Office of the City Clerk - Record #: SO2014-9060

• Record #: SO2014-9060
• Type: Ordinance
• Status: Passed
• Intro date: 11/5/2014
• Current Controlling Legislative Body: Committee on Finance
• Final action: 11/19/2014
• Title: Amendment No. 5 to Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Redevelopment Plan and Project
• Sponsors: Emanuel, Rahm
• Topic: TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS - Belmont/Cicero T.I.F. - Amendment

Date	Journal Page Number	Action By	Action	Result
12/1/2014		City Council	Signed by Mayor
11/19/2014	98397	City Council	Passed as Substitute	Pass
11/18/2014		Committee on Finance	Recommended to Pass	Pass
11/5/2014	93508	City Council	Referred

SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE

WHEREAS, under ordinances adopted on January 12, 2000, and published in the Journal of Proceedings of the City Council (the "Journal") for such date at pages 22866 to 22995, and under the provisions of the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11 - 74.4.1 et seg., as amended (the "Act"), the City Council (the "Corporate Authorities") of the City of Chicago (the "City"): (i) approved "The Belmont/Cicero Avenue Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project" (the "Original Plan") for a portion of the City known as the "Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area" (the "Area") (such ordinance being defined herein as the "Approval Ordinance"); (ii) designated the Area as a "redevelopment project area" within the requirements of the Act (the "Designation Ordinance") and, (iii) adopted tax increment financing for the Area (the "Adoption Ordinance"); and

WHEREAS, under an ordinance adopted on May 17, 2000 and published in the Journal for such date at pages 32000 to 32102 (the "2000 Amended Approval Ordinance"), the Corporate Authorities approved an amendment to the Original Plan entitled "Revision Number 2 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project" ("Revision Number 2"); and

WHEREAS, under an ordinance adopted on May 14, 2008 and published in the Journal for such date at pages 26744 to 26854 (the "2008 Amended Approval Ordinance"), the Corporate Authorities approved an amendment to the Original Plan entitled "Revision Number 3 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project" ("Revision Number 3"); and

WHEREAS, under an ordinance adopted on July 30, 2014 and published in the Journal for such date at pages 84896 to 84899 (the "2014 Amended Approval Ordinance", together with the 2000 Amendment Approval Ordinance and the 2008 Amendment Approval Ordinance, the "Amended Approval Ordinances), the Corporate Authorities approved an amendment to the Original Plan entitled "Revision Number 4 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project" ("Revision Number 4"); and

WHEREAS, the Approval Ordinance, the Designation Ordinance, the Adoption Ordinance, and the Amended Approval Ordinances are collectively referred to in this ordinance as the "TIF Ordinances"; and

WHEREAS, the Plan, as amended by Revision Numbers 2, 3 and 4, is referred to in this ordinance as the "Plan" (a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 2): and

WHEREAS, Public Act 92-263, which became effective on August 7, 2001, amended the Act to provide that, under Section 11-74.4-5(c) of the Act, amendments to a redevelopment plan which do not (1) add additional parcels of property to the proposed redevelopment project area, (2) substantially affect the general land uses proposed in the redevelopment plan, (3) substantially change the nature of the redevelopment project, (4) increase the total estimated redevelopment project cost set out in the redevelopment plan by more than 5% after adjustment for inflation from the date the plan was adopted, (5) add additional redevelopment project costs to the itemized list of redevelopment project costs set out in the redevelopment plan, or (6) increase the number of inhabited residential units to be displaced from the redevelopment project area, as measured from the time of creation of the redevelopment project area, to a total of more than 10, may be made without further hearing, provided that notice is given as set forth in the Act as amended; and

EXHIBIT 1 REVISION NUMBER 5 (see attached)

3

CITY OF CHICAGO REVISION NUMBER 5 BELMONT/CICERO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN AND PROJECT

NOTICE is hereby given by the City of Chicago of the publication and inclusion of changes to the City of Chicago Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project (as amended by this Revision Number 5, the "Plan") for the Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area approved pursuant to an ordinance enacted by the City Council on November 5, 2014 pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-5 of the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, as amended, 65 ILCS Section 5/11-74.4-1 et seq. (the "Act").

1. In Section 1 entitled, "Introduction and Executive Summary", in sub-section F, entitled "Redevelopment Plan And Project Activities And Costs", the following shall be added before the seventh bullet point:

•   Construction of residential development

1. In Section 1 entitled, "Introduction and Executive Summary", the last sentence in subsection F, entitled "Redevelopment Plan And Project Activities And Costs", shall be deleted and replaced with the following:

The total estimated cost for the activities listed in Table Three is Thirteen Million Nine Hundred Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($13,925,000).

1. In Section 4 entitled, "Redevelopment Goals and Objectives," number 2 in sub-section A, entitled "General Goals for the Belmont/Cicero Avenue Redevelopment Area", shall be deleted and replaced with the following:

2. Within the Area, create commercial, mixed use and residential environments that will contribute positively to the health, safety and general welfare of the City.

1. In Section 4 entitled, "Redevelopment Goals and Objectives," number 7 in sub-section B, entitled "Redevelopment Objectives", shall be deleted and replaced with the following:

7. Assemble or encourage the assembly of land into parcels of appropriate shape and sufficient size for commercial, mixed use and residential redevelopment in accordance with this Plan, and contemporary development needs and standards.

1. In Section 6 entitled, "Redevelopment Plan and Project," the fourth and fifth paragraphs in sub-section B, entitled "Proposed Generalized Land Use Plan", shall be deleted and replaced with the following

The generalized land use plan focuses on maintaining and enhancing sound and viable existing businesses, and promoting new businesses and residential developments at selected locations The generalized land use plan highlights areas for use as commercial that will enhance existing development and promote new development within the Area. It also highlights two areas for residential development. The generalized land use plan designates four land uses within the Area'

4

• Commercial
• Industrial
• Mixed Use
• Residential

1. In Section 6 entitled, "Redevelopment Plan and Project," the last sentence of the third paragraph of number 2, "Public Redevelopment Investment" in sub-section C, entitled "Redevelopment Projects", shall be deleted and replaced with the following:

In no instance, however, shall such additions or adjustments result in any increase by more than 5%, after adjustment for inflation, from the date the Plan was adopted without following the procedures for amendment set forth in the Act.

1. In Section 6 entitled, "Redevelopment Plan and Project," under sub-section C, entitled "Redevelopment Projects", the table and associated footnotes entitled "Table Three: Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs," shall be deleted and replaced with the following:

Table Three

Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs

Activity	Cost
Planning, Legal, Marketing Professional Services	$ 500,000
Property Assembly, Site Clearance, and Environmental Remediation and Site Preparation	$ 1.550,000
Rehabilitation Costs and Leasehold Improvements	$ 2,725,000
Public Works or Improvements (1)	$ 2,200,000
Job Training, Retraining, Welfare to Work and Day Care	$ 700,000
Taxing Districts Capital Costs	$ 1,200,000
Relocation Costs	$ 250,000
Interest Subsidy	$ 250,000
Affordable Housing Construction	$ 4,5000,000
Day Care Services	$ 50,000
Total (2)(3)(4)	$ 13,925,000

(1)      Public improvements may also include capital costs of taxing district Specifically, public

improvements as identified in the Redevelopment Plan and as allowable under the Act may be made to

property and facilities owned or operated by the City or other public entities, As provided in the Act to

the extent the City by written agreement accepts and approves the same, all or a portion of a taxing

district's capital costs resulting from the redevelopment project necessarily incurred or to be incurred

within a taxing district in furtherance of the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan

(2)      Total Redevelopment Project Costs represent an upper limit on expenditures that are to be

5

funded using tax increment revenues and exclude any additional financing costs, including any interest expense, capitalized interest and costs associated with optional redemptions These costs are subject to prevailing market conditions and are in addition to Total Redevelopment Project Costs Within this limit, adjustments may be made in line items without amendment to this Plan, to the extent permitted by tlie Act.

1. The amount of the Total Redevelopment Project Costs that can be incurred in the Belmont/Cicero Area will be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated from the Belmont/Cicero Area only by a public nght-or-way, that are permitted under the Act to be paid, and are paid, from incremental property taxes generated in the Belmont/Cicero Area but will not be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in the Belmont/Cicero Area which are paid from incremental property taxes generated in contiguous redevelopment project areas or those separated from the Belmont/Cicero Area only by a public right-of-way.
2. All costs are in 2014 dollars and may be increased by five percent (5%) after adjusting for inflation reflected in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers for All Items for the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI CMSA, published by the U.S. Department of Labor.

Additional funding from other sources such as federal, state, county, or local grant funds may be utilized to supplement the City's ability to finance Redevelopment Project Costs identified above.

6

EXHIBIT 2 PLAN (see attached)

7

26744

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

"T.I.F. Contribution" shall mean a contribution by the City of tax increment financing funds towards payment of a portion of the construction costs of the Home.

APPROVAL OF REVISION NUMBER 3 TO BELMONT/CICERO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PROJECT.

The Committee on Finance submitted the following report:

CHICAGO, May 14, 2008.

To the President and Members of the City Council:

Your Committee on Finance, having had under consideration an ordinance authorizing Amendment Number 3 to the Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project, having had the same under advisement, begs leave to report and recommend that Your Honorable Body Pass the proposed ordinance transmitted herewith.

This recommendation was concurred in by a viva voce vote of the members of the Committee.

Respectfully submitted,

(Signed)   EDWARD M. BURKE,

Chairman.

On motion of Alderman Burke, the said proposed ordinance transmitted with the foregoing committee report was Passed by yeas and nays as follows:

26745

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Yeas — Aldermen Flores, Fioretti, Dowell, Preckwinkle, Hairston, Lyle, Harris, Beale, Pope, Balcer, Cardenas, Olivo, Burke, Foulkes, Thompson, Thomas, Lane, Rugai, Cochran, Brookins, Munoz, Zalewski, Dixon, Solis, Ocasio, Burnett, E. Smith, Carothers, Reboyras, Suarez, Waguespack, Mell, Austin, Colon, Banks, Mitts, Allen, Laurino, O'Connor, Doherty, Reilly, Daley, Tunney, Levar, Shiller, Schulter, Moore, Stone - 48.

Nays - None.

Alderman Carothers moved to reconsider the foregoing vote. The motion was lost. The following is said ordinance as passed:

WHEREAS, Under ordinances adopted on January 12,2000, and published in the Journal of the Proceedings of the City Council of the City of Chicago (the "Jqurnaf) for such date at pages 22866 to 22995, and under the provisions of the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4.1, et seq., as amended (the "Act"), the City Council (the "Corporate Authorities") of the City of Chicago (the "City"): (i) approved 'The Belmont/Cicero Avenue Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project" (the "Original Plan") for a portion of the City known as the "Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area" (the "Area") (such ordinance being defined herein as the "Approval Ordinance"); (ii) designated the Area as a "redevelopment project area" within the requirements of the Act (the "Designation Ordinance") and, (iii) adopted tax increment financing for the Area (the "Adoption Ordinance"); and

WHEREAS, Under an ordinance adopted on May 17,2000 and published in the Journalfor such date at pages 32000 to 32102 (the "Amended Approval Ordinance"), the Corporate Authorities approved an amendment to the Original Plan entitled "Revision Number 2 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project" ("Revision Number 2"); and

WHEREAS, The Approval Ordinance, the Designation Ordinance, the Adoption Ordinance, and the Amended Approval Ordinance are collectively referred to in this ordinance as the "T.I.F. Ordinances"; and

WHEREAS, The Plan, as amended by Revision Number 2, is referred to in this ordinance as the "Plan" (a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 2); and

WHEREAS, Public Act 92-263, which became effective on August 7, 2001, amended the Act to provide that, under Section 11-74.4-5(c) of the Act, amendments to a redevelopment plan which do not (1) add additional parcels of property to the proposed redevelopment project area, (2) substantially affect the general land uses proposed in the redevelopment

9

26746

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

plan, (3) substantially change the nature of the redevelopment project, (4) increase the total estimated redevelopment project cost set out in the redevelopment plan by more than five percent (5%) after adjustment for inflation from the date the plan was adopted, (5) add additional redevelopment project costs to the itemized list of redevelopment project costs set out in the redevelopment plan, or (6) increase the number of inhabited residential units to be displaced from the redevelopment project area, as measured from the time of creation of the redevelopment project area, to a total of more than ten (10), may be made without further hearing, provided that notice is given as set forth in the Act as amended; and

WHEREAS, The Corporate Authorities now desire to amend the Plan further to change the land uses proposed in the Plan with respect to certain parcels of property, which such amendment shall not (1) add additional parcels of property to the proposed redevelopment project area, (2) substantially affect the general land uses proposed in the redevelopment plan, (3) substantially change the nature of the redevelopment project, (4) increase the total estimated redevelopment project cost set out in the redevelopment plan by more than five percent (5%) after adjustment for inflation from the date the plan was adopted, (5) add additional redevelopment project costs to the itemized list of redevelopment project costs set out in the redevelopment plan, or (6) increase the number of inhabited residential units to be displaced from the redevelopment project area, as measured from the time of creation of the redevelopment project area, to a total of more than ten (10); now, therefore,

Be It Ordained by the City Council of the City of Chicago:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are incorporated herein and made a part hereof.

SECTION 2. Approval Of Revision Number 3 To Plan. The "Revision Number 3 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project", a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 (the "Revision Number 3"), is hereby approved. Except as amended hereby, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 3. Invalidity Of Any Section. If any provision of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this ordinance.

SECTION 4. Superseder. All ordinances (including, without limitation, the T.I.F. Ordinances), resolutions, motions or orders in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflicts.

SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage.

Exhibits 1 and 2 referred to in this ordinance read as follows:

10

5/14/2008

26747

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Exhibit 1. (To Ordinance)

Revision Number 3 April, 2008.

Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project.

Revision Number 2 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project (the "Plan") is amended as follows:

Title.

"Revision Number 3 April, 2008" is added directly below "Revision Number 2".

Section I.

