David Galloway, left, and Jack Weiss of Design Evanston, a group that conducted a charette for the library lot.                                                                                  RoundTable photo
 

David Galloway, left, and Jack Weiss of Design Evanston, a group that conducted a charette for the library lot.                                                                                  RoundTable photo

 

Evanston City Council members showed interest in a local design group’s offer on July 8 to utilize its expertise in exploring solutions for the development of the City-owned library lot.

Addressing the City Council’s Planning and Development Committee July 8, David Galloway, Vice President of Design Evanston, a not-for-profit design advocacy group, told aldermen that “given the level of consternation and controversy related to the development of the 1714-20 [Chicago Ave.] property,” the group is volunteering to hold a charette [special meeting], exploring possibilities for the site.

“We believe that the results of such an effort would add valuable information and context for any future RFQ [Request for Qualifications],” he said.

Earlier this year, City Council rejected a developer’s proposal to build an 11-story office building at the site.

During the process, members of two City committees, as well as residents of adjacent residential properties, had raised concerns about the bulk and height of the building, as well as the small setbacks proposed to fit the building into the space.

The property is wedged between two historic structures – the three-story Woman’s Club of Evanston to the south at 1702 Chicago Ave. and the Women’s Christian Temperance Union properties to the north, with a busy alley that runs along the west side of the property line.

Mr. Galloway told aldermen that Design Evanston members include planners, architects, landscape architects, graphic designers and interior designers.

The group would pool existing information on the site, including zoning, searching for development solutions.

At the Planning and Development meeting, aldermen expressed interest in moving in that direction, holding off on a proposal by First Ward Alderman Judy Fiske to gauge interest from developers.

Alderman Eleanor Revelle, 7th Ward, said the design group could provide “really important expert assistance that we’ll need to determine what would be appropriate for this site.”

Alderman Donald Wilson, 4th Ward, said he preferred moving in that direction at the current time, raising concern that “if  we get just a random list of things [inviting interest from developers], it could be completely inappropriate, cause a lot of consternation in the community, even though there might be things we might not otherwise pursue.”

Ald. Fiske said her proposal was in response to those people who contacted the City during the debate over the proposed office building and indicated they might be interested in developing the site if that project did not work out.

“And I think it’s incumbent to respond to them, hear what they have to say, and what their vision for the site is,” she said.

Ald. Fiske pointed out that the property, as currently zoned, allows for a building 85 feet tall with four more floors of parking.

“I would like to know what the development community is saying to us. We could either accept it or move forward with any of the responses or not. But I think it’s an easy piece of information we need to have going forward.”

Ald. Melissa Wynne, 3rd Ward, preferred the charette idea. To move forward with a request for qualifications at this stage, the City might receive a wide assortment of offers. “But then it’s apples, oranges, grapefruits, watermelons – you really can’t compare them,” she said.

“We’ve had charettes that have been useful,” she pointed out. “We had one about Fountain Square that really gave us the seeds for what we have now there. It’s an excellent process that many people can participate in, not just design professionals.”

But Alderman Ann Rainey, 8th Ward, expressed concern about a “closed” process, by only involving design professionals. She asked why the City could not move in both directions: have Design Evanston hold a charette, but also see what interest is in the market at this time.

“We want to know who’s out there that has any interest in a project at this location,” she said. We want to know how much money you have, how deep are your pockets, who is your team, who would be your builder, who would be your design people. ...Those are the things we want to know. What would be so bad to have found out who the qualified people are who would be interested?”

“Let’s say nobody sends us anything. Let’s say we get 20 proposals,” Ald. Rainey said. “There might be something really brilliant. We’re asking who’s out there. I think we ought to give it a chance.”

Ald. Wilson said the City could indeed receive a ton of proposals if there were no price attached to the request and no limitations.

“Somebody might say, ‘Let’s do a tall hydroponic facility for growing plants,” he suggested as an example. “It could be anything, but I think we need to take the lead on this, and we need to make a decision on what we want as a community to have there before we open it up.”