an alternative to a “fixed” step-back dimension, the minimum step-
back could be tied to lot depth (e.g., all floors above the 4th floor must be setback
X% of the lot depth (not to exceed 30 feet) from the front building wall…
4.3.3. Upper-story Building Coverage
A. Limits on upper-story building coverage help ensure that
residential (mixed-use) buildings have a tapered and slen-
der appearance and to promote generous separation be-
tween tall towers.
B. Maximum upper-story building coverage limits apply to
floors containing residential dwelling units. Floors containing
only office or other forms of nonresidential development
are not subject to coverage limits. (See Figure 4.2)
C. Upper-story building coverage limits are established for the
three subareas of the DC district as follows:
Floors/Stories DC1 DC2 DC-3
1st through 4th 100% 100% 100%
5th through 15th 65% 65% 65%
16th through 25th 50% 50% 50%
Above the 25th NA NA 35%
Note: In all cases, floors may have a min.gross area of
5,000 sq. ft.
4.3.4. Building Frontage
Building frontage standards address the ground-floor profile of
buildings. Such standards work with building placement stan-
dards to help ensure an appropriate pedestrian relationship
between buildings and the sidewalk, which in turn, helps cre-
ate a safe and pleasant pedestrian experience and preserve
the character of designated traditional areas of downtown.
A. A minimum of 75% of the street-facing building façade be-
tween 2 feet and 8 feet in height (above the sidewalk) must
consist of clear, non-reflective windows that allow views of
indoor areas. Buildings that abut alleys that have been im-
proved with pedestrian amenities (e.g. special pavers,
landscaping, benches, lighting), must provide the window
111 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
4. DC, Downtown Core District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
96
treatment required by this section along the alley frontage
for a minimum depth of 20 feet. The bottom of any win-
dow used to satisfy this requirement may not be more than
4.5 feet above the adjacent sidewalk or alley. (See Figure
4.3)
B. Buildings must have a public entrance facing the street
(sidewalk). Building entrances must occur at a rate of at
least 1 per 50 feet of frontage. If a lot abuts two streets,
the required pedestrian entrances must face the street
(sidewalk) with the highest pedestrian volumes. Lots that
front on more than two streets must have at least one pub-
lic entrance on at least two street frontages. The depth and
width of recessed building entries may not exceed 8 feet.
C. The building’s ground floor elevation must be between zero
and one foot above the sidewalk.
D. The façade of all buildings exceeding 50 feet in width must
be vertically divided into bays or other segments no more
than 30 feet in width. (See Figure 4.3)
E. The ground floor elevation (building base) must be visually
distinguished from the upper floors.
Figure 4.3
4.4. Parking
4.4.1. Spaces Required
A. Bicycle: Minimum one bicycle parking space per 10 vehi-
cle parking spaces provided.
B. Residential: Minimum 1 parking space per dwelling unit
(0–800 sq. ft.); 1.25 per unit (801–1,500 sq. ft.); 1.5
per unit for dwelling units over 1,500 square feet.
112 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
4. DC, Downtown Core District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
97
C. No parking is required for nonresidential uses located on
the ground-floor of a building unless such uses occupy
more than 4,000 square feet of floor area (gross). Ground-
floor uses that occupy more than 4,000 square feet
(gross) must provide at least 2.5 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of floor area.
D. Minimum off-street parking requirements are reduced for
projects that provide reserved parking for carsharing ser-
vices. For projects that require from 5 to 10 off-street
parking spaces, a reduction of one space is allowed for
providing a reserved carsharing parking space. For projects
that require more than 10 off-street parking spaces, a
parking reduction of 10% is allowed for providing a re-
served carsharing parking space. The Zoning Administra-
tor may grant a parking reduction consistent with this Sec-
tion provided that the applicant has submitted a long-term
lease/agreement demonstrating that the reserved spaces
are for the exclusive use of carshare vehicles.
4.4.2. Parking Structure Height
For buildings constructed after [insert effective date of revised
downtown zoning regulations], all off-street parking and circu-
lation areas provided above the 4th story of a building must be
counted as floor area for the purpose of floor area ratio calcu-
lations.
4.4.3. Parking Placement
The placement of parking, loading and other vehicular use ar-
eas has greatly affects the appearance, function and safety of
the pedestrian environment. In recognition of this fact, off-
street parking, loading and other vehicular use areas may be
located only in the shaded areas shown in Figure 4.4, unless
located underground or concealed from view by habitable
residential or commercial floor space with a minimum depth
of 50 at the ground level. Parking facilities must be accessed
from alleys but driveways may extend beyond the boundaries
of the shaded area in Figure 4.4 to the extent necessary to
accommodate safe access to allowed parking and vehicular
use areas as determined by the Site Plan and Appearance
Review Committee.
A. Minimum Setback abutting front property line: min 50 feet
at ground level; no setback is required above the ground
level if the parking area is fully enclosed and has an archi-
Figure 4.4
113 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
4. DC, Downtown Core District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
98
tectural treatment (including building materials) that is con-
sistent with the architecture and materials used in the re-
mainder of the building .
B. Setback abutting side/rear street property line: 25 feet at
ground level; no setback is required above the ground level
if the parking area is fully enclosed and has an architectural
treatment (including building materials) that is consistent
with the architecture and materials used in the remainder of
the building.
C. Minimum setback abutting other property lines: 0’ min.
4.4.4. Driveways may not exceed 28 feet in width, and no driveway
may be located within 100 feet of another driveway or inter-
section unless the Site Plan and Appearance Review Commit-
tee determines that no reasonable alternative exists that would
provide safe and adequate vehicle access.
4.5. Use
Editor’s Note: The new code’s use regulations should be tailored to recognize the existing
character of the downtown core area and allow a range of land uses consistent with the area’s
existing character and zoning.
4.5.1. Ground Floor
Only nonresidential uses may be located on the ground floor
of buildings in the DC district.
4.5.2. Above the Ground Floor
Any combination of allowed residential and nonresidential use
is allowed above the ground floor.