Introduction And Executive Summary.

E. Plan Objectives And Strategies.

Following the second (2^nd) paragraph, the fourth (4^th) of eight (8) listed goals and objectives is amended to read as follows:

~  develop new commercial or mixed-use (residential/commercial/institutional) uses on vacant and/or underutilized properties in the Area;

In the fifth (5^lh) and final paragraph, the existing third (3^ra) and fourth (4^,h) sentences are deleted and replaced with the following:

However, where appropriate, mixed-use (residential/commercial/institutional) uses may be interspersed within the Area. This Plan is intended to build on the City's previous actions

i

26748

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

to stabilize commercial land uses, attract new businesses, and provide for new mixed-use development along Belmont and Cicero Avenues.

Section 1fL

Statutory Basis For Tax Increment Financing.

B. The Redevelopment Plan And Project For The Belmont/Cicero Avenue Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Project Area.

Following the sixth (6^th) and final paragraph, the first (1^sl) of the four (4) listed anticipated benefits is deleted and replaced with the following:

—  An increased property tax base arising from new commercial and mixed-use (residential/commercial/institutional) development and the rehabilitation of existing buildings.

Section IV. Redevelopment Goals And Objectives.

1. General Goals For The Belmont/Cicero Avenue Redevelopment Area

The following is added as the sixth (6*) listed general goal, and the previous sixth (6^lh), seventh (7^lh) and eighth (8^lh) listed general goals are renumbered as 7., 8. and 9. respectively:

6. Attract new mixed-use (residential/commercial/institutional) development in the Area.

Section IV. Redevelopment Goals And Objectives.

1. Redevelopment Objectives.

The following are added as the ninth (9^th) and tenth (10^tn) listed redevelopment objectives,

12

26749

.5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

and the previous ninth (9^,h) and tenth (10^,h) listed ninth (9^th) and tenth (10^lh) redevelopment objections are renumbered 11. and 12; respectively.

1. Facilitate the rehabilitation of existing mixed-use development and new development of same.
   1. Facilitate the development of new mixed-use development.

Section IV Redevelopment Goals And Objectives.

C. Development And Design Objectives. 1. Land-Use.

The first (1^s') and second (2^ntl) of the four (4) listed guidelines are deleted and replaced with the following:

~  Promote new commercial and mixed-use development where appropriate and integrate new development with existing uses throughout the Area.

-  To the extent possible, facilitate rehabilitation and development of commercial and mixed-uses.

Section VI. Redevelopment Plan And Project.

B. Proposed Generalized Land-Use Plan.

The first (1^st) sentence in the third (3^rd) paragraph is deleted and replaced with the following:

The commercial corridors that comprise the Area should be revitalized through improvement of the existing streetscape and infrastructure and through redevelopment of small-scale individual properties.

13

26750

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

The fourth (4^th) and final sentence in the third (3"*) paragraph is deleted and replaced with the following:

The intent of this land-use plan is also to enhance and support the existing, viable commercial businesses in the Area through providing opportunities for financial assistance for expansion and growth, and encourage the development of mixed-use uses where appropriate.

The fourth (4^th) paragraph is deleted and replaced with the following: The generalized land-use plan designates four (4) land-use categories within the Area:

Following the fourth (4^,h) paragraph, the following land-use category is added as the third (3^,d) listed land-use category:

— Mixed-Use.

In the fifth (5^,h) paragraph, "two (2)" is deleted and replaced with "three (3)".

The sixth (6^m) paragraph is deleted.

(Sub)Exhibit C.

(Sub)Exhibit C to the Plan is replaced in its entirety with (Sub)Exhibit C attached to this Revision Number 3.

[(Sub)Exhibit "C" referred to in this Revision Number 3 printed on page 26751 of this Journal.]

14

26751

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

(Sub)Exhibit "C". (To Revision Number 3)

Generalized Land-Use Plan

Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Area (Amended, Apnl 2008).

DERHICG

3Si ^

WAVCIAHO

PATTERSON

ADDISON

CORNELIA

■ NEWPORT

IE ND ERS ON SCHOOL

BELMONT

EEBt

FLETCHER

/ELLINGTON

WOLFRAM

EEBFE

SCHUOCRT

EE3EE

DRUMMOND

RICMTWOOO

f— Legend

BELMONT CICERO Tit COMMERCIAL INSTITUMOIvJAl.

MONTANA

ULLERTON

1  CM*ernllz*d Lahd Uoo Flan I Bclmonl / CJcoro R«4avlo|ffn_Dnl Aroo IlArtunijfcd, April 2OO0)

"11" -I L -.

15

26752

5/14/2008

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO

"Exhibit 2". (To Ordinance)

The Plan.

WHEREAS, Pursuant to ordinances adopted on January 12,2000,and published in the Journal of the Proceedings of the City Council of the City of Chicago for such date (the" Journal of Proceedings") a t pages 22866 — 22995, and in accordance with the provisions of the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1, etseq. (the"Actⁿ),the City Council (the "Corporate Authorities") ofthe City of Chicago (the"City") (i)approved a redevelopment plan and project (the"Plan")for a portion of the City known as the "Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area" (the "Area") (the "Plan Ordinance"); (ii) designated the Area as a "redevelopment project area"; and (iii) adopted tax increment allocation financing for the Area; and

WHEREAS,Section 5/1 l-74.4-3(n)(F) of the Act requires a redevelopment plan to include the most recent equalized assessed valuation ("E.A.V.")of a redevelopment project area; and

WHEREAS, The Plan, attached as Exhibit A to the Plan Ordinance, included the 1997 E.A.V. and contemplated in Section VILA of the Plan that if the 1 998 E.A.V. became available prior to the date of the adoption of the Plan by the City Council, then the City would update the Plan by replacing the 1997 E.A.V. with the 1998 E.A.V. in order to comply with the Act; and

WHEREAS, The 1998 E.A.V. became available prior to the date of the adoption of the Plan Ordinance by the Cily Council, but after the Plan had been submitted to the Community Development Commission to set a public hearing pursuant to Section 5/1 1-74.4-4 and 5/11-74.4-5 of the Act, and the City was not able to insert the 1998 E.A.V. in the Plan prior to its adoption by ordinance for various logistical reasons; and

WHEREAS, The Corporate Authorities desire to amend the Plan to update the E.A.V. as contemplated in the Plan and to conform the Plan to Section 11-74.4-3(n)(F) of the Act, and to make other, minor changes; and

WHEREAS, Section 5/1 l-74.4-5(c) of the Act permits amendments for such changes to a redevelopment plan to be made without a public hearing, provided that the Cityshall give notice of such changes by mail to each affected taxingdistrict and each registrant in the interested parties registry for the Area, and by publication in a newspaper of general circulation within the affected taxing district not later than ten (10) days following the adoption by ordinance of such changes; now, therefore,

Be Jt Ordained by the City Council cf tlie City cf Chicago:

16

5/14/2008

26753

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are incorporated herein and made a part hereof.

SECTION 2- Amendments To Redevelopment Plan. The City, pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-5 of the Act, hereby amends the Plan, as previously published in the Journal of Proceedings, by the amendments set forth in Exhibit 1 attached hereto and approves the Plan, as amended, the amended version of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

SECTION 3, Invalidity Of Any Section. If any provision cf this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this ordinance.

SECTION 4. Superseder. All ordinances, resolutions, motions or orders in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflicts.

SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage.

Exhibits 1 and 2 referred to in this ordinance read as follows:

Exhibit 1. Amendments To Plan

The Plan, as previously published in the Journal of the Proceedings ofthe City Council ofthe City of Chicago for January 12, 2000 (the "Journal of Proceedings") at pages 22866 — 22995, is hereby amended as follows. Insertions are shown as italicized text; deletions are shown in brackets. Page number references refer to the page numbers in such Journal of Proceedings.

1. The date of the Plan shall be "September 1, 1999, Revised as of October 29, 1 999, Revised as of January 6, 2000".
2. The date (if the Eligibility Study included as Attachment One to the Plan (the'^,EligibilityStudy")shall be "September 1,1 999, Revised as of October 29, 1 999, Revised as of January 6, 2000".

17

26754

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

3.      Section V.B.2 is hereby amended by deleting the last complete sentence on page 22889 and replacing it with the following language:

Age and the requirements of contemporary commercial tenants have caused portions of the Area and its building stock to become obsolete and the growth rate of the E.A. V. of the Area has grown slower than the growth rate for the City as a whole since 1994.

1. Section V.B.2 is hereby amended by deleting the third (3^rd) full paragraph on page 22890 and replacing it with the following language:

From 1994 through 1998, the City of Chicago equalized assessed value increased., from    Thirty   Billion   One   Hundred    Million Dollars ($30,100,000,000) to Thirty-three Billion Nine Hundred Million Dollars ($33,900,000,000)according to Cook County records. This represents a gain of Three Billion Eight Hundred Million Dollars ($3,800,000,000) (annual average of two and seven-tenths percent (2.7%)) during this five (5)year period. In 1994 the equalized assessed value of Cook County was Sixty-seven Billion Eight Hundred Million Dollars ($67,800,000,000) and grew to  Seventy-eight Billion Five Hundred Million Dollars ($78,500,000,000) in 1998. This represents a gain of Ten Billion Seven Hundred Million Dollars ($10, 700,000,000) (annual average of two and eight-tenths percent (2.8%))iuring this five (5) year period. In 1998, the E.A. V. of the Area was Thirty-three Billion Seven Hundred Million Dollars ($33,700,000,000). This figure represents an approximately One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000) million increase in E.A.V. since 1994.  Tlie average rale of increase in E.A. V. for the Area has only been one and txuo-tenths percent (1.2%) annually since 1994. Further, approximately two and nine-tenths percent (2.9%) of the properties in the Area are delinquent in the payment of 1997 real estate taxes and one hundred four (104) building code violations have been issued on buildings since January of 1994.

5. Section VI.D. of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the second (2^nd) sentence in the second (2^nd) full paragraph on page 22907 and replacing it with the following language:

ln recent years, E.A. V. in the Area has grown slower than the Ctiy as a whole.

18

5/14/2008

26755

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

6.      Section VII of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the second (2^nd) and third (3^rd) sentences in the paragraph on page 2291 1 following the header "A. Most Recent Equalized Assessed Valuation" and replacing them with the following:

The 1998 E.A. V. of all taxable parcels in the Area is approximately Thirty-three Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($33,700,000). This total E.A. V. amount, by P.I.N., is summarized in 1998 Estimated E.A. V. by Tax Parcel included as Attachment Four of the Appendix

1. Section H.B. of the Eligibility Study is hereby amended by deleting the third (3^rd) full paragraph on page 2292 land replacing it with the following language:

From 1994 through 1998, the City of Chicago equalized assessed value increased   from    Thirty    Billion   One   Hundred    Million Dollars ($30,100,000,000)to Thirty-three Billion Nine Hundred Million Dollars ($33,900,000,000) according to Cook County records. This represents a gain of Three Billion Eight Hundred Million Dollars ($3,800,000,000) (annual average of two and seven-tenths percent (2. 7%))during this jive (5) year period.  In 1994 the equalized assessed value of Cook County was Sixty-seven Billion Eight Hundred Million Dollars ($67,800,000,000) and grew to   Seventy-eight Billion Five  Hundred  Million Dollars ($78,500,000,000) in 1998. Ihis represents a gain of Ten Billion Seven Hundred Million Dollars ($10,700,000,000) billion (annual average of two and eight-tenths percent (2.8%)fluring this five (5)year period. In 1998, the E.A.V. ofthe Area was Thirty-three Million Seven Hundred Thousand ($33,700,000). This figure represents an approximately On e Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000) million increase in E.A. V. since 1994. The average rate of increase in E.A. V. for the Area has only been one and two-tenths percent (1.2%) annually since 1994. Further, approximately two and nine-tenths percent (2.9%)of the properties in the Area are delinquent in the payment of 1997 real estate taxes and one hundredfour (104) building code violations have been issued on buildings since January of 1994 according to information provided by the City of Chicago Department of Bui/dings.

19

26756

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

8.      Section IV of the Eligibility Study is hereby amended by deleting the second (2¹"¹) sentence in the last paragraph on page 22944 and replacing it with the following language:

In addition, the E.A. V. growth rate of the Area has grown slower than the City as whole since 1994.

1. Attachment Four to the Plan appearing on pages 22951 through 22959 is hereby amended by replacing the 1997 E.A.V. data with the 1998 E.A.V. data and by deleting the number [1997] in the header for Attachment Four and in the column heading of the third {3ⁿ) column in Attachment Four and inserting in each instance the number 1998. A copy of such updated table is included in Amendment Number 1 to the Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area Tax Increment Financing Program Redevelopment Plan and Project, attached to this ordinance as Exhibit 2.

Exhibit "2". Revision Number 2.

Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project.

Section 1.

Introduction And Executive Summary.

A.   Area Location.

The Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area (hereafter referred to as the "Area")is located on the northwest side of the City of Chicago ("City"),approximately eight (8)miles northwest of the central business district. A location map is provided on the following page that indicates the general location ofthe Area within the City. The Area covers approximately ninety-nine (99)acres and includes forty-nine (49) (full and partial) city blocks. The Area is of Linear shape and encompasses the property along Cicero Avenue from Grace Street on the north to Montana Avenue on the south. In addition, an east/west linear section follows Belmont Avenue, from

20

5/14/2008

26757

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Cicero Avenue on the east to Leclaire Avenue on the west. The boundary of the Area is identified on (Sub)Exhibit A, Boundary Map of T.I.F. Area included in Attachment Two of the Appendix. The Area is adjacent to the Northwest Industnal Corridor Redevelopment Project Area on the south and the Irving/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area on the north.

Witiiin these two (2)comdors, the block face on both sides ofthe street (to the respective parallel alley) is generally included.

