Evanston’s Parks Board Thursday is scheduled to review a consultant’s report that says the Noyes Cultural Arts Center needs $22 million in upgrades.
The building, designed as a school by Daniel Burnham and constructed in 1892, was shuttered by School District 65 in 1976 and purchased by the city for $1.1 million in 1980.
It has primarily been used to provide subsidized rental space for artists and arts groups ever since.
Part of the work proposed by the consulting firm, Salas O’Brien, is designed to meet the city’s Climate Action and Resilience Plan, by switching the heating system from gas to electric.
But the structure is also said to need a variety of improvements to the building envelope and action to improve accessibility and eliminate code violations.
The consulting firm has suggested the work could be done in five phases over the next decade, but a staff memo suggests that doing the work in fewer phases “may reduce the cost slightly and be beneficial to operations.”
More than a decade ago aldermen went on a tour of city recreation facilities that were said then to need millions in repairs.
And around that time then the city manager, Wally Bobkiewicz, suggested the cultural arts center might be turned into an “arts incubator” providing short-term rentals rather than being the “long term creative home” for groups.
Tenants in the building have resisted proposals to raise rents, although some increases have been imposed.
Time to let this one go. We all want lots of things but then the bills come due. Evanston has too many needs to put this anywhere near the priority to spend this kind of money.
Agreed just sell the building.
Less than a year ago it was reported that Noyes is “estimated to need $10 million to $20 million in upgrades.”
This is becoming significantly more expensive each month.
Evanston should act soon.
However, I’d first like to see an overall plan for decrepit buildings, including Harley Clarke, with guidelines on choosing repairs vs tear downs.
Interesting commentary from staff at
The Peoples Republic
“Help meet Climate Action and Resilience Plan by converting from gas to electric.”
An absurd idea here and across the country.
Natural gas is an American product and extremely clean energy.
Use it here – export it there – it’s a natural!
America needs to bring back energy independence – something accomplished prior to:
The Biden Administration ™
Regardless – the city mission, vision and hope for Noyes Street should be about the the arts in Evanston – not an ancillary virtue signaling position – a most controversial one at that.
I invite Evanston leaders staff and citizens to use other lenses to evaluate virtually everything other than the “greatest hits” of the radical left.
This is another example of the City’s staff going to the extreme on rehabbing whenever the opportunity presents itself. From what I understand, the only priority issue is the HVAC for about $4 million, with 40% of that being paid for by the federal government clean energy grants. The $22 million is intended for shock and awe when all we need is a reasonable plan. The idea of regular maintenance is to fix things when they are broken, not when the opportunity presents itself.
This is a sound comment full of common sense. We do have a tendency to build atomic fly swatters. Regular maintenance prevents or at least delays large capital outlays such as may be the case here and at city hall.
For anyone who doesn’t want to dive though the documents, the building doesn’t NEED $22 Million in improvements — the bulk of that cost is to make the building carbon neutral by 2035. Some roof/insulation/lighting work but a complete replacement of the HVAC, electrical and plumbing systems throughout the building. And the $22 Million is actually $30 Million if spaced out over several years.
This building is an Arts Center in an historical building. Does the City want a Cultural Arts Center? Does it want to preserve the building? Burdening it with these super ambitious CARP goals only makes it harder to keep the building. That’s a lot of money — and it doesn’t even address the actual facilities and theatre or exhibition space. You can build a new theatre (like Northlight) for $30 Million. If you wanted to keep the existing building, you could go to Shuler Shook and get an architect and give them $30 Million and get a much more vibrant and accessible arts building — but it would not be carbon neutral. Are CARP goals the only thing that matter?
Some money clearly needs to be spent on the building…but $22-30 Million? So that the City can meet an invented and arbitrary goal that will have no measurable effect on the environment? While all the other old buildings in town still keep their boilers? Yes, “every little bit helps”…but at what cost?