4.6. Floor Area
Floor area limits are imposed to ensure reasonable, predictable limits on
overall building intensity, which is critical for service and facility planning pur-
poses. Floor area is controlled by establishing maximum floor-area to lot-area
ratios, or FAR. As with building height, two FAR limits are established for each
district: (1) a maximum (as-of-right) “base” FAR and (2) a maximum “public
benefits” FAR. The maximum “base” FAR applies to all buildings. Only pro-
jects that provide extraordinary public benefits, in accordance with the provi-
sions of Sec. 5, may be authorized to build up to the “public benefits” FAR
limit. Maximum FAR limits are as follows:
Zoning
District
Max. Base FAR Max. Public Benefits FAR
DC1 5 6
Figure 4.5
114 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
4. DC, Downtown Core District
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
99
Zoning
District
Max. Base FAR Max. Public Benefits FAR
DC2 5 10
DC3 7.5 12
115 of 144
116 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
101
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
5.1. Intent
The public benefit bonus provisions of this chapter are intended to provide an
economic incentive for developers to invest in sustainable design, high-quality
urban design and other features and services that provide significant public
benefits and improve the quality of life of downtown residents and visitors.
The public benefits bonus system is also intended to promote certainty in the
development process by establishing objective standards for the granting of
bonus floor area and building height.
5.2. Bonus Threshold
Only buildings that incorporate a green roof and that are LEED-pre-certified
(or the municipal equivalent) may apply for the public benefit bonuses of this
section.
5.3. Features Eligible for Public Benefits Bonus
Floor area bonuses may be approved for projects that provide the following
public benefit features:
5.3.1. Whole-building sustainability (e.g., LEED Gold or Platinum);
5.3.2. Affordable housing units constructed on site that exceed oth-
erwise applicable minimum requirements;
5.3.3. Financial contributions to landmark preservation or on-site
preservation of designated landmarks;
5.3.4. Public plazas;
5.3.5. Financial contributions to public park/open space improve-
ments;
5.3.6. Underground parking or loading spaces;
5.3.7. Above-grade parking wrapped by habitable (residential or
commercial) floor space;
5.3.8. Affordable office space;
5.3.9. Streetscape and alley improvements; and
5.3.10. Façade improvements.
117 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
102
5.4. Public Benefits Summary Table
The following table provides a summary of public benefit bonuses available in
one or more downtown zoning districts.
Public Benefit Feature Eligible
Districts
Max. Bonus
(% of base FAR)
Underground Parking and Loading RD, DT, DC 25%
Whole-building Sustainability (e.g., LEED
Gold/Platinum)
RD, DT, DC 15%/25%
On-site Affordable Housing (in excess of
any applicable minimum requirements)
RD, DT, DC 15%
Affordable Office Space DT, DC 15%
Public Park/Open Space Improvements RD, DT, DC 10%
Above-grade Parking Wrapped by Habit-
able Floor Area
DT, DC 10%
Landmark Preservation RD, DT, DC 10%
Streetscape and Alley Improvements DT, DC 10%
Public Plazas DT, DC 10%
Façade Improvements RD, DT, DC 5%
5.5. Underground Parking and Loading
5.5.1. Public Benefits Bonus Formula
A floor area bonus for qualifying underground parking and
loading areas may be approved for buildings in RD, DT, and
DC districts in accordance with the following formula:
A. For parking spaces within the first two levels that are fully
underground: Bonus FAR = [(number of underground
parking spaces × 350 square feet) ÷ lot area] × 0.15 ×
Base FAR.
B. For parking spaces within the third or lower levels that are
fully underground: Bonus FAR = [(number of underground
parking spaces × 350 square feet) ÷ lot area] × 0.20 ×
Base FAR.
C. For loading docks that are fully underground: Bonus FAR =
[(number of underground loading docks × 1000 square
feet) ÷ lot area] × 0.15 × Base FAR.
5.5.2. Standards and Guidelines
Underground parking and loading facilities are eligible for floor
area bonuses, provided they meet the following minimum
standards:
118 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
103
A. Parking spaces and loading docks must be located entirely
below the lowest grade level of any adjacent street front-
age.
B. Underground parking and loading spaces for which a floor
area bonus is granted must comply with all city size, di-
mension, and access requirements. Floor area bonuses
may not be granted for tandem parking spaces.
C. The entrance and exit to the parking garage or loading
dock should be located off an alley. Other locations must
comply with applicable city criteria.
D. The design of any garage entrance or exits that are permit-
ted on public streets must be compatible with the façade
treatment of the rest of the building.
5.6. Whole-building Sustainability
5.6.1. Public Benefit Bonus Formula
Additional floor area may be allowed for buildings in RD, DT,
and DC districts as follows:
A. Commitment to LEED Gold (or city-administered equivalent)
sustainability rating: 6% minimum increase in FAR. Higher
bonus [up to max] may be awarded to projects that exceed
minimum certification levels.
B. Commitment to LEED Platinum (or city-administered
equivalent) sustainability rating: 15% minimum increase in
FAR. Higher bonus [up to max] may be awarded to pro-
jects that exceed minimum certification levels.
5.6.2. Because LEED certification or city-administered equivalent
sustainability determination cannot occur until after a building
is constructed, public benefit bonuses are granted based on
the developer’s good faith commitment to achievement of the
applicable sustainability level.
A. The developer / owner (applicant) must submit a binding
letter of intent that communicates their commitment to
achievement of the required sustainability level.
B. The city will then issue subsequent permits and the certifi-
cate of occupancy based on this commitment.
119 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
104
C. Within 120 days of receiving the final certificate of occu-
pancy, the applicant must submit documentation that dem-
onstrates achievement of the applicable sustainability level.
5.6.3. A letter of credit or other city-approved financial guarantee is
required to ensure ultimate compliance with the required sus-
tainability level. The amount of the financial guarantee must be
equal to extra development and construction costs estimated
by the city to be required to achieve the required sustainability
level, plus 15%.
5.6.4. Failure to submit a timely report or demonstrate performance
will result in a penalty.
A. The penalty for failure to submit a timely report is $500 per
day from the due date.
B. The penalty for failure to demonstrate performance with the
required sustainability level will result in forfeiture of the fi-
nancial guarantee.
C. Performance must be demonstrated through an independ-
ent report provided by the U.S. Green Building Council, the
city or a city-approved alternative organization that confirms
achievement of the required sustainability level.
D. All penalties collected will contribute to a Green Building
Fund dedicated to supporting market adoption of green
building.
5.7. Affordable Housing
5.7.1. Public Benefit Bonus Formula
A floor area bonus for affordable housing may be approved
for buildings in RD, DT, and DC districts in accordance with
the following formula:
A. Bonus Floor Area = (sum of the on-site floor area im-
proved with affordable housing units in excess of minimum
requirements) × 4.0,
5.7.2. Standards and Guidelines
Floor area bonuses for affordable housing are intended to
promote private-sector participation in helping meet the city’s
affordable housing needs. Bonuses are allowed only for pro-
viding affordable housing or funding that exceeds the city’s
minimum affordable housing requirements.
