The Evanston Preservation Commission voted unanimously to direct staff to draft a landmark nomination report for Willard School, 2700 Heard Avenue, after hearing a nomination presentation and extended discussion about the building’s architectural and historic significance.

Mister Weber, who submitted the nomination, told the commission that Willard ‘‘easily meets the criteria for landmarking’’ and urged the commission to recommend designation to the city council. Weber outlined the school’s association with reformer Frances Willard, described architect Henry Rader’s (and later firm Childs & Smith’s) role in its 1922 construction and 1931 addition, and detailed a century of community uses that make the building a neighborhood anchor.

Commissioners focused much of the discussion on which ordinance criteria applied. Several members said the building’s architectural features — including balanced Georgian Revival proportions, arched fenestration and paired entry treatments — clearly support criteria for architectural significance. ‘‘I think it’s a really fine elegant example of Georgian Revival architecture,’’ one commissioner said, pointing to the dual entry treatment and the grouping of arches on the Heard Avenue façade.

By contrast, commissioners were divided over whether naming the school for Frances Willard alone provides a direct physical association sufficient for the ordinance’s identification or association criterion. An absent commissioner’s written comment read into the record said the ‘‘connection with Frances Willard is purely in the decision to name the school after her’’ and described that link as ‘‘tenuous,’’ while recommending the nomination proceed on other grounds.

Commissioners also asked the nominator and staff about historic evidence for the site. Staff and commissioners pointed to a 1924 Sanborn map and 1930s aerial photos as useful sources to document original parcel boundaries and the building’s setting; Weber said he had searched deeds and filed a FOIA request for blueprints but had not yet received full documentation.

On integrity, staff recommended evaluating the seven National Register qualities (location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association). Commissioners concluded the property retains sufficient integrity overall — noting that some historic windows had been replaced but that fenestration patterns and massing remain intact — and urged the nomination to identify character‑defining features that should be protected in future reviews.

Commissioner (Speaker 3) moved that staff prepare a draft report recommending designation and addressing criteria 3 and 4 (architectural significance and identification as the work of a significant architect), and considering criteria 6, 9 and 10 (association, setting and pattern of development) where additional evidence supports them. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Staff will draft the report within the commission’s 70‑day review window and return it for public review and a formal vote before transmission to the city manager and city council.

The commission chair closed the meeting following the vote. The next procedural step is the public review of the draft report and a subsequent commission vote to adopt the final recommendation to council.