Only two consulting firms bid on Evanston's first zoning code rewrite in more than 30 years, and now council members are openly debating whether the city's own progressive regulations are to blame.

The City Council on July 27 deferred selecting a consultant for the overhaul, pushing the decision to at least Aug. 24. In the days since, council members and anonymous developers have pointed to Evanston's Responsible Bidder Ordinance, Healthy Buildings Ordinance and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance as potential reasons firms are choosing to work elsewhere.

The city advertised the request for proposals for six weeks. More than 300 firms received an initial email, staff directly contacted 21 firms, and about nine potential bidders downloaded the RFP document. Five attended a pre-bid meeting on April 30. Yet when the deadline passed, only Austin-based Code Studio and Michigan-based McKenna submitted qualifying proposals.

Code Studio bid $1,088,580 for an 18-to-24-month project. City staff negotiated that down to $911,480. McKenna bid $369,400 for 15 months.

At the July 27 meeting, Councilmember Matt Rodgers (8th Ward) compared the gap to shopping for a Honda Civic and a Lamborghini without anything in between. He said Evanston has been "blackballed" and called it a place firms don't want to work.

Ordinances under scrutiny

Three city policies drew the most criticism from anonymous sources who spoke to the Evanston Roundtable for a story published Sunday, Aug. 2:

  • The Responsible Bidder Ordinance sets strict labor and safety standards for anyone contracting with the city.
  • The Healthy Buildings Ordinance requires buildings of 20,000 square feet or more to achieve zero on-site carbon emissions by 2050.
  • The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, created in 2007 and most recently amended in 2025, requires residential projects of seven or more units to include 15% affordable housing.

An anonymous vice president of a Chicago-based developer told the Roundtable that Evanston is "definitely strict" and that the work often isn't worth it for his firm, adding that the city has "several requirements, whereas many cities have two or three." An anonymous consultant said most cities will likely match Evanston's standards eventually but questioned why any firm would jump through extra hoops when easier work exists elsewhere.

The Roundtable reported it contacted more than a dozen consultants and developers. Only three agreed to speak, all anonymously.

Council divided

Rodgers, who cited the Emerson Street Project as an example of costly late-stage redesign demands that discourage future bids, told the Roundtable the city needs to engage developers earlier in the process rather than waiting until proposals reach council. He said the Healthy Buildings Ordinance has increased construction costs for everyone and that tariffs have made Evanston "a very expensive place to build."

Councilmember Shawn Iles (3rd Ward) acknowledged the tension directly in the same Roundtable story. "We are a progressive community, and we have a lot of things that are important to us, like the Responsible Bidder ordinance, having requirements around Black-owned and women-owned businesses," Iles said. "These are things that we add to all of our contracts, and it ends up that we get fewer bidders, and that drives up the price of everything." Iles said everything should be on the table for review but cautioned it was too early to say the city can do without certain requirements.

Councilmember Jonathan Nieuwsma (4th Ward), a founding member and former president of Citizens' Greener Evanston (now Climate Action Evanston), pushed back in the Roundtable story. He said he doesn't think environmental regulations are scaring people away, though he acknowledged Evanston has "a perception as a challenging community to work in."

Councilmember Bobby Burns (5th Ward) told the Roundtable he'd need more examples before concluding the low bid count reflects a broader pattern, noting the city drew competitive responses for the South Boulevard/Chicago Avenue project and a Jackson and Emerson project.

What's at stake

Planning Manager Liz Williams told the council on July 27 that the low bid count is consistent with prior Evanston RFPs: the 2022 comprehensive plan process received three proposals (one non-responsive), and the 2023 process received four (two non-responsive).

But a prolonged delay carries financial risk. The city has proposed spending $365,053 in leftover American Rescue Plan Act funds from the original HDR contract on the zoning rewrite. Those federal dollars must be spent by the end of 2026. Restarting the process with a new RFP would take a minimum of 13 weeks to reach a council vote, according to Williams.

The contract vote is expected to return at the council's Monday, Aug. 24 meeting.