120 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
105
5.8. Affordable Office Space
5.8.1. Public Benefit Bonus Formula
A floor area bonus for affordable office space may be ap-
proved for buildings in DT and DC districts in accordance with
the following formula:
A. Bonus Floor Area = (sum of the on-site floor area im-
proved with affordable office space) × 4.0,
5.8.2. Standards and Guidelines
A. Affordable office space must be integrated into new office
buildings or mixed-use developments and may not be lo-
cated off-site.
B. The lease rate for affordable office space must be at or be-
low median Class B or Class C office rents in downtown
Evanston, as indicated in the most recent CoStar survey.
The rate must remain in effect for at least 10 years.
5.9. Public Park/Open Space Improvements
5.9.1. Public Benefits Formula
A. Floor area bonuses for financial contributions to acquire
public parks or open spaces or make improvements to
public parks or open spaces are to be based on the value
of property within the geographic area, based on the fol-
lowing formula: Cost of 1 square foot of floor area = 80%
× median cost of land per buildable square foot.
B. The cost of land must be based on sale prices within the
most recent 5 years, as provided by the Planning Division.
C. The Director of Planning is responsible for updating esti-
mates of land values every 5 years.
5.9.2. Standards and Guidelines
Floor area bonuses for financial contributions to acquire public
parks or open spaces or make improvements to public parks
or open spaces may be approved for buildings in RD, DT,
and DC districts, subject to the following standards and guide-
lines.
A. Contributions of land, cash, or improvements must be tar-
geted for specific improvement projects, or for off-site land
acquisition within one-half mile of the subject site. Pro-
121 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
106
posed improvements must be consistent with the priorities
identified within the City’s Parks and Recreation Plan. The
identification of specific improvement projects or land ac-
quisition sites will be made on a case-by-case basis by the
Parks, Forestry & Recreation Department.
B. Applicants who contribute improvements and who will be
undertaking the work themselves must submit documenta-
tion including but not limited to, appropriate drawings, de-
tailed construction commitments, a construction schedule,
and a performance bond for completion of the improve-
ments.
C. Applicants who make cash contributions for specific im-
provements that are to be undertaken by city agencies
must enter into an agreement with the City of Evanston and
the agency undertaking the improvement.
5.10. Above-Grade Parking Concealed by Habitable Floor Space
5.10.1. Public Benefits Bonus Formula
A floor area bonus may be approved for qualifying habitable
floor space that conceals a parking garage for buildings in DT
and DC districts in accordance with the following standards:
Bonus FAR = (area of concealed parking façade ÷ lot area)
× 0.40 × Base FAR. The “area” is calculated by multiplying
the height of the portion of the building elevation concealing
the parking by the width of the elevation that conceals the
parking.
5.10.2. Design Standards and Guidelines
Parking structures that are concealed from view of the street
(sidewalk) by habitable floor space—such as residential
dwelling units, office space, or retail space—are eligible for
floor area bonuses, provided they meet the following mini-
mum standards:
A. To be eligible for floor area bonus, concealed parking
structures must meet all applicable design standards and
guidelines for parking garages.
B. Parking structures must be separated from a public street
or public open space by residential, office or retail floor
space with a minimum depth of 20 feet.
122 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
107
C. The façade of the floor space separating the parking struc-
ture from the street or open space must contain transpar-
ent windows.
D. Only the façade area of the parking structure that is con-
cealed by habitable floor space is eligible for a bonus.
E. The parking structure must be separated from the street or
open space by habitable floor space for the entire length of
the façade. Minor exceptions may be made for non-
habitable floor space, such as mechanical or storage
spaces, which may occupy up to 10% of the façade
length.
F. The ground-floor is required to have active retail or other
pedestrian-oriented uses (e.g., offices, service uses, res-
taurants, galleries, or lobbies) for the entire length of the
façade qualifying for the bonus, except for accessory drive-
ways or loading bays.
G. Parking garage structures on sites that abut one or 2 public
streets or open spaces must be concealed by habitable
space along all public street or open spaces to receive a
floor area bonus.
H. Parking garage structures on sites that abut 3 or more
public streets or open spaces must be concealed by habit-
able floor space along at least two public street or open
spaces to receive a floor area bonus. On the side that is
not concealed, the façade of the exposed parking garage
structure must be treated with glazed window openings or
other treatments that are similar in proportion, materials,
and detailing to the habitable floors. This façade area may
not be granted any floor area bonus.
I. Louvers required for air intake and exhaust should be lo-
cated on non-public facing façades whenever possible.
When louvers are necessary on public façades, they should
be minimized and be architecturally integrated with the fa-
çade.
5.11. Landmark Preservation
5.11.1. Public Benefits Formula
A. Floor area bonuses for qualifying activities are to be based
on financial contributions that reflect the value of property
within the geographic area, based on the following formula:
123 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
108
Cost of 1 square foot of floor area = 80% × median cost
of land per buildable square foot.
B. The cost of land must be based on sale prices within the
most recent 5 years, as provided by the Planning Division.
C. The planning director is responsible for updating estimates
of land values every 5 years.
5.11.2. Standards and Guidelines
Floor area bonuses may be approved for historic landmark
preservation in RD, DT and DC districts. Floor area bonuses
may be granted in return for payments to property owners of
officially designated historic buildings to support specific build-
ing restoration projects, subject to the following criteria and
guidelines:
A. Restoration projects must be consistent with Section 2-9-9
of the City Code (Standards for Review of Applications for
Certificates of Appropriateness).
B. Landmarks eligible for adoption must be identified by the
Evanston preservation commission and must be located
within a DR, DT or DC district.
C. Funds received must be used for substantial interior or ex-
terior rehabilitation or restoration work that is visible from a
public street or within a portion of the interior that is open
to the public. Such work must exceed routine maintenance
work (e.g., restoration of a missing cornice, replacement
in-kind of deteriorated terra cotta).
D. The property owner of the landmark building receiving the
funds must enter into an agreement with the preservation
commission regarding the manner in which the funds will
be used.
5.12. Streetscape or Alley Improvements
5.12.1. Public Benefits Formula
Floor area bonuses for streetscape or alley improvements
may be approved for buildings in DT and DC districts. These
bonuses may be combined with sidewalk widening bonuses.
A. Floor area bonuses for qualifying improvements are to be
based on the value of property within the geographic area,
based on the following formula: Cost of 1 square foot of
124 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
109
floor area = 80% × median cost of land per buildable
square foot.