B.   Existing Conditions

The Cicero Avenue comdor, between Grace Street on the north and Montana Avenue on the south, is a continuous commercial comdor. A significant number of uses along this comdor are auto related. However, additional retail and service uses provide a wide range of services to adjacent residential neighborhoods. The Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue intersection is at the core of the Area and forms a central commercial node Irom which commercial uses stretch to the north and sou th along Cicero Avenue and to the west along Belmont Avenue. Belmont Avenue west of Cicero Avenue is an arterial street that exhibits a compact commercial character similar to Cicero Avenue. The commercial character extends to the west along Belmont Avenue for several blocks ending at Foreman High School.

The Area consists primarily of older commercial properties located along Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue (see (Sub)Exhibit B, Existing Land-Use Assessment Map included in Attachment Two of the Appendix). Many structures in the Area are in need of repair due to depreciation of physical maintenance and other conditions as documented in the Eligibility Study included as Attachment One of tlie Appendix. Zoning classification in lhe Area is predominately "commercial" and "business" district with a small portion of the Area designated for residential uses mainly associated with Foreman High School. Zoningclassificationsin the Area are shown on (Sub)Exhibit D, Generalized Existing Zoning Map included in Attachment Two ofthe Appendix. Seventy-seven percent (77%)of the buildings in the Area are or exceed thirty-five (35)years of age.

Declining public and private investment is evidenced by deterioration and depreciation cf maintenance of some of the public infrastructure components (principally streets and sidewalks) and deterioration of private properties as documented in the Eligibility Study (see Attachment One of the Appendix).

The Area is characterized by the following conditions:

the predominance (seventy-seven percent (77%))tvf structures that are thirty-five (35)years old or older;

21

26758

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

obsolescence (sixty percent (60%)of buildings or parcels);

excessive land coverage (seventy-one percent (71%)of buildings or site . improvements);

depreciation of physical maintenance (seventy-five percent (75%) cf buildings or site improvements);

lack of community planning (seventy-one percent (7 l%)cf buildings or parcels).

In addition, the Area exhibits other characteristics to a lesser extent which are set forth in the Eligibility Study including some streets, sidewalks, curbs and street lighting requiring repair and maintenance.

C.  Business And Industry Trends.

The age of many of the buildings and the inability of Area properties to provide contemporary commercial building sites and buildings has contributed to a gradual decline in the overall conditions of properties along Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue within the Area. Some Area buildings are vacant and/or in need of maintenance and repair to deteriorating portions of the structures. Approximately sixty thousand (60,000)square feet of commercial space is vacant. The Area is characterized by numerous automotive related businesses. These businesses range from small used car lots covering one (l)or two (2) commercial lots to large automotive sales lots covering nearly entire blocks. In most instances, these larger operations are franchised new car dealerships. The remaining commercial uses are a mix of small service and retail uses and many of these businesses are also automotive related uses such as genera] and specialty repair and service facilities, body shops, parts stores, et cetera.

There is also an inability to provide contemporary development sites throughout the Area. Because so many of the existing uses are located on one (l)or two (2) narrow lots, the availability of off-street paxking and room for expansion are limited. The possibility exists that the commercial businesses in the Area may look outside the Area to expand their operations. Loss of additional commercial tenants, due to an inability to meet contemporary commercial space needs, would likely have an adverse impact on the Area's viability as an employment center within the Cily. Loss of commercial tenants would likely be detrimental to the surrounding residential neighborhoods because residents likely would go outside the Area to find suitable shopping alternatives.

22

26759

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

The City has an on-going maintenance program for Area public improvements to repair and improve Area infrastructure. Despite these efforts, improved commercial sites in the Area are gradually becorning obsolete and underutilized. Some of these sites will likely become blighted and lose the ability to generate jobs and tax revenue if these conditions are not reversed.

D.   Redevelopment Plan Purpose.

Tax increment financing ("T.I.F.") is permitted by the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11 -74.4-1, et seq., as amended (the"Actⁿ). The Act sets forth the requirementsand procedures for establishing a redevelopment project area and a redevelopment pi an. This Belmont/Cicero Avenue Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project (hereafter referred to as the'Plan") includes the documentation as to the qualifications of the Area as a conservation area as defined in the Act. The purposes of this Plan are to provide an instrument that can be used to guide the correction of Area problems, attract new private development that will produce new employmentand tax increment revenues and to

stabilize existing development in the Area. This Plan identifies those activities,

sources of funds, procedures and various other necessary requirements in order

to implement tax increment financing pursuant to the Act.

E.   Plan Objectives And Strategies.

As a part of the City's overall strategy to retain viable businesses, recruit new businesses into the City and check the loss of jobs from the City, the City has chosen to utilize tax increment financing to revive the commercial comdors that make up the Area.

The Plan represents an opportunity for the City to implement a program that can achieve a number of Citywide goals and objectives, as well as some that are specificallydirected at the Area. These goals and objectives include:

support and retain the existing tax base of the Area with particular emphasis on maintaining the stability ofthe major auto dealerships;

~     retain the existing employment base and provide new employment opportunities in the Area;

^—     expand the tax base through  reiise and rehabilitation 'of existing commercial properties that are presently vacant or underutilized;

23

26760

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

develop new commercial buildings on vacant and/or underutilized properties in the Area;

establish a program of planned public improvements designed to enhance the retention of existing business and industries and to promote the Area as a place to do business;

attract new business that will complement the existing business community and provide expanded goods and services for adjacent neighborhoods and existing businesses;

improve the condition and appearance of properties within the Area; and

eliminate the conditions that have caused the Area to exhibit signs of blight and that qualify the Area as a conservation area.

These goals and objectives can be. accomplished by utilizing T.I.F. as described in Section III, herein. T.I.F. initiatives and establishment ofthe Area are designed to arrest the spread of blight and decline of the Area and v£SL help to retain, redevelop • and expand the commercial businesses within the Area. In doing so, the use of T.I.F. will help to preserve the adjoining residential neighborhoods that have traditionally been served by the commercial corridors of the Area. In addition, the opportunity exists to revive and enhance these declining commercial comdors that also serve the employees of the businesses located in or nearby the Area.

This Plan will create the mechanism to revitalize these important commercial corridors through the improvement of the physical environment and infrastructure. The City proposes to use T.I.F., as well as other economic development resources, when available, to address needs in the Area and induce the investment of private capital.

In implementing this Plan, the City is acting to facilitate the revitalization of the entire Area. The majority of the Area should be maintained as a pair of connected commercial corridors that provide services to the Area and surrounding residential neighborhoods. Cicero Avenue has long-standingrecognition as an automotivesales and service corridor in the City and it is a goal of this plan to support and improve the Area's image in that regard. This Plan is intended to build on the City's previous actions tostabilizecommercialland uses, support business expansion and attract new businesses to the Area. The Cily recognizes that blighting influences will continue to weaken the Area and that the Area may become blighted if the decline is not reversed. Consequently, the City wishes to encourage private development activity by using T.I.F. as a prime implementation tool to complete various public projects.

24

26761

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

F.  Redevelopment Plan And Project Activities And Costs.

The projects anticipated for the Area may include, but are not Limited to:

rehabilitation and improvement to existing properties including streetscape improvements;

property assembly, site clearance and preparation;

private developer assistance;

transportation improvements;

street, alley and sidewalk reconstruction;

utility work;

environmental remediation; marketing and promotion; and planning studies.

The anticipated activities and associated costs are shown on Table Three, Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs. The total estimated cost for the activities listed in Tabic Three is Nine Minim Six Hundred Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($9,625,000).

G.   Summary And Conclusions.

This Plan summarizes the analyses and findings ofthe consultant's work, which, unless otherwise noted, is the responsibility of PGAV-Urban Consulting ("Consultant*).Tlie City is entitled to rely on the findings and conclusions of this Plan in designating the Area as a redevelopment project area under the Act (defined herein). The Consultant has prepared this Plan and the related Eligibility Study with the understanding that the City would rely: 1) on the findings and conclusions ofthe Plan and the related Eligibility Study in proceeding with the designation ofthe Area and the adoption and implementation ofthe Plan, and 2) on the fact that the Consultant compiled the necessary u-iformation so that the Plan and the related Eligibility Study will comply with the Act.

25

26762

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

The study and survey of the Area indicate that the requirements necessary for designation of the Area as a conservation area under the Act are present. Therefore, the Area is qualified under the terms of the definitions in the Act. This Plan and the supporting documentation contained in the Eligibility Study (included herein as Attachment One ofthe Appendix) indicate that the Area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development through investment by private enterprise and would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed without the adoption of the Plan.

Section II.

Legal Description And Project Boundary.

The boundaries of the Area include only those contiguous parcels of real property and improvements thereon substantially benefitted by the activities to be undertaken as a part of the Plan. Since the boundaries of the Area include approximatelyninety-nine (99)acres of land, the statutory niinirnum cf one and five-tenths (1.5) acres is exceeded. The boundaries represent an area that consists of

two (2)adjoiningcommercialcorridors that serve adjacent residential neighborhoods and the northwestern part of the City. These commercial comdors contain common characteristics that influence the viability of the entire Area:

the comdors along Cicero and Belmont Avenues represent an older commercial core for the adjacent neighborhoods;

occupancy rates, building age, building conditions and streetscape conditions are relatively similar throughout the entire Area.

The boundaries of the Area are shown on (Sub)Exhibit A, Boundary Map of T.I.F. Area included in AttachmentTwo ofthe Appendix and the boundaries are described in the Legal Description ofthe Area included as Attachment Three of the Appendix. A listing ofthe permanent index numbers and the .1998 equalized assessed value for all properties in the Area are provided as 1998 Estimated E.A.V. by *I^x Parcel included as Attachment Four of the Appendix.

26

5/14/2008

26763

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Section UJ.

Statutory Basis For Tax Increment Financing.

A. Introduction.

In January, 1977, T.I.F. was made possible by the Illinois General Assembly through passage of the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 ,etseq., as amended (the"Act") The Act provides a means for municipalities, after the approval of a redevelopment plan and project, to redevelop blighted, conservation or industrial park conservation areas and to finance eligible "redevelopment project costs" with incremental property tax revenues, "Incremental property tax" or "incremental property taxes" are derived from the increase in the current EA.V. of real property vdtirin the redevelopment project area over and above the "certified initial E.A.V." of such real property. Any increase in EA.V. is then multiplied by the current tax rate, which results in incremental property taxes. A decline in current EA.V. does not result in a negative incremental property tax.

To finance redevelopment project costs, a municipality may issue obligations secured by incremental property taxes to be generated within the project area. In addition, a municipality may pledge toward payment ofsuch obligations any part or any combination of the following:

1. net revenues of all or part of any redevelopment project;
2. taxes levied and collected on any or all property in the municipality;
3. the full faith and credit of the municipality;
4. a mortgage on part or all of the redevelopment project; or

(_e)      any other taxes or anticipated receipts that the municipality may lawfully

pledge.

Tax increment financing does not generate tax revenues by increasing tax rates. It generates revenues by allowing the municipality to capture, for a prescribed period, the new revenues produced by the enhanced valuation of properties resulting from the municipality's redevelopment program, improvements and activities, various redevelopment projects and the reassessment of properties. Under T.I.F., all taxing districts continue to receive property taxes levied on the initial valuation of properties within the redevelopment project area. Additionally,

27

26764

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

taxingdistricts can receive distributions of excess incremental property taxes when annual incremental property taxes received exceed principal and interest obligations for that year and redevelopment project costs necessary to implement the redevelopment plan have been paid. Taxingdistricts also benefit from the increased property tax base after redevelopment project costs and obligations are paid.

As used herein and in the Act, the term "redevelopment project" ("project")means any public and private development project in furtherance of the objectives ofa redevelopment plan. The term "area" means an area designated by the municipality, which is not less in the aggregate than one and one-half (l'/a) acres and in respect to which the municipality has made a finding that there exist conditions which cause the area to be classified as an industrial park conservation area or a blighted area or a conservation area, or a combination of both blighted area and conservation area. Redevelopment plan ("Plan") means the comprehensive program of the municipality for development or redevelopment intended by the payment of redevelopment project costs to reduce or eliminate those conditions the existence of which qualified the redevelopment project area for utilization of tax increment financing, and thereby to enhance the tax bases of the taxingdistricts which extend into the redevelopment project area.

This increase or "increment" can be used to finance "redevelopment project costs" such as property assembly, site clearance, building rehabilitation, interest subsidy, construction of public infrastructure, et cetera, as permitted by the Act.

The Illinois General Assembly made various findings in adopting the Act:

1. that there exists in many municipalities within the State blighted and conservation areas; and
2. that the eradication of blighted areas and the treatment and improvement of conservation areas by redevelopment projects are essential to the public interest and welfare.

These findings were made on the basis that the presence of blight, or conditions which lead to blight, are detrimental to the safety, health, welfare and morals of the public.

To ensure that the exercise of these powers is proper and in the public interest, the Act specifies certain requirements that must be met before a municipality can proceed with implementing a redevelopment plan. One of these requirements is that the municipality must demonstrate that a redevelopment project area qualifies for designation. With certain exceptions, an area must qualify generally either as:

28

5/14/2008

26765

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

a blighted area (both "improved" and "vacant" or a combination of both); or

a conservation area; or

a combination of both blighted areas and conservation areas within the definitions for each set forth in the Act.

The Act does not offerdetailed definitions of the blighting factors used to qualify areas. The definitions set forth in the Illinois Department of Revenue's "Definitions and Explanations of Blight and Conservation Factors (1988)" were used in this regard in preparing this Plan.

B. The Redevelopment Plan And Project For The Belmont/Cicero Avenue Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Project Area.

As evidenced herein, the Area as a whole has not been subject to growth and development through private investment. Furthermore, it is not reasonable to expect that the Area as a whole will be redeveloped without the use of T.I.P.

