Evanston council directs staff to pursue downtown site, removes city hall return from options

Evanston’s City Council voted 8–1 on March 10 to direct the city manager to pursue a permanent downtown site for City Hall and to begin planning non‑municipal uses or adaptive reuse for the Civic Center property at 2100 Ridge Avenue.

The motion, moved by Council Member Jonathan Newsom and seconded by Council Member Nussma, removes renovating the existing Civic Center from the list of options being actively pursued and sends staff and the city’s consultant work to the city’s “putting assets to work” initiative to evaluate alternatives, Council Member Newsom said before the vote. “This building is not suitable for its current use,” he told colleagues.

City Engineer Laura Biggs outlined staff estimates for key options. Renovating 2100 Ridge into usable municipal space carried the highest estimated capital cost, while several downtown alternatives — a multi‑floor fit‑out inside the main library, a planned unit development at 900 Clark Street, or building new downtown (the planned unit development option was priced by the developer at about $43.1 million in capital cost) — fall in a lower and similar range. Consolidating into the library, for example, would add an estimated roughly $43.5 million in costs above what the library would spend to renovate for its own needs. Biggs also estimated continuing to maintain the vacant Civic Center at present activity levels costs about $1,000 per day (roughly $29,000 per month) for staff, utilities and contracts, not counting emergency repairs.

Economic Development Manager Paul Zalmiak told the council the immediate effect of adopting the resolution would be to send a clear signal to the development market and allow the consultant-led “putting assets to work” engagement to proceed without the option of “moving back in” to 2100 Ridge as a competing outcome. Zalmiak said that moving forward with the resolution could shorten time to a final transaction by avoiding repeated debate over returning municipal operations to the Ridge property, but he also gave a realistic timetable: from the start of a public RFQ and engagement the full cycle to an executable development transaction and zoning approvals could take 12–18 months.

Supporters of the motion pointed to long‑running facility and functional problems at 2100 Ridge, a public engagement program the city paid $50,000 to run last fall and a scientific poll the city commissioned that staff said found cost and accessibility were the top public priorities. Opponents said the Council’s prior decision to sign a 15‑year lease for interim office space at 909 Davis signaled the move away from Ridge had already begun and argued for more public process before ruling any option out. Council Member Kelly voted against the resolution and described concerns about timing and transparency; Corporation Counsel Alex Ruggie said redacted portions of an earlier RFP had been released under FOIA that afternoon.

The resolution directs the city manager to evaluate downtown options for permanent City Hall, to stop pursuing renovation of 2100 Ridge as municipal offices, and to evaluate non‑municipal or adaptive‑reuse options for 2100 Ridge. The council also authorized staff to use consultant time under the city’s “putting assets to work” plan to run a public process on the property and related public parcels.

Staff said the city will continue routine maintenance of 2100 Ridge during the initial phase of evaluation; if no near‑term redeployment emerges and a longer timeline materializes, staff said they could recommend a mothball strategy that would drain systems and board up the building to limit operating costs but accept a different long‑term deterioration profile. The council did not set a sale or redevelopment timeline in the resolution; it instead directed staff to begin the evaluation work immediately and bring results back during the consultant‑driven engagement.

Votes at a glance: Resolution 21‑R‑25 (permanent relocation of City Hall downtown) — mover: Council Member Newsom; seconder: Council Member Nussma; vote: 8 ayes, 1 nay (Council Member Kelly); outcome: adopted.

Why it matters: The council’s vote narrows the city’s active options for its long‑term municipal headquarters and starts a community and market process that, staff said, could produce a sale, a long‑term lease or some form of public‑private partnership for the Civic Center property. That process also sets an approximate 12–18 month horizon for a final transaction if the city and market progress steadily. The decision has budget implications (estimated tens of millions in comparative capital costs to retrofit downtown vs. Ridge) and will shape downtown planning conversations and future RFPs.