B. The cost of land must be based on sale prices within the
most recent 5 years, as provided by the Planning Division.
C. The planning director is responsible for updating estimates
of land values every 5 years.
5.12.2. Standards and Guidelines
Streetscape or alley improvements may be eligible for floor
area bonuses if they comply with the following standards and
guidelines:
A. To qualify for the streetscape or alley improvement bonus,
such improvements must extend beyond the boundaries of
the applicant’s property and, at a minimum, must extend
for the full length of the subject block face or the full length
of the alley (from street to street), as applicable.
B. To qualify for a floor area bonus, the improvements must
be located within 2 blocks as the proposed building.
C. Plans should demonstrate the maximum use of trees with-
out obstructing the public way or views of retail uses.
D. Pavement treatments and materials should reflect those
generally used in the immediate area.
E. Applicants who contribute street improvements and who
will be undertaking the work themselves must submit
documentation including but not limited to, appropriate
drawings, detailed construction commitments, a construc-
tion schedule, and a performance bond for completion of
the improvements.
F. Applicants who make cash contributions for specific im-
provements that are to be undertaken by city agencies
must enter into an agreement with the City of Evanston and
the agency undertaking the improvement.
5.13. Public Plazas
5.13.1. Public Benefit Bonus Formula
A floor area bonus for qualifying public plazas in accordance
with the following formula: Bonus FAR = (area of plaza or
park ÷ lot area) × 1.0 × Base (as-of-right) FAR.
125 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
5. Public Benefit Bonuses
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
110
5.13.2. Standards and Guidelines
Public plazas are eligible for floor area bonuses in DT and DC
districts and buildings incorporating public plazas will not be
subject to the build-to line requirements of Sections 2.2.2.A,
3.2.2.A, 4.2.2.A for that portion of the lot devoted to a plaza
if the plaza meets the following minimum standards and
guidelines:
A. Plazas and parks must be open to the sky, except for ar-
bors, trellises, or small pedestrian-oriented structures, such
as kiosks.
B. Plazas and parks must have a minimum site area of 2,500
square feet.
C. At least 20% of the park or plaza area must consist of
landscaping.
D. One linear foot of seating area must be provided for each
30 square feet of plaza or park space.
E. All parks or plazas must be visible from and connected to a
sidewalk.
F. The length of a park or plaza may not exceed 3 times its
width in order to avoid long, narrow spaces.
G. Parks and plazas must be designed in accordance with
ADA accessibility requirements. No plaza may be more
than 3 feet above the adjacent sidewalk level.
H. Plazas or parks must be open to the public at least during
the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. An appropriate
plaque approximately 2 to 4 square feet in area must be
displayed at all entrances stating the hours of public use.
I. Plazas and parks should be located so that they receive
natural light during the day. Generally plazas that face
south, east or west are acceptable. Preference will be
given to plazas at corner locations that both maximize pe-
destrian access and access to natural light. No floor area
bonus may be granted for a plaza or park that has street
frontage only on a north-facing street.
5.14. Façade Improvements
Editor’s Note: guidelines to be prepared by Preservation Commission, Plan Commission and
staff during zoning ordinance drafting phase.
126 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
6. Administration
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
111
A.
B.
6. Administration
6.1. Review and Approval
6.1.1. Small projects are subject to review by the Site Plan and Ap-
pearance Review Committee. Within RD and DT districts small
projects are those that do not use public benefit bonuses. In
the DC districts small projects are those that do not use public
benefit bonuses and that have a floor area ratio of 3 or less
and a height of 110 feet or less.
6.1.2. Projects in the DC district that exceed an FAR of 3 or have a
height of 110 feet or more but do not use any public benefit
bonuses require planning and architectural review and ap-
proval as major developments in accordance with Sec.
XREF1.
6.1.3. Projects that seek floor area bonuses for public benefit fea-
tures may be approved only through the public benefit bonus
review process, which involves a review and recommendation
by the Plan Commission and a final decision by the City
Council.
6.1.4. Projects that receive city financial assistance to provide any of
the subject public benefit “amenities” are not eligible to re-
ceive a floor area bonus for that amenity. For example, pro-
jects that receive city financial assistance to provide affordable
housing are not eligible for affordable housing floor area bo-
nuses.
6.1.5. The Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee (SPARC) is
responsible for review of all projects within the downtown area
and for recommendations to the Plan Commission for projects
subject to Plan Commission review. SPARC may defer rec-
ommendations for a period up to 3 months if an applicant fails
to make recommended changes. During this 3 month period,
projects may not be scheduled for Plan Commission review
and no building permits may be processed. SPARC member-
ship must include at least 2 members of the Plan Commission
appointed by the Chair.
1 “Major development review” is expected to involve plan commission (public) review. Major
development review criteria and procedures to be developed as part of downtown zoning
ordinance update.
127 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
6. Administration
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
112
6.1.6. The Director of Planning is responsible for maintaining and
updating estimates of land values in the downtown sub-
districts. Estimates must be updated annually. The estimated
cost of land used in the bonus formulas, however, will be
based on the average sale prices within the most recent 5
year period and these estimates will be subject to review by
the Plan Commission on 5 year intervals.
6.2. Decision-making Criteria
In acting on requested floor area bonuses, the Plan Commission and the City
Council must evaluate proposed amenities based on their contribution to and
the degree to which they enhance the quality of life and benefit the public in
the surrounding area. Floor area bonuses may be approved only if they:
6.2.1. comply with the standards and criteria of this section; and
6.2.2. are planned, designed and located to provide public benefits
for downtown residents and visitors.
6.3. Submittal Requirements
6.3.1. The applicant must file with the zoning administrator and the
planning director a bonus worksheet—in a form required by
the zoning administrator—that identifies the eligible public
benefit features to be provided and the floor area bonuses re-
quested.
6.3.2. Such worksheets must describe the size, location and design
of the public benefit features as well as any maintenance pro-
visions. The submittal must also include calculations for the
amount of bonus floor area requested.
6.4. Elimination or Reduction of Bonus Features
6.4.1. Such worksheets will serve as an official record of public
benefit bonuses and such records will be binding on the
property owners, successors, and assigns for the life of the
building for the design, operation, and maintenance of the
public benefit features.
6.4.2. No public benefit feature for which a floor area bonus has
been granted may be eliminated or reduced in size without a
corresponding reduction in building floor area or substitution
of an equivalent public benefit. Substitution requests must be
processed in the same manner as the original request.
128 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
6. Administration
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
113
6.4.3. Any proposed elimination or reduction of a public benefit fea-
ture for which a floor area bonus was granted requires review
and approval through the public benefit bonus review process.