This Plan has been formulated in accordance with the provisions of the Act and is intended to guide improvements and activities within the Area in order to stimulate private investment in the Area. The goal of the City, through implementation of this Plan, is that the entire Area be revitalized on a comprehensive and planned basis to ensure thatprivateinvestment in rehabilitation and new development occurs:

1. on a coordinated rather than piecemeal basis to ensure that land-use, access and circulation, parking, public services and urban design are functionally integrated and meet present-day principles and standards;
2. on a reasonable, comprehensive and integrated basis to ensure that blighting factors are eliminated; and
3. accomplish objectives within a reasonable, and defined period so that the Area may contribute productively to the economic vitality of the City.

29

26766

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

This Plan sets forth the overall Project which are those public and private activities to be undertaken to accomplish the City's above-stated goal. During implementation of the Project, the City may, from rime to time: (i) undertake or cause to be undertaken public improvements and activities; and (ii) enter into redevelopment agreements or intergovernmental agreements with private entities or public entities to construct, rehabilitate, renovate or restore private improvements on one (l)or several parcels (collectivelyreferred to as "Redevelopment Projects").

This Plan specifically describes the Area and summarizes the factors which qualify the Area as a "conservation area" as defined in the Act (also,see the Eligibility Study included as Attachment One of the Appendix).

Successful implementation of this Plan requires that the City utilize incremental property taxes and other resources in accordance with the Act to stimulate the comprehensive and coordinated development of the Area. Only through the utilization of tax increment financing will the Area develop on a comprehensive and coordinated basis, thereby reducing or eliminating the conditions which have precluded development of the Area by the private sector.

The use of incremental property taxes will permit the City to direct, implement and ■ coordinate public improvements and activities to stimulate private investment within the Area. These improvements, activities and investments will benefit the City, its residents, and all taxing districts having jurisdiction over the Area. These anticipated benefits include:

An increased property tax base arising from new commercial development and the rehabilitation of existing buildings.

An increased sales tax base resulting from new and existing development.

An increase in construction and employment opportunities for residents ofthe City.

Improved roadways, utilities and other infrastructure that better serve existing businesses, residents and institutions and accommodate desired new development.

30

26767

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Section TV. Redevelopment Goals And Objectives.

Information regarding the needs of the Area and proposals for the future was obtained from the City of Chicago, various neighborhood groups, comments expressed at neighborhood meetings and field investigations by the Consultant.

The Area boundaries have been established to maximize the development tools created by the Act and its ability to address Area problems and needs. To address these needs, various goals and objectives have been established for the Area as noted in this section.

A. General Goals For The Belmont/Cicero Avenue Redevelopment Area.

Listed below are the general goals adopted by the City for redevelopment of the Area. These goals provide the overall focus and direction of this Plan:

1. Improve the quality of life in the City by revitalizing the Area. This can be accomplished through assisting the Area to have secure, functional, attractive, marketable and competitive business environments that capitalize on the automotive nature of much of the Area.
2. Within the Area, create commercial environments that will contribute more positively to the health, safety and general welfare ofthe City.
3. Stabilize and enhance the real estate and sales tax base of the City and other taxingdistricts having jurisdiction over the Area.
4. Retain and enhancesound and viable existingbusinesses within the Area.
5. Attract new business development within the Area.
6. Improve the appearance of the Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue comdors that comprise the Area. This should be accomplished through: building facade renovation/restoration; removal of signage clutter; restoration of deteriorated signage; other public and private improvements that will have a positive visual impact and provide an identity for the commercial district.

31

26768

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

2. Create new job opportunities within the Area.

8.      Employ residents from within the Area as well as adjacent neighborhoods.

B.  Redevelopment Objectives.

Listed below are the redevelopment objectives that will guide planning decisions regarding redevelopment within the Area:

1. 1. Reduce or eliminate those conditions that qualify the Area as a "conservation area". These conditions are described in detail in the Eligibility Study (see Attachment One ofthe Appendix).
2. Create an environment that stimulates private investment in the upgrading and expansion of existing businesses and the construction of new business facilities that will create jobs and increase the property tax base.

1. Create a coherent overall urban design and character for the Area. Individual developments should be visually distinctive and compatible.
2. Encourage visually attractive buildings, rights-of-way and open spaces incorporating sound building and property design standards including signage and off-street parking.
3. Provideorreinforcenecessary public improvements and facilities in proper relationship to the projected demand for such facilities and in accordance with modem design standards for such facilities.
4. tteadirrize the existing transportation network of the Area and ensure that the Area is served by a street system and public transportation facilities that provide safe and convenient access to and circulation within the Area.
5. Assemble or encourage the assembly of land into parcels of appropriate shape and sufficient size for redevelopment in accordance with this Plan and contemporary development needs and standards.
6. Facilitate business retention, rehabilitation and new development.

32

5/14/2008

26769

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

9. Assist in the establishment of job training and job readiness programs to provide residents from within and surrounding the Area with the skills necessary to secure jobs within the Area.

10.    Provide opportunities for women-owned and minority-owned businesses to share in the redevelopment of the Area.

C.  Development And Design Objectives.

Listed below are the specific development and design objectives which will assist the City in directing and coordinating public and private improvement and investment throughout the Area in order to achieve the general gods and redevelopment objectives for the Area identified previously in this Plan.

The followingguidelines are intended to help attract desirable new businesses and employment opportunities, foster a consistent and coordinated development pattern and create an attractive and quality image and identity for the Area.

1. Land-Use.

Promote new commercial development, where appropriate, and integrate new development with existing businesses throughout the Area to create a planned mix of commercial uses.

\      --     To the extent possible, facilitate rehabilitation and development of

commercial, retail and commercial service uses where appropriate. However, the Plan recognizes the need for and existence of institutional and residential uses to a limited extent given the Area's current boundaries and existing land-use and zoning patterns.

Promote amenities such as shared parking in selected locations that support the needs of the Area's residents, employees and business patrons.

Protect areas designated for a particular land-use from development that may be detrimental through implementation of the generalized land-use plan for the Area.

33

26770

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

2.

Building And Site Development.

Repair, rehabilitate and reuse existing commercial buildings in poor condition, when feasible.

Promote the use of consistent and visually attractive architectural treatments (including lighting, signage and landscaping) around buildings to add visual interest and promote a unique identity within the Area.

Locate building service and loading areas away from front entrances and major streets where possible.

Encourage parking, service and support facilities that can be shared by multiple businesses.

3.

Transportation And Infrastructure.

Provide safe and convenient access to the Area for trucks, autos and public transportation.

Improve the street surface conditions, street lighting, curbs, sidewalks and traffic signalization.

Promote developments that will take advantage of the ease of access to the City's mass transit network.

Provide well-defined, safe pedestrian connections between developments within the Area and between the Area and nearby destinations.

Upgradepublic utilities and infrastructure throughout the Area as required.

4.

Urban Design.

Establish a comprehensive streetscape system to guide the design and location of light fixtures, sidewalks, paving materials, landscaping, street furniture and signage within the Area.

34

5/14/2008

26771

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Replace signage that is deteriorated and unattractive.

Discourage proliferation of building and s,ite signage and restrict off-premises advertising (particularly billboards) to the extent permitted by law.

Provide distinctive design features, including landscaping and signage, at the major entryways into the Area to create a unified identity.

Preserve and promote buildings with historic and architectural value, where appropriate.

5.     Landscaping And Open Space.

Provide landscaped buffer areas around the periphery of and within the commercial portions of the Area to reduce the adverse impact of commercial activities on adjacent residential neighborhoods.

Promote the use of landscaping and attractive fencing to screen dumpsters, waste collection areas, loading areas, service areas and the perimeter of parking lots and other vehicular use areas.

Ensure that all landscaping and design materials comply with the City of Chicago Landscape Ordinance.

Promote the development of shared open spaces including courtyards, outdoor eating areas, recreational areas, et cetera.

Ensure that all open spaces are designed, landscaped and lighted to achieve a high level of security.

35

26772

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Section V.

Basis For Eligibility Of The Area And Findings.

1. Introduction.

Attachment One of the Appendix (the"E]igibihty Study")contains a comprehensive report that documents all factors required by the Act to make a determination that the Area is eligible under the Act. A brief synopsis of this Eligibility Study is included in this section.

To designate a redevelopment project area, according to the requirements ofthe Act, a municipality must find that there exist conditions which cause such project area to be classified as a blighted area, conservation area, combination of blighted and conservation areas, or an industrial park conservation area. The criteria and the individual factors that were utilized in conducting the evaluation of the physical conditions in the Area are outlined under the individual headings that follow.

1. Area Background Information.

1.   Location And Size Of Area.

The Area is located eight (8)miles northwest of downtown Chicago. The northern limit of the Area along Cicero Avenue is approximately one (I)mile southwest of the Kennedy Expressway. The Area contains approximately ninety-nine (99)acres and consists of forty-nine (49)(fLQland partial) blocks.

The boundaries of the Area are described in the Legal Description included as Attachment Three of the Appendix and are geographically shown on (Sub)Exhibit A, Boundary Map of T.I.F. Area, included in Attachment Two of the Appendix. Existing land uses are identified on (Sub)ExhibitB, Existing Land-UseAssessment Map, included in Attachment Two of the Appendix.

2.   Description Of Current Conditions.

As noted previously, the Area consists of forty-nine (49)(fulland partial) city blocks, one hundred seventy-three (373) buildings and three hundred seventy-seven (377)parcels covering approximately runery-nine (99)acrcs. The gross land-use percentage breakdown of the Area's acreage is shown below:

36

5/14/2008

26773

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Land-Use

Percentage Of Gross Land Area

0.4

Residential

0.4

Industrial

46.9

Commercial

13.4

Institutional and Related

0.3

Vacant/Undeveloped Land

38.6

Public Right-of-way

Much ofthe Area is in need of redevelopment, rehabilitation and revitalization and is characterized by the conservation area factors that exist to a major extent listed below:

Obsolescence.

Sixty percent (60%)of buildings or parcels exhibited evidence of obsolescence. Obsolescence identified in tlie Area includes: structures containing vacant space, structures with design and space layouts that are no longer suitable for their current use, parcels of limited and narrow size and configuration and obsolete site improvements including limited provisions for on-site parking.

Excessive Land Coverage.

Seventy-one percent (71%) of buildings or site improvements exhibited evidence cf excessive land coverage. Examples of excessive land coverage identified in the Area include: building or site improvements exhibiting nearly one hundred percent (100%)ot coverage, lack of required off-street parking and inadequate provision for loading or service areas.

Depreciation Cf Physical Maintenance.

Depreciation of physical maintenance was identified on seventy-five percent (75%))f buildings and site improvements in the Area. Examples observed in the Area include: unpainted or unfinished surfaces, peeling paint, loose or missing materials, cracks in masonry construction, broken windows, loose gutters and

37

26774

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

downspouts, and damaged building areas still in disrepair. Trash and debris was also observed on several sites and several parking lots and paved areas exhibited cracks and potholes in need of repair.

Lack Of Community Planning.

The presence of a lack of community planning was observed on seventy-one percent (71%)of the buildings or parcels in the area. This factor is primarily associated with commercial properties that are located on lots that are too small to adequately accommodate appropriate off-street parking and loading requirements.

In addition to the four (4)factors noted above, the following factors were found to exist to a minor extent:

Dilapidation (eleven percent (11%) of buildings and site improvements).

Deterioration (twenty-three percent (23%) of buildings and site improvements).

. Illegal use of individual structures (twopercent (2%) of buildings).

Presence of structures below minimum code standards (seventeen percent (17%) of buildings).

Abandonment (onepercent (l%)of buildings). Excessive vacancy (eight percent (8%)of buildings).

Overcrowding of structures and community facilities (twopercent (2%)of buildings).

Deleterious land-use and layout (ten percent (10%)of buildings and site improvements).

The Area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development through investment by private enterprise and would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed without the, adoption of this Plan. Age and the requirements of contemporary commercial tenants have caused portions ofthe Area and its building stock to become obsolete and the E.A.V. of the Area has grown slower than the growth rate for the City as a whole since 1994. These and other factors may result

38

5/14/2008

26775

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

in further disinvestment in the Area. Some businesses have relocated out of the Area and approximately fourteen (14)commercial buildings contain vacant floor space.

Previous efforts to check decline in the Area have been limited to on-going maintenance of public improvements by the City. However, these efforts have not prevented further decline. In addition, these efforts have not resulted in occupancy and beneficial use of some vacant buildings. The City is developing this Plan in an attempt to attract new growth and development.

The City and the State oflllinois ("State")have designated a portion of this section of the community as Enterprise Zone 5 ((Sub)Exhibit F, Enterprise Zone Map included in AttachmentTwo of the Appendix). However, this designation only covers the right-of-way of Cicero Avenue. The remaining portion of the Area will not benefit from the Enterprise Zone program.

From 1994 through 1998, the City of Chicago equalized assessed value increased from Thirty Billion One Hundred Million Dollars ($30,100,000,000)to Thirty-three Billion Nine Hundred Million Dollars ($33,900,000,000)according to Cook County records. This represents a gain of Three Billion Eight Hundred Million Dollars ($3,800,000,000)(annual average of two and seven-tenths percent (2.7%))during this five (5)year period. In 1998, the E.A.V. of the Area was Thirty-three Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($33,700,000). This figure represents an approximately One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000) increase in EAV. since 1994. The average rate of increase in EA.V. for the Area has only one and two-tenths percent (l-2%)annually since 1994. Further, approximately two and nine-tenths percent (2.9%)of the properties in the Area are delinquent in the payment of 1997 real estate taxes and one hundred four (104) building code violations have been issued on buildings since January of 1994.

Of the approximately one hundred seventy-three (173) buildings and ninety-nine (99)acres in the Area, only two (2) major new buildings have been built since January of 1994 according to building permit information provided by the City of Chicago Building Department. Both ofthese buildings were commercial buildings. Approximately seventy-seven percent (77%) of the buildings in the Area are or exceed thirty-five (35)years of age.

There is approximately sixty thousand (60,000)square feet of vacant commercial floor space. A significant portion of the vacant floorspace in the Area is located in bu'Ddings that are obsolete in terms of contemporary business requirements and layout. As pail of the documentation of existing conditions in the Area, a separate analysis looked at development opportunities in the Area.

