Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landmark Nomination topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission declines to recommend Lincolnwood School for landmark designation, asks staff to draft report acknowledging community significance
Summary
After more than an hour of public testimony and debate about criteria and integrity, Evanston’s Preservation Commission signaled it will not recommend individual landmark designation for Lincolnwood School but asked staff to prepare a report noting the site’s community significance and potential role as a contributing property in a future historic district.
The Evanston Preservation Commission concluded a lengthy discussion of the Lincolnwood Elementary School landmark nomination by asking staff to draft a report reflecting the commission’s findings: while many residents described the site as a familiar visual node and community cornerstone, commissioners were divided on whether the building meets the ordinance’s standards for individual landmark designation given questions about architectural integrity and the site’s complex racial history.
Multiple residents and research volunteers offered opposing perspectives during public comment. Janet Peel, a parent and librarian who assisted with historical research, described the school’s long role in neighborhood life and called Lincolnwood “woven into the fabric of the neighborhood” through programs and gatherings.
Other commenters urged fuller consideration of difficult aspects of the school’s past. “The history of that school and the cultural significance of it is not a unitarily positive one for this community,” said Malia Gardsman, who presented research highlighting episodes of segregation and exclusion tied to the school’s early years.
Commissioners reviewed procedural constraints: the public hearing portion of the record had been closed and the commission was operating within the 70‑day window for a decision. Staff explained that new, material evidence could prompt a reopening of the hearing within statutory limits. Commissioners wrestled with whether the site meets criterion 9 (an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood) and whether any criterion tied to urban‑planning significance (criterion 5) could be supported by the record.
Several members said Lincolnwood functions as an important neighborhood landmark in residents’ perceptions but questioned whether that alone satisfies standards requiring demonstrable integrity or architectural distinction. Options discussed included declining to recommend designation while explicitly acknowledging community significance in the staff report, suggesting the property as a potential contributing resource in a future historic district, or pursuing alternative protections (conservation easement, retention of public ownership). Several commissioners favored a careful report that documents the multiple layers of history and the commission’s reasoning rather than forwarding a recommendation for designation that might fail at the city council level.
The commission did not vote to recommend landmark designation that night. Instead it directed staff to draft findings and a resolution that reflect the majority view — that the property has community significance but does not, at this time, meet the standards for individual landmark designation — and to circulate drafts for further deliberation within the statutory window.