129 of 144
130 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
7. Design Standards and Guidelines
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
115
7. Design Standards and Guidelines
7.1. Intent
7.1.1. The design standards and guidelines of this section comple-
ment the downtown zoning regulations.
7.1.2. They are intended to accommodate a diversity of architectural
styles and variations in the treatment of building facades,
building heights and rooflines.
7.1.3. The standards and guidelines promote the articulation of
buildings with detailed fenestration, high-quality building mate-
rials, signage and lighting.
7.1.4. The standards and guidelines are further intended to promote
attractive streetscape elements and to promote environmen-
tally sensitive, sustainable design.
7.2. Applicability
7.2.1. The design standards and guidelines of this section apply to
all development that requires a certificate of zoning compli-
ance pursuant to Section 6-3-2 of the Zoning Ordinance ex-
cept for development involving only “substantial rehabilitation
or substantial addition,” as defined in Section 6-18-3 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
7.2.2. If the design standards and guidelines of this section conflict
with the zoning district standards of Sec. 2 through Sec. 4,
the more restrictive provision governs.
7.3. General Standards
7.3.1. Façade elements must include variety in terms of building set-
backs, shadows, changes in building materials that create di-
versity and interest along the streetscape.
7.3.2. Standardized or franchised architecture with formulaic styles
and architectural features mainly designed for advertising are
prohibited.
7.3.3. Building materials must be of a durable quality that requires
minimal maintenance. Exterior insulation and finish system
(EIFS) should not be used on storefronts or on the street-
facing building elevations.
131 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
7. Design Standards and Guidelines
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
116
7.4. Sustainable Design
7.4.1. Retrofits of downtown buildings and the construction of new
buildings should incorporate the principals of “green” building
and sustainable design. This would include enhancements to
the efficiency of water and energy use and commitments to
the use of recycled materials, locally manufactured or pro-
duced materials, or to the use of “renewable” building materi-
als.
7.4.2. Developments must incorporate “green elements” into build-
ing designs. This may include stormwater collection and recy-
cling facilities, “green” roofs, solar panels, or rooftop wind
powered turbines.
7.4.3. Large-scale residential developments (projects over 100
units) must incorporate on-site recreational facilities or on-site
open spaces for building residences. These facilities or open
spaces may be located at grade, on roof-top decks, within
upper level terraces or within health clubs or recreational
rooms within the building. . Buildings are encouraged to be
self-sufficient in terms of the recreation facilities needed by
building residences.
7.5. Articulation
7.5.1. All buildings must have basic elements of a base, middle, and
top.
7.5.2. Buildings within DT and DC districts must have a distinct
ground- elevation (building base) that is visually distinguished
from the upper floors by a horizontal design expression, such
as a change in materials or architectural details.
7.5.3. To avoid long, monolithic structures, buildings should be ar-
ticulated with projections, recesses, material changes, para-
pets, cornices, and varying roof heights. Long blank or unar-
ticulated walls are prohibited on street-facing building eleva-
tions.
7.5.4. Long buildings should be “broken-up” in a way that creates
the appearance of separate storefronts at regular intervals.
7.6. Fenestration
Dark-tinted, spandrel, frosted, or smoked glass should not be used in win-
dows within the DT or DC districts. Use of such materials should be limited to
decorative elements and accent features.
132 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
7. Design Standards and Guidelines
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
117
7.7. Entries
7.7.1. Building entries should be clearly defined and articulated.
7.7.2. The largest, most prominent building entries should generally
be located along the street frontage with the highest pedes-
trian volumes.
7.7.3. In mixed-use buildings on corner lots commercial building en-
tries and windows should be located along (primary) streets
with the highest pedestrian volumes and entries to residential
units should be located on secondary streets.
7.7.4. Entryways to retail sales and service businesses, restaurants,
offices must be directly accessible from the sidewalk. Such
entries should not be accessed through lobbies or residential
entryways.
7.7.5. Grand entryways, recessed entryways, entryways that incor-
porate public art or public plazas are encouraged.
7.8. Utilities and Service Areas
7.8.1. Service areas, utility equipment areas, heating and ventilation
equipment must be enclosed or otherwise screened from
view of street rights-of-way.
7.8.2. Loading, trash, and utility equipment areas must be located
out of view of street rights-of-way. In most cases, such areas
must be enclosed within a building.
7.8.3. Rooftop mechanical equipment should be setback from the
building line and screened so that it is not visible from street
rights-of-way right-of way.
7.9. Parking
7.9.1. The design of parking lots, parking garages and other areas
used for service vehicle access must minimize the number of
vehicle access and exit points crossing sidewalks or other pe-
destrian routes.
7.9.2. The exterior elevations of any parking garage must be de-
signed so as to screen or conceal parked cars from view from
public street rights-of-way and open spaces.
7.9.3. All parking garages must provide shielding of lighting so as to
minimize glare on adjoining properties.
133 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
7. Design Standards and Guidelines
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
118
7.9.4. The location and design of a parking structure’s entrances
and exits should be planned so as to have the least impact on
pedestrian and vehicular safety and comfort. Special paving
materials should be used to help define the pedestrian walk-
ways along garage openings when such designs would en-
hance pedestrian safety.
7.9.5. At ground level parking garages must incorporate street-level
retail and commercial businesses that activate the entire struc-
ture’s street frontage (with the exception of driveways and pe-
destrian entrances).
7.9.6. The upper floors of multi-story garages must be screened or
concealed by one or more of the following methods:
A. Habitable floor space; or
B. Glazing, metal grillwork, louvers and other architectural
treatments.
7.10. Lighting
7.10.1. Lighting on buildings should be integrated within the architec-
tural style of the building.
7.10.2. Lighting should be located and directed to enhance pedes-
trian safety.
7.10.3. Lights must be located and designed to prevent negative ef-
fects on neighboring properties.
7.11. Administration
7.11.1. The Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee is respon-
sible for reviewing projects for compliance with the design
standards and guidelines of this section.
7.11.2. In reviewing projects for compliance with these design stan-
dards and guidelines, the Site Plan and Appearance Review
Committee must make findings that the proposed site plan
and elevations comply or fail to comply with the design stan-
dards and guidelines of this section.
7.11.3. If the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee finds that
the proposed development fails to comply with the design
standards and guidelines, they must return the plans and ele-
vations to the applicant for modifications or revisions.