According to information provided by the Goodman Williams Group, large-scale

39

26776

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

retail opportunities are limited in the Area. The main factor limiting development in the Area is the lack of sites capable of accommodating the space and site requirements of contemporary retail development. Several large retailers are located in shopping centers near the Area. These shopping centers are on large sites that provide adequate parking and large building footprints more suited for contemporary retail use. Retail demand for large building footprints and on-site parking may be causing some Area properties to be less desirable for commercial uses. In addition, a major neighborhood retail-shopping node is located just north of the Area at Cicero Avenue and Irving Park Road, outside the Area boundaries.

For many Area properties, building size, building layout and limited on-site parking is not suited for large contemporary commercial tenants. The result is that a narrower mix of commercial uses will seek to occupy the existing commercial buildings in the Area and thereby limit demand for some properties. This adds significantly to the view that the Area has experienced additional blight and that private market acceptance of portions ofthe Area is not favorable and likely will not be favorable in the future.

The documentation provided in this Plan and the attached EligibilityStudy (long-term vacancies, properties that are tax delinquent, absence of new development and - declining E.A.V.) indicates that private investment in revitalization and redevelopment has not occurred. These conditions may cause the Area to become' blighted in the future. In addition, the Area is not reasonably expected to have increased stability and be redeveloped without the aggressive efforts and leadership of the City, including the adoption of the Plan.

C.   Area Data And Profile.

The City is proposing an overall strategy to address conditions that qualify the Area as a conservation area. These efforts are directed at increasing property values, retaining viable businesses, recruiting new businesses into the City and reversing the loss of industrial and commercial jobs. Isolated areas within the Belmont/Cicero Avenue Redevelopment Area and surrounding areas have received or will receive funding for planning and capital improvement programs. Funding of these projects is outlined in the 1998 — 2002 City of Chicago Capital Improvement Program. However, these programs are not sufficient to overcome the factors causing decline in the Area.

As noted in the Introduction, the Area is a pair of connected, linear commercial corridors located along Cicei o Avenue and Belmont Avenue. These corridors contain numerous commercial businesses and provide employment opportunities to residents in the sunounding neighborhoods. However, many existing structures are not suited forcontemporary commercial development because ofage, size, condition

40

26777

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

and layout. Deteriorating buildings, small lots, inadequate or non-existent on-site parking, buildings that are obsolete in terms of contemporary retail space needs and declining streetscapes are present throughout the Area, lf the Area is to be revitalized, these conditions must be addressed.

The primary purpose of the Plan is to establish a program of addressing those factors that cause the Area to qualify under the Act. Further, the tax increment financing identified in this Plan is designed to lead to retention of existing business and promote the Area for new commercial development and private investment.

D. Existing Land-Use And Zoning Characteristics. A tabulation of existing land-use by category is shown below:

Land-Use

Table One. Tabulation Of Existing Land-Use.

Land Area Percentage Of Gross      Parentage Of Net

Gross Acres             Land Area      Land Area^,l,

Residential 0.4

Industrial 0.4

Commercial      46.5

Institutional      13.3

Vacant/Undeveloped 0.3 Land

Subtotal - Net Area      60.9

Public Right-of-way      38-3

TOTAL:      99.2 Ac.

0.4 0.4 46.9 13.4 0.3

61.4 3.SL6 100.0%

0.7 0.7 76.4 21.8 0.4

100.0 NA NA

Note:

(I) Net land area exclusive ol'acreage associated with public right-of-way.

41

26778

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

The existing land uses itemized in Table One are predominantly commercial in nature, as seventy-six and four-tenths percent (76.4%)cf the net Area (exclusiveof public right-of-way)!s commercial. One (1) institutional use (ForemanHigh School) is located in the Area. Nd public parks are located in the Area and several residential uses are scattered throughout the Area. The majority of properly within the Area is zoned in commercial or business categories with the primary exception being Foreman High School, which is in an area zoned residential (see(Sub)Exhibit D, Generalized Existing Zoning Map included in Attachment Two of the Appendix).

There are no large retail shopping centers in the Area. The pockets of residential use existing in the Area contain single-family and multi-family buildings or commercial buildings containing upper floor residential uses. These residential areas are associated with individual lots located along Cicero Avenue. The overwhelming commercial nature of these corridors makes these residential uses incompatible with the overall character of the Area. Approximately zero and four-tenths percent (0.4%) of the total gross land area or zero and seven-tenths percent (0.7%)of the net land area (exclusiveof public right-of-way) is residential.

The land-use survey and map are intended to focus on the uses at street level which usually are the predominate use of the properly. It should be recognized, however, that many of the multi-story buildings throughout the corridor are actually mixed-use structures. Tlie upper floors of these buildings are often intended for multi-familyuse, constructed so that the business owner could live above his shop and maximize the rental income potential of the building. In the overwhelming majority cf these instances, these upper floors experience high rates of occupancy even if the first (1^st) floor commercial space is vacant. The focus on ground floor uses is not intended to minimize the importance of the second ('2^aa) floor uses. In fact, maximum use and occupancy of these mixed-use buildings is and should be encouraged.

Cicero and Belmont Avenues have parking restrictions that limit on-street parking during peak periods. In addition, several zones have been created adjacent to the Area that Limit on-street parking in residential areas through a parking permit program. However, these areas are small in number. Along Cicero and Belmont Avenues limited on-street parking is available. Individual businesses along these streets have narrow street frontage and many buildings cover one hundred percent (100%))f their lots, diereby preventingany on-site parking or loading. Many ofthe Area's residents, employees and patrons of Area businesses must park on adjacent streets to access the Area.

42

5/14/2008

26779

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

E.   Investigation And Analysis Of Conservation Factors.

In determining whether the proposed Area meets the eligibility requirements of the Act, various methods of research were utilized in addition to the field surveys. The data includes information assembled from the sources below:

1. 1. Contacts with local individuals knowledgeable of Area conditions and history, age of buildings and site improvements, methods of construction, real estate records and related items.
2. Aerial photographs, Sidwell block sheets, et cetera.
   1. Inspection and research as to the condition of local buildings, streets, utilities, et cetera.
   2. On-site field inspection of the Area conditions by experienced property inspectors ofthe Consultant and others as previously noted. Personnel of the Consultant are trained in techniques and procedures of determining conditions of local properties, utilities, streets, et cetera and determining eligibility of designated areas for tax increment financing.
   3. Use of accepted definitions and guidelines to determine area eligibility as established by the Illinois Department of Revenue manual in conducting eligibility compliance review for State oflllinois Tax Increment Finance Areas in 1988.
   4. Adherence to basic findings of need as established by the Illinois General Assembly in establishing the Act. These are:

1. There exists in many Illinois municipalities, areas that arc conservation or blighted areas, within the meaning of the Act.
2. Theeradication of blighted areas and the treatment of conservation areas by redevelopment projects are essential to the public interest.

c. These findings are made on the basis that the presence of blight or conditions, which lead to blight, are detrimental to the safety, health, welfare and morals of the public.

43

26780

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Tn making the determination of eligibility, it is not reqxrired that each and every property or building in the Area qualify. It is the Area asa whole that must be determined to be eligible.

The Act sets forth fourteen (14)separate factors that are to be used to determine if an area qualifies as a "conservation area". In addition, two (2) thresholds must be met. For an area to qualify as a conservation area, fifty percent (50%)or more of the structures in the area must have an age of tirircy-five (35)years or more and a combination of three (3)or more of the fourteen (14)factors must be found to exist such that although the area is not yet a blighted area, it is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals or welfare and may become a blighted area.

The Act does not define the blight terms, but the Consultant has utilized the definitions for these terms as established by the Illinois Department of Revenue in their 1988 Compliance Manual. The Eligibility Study included in the Appendix defines all of the terms and the methodology employed by the Consultant in arriving at the conclusions as to eligibility.

Conservation Area: A combination of three (3)or more of the following factors must exist for an area to qualify as a conservation area under the Act.

1.      Dilapidation.

1. Obsolescence.
2. Deterioration.
3. Illegal use of individual structures.
4. Presence of structures below minimum code standards.
5. Abandonment.
6. Excessive vacancies.
7. Overcrowding of structures and community facilities.
8. Lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities.

44

5/14/2008

26781

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

2. Inadequate utilities.
3. Excessive land coverage.
4. Deleterious land-use or layout.
5. Depreciation of physical maintenance.

14.      Lack of community planning.

Table Two, Conservation Factors Matrix, tabulates the condition of aLL improved properties in the approximately ninety-nine (99)acre, forty-nine (49)full and partial block Area. Table Two documents the conditions of improved portions of the Area. The data contained in Table Two indicate that four (4)bughting factors associated with improved land are present to a meaningful extent and generally distributed throughout the Area. These four (4) factors were summarized previously and are further described in the Eligibility Study contained as Attachment One of the Appendix.

F. Stimmary Of Findings/Area Qualification.

It was determined in the investigation and analysis of conditions in the Area that the Area qualifies asa "conservation area" under the Act Those quaJLifying factors that were determined to exist in the Area are summarized in Table Two, Conservation Factors Matrix. The Plan includes measures designed to reduce or eliminate the deficiencies that cause the Area to qualify. This is consistent with the strategy of the City in other redevelopment project areas.

The loss of business from this Area further documents the trend line and deteriorating conditions of the Area. Vacant buildings, declining EA.V., lack of private investment and little interest in the Area by the private market are further evidence of decline in the Area. There is approximately sixty thousand (60,000) square feet of vacant commercial floor space in approximately fourteen (14) buildings scattered throughout the Area. Some of these properties have been available in the real estate market for an extended time-period.

45

26782

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

The City and the State have designated the right-of-way of Cicero Avenue as a portion of State oflllinois Enterprise 2x»ne Number 5. However, this designation can not address problems associated with property along Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue (see(Sub)Exhibit F, Enterprise Zone Map included in Attachment Two of the Appendix).

The conclusion of the Consultant is that the number, degree and distribution of eligibility factors as documented in this report warrant the designation of the Area as a conservation area as set forth in the Act. The summary tables contained on the following pages highlight the factors found to exist in the Area that cause it to qualify.

Although it may be concluded that the mere presence of the stated eligibility factors noted herein may be sufficient to make a finding of qualification as a conservation area, this evaluation was made on the basis that the factors must be present to an extent that would lead reasonable persons to conclude that public intervention is appropriate or necessary. Secondly, the conservation area eligibility factors must be reasonably distributed throughout the Area so that a non-eligible area is not arbitrarily found to be a conservation area simply because of proximity to an area that exhibits blighting factors.

In addition to the presence ofmultipleconservation area factors, trends indicating that Area EA.V. is declining and the presence of vacant floor space indicates that the Area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development as a result of investment by private enterprise and will not be developed without action by the City. These have been previously documented. All properties within the Area will benefit from the use ofT.I.F. and the implementation of the Plan.

The table presented on the following page shows the status of the Area with respect to the age threshold and eligibility factors documented in the Area. The analysis presented in this Plan was based upon field review and data assembled by the Consultant. The conclusions presented in this report are those of the Consultant. The local governing body should review this report. Ifsatisfied with the summary offindings contained herein, the governing body may adopt a resolution making a findingofa conservation area for the Area and make this report a part of the public record. The study and survey of the Area indicate that requirements necessary fordesignation as a "conservationarea*are present. Therefore, the Area meets the requirements fordesignation as a conservation area and is eligible to be designatedasa redevelopment projectarca andeligihleforTaxIncrement Financing under the Act (see full text of Attachment One, Eligibility Study included in the Appendix").

46

I

5/14/2008

26783

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

1. Improved Land Statutory Factors.

Eligibility Factor'" Age¹²'

1.      Dilapidation

1. Obsolescence
2. Deterioration
3. Illegal use of individual structures
4. Presence of structures below

minimum code standards

1. Abandonment
2. Excessive vacancies
3. Overcrowding of structures and

communiry facilities

1. Lack of ventilation, light or sanitary

facilities

10.    Inadequate utilities

Existing In Area

77% of buildings are or exceed 35 years of age

Minor Extent

Major Extent

Minor Extent

Minor Extent

Minor Extent Minor Extent Minor Extent

Minor Extent

Not Present Not Present

Notes:

1. Only three (3)f:ictors are required by the Act for eligibility. Twelve (J 2) factors arc present in the Area. Four (4)factors were found to exist to :> major extent and eight (8)vverc found to exist to a minor extent.
2. Age is not a factor for designation but rather a threshold that must be met before an area can qualify as a conservation axea.

47

26784

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Existing I n Area

Eligibility Factor'

Major Extent

11.   Excessive land coverage

Minor Extent

12.   Deleterious land-use or layout

Major Extent

13.    Depreciation of physical maintenance

Major Extent

14.    Lack of community planning

Section Vi.

Redeveloptnent Plan And Project.

A. Introduction.

This section presents the Plan and Project for the Area. Pursuant to the Act, when the finding is made that an area qualifies as a conservation, blighted, combination of conservation and blighted areas, or industrial park conservation area, a redevelopment plan must be prepared. A redevelopment plan is defined in the Act at 65 ILCS 5/1 l-74.4-3(n) as:

"the comprehensive program of the municipality for development or redevelopmentintendedby the payment of redevelopment projectcosts to reduce or eliminate those conditions the existence of which qualified the redevelopment project area as a 'blighted area' or 'conservation area' or combination thereof or 'industrial park conservation area', and thereby to enhance the tax bases ofthe taxingdistricts which extend into the redevelopment project area".

Notes:

(1) Only three (3)factors are required by the Act for eligibility. Twelve (12) factors are present in the Area. Four (4)factors were found to exist to a major extent and eight (8) were found to exist fo a minor extent.

48

5/14/2008

26785

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

B. Proposed Generalized Land-Use Plan

The generalized land-use plan for the Area is presented on (Sub)Exhibit C, Generalized Land-Use Plan included in Attachment Two of the Appendix.

