Evanston committee forwards Francis Willard School landmark designation after split public comment

The Evanston Planning and Development Committee voted 4–1 on March 9 to forward Ordinance 23026 to the City Council, a move that would designate Francis Willard Elementary School at 2700 Hurd Avenue as a local landmark.

The designation drew public comment both for and against. Thomas Weber, who nominated the school, urged the committee to preserve not only the building but its surrounding grounds, saying the site "represents evolutionary trends in architecture, high quality design, and craftsmanship" and noting Willard is the only Evanston public school bearing a woman's name that will remain open next school year. Weber urged the committee to reconsider staff’s removal of seven of 10 parcels from the proposed landmark boundary so that the "open space to the north" and heritage trees remain protected.

Resident and legal advocate Malia Gertzma opposed the nomination as it stood, asking the council to reject the designation or return it to the preservation commission for further study. Gertzma said the record failed to incorporate evidence of Black displacement associated with the site's selection and annexation in the 1910s and subsequent condemnation actions in the early 1920s. "The commission's report concludes that there was no displacement connected with Willard," she said, calling that conclusion erroneous based on her review of historical materials.

Committee members questioned staff on the practical implications of landmark status. Council Member Rogers noted District 65 had been engaged and "are okay with this," and staff explained that while the district’s current ownership generally would not be encumbered for ordinary building work under state law, a change of ownership would trigger the certificate-of-appropriateness process under the preservation ordinance. Council Member Davis asked whether the designation would affect resale value; staff cautioned that any future owner would be subject to preservation requirements when city permits are required.

At the vote, four members supported forwarding the ordinance and one opposed; the measure will next appear on the City Council agenda for final action.

The record of public comment and the commission’s findings about the site’s history were central to the debate at committee; the council will now consider the ordinance and any additional materials or motions council members may introduce.