Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves five‑story, 30‑unit development at 2206 Maple Avenue; Kelly flags long-term tax tradeoffs under HB 2621
Summary
The council approved an ordinance permitting a five‑story, 30‑unit multifamily building at 2206 Maple Avenue with 29 on‑site parking spaces; Council member Kelly warned that under House Bill 2621 the city may forgo millions in tax revenue over 30 years when developers provide deeper affordable-unit mixes.
Get email alerts on the Housing Development Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Evanston City Council on April 28 approved an ordinance granting a major variation to allow construction of a five‑story, 30‑unit multi‑family building with 29 on‑site parking spaces at 2206 Maple Avenue (Ordinance 35,025). The vote was 8–0 in favor.
Council member Reid moved the ordinance and Council member Wynne seconded; the council adopted the zoning variation after a brief floor discussion. Council member Kelly said she would support the project but urged the council to study the fiscal implications of House Bill 2621, which she said can create a multi‑decade tax offset when developers provide higher levels of on‑site affordable housing.
Kelly described a specific example: she explained that under a 20% affordable set‑aside the city may forgo incremental tax revenue for the first three years and, over a 30‑year period, could result in the equivalent of roughly $3,000,000 in foregone tax revenue compared with a smaller affordable requirement. Kelly urged a fuller finance-and‑budget committee discussion to weigh tradeoffs — for example, whether proceeds otherwise captured could instead fund permanent affordable housing programs or land trusts.
The ordinance record shows the approval of the major variation for the Garrett Seminary property parcel referenced in committee testimony; council members did not enter any amendments to the ordinance on the floor. Council member Kelly said that because the project is on tax‑exempt property being redeveloped, the timing and tier structure in HB 2621 affects when and whether tax increment is captured locally.
The developer’s final building plans, construction timeline and any pro forma financial details were not discussed in depth on the council floor. City staff and the council indicated the item moved forward consistent with standard variation/rezoning procedures.