The generalized land-use plan for the Area will be in effect upon adoption of this Plan. This land-use plan is a generalized plan in that it states land-use categories and even alternative land-uses that apply to each block in the Area. Existing land uses that are not consistent with these categories may be permitted to exist if they are legal and conform to the underlying zoning. However, T.LF. assistance will only be provided for those properties in conformity with this generalized land-use plan.

The commercial corridors that comprise the Area should be revitalized through improvement cf the existing streetscape and infrastructure and through redevelopment of small-scale individual properties with the primary focus being a series of planned commercial retail/service corridors. In addition, provisions for the lone institutional use (Foreman High School) are also included. The land uses should be arranged and located to minimize conflicts between neighboring land-use activities. The intent of this land-use plan is also to enhance and support th,e existing, viable commercial businesses in the Area through providing opportunities for financial assistance for expansion and growth.

The generalized land-use plan is focused on maintaining and enhancing sound and viable existing businesses, and promoting new business development at selected locations. The generalized land-use plan highlights areas for use as commercial business that will enhance existing development and promote new development within the Area. The generalized land-use plan designates two (2) land-use categories within the Area:

Commercial. _ Institutional.

These two (2) categories, and their location on the map on (Sub)Exhibit C, Generalized Land-Use Plan included as Attachment Two of the Appendix, were developed from several factors: existing land-vise, the existing underlying zoning districts and the land-use anticipated in the futuie (anddeemed to be appropriate based on sound urban planning principles and real estate market realities).

It is not the intent ofthe generalized land-use plan to eliminate non-conforming existing uses in this Area except to the extent such elimination would occur asa result of the City's Zoning Ordinance provisions. The intent is to prohibit the expansion of non-conforming uses and allow the commercial nature ofthe Area to

49

26786

JOURNAL—CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

remain intact. In some instances, transformation from residential use to commercial use may be desirable. It should be noted that existing residential uses can remain until such time that they are no longer viable for their current use. All redevelopment project activities shall be subject to the provisions of the City's ordinances and applicable codes as may be in existence and may be amended from time to time.

C. Redevelopment Projects.

To achieve the objectives proposed in the Plan, a number of projects and activities will need to be undertaken. While no private projects are proposed at this time, an essential element of the Plan is a combination of private projects, public projects and infrastructure improvements. Projects and activities necessary to implement the Plan may include the following:

1.      Private Redevelopment Investment.

Rehabilitation of existing properties including adaptive reuse of certain existing buildings built for one use but proposed for another use. New construction or reconstruction of private buildings at various locations as permitted by the Plan.

2.      Public Redevelopment Investment.

Public projects and support activities will be used to induce and complement private investment. These may include, but are not limited to: street improvements; public building rehabilitation; propertyassembly and site preparation; street work; transportation improvement programs and facilities; public utilities (water, sanitary and storm sewer facilities); environmental clean-up; park improvements; school improvements; landscaping; trafficsignalization; promotional and improvement programs; signage and lighting, as well as other programs as may be provided by the City and permitted by the Act.

The estimated costs associated with the eligible public redevelopment investment are presented in Table Three, Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs below. These projects arc necessary to carry out the capital improvements and to address the additional needs identified in preparing this Plan. This estimate includes reasonable or necessary costs incurred or estimated to be incurred in the implementation of this Plan.

50

26787

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Some of the costs Listed in Table Three, Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs will become eligiblecosts under the Act pursuant to an amendment to the Act which will become effective November 1, 1999. In no instance, however, shall such additions or adjustments result in any increase in the total redevelopment costs without further amendment to this Redevelopment Plan.

The City proposes to achieve its redevelopment goals and objectives for the Area through the use of public financing techniques including, but not limited to tax increment financing. The City also reserves the right to undertake additional activities and improvements authorized under the Act.

Table Three. Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs.

Activity Cost"

1. Planning, Legal, Marketing Professional

Services, Administrative      $ 500,000

1. Property Assembly, Site Clearance,

and Environmental Remediation 1,550,000 and Site Preparation

1. Rehabilitation Costs and Leasehold

Improvements 2,500,000

1. Public Works or Improvements 2,200,000
2. Job Training, Retraining, Welfare to

Work and Day Care 750,000

(1) Further descriptions of costs are provided in Section VII of this Plan. Certain costs contained in this table will become eligible costs as of November 1, 15)99 pursuant to an amendment to the Act.

51

26788

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Cost'"

Activity

$1,200,000

6.   Taxing Districts' Capital Costs

50,000

7.  Relocation Costs

875,000

8.   Interest Subsidy

$9,625,000

* TOTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COSTS:

3.   Property Assembly.

Property assembly in accordance with this Plan may be undertaken by the private sector. Additionally, the City may encourage the preservation of buildings that are structurally sound and compatible with the overall redevelopment of the Area.

Further descriptions cf costs are provided in Section VII of this Plan. Certain costs contained in this table will become eligible costs as of November 1, 1999 pursuant to an amendment to the

Act.

ln addition to the above stated costs, each issue of bonds issued to finance a phase of the project may include an amount of proceeds sufficient to pay customary and reasonable charges associated with the issuance of such obligations,includinginterest. Each individual project cost will be re-cvaluatcd in light of projected private development and resulting incremental tax revenues as it is considered for public financing under the provisions of the Act. The totals of line items .set forth above are an upper Limit on expenditures. Adjustments may be made in line items within the total and may be made without amendment to tlie Plan. In no instance, however, shall such additions or adjustments result in any increase in the total redevelopment costs without further amendment to this Redevelopment Plan. The City may incur Redevelopment Project Costs which are paid for from tlie funds of the City other than incremental taxes, and the City may then be reimbursed for such costs from incremental taxes.

52

5/14/2008

26789

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

To meet the goals and objectives of the Plan, the City may acquire and assemble property throughout the Area. Land assemblage by the City may be by purchase, exchange, donation, lease, eminent domain or through the Tax Reactivation Program and may be acquired for the purposes of (a)sale, lease or conveyance to private developers, or (b)sale, lease, conveyance or dedication for the construction of public improvements or facilities. Furthermore, the City may require written redevelopment agreements with developers before acquiring any properties. As appropriate, the City may devote acquired property to temporary uses until such property is scheduled for disposition and development.

The City may demolish improvements, remove and grade soils and prepare sites with soils and materials suitable for new construction. Acquisition, clearance and demolition will, to the greatest extent possible, be timed to coincide with redevelopment activities so that tax-producing redevelopment closely follows site clearance.

The City may (a)acquire any historic structure (whethera designated City or State landmark or on, or eligible for, nomination to the National Register of Historic Places); (b)demolish any non-historic feature of such structure; and (c)incorporate any historic structure or historic feature into a development on the subject property or adjoining property.

In connection with the City exercising its power to acquire real property, including the exercise of the power of eminent domain, under the Act in implementing the Plan, the City will follow its customary procedures of having each such acquisition recommended by the Community Development Commission (orany successor commission)and authorized by the Cily Council ofthe City. Acquisition of such real property as may be authorized by the City Council does not constitute a change in the nature of the Plan.

Relocation assistance may be provided in order to facilitate redevelopment of portions of the Redevelopment Project 'Area, and to meet the other City objectives. Businesses or households legally occupying properties to be acquired by the City may be provided with relocation advisory and financial assistance as determined by the City.

D.   Assessment Of Financial Impact On Taxing Districts.

hi 1994, the Act was amended to require an assessment of any financial impact of the redevelopment project area on, or any increased demand for services from, any taxing district affected by the redevelopment plan and a description of any program to address such financial impacts or increased demand. The City intends

53

26790

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

to monitor development in the Area and with the cooperation of the other affected taxing districts will attempt to ensure that any increased needs are addressed in connection with any particular development.

The following major taxing districts presently levy taxes against properties located vitrdn the Area:

Cook County. The County has principal responsibility for the protection of persons and property, the provision of public health services and the maintenance of County highways.

Cook County Forest Preserve District. The Forest Preserve District is responsible for acquisition, restoration and management of lands for the purpose of protecting and, preserving open space in the City and County for the education, pleasure and recreation ofthe public.

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District Of Greater Chicago. This district provides the main trunk lines for the collection of wastewater from cities, villages and towns, and for the treatment and disposal thereof.

Chicago Community College District 508. This district is a unit of the State of Illinois' system of public community colleges, whose objective is to meet the educational needs of residents of the City and other students seeking higher education programs and services.

Board Of Education Of The City Of Chicago. General responsibilities of the Board of Education include the provision, maintenance and operations of educational facilities and the provision of educational services for kindergarten through twelfth (12") grade. Edwin G. Foreman High School is located within the Area. This school as well as other Chicago Public Schools near the Area are shown on (Sub)Exhibit A, Boundary Map of T.I.F. Area included as Attachment Two of the Appendix.

Chicago Park District. The Park District is responsible for the provision, maintenance and operation of park and recreational facilities throughout the City and for the provision of recreation programs. No recreational facilities are located within the Area. Parks near the Area are located on (Sub)Exhibit A, Boundary Map of T.I.F. Area included in Attachment Two of the Appendix.

54

5/14/2008

26791

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Chicago School Finance Authority. The Authority was created in 1980 to exercise oversight and control over the financial affairs of the Board of Education.

Cook County Health Facility. The Cook County Health Facility provides health care "services to residents of Cook County.

City Of Chicago. The City is responsible for the provision of a wide range of municipal services, including: police and fire protection; capital improvements and maintenance; water supply and distribution; sanitation service; building, housing and zoning codes, et cetera.

City Of Chicago Library Fund. The Chicago Library District operates and maintains seventy-nine (79)libraries throughout the City of Chicago. Nb library facilities are located in the Area. Branch library facilities in the environs of the Area provide library services for residents of the Area.

The City finds that the financial impact on taxing districts of the City implementing the Plan and establishing the Area is not significant. In fact, the indication is that the Area is a liability to taxing districts if E.A.V. trends indicating decline are not reversed. This Plan and Area will not result in significant increased demand for facilities or services from any taxing district.

The replacement of vacant and underutilized properties with new development may cause some increased demand for services and/or capital improvements. These services are provided by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (M.W.R.D.) and the City (fireand police protection as well as sanitary collection, recycling, et cetera). Because no vacant land exists in the Area and no residential development is anticipated to result from activities associated with this Plan, it is not anticipated that the demand for increased services and facilities will be significant. All portions of the Area are currently served via the existing infrastructure. Any increase in demand can be adequately handled by existing facilities ofthe M.W.R.D. Likewise, services and facilities of the City of Chicago are adequate to handle any increased demand that may occur.

55

26792

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

The major goals of this Plan are to: revitalize existing business areas; assist in property assembly; accomplish the planned program of public improvements; and address the needs identified herein which cause the Area to qualify for T.I.F. under the Act. Existing built-up areas are proposed to be revitalized and stabilized. Revitalization is not expected to result in a need for new facilities or expanded services from area taxing bodies.

The costs presented in Table Three, Estimated RedevelopmentProject Costs, have included a limited portion of costs associated with capital improvement projects for Area taxing jurisdictions. The City will monitor the progress of the Plan and its future impacts on all local taxing bodies, ln the event significant adverse impacts are identified that increase demand for facilities or services in the future, the City will consider utilizing tax increment proceeds or other revenues, to the extent they are available, to assist in addressing needs that are in conformance with this Plan.

The Area represents a veiy small portion (less than one-tenth of one percent, or (0.09%)$>f the total tax base of the City. In recent years, E.A.V. in the Area has grown slower than the City as a whole. Hence, the taxing bodies will benefit from a program designed to stabilize the-tax base in the Area, check the declining tax revenues that are the result of deterioration in the Area and attract new growth and development in the future.

E. Prior Efforts.

As noted previously, efforts to revitalize portions ofthe Area have been limited to on-going maintenance of public infrastructure. Community meetings held in the Area with respect to this plan have elicited comments and inputs from those residing in or doing business in the Area. However, continued and broader efforts that address the factors causing decline of the Area are needed. The community leaders and businesses point to the need for expanded concerted efforts to:

ehnainate blighting factors;

redevelop abandoned sites;

reduce crime;

improve transportation services, including provision of or improvement to centralized parking areas and incorporation ofvehicular traffic and safety measures;

56

5/14/2008

26793

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

initiate employment training programs so as to better prepare the labor force in the Area for employment opportunities;

undertake physical improvements to improve the appearance, image and marketability of the Area; and

encourage other proposals that can create long-term economic Life and stability.

Section V77.

Statutory Compliance And Implementation Strategy.

The development and follow through of an implementation strategy is an essential element in achieving the success of this Plan. In order to maximize program efficiency, take advantage of current developer and existing property owner interest in improving property in the Area, and with fiill consideration of available funds, a phased implementation strategy will be employed.

A combination of private investments and projects and public improvements and projects is an essential element of the Plan. In order to achieve this end, the City may enter into agreements with public entities, private developers or existing property owners, where deemed appropriate by the City, to facilitate public or private projects. The City may also contract with others to accomplish certain public projects and activities as contained in this Plan.

Costs that may be incurred by the City in implementing this Plan may incude, without limitation, project costs and expenses that may be eligible under the Act, as amended from time to time, including those costs that are necessary and related or incidental to those listed below as currently permitted by the Act. Some of the costs listed below will become eligiblecost under the Act pursuant to an amendment to the Aa which will become effective November 1, 1999:

1. Costs of studies, surveys, development of plans and specifications, implementation and administration ofthe Plan including but not limited to staff and professional service costs for architectural, engineering, legal, linancial, plarming and marketing sites within the Area to prospective businesses, developers and investors or other services.

57

26794

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

2.      Property assembly costs, including but not limited to acquisition of land

and other property, real or personal or rights or interest therein,

demolition of buildings, site preparation, site improvement that serve as

an engineered barrier addressing ground level or below ground

'environmental contamination, including, but not limited to parking lots

and other concrete or asphalt barriers, and the clearing and grading of

land.

3.      Costs of rehabilitation, reconstruction or repair or remodeling of existing

public or private buildings, fixtures and leasehold improvements.

