Evanston Moves Forward with Church Zoning Compromise

An ordinance meant to boost economic growth by limiting the number of storefront churches has been approved, but has been scaled back to only apply to specific areas of the city.

The original ordinance would have required any new religious institutions in Evanston to obtain a special use permit, but the amended version would only require churches to obtain the permit if they are to be built in certain areas, including the Howard Street commercial district.

Ald. Ann Rainey (8th Ward) introduced the ordinance as a means to revitalize the Howard Street commercial district, which has a number of storefront churches. On , Rainey told faith leaders that the churches are shuttered most days of the week, reducing foot traffic in the area.

Congregations hoping to move into in B1 and B3 business districts will be affected by the new ordinance, but religious institutions already in those areas will not have to apply for a permit unless their building is destroyed or they plan to expand.

Faith leaders have , saying they felt unfairly targeted and said their congregations boost economic activity by drawing people from surrounding towns into Evanston.

The idea to limit the ordinance to certain areas of the city came about during a Dec. 7 public discussion with faith leaders and city officials. At that meeting, Rev. Mark A. Dennis, Jr. of the Second Baptist Church, one of the most vocal opponents of the measure, refrained from fully supporting the compromise, but said scaling back the ordinance seemed like a step in the right direction.

Ald. Donald Wilson (4th Ward) and Ald. Mark Tendam (6th Ward) voted against the ordinance. Tendam said he felt uncomfortable with the measure, and Wilson said he felt the ordinance sends the wrong message and doesn't take into full consideration the other reasons behind the slow economic growth on Howard Street.

Holding a list of existing churches that had successfully received special use permits, Rainey expressed frustration with aldermen who hoped to limit the ordinance.

 "I just don't understand why we're so opposed to a special use," she said. "We've demonstrated that they can be granted."

Ald. Judy Fiske (1st Ward) supported the measure, noting that one of the council's primary goals is to support economic development.

"I think we need to do everything that we can to help encourage new businesses, especially those businesses that are going to be producing tax revenue for the city," Fiske said. "I don't want to see anyone assume that this is anti-church or in any way sending a negative message to the congregations."