Report on CSNA Evanston Population, Density, & Development Survey

CSNA would like to thank all who sincerely participated in the survey we ran in May on how residents feel about some of the basic choices confronting the city. The response was nearly overwhelming for a volunteer organization. However, we have been able to compile the responses and are issuing a preliminary report, downloadable below.

The findings won't be surprising to any longtime observer of Evanston. The short takeaways are as follows:

• while most Evanstonians are comfortably housed, concern about future challenges to being able to afford Evanston are widespread, affecting even those who currently have little to no difficulty meeting monthly costs
• higher taxes are indisputably the greatest concern for homeowners, and, for non-homeowners, higher rents, but significant numbers of respondents express other worries
• there is no widespread clamor in Evanston for greater density or dramatic population growth; the pro-density point of view has zealous adherents but is not the majority opinion
• people believe that additional density will make it more expensive to live here, not more affordable
• by and large, Evanstonians want Evanston to maintain its existing urban-suburban balance and, if anything, believe that Evanston is already overdeveloped, not underdeveloped
• preserving existing neighborhood character is widely supported, even by those who don’t own property, as is preservation of low-rise business districts like Central Street
• single-family homes are appreciated and valued as an integral part of Evanston

However, generalizations typically oversimplify, and we urge a full review. The survey was an opt-in device and, because first distribution was through our membership, could naturally be expected to have a slightly homeowner, older, and north Evanston tilt. Still, the response was broad enough to see that Evanston has more in common with itself than differences. This is styled a preliminary report because further number-crunching is always possible, we may seek to augment the results with additional outreach, and time constraints prevent instant fuller discussion of policy implications. Again, we thank all those who took part in good faith.

Note: We've e-mailed notice of this report to our general mailing list. Hundreds more have requested to be advised of the results, and we're working on that, we just had no quick mechanism for responding to that many names that were not in our list. Thank you for your patience!