4.      The cost of replacing an existing public building if pursuant to the

implementation ofa redevelopment project the existing public building is

to be demolished to use the site for private investment or devoted to a

different use requiring private investment and the cost of construction of

public works or improvements.

1. Cost of job training and retraining projects including the costs of "welfare to work" programs implemented by businesses located within the redevelopment project area.
2. Financing costs, including but not limited to all necessary and incidental expenses related to the issuance of obligations and which may include payment of interest on any obligations issued thereunder including interest accruing during the estimated period of construction of any redevelopment project for which such obligations are issued and for not exceeding thirty-six (36) months thereafter and including reasonable reserves related thereto.
3. To the extent the City by written agreement accepts and approves the same, all or a portion ofa taxing district's capital costs resulting from the redevelopment project necessarily incurred or to be incurred (consistent with statutory requirements) within the taxing district in furtherance of the objectives of the Plan and Project.
4. Relocation costs to the extent that a municipality determines that relocation costs shall be paid oris required to make payment of relocation costs by Federal or state law.
5. Payments in lieu of taxes.

58

5/14/2008

26795

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

] o.    Costs of job training, retraining, advanced vocational education or career education, including but not limited to courses in occupational, semi-technical or technical fields leading directly to employment, incurred by one (l)or more taxingdistricts, provided that such costs: (i)are related to the establishment and maintenance of additional job training, advanced vocational education or career education programs for persons employed or to be employed by employers located in a Redevelopment Project Area; (ii) when incurred by a taxing district or taxing districts other than the municipality, are set forth in a written agreement by or among the municipality and the taxing district or taxing districts, which agreement describes the program to be undertaken, including but not Limited to the number of employees to be trained, a description of the training and services to be provided, the number and type of positions available or to be available, itemized costs ofthe program and sources of funds to pay for the same, and the tenn of the agreement. Such costs include, specifically, the payment by community college districts of costs pursuant to Sections 3-37, 3-38, 3-40 and 3-40.1 of the Public Community College Act (as defined in the Act) and by school districts of costs pursuant to Sections 10-22.20a and l0-23.3a ofthe School Code (asdefined in the Act).

11.    Interest costs incurred by a redeveloper related to the construction, renovation or rehabilitation of a redevelopment project provided that:

^) such costs are to be paid directly from the special tax allocation fund established pursuant to the Act;

(B) such payments in any (l )one year may not exceed thirty percent (30%)of the annual interest costs incurred by the redeveloperwith regard to the redevelopment project during that year;

(O if there are not sufficient funds available in the special tax allocation find to make the payment pursuant to this provision then the amounts so due shall accrue and be payable when sufficient funds are available in the special tax allocation fund;

the total ofsuch interest payments paid pursuant to the Act may not exceed thirty percent (30%)of the total: (i) cost paid or incurred by the redeveloper for the redevelopment project plus (ii) redevelopmentproject costs excludingany property assembly costs and any relocation costs incurred by a municipality pursuant to the Act; and

59

26796

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

(E) the thirty percent (30%)1imitation in (B)and (D) above may be increased to up to seventy-five percent (75%)of the interest cost incurred by a redeveloper for the financing of rehabilitated or new housing for low-income households and very low-income households, as defined in Section 3 of the Illinois Affordable Housing Act.

1. An elementary, secondary or unit school district's increased costs attributable to assisted housing units as provided in the Act.
2. Up to fifty percent (50%) of the cost of construction, renovation and/or rehabilitation ofall low-and verylow-incomehousingunits (forownership or rental) as defined in Section 3 of the Illinois Affordable Housing Act. If the units "are part of a residential redevelopment project that includes units not affordable to low- and very low-income households, only the low-and very low-income units shall be eligible for this benefit under the Act.
3. The cost of day care services for children of employees from low-income families working for businesses located within the redevelopment project area and all or a portion,.of the cost of operation of day care centers established by redevelopment project area businesses to serve employees from low-income families working in businesses located in the redevelopment project area. For the purposes of this paragraph, "low-income families" means families whose annual income does not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the City, county or regional median income as determined from time to time by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

A.   Most Recent Equalized Assessed Valuation.

The purpose of identifying the most recent equalized assessed valuation (E.A.V.) ofthe Area is lo provide an estimate of the initial EAV. which the Cook County Clerk will certify for the purpose of annually calculating the incremental E.AV. and incremental property taxes ofthe Area. The 1998 EA.V. ofall taxable parcels in the Area is approximately Thirty-three Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($33, 700, OOO/Diis total E.A.V. amount, by P.I.N., is summarized in 1998 E.A.V. by Tax Parcel included as Attachment Four of the Appendix. The EA.V. is subject to verification by the Cook County Clerk. After verification, the final figure shall be cer-ed by the Cook County Clerk, and shall become the Certified Initial EAV. from which all incremental property taxes in the Area will be calculated by Cook County. If the 1998 E.A.V. shall become available prior to the date of the adoption ofthe Plan by the City Council, the City may update the Plan by replacing the 1 997

60

5/14/2008

26797

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

E.A.V. with the 1998 E.A.V. without further City Council action.

B.   Redevelopment Valuation.

Contingent on the adoption of this Plan, it is anticipated that several major private developments and/or improvements may occur within the Area. The private redevelopment investment and anticipated growth that will result from redevelopment and rehabilitation activity in this Area is expected to increase the equalized assessed valuation by approximately Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000)to Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000).This is based, in part, upon an assumption that the vacant buildings and underutilized properties in the Area will be improved and increase in assessed value. These actions will stabilize values in the remainder of the Area and further stimulate rehabilitation and expansion of existing viable businesses.

C.  Sources Of Funds.

The primary source of funds to pay for Redevelopment Project Costs associated with implementing die Plan shall be funds collected pursuant to tax increment allocation financing to be adopted by the City in connection with the Plan. Under such financing, tax increment revenue resulting from increases in the EAV. of property in the Area shall be allocated to a special fund each year (the"SpecialTax Allocation Fund"). The assets of the Special Tax. Allocation Fund shall be used to pay Redevelopment Project Costs and retire any obligations incurred to finance Redevelopment Project Costs.

In order to expedite the implementation of the Plan and construction of the public improvements and projects, the City of Chicago, pursuant to the authority granted to it under the Act, may issue bonds or other obligations to pay for the eligible Redevelopment Project Costs. These obligations may be secured by future revenues to be collected and allocated to the Special Tax Allocation Fund. The City may also incur redevelopment project costs which are paid for from the funds of the City other than incremental taxes, and the City may then be reimbursed for such costs from incremental taxes.

Jf available, revenues from other economic development funding sources, public or private, will be utilized. These may include City, state and federal programs, local retail sales tax, applicable revenues from any adjoining tax increment financing areas and land disposition proceeds from the sale of land in the Area, as well as other revenues.The final decision concerning redistribution of yearly tax increment revenues may be made a part ofa bond ordinance.

61

26798

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

The Area is presently contiguous to the Northwest Industrial Comdor Redevelopment Project Area and the Irving/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area, and in the future, may be contiguous to, or be separated only by a public right-of-way from, other redevelopment project areas created under the Act. The City may utilize net incremental property taxes received from the Area to pay eligible redevelopment project costs, or obligations issued to pay such costs, in other contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated only by a public right-of-way,and vice versa. The amount of revenue from the Area made available to support such contiguous redevelopment project areas or areas separated only by a public right-of-way, when added to all amounts used to pay eligible Redevelopment Project Costs within the Area, shall not at any time exceed the total Redevelopment Project Costs described in this Plan.

The Area may become contiguous to, or be separated only by a public right-of-way from, redevelopment project areas created under the Industrial Jobs Recovery Law (65 ILCS 5/11-74.61-1, et seq., as amended).   If the City finds that the goals, objectives and financial success ofsuch contiguous redevelopment project areas or those separated only by a public right-of-way are interdependent with those of the Area, the City may determine that it is in the best interests of the City and in furtherance of the purposes of the Plan that net revenues from the Area be made available to support any such redevelopment project areas and vice versa. The City therefore proposes to utilize net incremental revenues received from the Area to pay eligible redevelopment project costs (which are eligible under the Industrial Jobs Recovery Law referred to above) in any such areas and vice versa. Such revenues may be transferred or loaned between the Area and such areas. The amount of revenue from the Area so made available, when added to all amounts used to pay eligible Redevelopment Project Costs within the Area or other areas as described in the preceding paragraph, shall not at any time exceed the total Redevelopment Project Costs described in Table Three of this Redevelopment Plan.

D.   Nature And Term Of Obligation.

Without excluding other methods of City or private financing, a major source of funding will be those deposits made into the Special Tax Allocation Fund of monies received from the taxes on the increased value (above the initial equalized assessed value) of real property in the Area. These monies may be used to repay private or public sources for the expenditure of funds made as Redevelopment Project Costs forapplicablepublic or private redevelopment activities noted above, ormay beused to amortizeT.I.F. obligations, issued pursuant to this Plan, for a term not to exceed twenty (20)years bearing an annual interest rate as permitted by law. Revenues received in excess of one hundred percent (100%)of funds necessary for the payment of principal and interest on the bonds and not needed for other redevelopment project costs or early bond retirements may be declared as surplus

62

5/14/2008

26799

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

and become available for distribution annually to the taxing bodies to the extent that this distribution of surplus does not impair the financial viability of the project or the bonds. One (I)or more bond issues may be sold at any time in order to implement this Plan.

1. Completion Of Redevelopment Project And Plan.

The redevelopment projectshall be completed, and all obligations issued to finance redevelopment costs shall be retired, no later than December 31" of the year in which the payment to the City treasurer as provided in the Act is to be made with respect to ad valorem taxes levied in the twenty-third (23^rd) calendar year following the year in which the ordinance approving this redevelopment project area is adopted (By December 31, 2024).

1. Commitment To Fair Employment  Practices,  Affordable  Housing And

Aflirmative Action Plan.

The City is committed to and will affirmatively implement the following principles in redevelopment agreements with respect to this Plan:

1. The assurance of equal opportunity in all personnel and employment actions, including, but not limited to: hiring, train ing, transfer, promotion, discipline, fringe benefits, salary, employment working conditions, termination, et cetera without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, handicapped status, national origin, creed or ancestry.
2. Redevelopers will meet City of Chicago standards for participation of Minority Business Enterprises and Woman Business Enterprises and the City Resident Construction Worker Employment Requirement as required in redevelopment agreements.
3. This commitment to aifirmative action will ensure that all members of the protected groups are sought out to compete for all job openings and promotional opportunities.
4. The City requires that developers who receiveT.I.F. assistance for market rate housing set aside twenty percent (20%) of the units to meet affordability criteria established by the City's Department of Housing. Generally, this means the affordable for-sale units should be priced at a level that is affordable to persons earning no more than one hundred twenty percent (120%)of the area median income, and affordable rental units should be affordable to persons earning no more than eighty percent

63

26800

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

(80%)of the area median income.

In order to implement these principles, the City shall require and promote equal employment practices and affirmativeaction on the part of itself and its contractors and vendors. In particular, parties engaged by the City shall be required to agree to the principles set forth in this section.

G. Amending The Redevelopment Plan.

This Plan may be amended in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In addition, the City shall adhere to all reporting requirements and other statutory provisions.

In the event the Act is amended after the date of the approval of this Redevelopment Plan by the City Council of Chicago to (a) include new eligible redevelopment project costs (such as, for example, to include the cost of construction of residential housing),or (b)expand the scope or increase the amount of existing eligible redevelopment project costs (such as, for example, by increasing the amount of incurred interests costs that may be paid under 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(l 1)). ^lhis Redevelopment Plan shall be deemed to incorporate such additional, expanded or increased eligiblecosts as eligiblecosts under the RedevelopmentPlan. In the event of such amendment(s), the City may add any new eligible redevelopment project costs as a lineitem in Table Three (whichsets forth the T.I.F. eligible costs for the Redevelopment Plan), or otherwise adjust the line items in Table Three without amendment to this Redevelopment Plan.

In no instance, however, shall such additions or adjustments result in any increasein the total redevelopment project costs with out further amendment to this Redevelopment Plan.

H.   Conformity Of The Plan For The Area To Land Uses Approved By The Planning Commission Of The City.

This Plan and the Project described herein include the generalized land uses set forth on the Generalized Land-Use Plan, as approved by the Chicago Plan Commission prior to the adoption ofthe Plan by the City of Chicago.

64

5/14/2008

26801

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

I.   Housing Impact And Related Matters.

The Area contains one (1 )smgle-farnily building, four (4)mulu-famity buildings and fifty-one (51)mixed-use buildings with upper story residential for a total of three hundred fifty-nine (359)units. Three hundred fwenty-one (321 )of the three hundred fifty-nine (359)residential units in the Area are inhabited. Because the Area includes a significant number cf residential units, information is provided regarding this Plan's potential impact on housing.

Included in the Plan is (Sub)Exhibit C, Generalized Land-Use Plan, included as Attachment Two of the Appendix. This map, when compared tp (Sub)Exhibit B, Existing Land-Use Assessment Map, indicates that there are parcels of real property on which there are buildings containing residential units that could be removed if the Plan is implemented in accordance with the Generalized Land-Use Plan, and that to the extent those units are inhabited, the residents thereof might be displaced. The Plan also includes information on the condition of buildings within the Area. Some of the residential buildings exhibit a combination of characteristics such as dilapidation or deterioration, excessive vacancies and obsolescence which might result in a building's removal and the displacement of residents, during the time that this Plan is in place.

The number and type of residential buildings in the Area potentially affected by this Plan were identified during the building condition and land-use survey conducted as part ofthe eligibility analysis for the Area. A good faith estimate and determination of the number of residential units within each such building, whether such residential units were inhabited and whether the inhabitants were low-income or very low-income households were based on a number cf research and analytical tools including, where appropriate, physical building surveys, data received from buildingownersand managers and data bases maintained by the City's Department of Planning and Development, Cook County tax assessment records and census data.