134 of 144
Section 8: Form-Based Zoning for Downtown: Conceptual Strategy
7. Design Standards and Guidelines
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by the City Council–February 9th, 2009)
119
7.11.4. If the applicant fails to make the required revisions or objects
to the findings of the Site Plan and Appearance Review
Committee then the plan may only be approved through the
approval of a “major variation,” in accordance with procedures
of Zoning Ordinance Section 6-3-8-10.
135 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-1
APPENDIX A: EVANSTON LANDMARKS WITHIN THE
DOWNTOWN STUDY AREA
1. 1717 Benson
2. 816 Clark
3. 1468 Chicago/600-610 Grove
4. 1501-1511 Chicago
5. 1604-1608 Chicago
6. 1702 Chicago
7. 1724 Chicago
8. 1728 Chicago
9. 1730 Chicago (National Register)
10. 630-640 Church/1633-1645-49 Orrington
11. 610-612 Davis
12. 630 Davis
13. 1101-1115 Davis
14. 1451-1457 Elmwood
15. 618-628 Grove/1511-1521 Sherman
16. 1626-1640 Hinman/516 Church
17. 607 Lake
18. 1449-1453 Maple
19. 1509 Oak (1505-1515 Oak)
20. 1560 Oak
21. 1618 Orrington
22. 1603-1611 Ridge/1125 Davis
23. 1615-1625 Ridge
24. 1627-1645 Ridge/1124-1136 Church
25. 1703-1713 Ridge
26. 1578 Sherman
27. 1700 Sherman
28. 1830 Sherman
136 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-3
APPENDIX B: PARKING SURVEY DATA
Parking Requirements: Comparison of Existing and Proposed Standards
Address Unit Size and Current Requirement Unit Size and Proposed Requirements
Bedrooms Total
Units
Required
Parking
Actual
Parking
Supplied
Occupied
Spaces (rate
per unit)
Plus
10%
Bedrooms [1] Total
Units
Proposed
Parking Re-
quirement
1 2 3 1 2 3
1720
Maple
60 99 45 204 315 237 197 (0.96) 217 60 99 45 204 254
1640
Maple
29 71 3 103 168 145 98 (0.97) 108 29 71 3 103 123
1572
Maple
8 8 12 28 46 48 33 (1.18) 36 8 8 12 28 36
1580
Sherman
21 64 18 103 158 130 111 (1.06) 123 21 64 18 103 128
807 Davis 72 154 27 253 375 304 185 (0.83) 204 72 154 27 253 305
800 Elgin 94 129 25 248 361 NA[2] 223 (0.93) 246 94 129 25 248 293
[1] Estimate; proposed parking requirements based on unit size (square feet) rather than bedrooms.
[2] Not available
137 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-5
APPENDIX C: GLOSSARY
Accessible: An adjective used to describe a place or destination that is easy to reach. Downtown
Evanston is accessible because it has a thorough street system, sidewalks, excellent rail service,
numerous bus lines, and ample parking. Accessible also refers to the degree to which a system is
usable by as many people as possible, including persons with physical disabilities and mobility
impairments.
Activity generator: A building, destination, or district that has achieved a certain critical mass,
density, or scale such that these locations or buildings create significant amounts of pedestrian
and vehicle traffic.
Adaptive Use: The reuse of a building or structure, usually for a purpose different from the origi-
nal. The term implies that certain structural or design changes have been made to the building in
order for it to function in its new use. Examples might include a factory building now used for
loft apartments, or a house now used as a professional office.
Affordable office space: In the context of this plan only, this phrase refers to office space in a
new building where the rent charged for this space is subsidized and equal to the rents received
Class B or Class C office space within the immediate area. The Director of Planning will make a
determination that the proposed rents are “comparable” or “equal” to those of Class B or Class C
office space on the basis of verifiable published data such as the CoStar Groups office rents data.
Architectural details: A full range of building features, including recesses, projections, wall in-
sets, arcades, fenestration, doors, window display areas, awnings, canopies, balconies, window
projections, signage, light fixtures, ornamentation, landscape elements, or other elements that
complement the architectural character of a building.
Architectural integrity: The degree to which a particular building reflects its historic character
and retains its original building materials. Integrity is lost through alterations and the replace-
ment of original building materials.
Articulation: Architectural composition in which elements and parts of the building are dis-
played in an ordered, distinct, and consistent manner.
Building character: Building styles, forms, and types that have a distinctive trait, quality or at-
tribute. Frequently these traits, qualities, or attributes are repeated in multiple buildings or multi-
ple locations and thereby represent an essential characteristic of a community.
Building form: The mass of individual buildings, including height, bulk, scale, and setbacks and
the relationship of this form to other buildings and public spaces.
Chain store: A large class of retail, restaurant, and service outlets where the operators share a
brand and central management, usually with standardized business methods, practices, and cor-
porate identify.
Character-giving buildings: Buildings that establish the image of a community or a defined area
of the community where the character is defined by building type, building scale, architectural
style, or architectural or urban design features.
Charrette: A technique for engaging the public in the preparation of a plan for a neighborhood,
corridor, new town, or other district that involves a multidisciplinary team of professionals de-
138 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-6
veloping all aspects of a plan from the overarching goals, to alternative development concepts, to
regulations that implement the plan. A charrette typically entails an intense schedule of 4 to 7
days. The approach is considered well-suited to high-stakes projects, volatile political environ-
ments, and complex design problems.
Connectivity: The directness and the connectedness of streets, sidewalks, paths, and other types
of routes within a defined geographic area. A well-connected road or path network has many
short connections, numerous intersections, and minimal dead-ends. As connectivity increases,
travel distances decrease and route options increase, allowing more direct travel between destina-
tions, creating a more accessible system.
Conservation district: An area that contains buildings and structures within definable boundaries
that, while not of such historic or architectural significance to be designated landmarks or in-
cluded in a historic district, nevertheless contain structures and buildings that reflect distinctive
features (e.g. size, scale, urban design) that are of significance to the architectural, cultural, eco-
nomic, or social history of the city.
Contextualism: An approach to architecture and building design that derives from the belief that
new buildings must blend in with its neighbors in terms of height, materials, fenestration, and in
some cases with the architectural style altogether.
Contributory building: A classification applied to a structure or building within a historic district
signifying that it generally shares, along with most of the other buildings or structures in the his-
toric district, the qualities that give the historic district cultural, historic, architectural or archaeo-
logical significance as embodied by the criteria for designating the historic district. These re-
sources are of the highest importance in maintaining the character of the historic district. Typi-
cally, contributory resources have been modified very little over time.
Core districts/zones: Areas of downtown Evanston where most new development has already
occurred. Recent developments have included several large sites with new multi-story buildings
reaching heights of 15 to 28 stories. Generally, the Core districts are closest to the train stations
and the existing large parking decks. The Core districts are appropriate for high-rise, mixed-use
development with ground floor retail. These districts or zones can also be a location for a larger
entertainment use such as movie theaters and performance centers and they are appropriate loca-
tions for hotels, libraries and large assembly uses.
Downtown District: The area bounded by Lake Street west to Oak Avenue then west on Oak to
Ridge Avenue and north on Ridge to Emerson Avenue then east on Emerson to Benson Avenue
then south on Benson to University Place and east on University Place to Sherman Avenue and
south on Sherman Avenue to Clark Street and then south along the alley next west of Hinman
Avenue to a line 200 feet north of and parallel to Davis Street then east along this line to Hinman
Avenue and then south along Hinman to a line 125 feet south of and parallel to Davis Street then
west along this line to the alley next west of and parallel to Hinman Avenue and then south along
this alley to Grove Street then west along Grove to Chicago Avenue and south along Chicago to
Lake Street.
Edge/link/ transitional district: The edge, link, or transitional districts are located on the fringe
or perimeter of downtown and these districts include multi-family housing and office and institu-
tional buildings with varied architecture, building height, and density. These blocks provide a
139 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-7
“bridge” or transition between downtown’s denser, active core and its adjacent residential
neighborhoods and Northwestern University
Fenestration: The arrangement and design of windows in a building.
Focus group: is a public participation or research technique in which a small group of people
(typically eight to ten individuals) engages in a roundtable discussion of a specific topic related
to a city plan or city planning document. The focus group discussion is typically directed by a
moderator who guides the discussion in order to obtain the group's opinions about or reactions to
specific proposals or planning concepts.
Form-based code: A method of regulating development to achieve a specific urban shape or de-
sign. Form-based codes address the relationship between building facades and the public realm,
the shape and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets and
blocks. The regulations and standards in form-based codes, presented in both diagrams and
words, are keyed to a regulating plan that designates the appropriate shape and scale (and there-
fore, character) of development, rather than distinguishing solely on the basis of land-use types,
which is the basis of conventional Euclidean zoning.
Gateway: A street corridor or a specific point where pedestrians or motorists designed to create a
sense of arrival in a new district, place, or distinct destination. Physical design elements that de-
fine a gateway include such things as signs, monuments, landscaping or a change in the character
of development.
Green building design: The practice of optimizing the efficiency of buildings and their use of
energy, water, and materials, and reducing building impacts on human health and the environ-
ment, through better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and recycling.
Green roof: A roof of a building that is partially or completely covered with vegetation and soil
or a growing medium, planted over a waterproofing membrane. The term "green roof" may also
be used to describe roofs that use some form of "green" technology, such as solar panels or a
photovoltaic module.
Guideline: A principle or concept that provides guidance, direction, or advice as to a decision or
course of action.
Historic building: any building that is historically or architecturally significant.
Historic district: a district or zone designated by ordinance by the city council or by the state or
federal government within which buildings, structures, and places have a high concentration of
historical, architectural, archeological, or cultural significance or a high concentration of contrib-
uting buildings or structures.
Historic Landmark: a property, structure, or building designated as a landmark by ordinance of
the city council that is worthy of rehabilitation, restoration, and preservation because of its his-
toric or architectural significance.
Human scale: Architectural design based on the understanding that humans interact with their
environments based on their physical dimensions. Buildings scaled to human physical capabili-
ties have steps, doorways, railings, work surfaces, seating, shelves, fixtures, walking distances,
and other features that fit well to the average person.
140 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-8
Knowledge-based business: A firm where the main line of business, product, or service is de-
pendent on employees that possess and can apply knowledge. This may includes financial ser-
vice firms, consulting or research firms, and product development firms where knowledge is
necessary for the very survival of the enterprise.
LEED certification: The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification
system based on the Green Building Rating System, developed by the U.S. Green Building
Council (USGBC). The certification is based on a myriad of standards related to environmen-
tally sustainable construction.
Landmark: a building designated as a historic landmark by the Evanston City Council.
Livability: A concept that encompasses elements of home, neighborhood, and community that
contribute to safety, economic opportunity, and welfare, health, convenience, mobility, and rec-
reation. The adjective “livable” for a city connotes a desirable quality of life for its citizens --
including social activities, attractive public places, provision of a certain level of privacy, as well
as a sense of community.
Market value: the theoretical highest price a buyer, willing but not compelled to buy, would pay,
and the lowest price a seller, willing but not compelled to sell, would accept.
Mass: the shape, size, height, and volume of a building.
Mixed-use development: Individual buildings or districts in which more than one category of
land use is encouraged. In zoning this means some combination of residential with commercial,
industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses.
Multi-modal transportation: A transportation system that includes or allows for at least two
modes of transport, such as mass transit, private automobiles, bicycles, and other modes.
National Register of Historic Places: a listing maintained by the U.S. Park Service of areas that
have been designated as historically significant. The register includes places of local and state
significance, as well as those of value to the nation in general.
New Urbanism: An American urban design movement that arose in the early 1980s. Its goal is
to reform many aspects of real estate development and urban planning, from injecting new de-
velopment into older urban areas while changing the suburban development paradigm of the last
50+ years of sprawling, low-density development forms to a new model that stresses human-
scaled walkable environments and a mix of residential, commercial, public, and office land uses.
New urbanist neighborhoods are designed to contain a diverse range of housing types, narrow
streets, distinctive architecture evocative of the region, and a mix of residential and commercial
land uses that make them more attractive and more marketable than conventional suburban de-
velopment.
Office space, Class A, B. and C: Class A space can be characterized as buildings that have ex-
cellent location and access, attract high quality tenants, and are managed professionally. Building
materials are high quality and rents are competitive with other new buildings. Class B buildings
have good locations, management, and construction, and tenant standards are high. Buildings
should have very little functional obsolescence and deterioration. Class C buildings are typically
15 to 25 years old but are maintaining steady occupancy. Tenants filter from Class B to Class A
and from Class C to Class B. In a normal market, Class A rents are higher than Class B which
are above Class C.
141 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-9
Pedestrian friendly: urban design that emphasizes pedestrian connections to major destinations;
the use of public spaces and open spaces as a way to promote walking and as a way to encourage
pedestrians to linger. Pedestrian friend design encourages compact, mixed-use development;
promotes a building architecture that creates interest for the pedestrian; and incorporates con-
cepts of parking and traffic management that reduce the dominance of automobile and private
automobile traffic.
Placemaking: A term that came into use in the 1970s by architects and planners to describe the
process of creating attractive squares, plazas, parks, streets, waterfronts, and other locales that
that will attract people because they are pleasurable or interesting.
Public Art: Sculpture, street furniture, screens, paintings, murals, brickwork and paving, video
installations, fabrics and furnishings, and other works of art that can be seen on the street, in
parks and gardens, and inside buildings.
Public realm: All areas outside of and between buildings including town centers, parks, public
plazas, external areas of public buildings, sidewalks, parks, streets, street trees, landscaping,
street furniture, and pavement. Government buildings, such as public libraries and similar build-
ings open to the public are also part of the public realm. The design, style, and configuration of
private buildings, particularly at the street level can affect the desirability and level of activity
within the public realm.
Redevelopment: The reconstruction, re-use or change in use of any developed property includ-
ing an increase in the intensity of use such as an increase in the number of dwelling units or a
change to a more intensive commercial or industrial use. Much redevelopment may simply in-
volve the redesign or rehabilitation of existing properties.
Scale: The relationship between the size and parts of a building to one another and to surround-
ing buildings.
Sense of place: The characteristics or qualities of a location, area, or district that that makes it
special or unique, as well as to those that foster a sense of authentic human attachment and be-
longing. Places are said to have a strong "sense of place" when they have a strong identity and
character that is deeply felt by local inhabitants and by visitors.
Sites susceptible to change (opportunity sites): Parcels of land that are most likely to change to
an alternative use in the near term (5 to 10 years). Sites susceptible to change may include vacant
land, vacant buildings, or underused properties. They may include properties that currently
command low rents. In contrast, sites that have only recently been developed, that are currently
intensively used, or that are under diverse ownership are less susceptible to change in the near
term. Properties that are under public ownership or control may also be less susceptible to
change.
Smart growth: An urban and transportation planning paradigm that emerged in the early 1990s
that focuses primarily on reducing urban sprawl through more efficient use of land and public
infrastructure. The smart growth approach is centered on 10 principles that have evolved over
time and are recognized by many city, county, and state governments as well as nonprofit re-
search, transportation and environmental groups:
Create range of housing opportunities and choices
Create walkable neighborhoods
142 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-10
Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration
Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place
Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost effective
Mix land uses
Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas
Provide a variety of transportation choices
Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas;
Provide a variety of transportation choices
Most recently the relationship between the built environment and patterns of growth to the pub-
lic’s health, namely rising rates of obesity brought about by car dependent lifestyles and an ab-
sence of places to walk, as well as air quality issues caused by greenhouse gas emissions, have
been recognized among smart growth advocates and are now recognized as another set of valid
arguments in favor of more compact, walkable neighborhoods.
Standard: A criterion or reference against which performance can be compared and evaluated.
A measure or criteria used for comparison purposes to evaluate the quantitative or qualitative
values of a proposal.
Streetscape: The area between buildings on opposite sides of the street, which includes sidewalk
design, materials, and width, landscaping, curb design, crosswalks, building heights and en-
trances, signage, street trees, street furniture, the roadway, and on and off-street parking.
Sustainability, whole building: An approach to sustainability that recognizes the environmental
impact and performance of buildings in five key areas of human and environmental health: sus-
tainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials selection, and indoor envi-
ronmental quality.
Sustainable development: As defined by the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development, it
is development that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs.” Sustainable development is considered a three-
dimensional concept involving a balance of environmental protection; economic growth; and so-
cial development.
Traditional districts: Three sub-areas of downtown Evanston that have a more traditional shop-
ping street character with smaller buildings and shops. These districts provide a special function,
acting both as “downtown” shopping streets with specialty merchants and restaurants, and
“neighborhood” convenience centers serving the daily shopping and service needs of the down-
town’s growing residential population.
Transit-oriented development: A mixed-use residential or commercial area designed to maxi-
mize access to public transport with features to encourage transit ridership. A TOD neighbor-
hood typically has a center with a rail or bus station, surrounded by relatively high-density de-
velopment with progressively lower-density development spreading outwards from the center.
TODs generally are located within a radius of one-quarter to one-half mile from a transit stop,
which is considered an appropriate distance for pedestrians to walk to transportation, shopping,
and other services.
143 of 144
Downtown Evanston Plan Update (As Adopted by City Council–February 9th, 2009)
A-11
Urban design: A disciplinary subset of urban planning, landscape architecture, or architecture
that concerns the arrangement, appearance, and functionality of buildings and spaces.
Urban form: The pattern of development that characterizes physical configuration and layout of
urban and suburban areas. It includes aspects such as development density; the use of land; the
size and configuration of blocks; and the arrangement and hierarchy of streets, yards, and open
spaces.
Urban plaza: A small public open space that is often integrated with or related to the adjacent
buildings. Typical features include walkways, trees and shrubs, places to sit, and/or restaurants
and shops.
Urban village: An urban planning concept that aims to aims to create an environment in which
people can both live and work; where the environment is self-sustaining and environmentally
friendly; and where the urban form encourages community interaction and involvement. Many
transit-oriented developments are designed as and function as urban villages.
Vacancy/occupancy rate: a ratio of the empty and unoccupied properties or buildings versus
those properties and buildings currently in use and occupied with tenants, owners, or residents.
Walkability: A measure of the overall conditions for people on foot in an area. Factors affecting
walkability include, but are not limited to: land use mix; street connectivity; residential density;
orientation and placement of homes and buildings; and the location of destinations and activity
centers. Walkability is also influenced by infrastructure such as access to mass transit, presence
and quality sidewalks, buffers to moving traffic (planter strips, on-street parking or bike lanes)
and pedestrian crossings, aesthetics, and street furniture.
Wayfinding: The means by which people orient themselves in physical space and navigate from
place to place. In other words, it is the process and the tools people rely upon to find their way
around a city, a large complex of buildings, or an institution, such as a museum or hospital.
Wayfinding systems refers to the set of architectural and/or design elements that aid orientation,
including signs, icons, images, colors, artwork, and other elements that may have been installed
for such purposes or that are distinct and of use to people in need of orienting themselves to their
surroundings.
Zoning bonus system: A technique used to encourage developers to include public amenities in
their private development projects in exchange for additional allowable density or floor space
according to a formula based on the value placed on the amenity and the cost to provide it. For
example, a developer might provide a plaza in front of a building and be allowed to build an ad-
ditional floor in height.
144 of 144