Any buildings containing residential units that may be removed and any displacement of residents of inhabited units projected herein are expressly intended to be within the contemplation of the comprehensive program intended or sought to be implemented pursuant to this Plan. To the extent that any such removal or displacement will affect households of low-income and very low-income persons, there shall be provided affordable housing and relocation assistance not less than that which would be provided under the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistanceand Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 and the regulations thereunder, including the eligibility criteria. Affordable housing may either be existingor newly constructed housing and the City shall make a good faith effort to ensure that the affordable housing is located in or near the Area. For the purposes hereof, "low-income households", "very low-income households" and "affordable households"

65

26802

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

shall have the meanings set forth in the Illinois Affordable Housing Act.

Map And Survey Overview.

As noted, based on the Plan's land-use map shown in (Sub)Exhibit C, Generalized Land-Use Plan, included as Attachment Two cf the Appendix, when compared to (Sub)Exhibit B, Existing Land-Use Assessment Map, also included in Attachment Two of the Appendix, there are certain parcels of property currently containing residential uses and units that, if the Plan is implemented in accordance with the Generalized Land-Use Plan, could result in such buildings being removed. There are three hundred twenty-one (321) occupied residential units reflected on the Existing Land-Use Assessment Map that would be removed if the Generalized Land-Use Plan were implemented. Of this number, seventy-two (72)are estimated to be occupied by residents classified as low-incomeand ninety-six (96)are estimated to be occupied by residents classified as very low-income.

In instances where residential uses on the Existing Land-Use Assessment Map (Appendix,Attachment 2, (Sub)Exhibit B) are identified as a land-use designation irjdkatirjg a combination of residential and other use, as shown on the Generalized Land-Use Plan (Appendix,Attachment 2, (Sub)Exhibit C), the future land-use may continue to be residential.

The Appendix contains references to reflect the parcels containing buildings and units of residential housing that are impacted by the discussion presented in the previous paragraphs. In Attachment Four of the Appendix those properties referenced above are identified with an *.

[(Sub)Exhibits "Aⁿ, "B", "C\ "D", "Eⁿ and "Fⁿ of Attachment Two-Maps and Plan Exhibits referred to in this Revision Number 2 to Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project printed on pages 26838 through 26843.of this Journal.]

[Attachment  Four — 1998   Estimated   EAV.   by  Tax  Parcel referred to in this Revision Number 2 to Belmont/Cicero lax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project printed on pages 26844   through 26852  of this Journal.]

66

5/14/2008

26803

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

[Location Map' and Table Two referred to in this Revision Number 2 to Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project printed  on   pages 26853  through 26854 of this Journal.]

Attachment One — Eligibility Study and Attachment Three — Legal Description referred to in this Revision Number 2 to the Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project read as follows:

Attachment One. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Eligibility Study.

Revision Number 2.

Belmont/Cicero Avenue Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project.

September 1, 1999. (Revised As Of October 29, 1999) (Revised As Of January 6. 2000)

I.

Introduction

PGAV Urban Consulting (the "Consultant") has been retained by the City of Chicago (the"C±ty")to prepare a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project for the proposed redevelopment project area known as the Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Area (the"Area"). Prior to preparation of the Plan, the Consultant undertook various surveys and investigations of the Area to determine whether the Area, containing all or part of forty-nine (49) full or partial City blocks and approximately ninety-nine (99)acres. qualifies fordesignation as a tax increment financingdistrict, pursuant to the IllinoisTax increment Allocation Redevelopment

67

26804

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1, et seq., as amended (the"Act"). This report summarizes the analyses and findings of the Consultant's work. This assignment is the responsibility of PGAV Urban Consulting who has prepared this Eligibility Study with the understanding that the City would rely: 1) on the findings and conclusions of this Eligibility Study in proceeding with the designation of the Area as a redevelopment project area under the Act, and 2) on the fact that PGAV Urban Consulting has obtained the necessary information to conclude that the Area can be designated as a redevelopment project area in compliance with the Act.

Following this introduction, Section II presents background information of the Area including the geographic location, description of current conditions and area data; Section III documents the building condition assessment and qualifications of the Area as a conservation area under the Act Section IV, Summary and Conclusions, documents the findings of the Eligibility Study.

This EligibilityStudy is a part of the overall tax incrementredevelopment plan (the "Plan") for the Area. Other portions of the Plan contain information and documentation as required by the Act for a redevelopment plan.

U.

Background Information

A.   Location And Size Of Area.

The Area is located approximately eight (8)rriQfis northwest of downtown Chicago. The Area contains approximately ninety-nine (99) acres and consists of forty-nine (49) (full and partial) blocks. The Area consists of two (2) linear commercial corridors connected a I Cicero and Belmont Avenues and is adjacent to the Northwest Industrial Corridor Redevelopment Project Area on the south and the Irving/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area on the north. The Area includes property that flanks Cicero Avenue, from Grace Street on the north to Montana Street on the south and Belmont Avenue, from Cicero Avenue on the east to Leclaire Avenue, on the west. The Area generally includes the block face to the respective parallel alley on both sides of the streets noted above.

The boundaries of the Area are described in the Legal Description included as AttachmentThreeof tbe Appendixof the Redevelopment Plan and are geographically shown on (Sub)Exhibit a, Boundary Map included in Attachment Two ofthe Appendix of the Redevelopment Plan. Existing land uses sire identified on (Sub)Exhibit B, Existing Land-Use Assessment Map included as Attachment Two

08

5/14/2008

26805

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

of the Appendix of the Redevelopment Plan.

B.   Description Of Current Conditions.

As noted previously, the Area consists of forty-nine (49) (full and partial) city blocks and ninety-nine (99)acres. The Area contains one hundred seventy-three (173) buildings and three hundred seventy-seven (377)parcels. Ofthe estimated ninety-nine (99)acres in the Area, the land-use breakdown (shownas a percentage of gross land within the Area) is as follows:

Percentage Of

Land-Use      Gross Land Area

Residential      0.4

Industrial      0.4

Commercial      46.9

Institutional and Related      13.4

Vacant/ Undeveloped Land      , 0.3

Public Right-of-way      38.6

Much of the Area is in need of redevelopment, rehabilitation or revitalization and is characterized by:

obsolescence (sixty percent (60%)of buildings or parcels);

excessive land coverage (seventy-one percent (71%)of buildings or site improvements);

depreciation of physical maintenance (seventy-five percent (75%) of buildings or site improvements); and

lack of community planning (seventy-one percent (7 l%)of buildings or parcels).

69

26806

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

The Area on the whole has not been subject to growth and investment and is not expected to do so without the adoption of the Plan. Age and the requirements of contemporary commercial and industrial tenants have caused portions of the Area and its budding stock to decline and may result in further disinvestment in the Area. Along Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue, vacancies in commercial buildings and depreciation of physical maintenance are present and evidence a need to revitalize the area through the Plan.

Prior efforts by the City, Area leaders and residents, businesses and neighborhood groups have met with Limited success. The City has continued ongoing maintenance on public infrastructure. However, these efforts have not been able to address the needs of the Area properties.

The City and the.Slate oflllinois ("State") have also included a portion (Cicero Avenue) of the Area in Enterprise Zone Number Five as shown on (Sub)Exhibit F, Enterprise Zone Map included in Attachment Two of the Appendix of the Redevelopment Plan. However, this initiative only covers the right-of-way of Cicero Avenue and cannot reverse decline in Area properties.

From 1994 through 1998, the City of Chicago equalized assessed value increased • from Thirty Billion One Hundred Million Dollars ($30,100,000,000>o Thirty-three Billion Nine Hundred Million Dollars ($33,900,000,000)according to Cook County records. This represents a gain of Three Billion Eight Hundred Million Dollars ($3,800,000,0()0)(annual average of two and seven-tenths percent (2.7%)) during this five (5)year period. In 1994 the equalized assessed value of Cook County was Sixty-seven Billion Eight Hundred Million Dollars ($67,800,000,000)and grew to Seventy-eightBillion Five Hundred Million Dollars ($78,500,000,000>n 1998. This represents a gain of Ten Billion Seven Hundred Million Dollars ($1 0,700,000,000) (annual average of two and eight-tenths percent (2.8%))during this five (5)year period. In 1998 the EAV. of the Area was Thirty-three Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($33,700,000).This figure represents approximately One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000)increase in E.A.V. since 1994. The average rate of increase in E.A.V. of the Area has only been one and two-tenths percent (1.2%) annually since 1994. Further, approximately two and nine-tenths percent (2.9%)of the properties in the Area are delinquent in the payment of 1997 real estate taxes and one hundred four (104) building code violations have been issued on buildings since January of 1994 according to information provided by the City of Chicago Department of Buildings.

70

5/14/2008

26807

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Of the one hundred seventy-three (173)buildings in the Axea, only two (2) major new buildings have been built since January of 1994 according to building permit information provided by the City of Chicago Department of Buildings. Both of these buildings were commercial buildings. Approximately seventy-seven percent (77%) of the-buildings in the Area are thirty-five (35)ycars old or older.

A small percentage of buildings has been vacant for more than one (l)year and has not generated private'development interest. There is approximately sixty thousand (60,000)square feet of vacant commercial floor space in the Area which suggest that the Area may experience additional decline and that market acceptance of portions ofthe Area is not favorable.

It is clear from the study of this Area and documentation in this Eligibility Study (commercial vacancies, properties that are tax delinquent, absence of significant new development, E.A.V. growth lagging behind surrounding areas, et cetera) that private revitalization and redevelopment is not occurring and may cause the Area to become blighted. The Area is not reasonably expected to experience significant development without the aggressive efforts and leadership of the City, including the adoption of the Plan.

C. Area Data And Profile.

Public Transportation.

A description ofthe transportation network of the Area is provided to document the availability of public transportation at the present and for future potential needs of the Area. The frequent spacing of C.TA bus lines and direct connection service to various C.T.A. train and Metra station locations provides the Area with adequate commuter transit alternatives.

The Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Area is served byseveral C.T.A. bus routes. These routes include:

North/South Route:

Route 54: Cicero Avenue.

71

26808

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

East/West Route:

Route 152: Addison Street. Route 77: Belmont Avenue. Route 76: Diversey Avenue.

Route 152 (Addison Street) and Route 77 (Belmont Avenue) both have direct connection to the CTA Blue Line to the east. Route 54 (Cicero Avenue) has direct connection to the C.TA. Blue Line to the south at the Cicero station and to the north at the Montrose station.

Access to Metra commuterrail is provided through direct connecting bus routes. The Cicero Avenue (Route 54) route provides a direct connection to the Metra Milwaukee District North Line to Fox Lake at the Mayfair station and the Addison bus (Route 152) provides a direct connection route to this line at the Grayland station east of the Area.

Street System. Region.

Access to the regional street system is primarily provided via the Kennedy Expressway (1-90/94) located approximately one (l)mile to the north ofthe northern portion cf the Area. Cicero Avenue is designated as State Highway 50.

Street Classification.

Cicero Avenue has two (2) travel lanes in each direction. Signalized intersections along Cicero Avenue are located at intersections with arterial class streets. Cicero Avenue carries a large amount of through and local traffic. Truck traffic, both through and local, is common along Cicero Avenue. Belmont Avenue has one (1 )travel lane in each direction and a curbside lane that can be used for parking during certain periods.

Parking.

Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue have peak-period parking restrictions, which can increase street capacity and improve efficiency, hi addition, several

72

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

zones have been created adjacent to the Area that limit on-street parking in residential areas through a parking permit program. However, these areas are not widespread. Along Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue, limited on-street parking is available.Individual businesses along these streets have narrow street frontage and many buildings cover one hundred percent (100%)cf the lot thereby preventing any on-site parking. In some instances, businesses have acquired adjacent or nearby property in order to increase parking for customers and employees in the Area.

Pedestrian Traffic.

Pedestrian traffic is prevalent along both Cicero and Belmont Avenues with the heaviest concentrations located near intersections with arterial class streets.

Historic Structures.

Nd buildings in the Area were identified as significant in a survey of historic resources undertaken by the City.

Area Decline.

The Area has experienced a gradual decline in its visual image and viability as a commercial corridor. Along Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue the effects of age and reuse cf many of the commercial structures have resulted in the depreciation cf physical maintenance of the building stock of the Area. In addition, the E.A.V. of the Area has declined since 1994.

Along Cicero and Belmont Avenues existing buildings are suffering from a lack of maintenance. In some instances, property uses and appearances are not up to the standards cf con temporary commercial development. As can be said for much ofthe Cicero Avenue corridor through the City, this segment of the street is populated almost exclusively by auto-related uses including new and used car dealerships, auto parts and repair operations and other similar uses.

Along Cicero Avenue,several ofthe existing commercial uses generally consume entire block frontages with sales lots or buildings covering nearly every square foot ofthe parcels. In many cases, the structures being used to support these uses were not designed for such uses. In some instances, sales offices are being operated out of buildings that are intended to be temporary structures or were otherwise never intended tosupport the commercialuses currently presenton the sites. Many of the commercial uses along Cicero Avenue generally abut residential

73

26810

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

property with only an alley acting as the separation. This proximity of uses has a deleterious effect on the livability and value of adjacent residential property. In addition, off-street parking for employees and customers is nearly non-existent.

The combination of overall parcel size and depth and the age and design ofthe building stock has meant that these properties generally have limited use for modem commercial operations of any type. Even assembly of sites would mean that any new commercial use would have to conform to a long and narrow parcel configuration ~ sometiiing not generally acceptable to commercial businesses today. Therefore, these conditions hamper large-scalecommercial redevelopment ofthe parcels and have resulted in vacancy of some of the buildings. In addition, existing businesses in the Area have had difficulty expanding. The departure of any of the commercial businesses in the Area will result in the loss of significant tax revenue to the City.

The physical appearance of some uses along Cicero Avenue also creates a negative image for the Area. Overly large signage, streamers, banners and other attention-grabbing visibility gimmicks create a carnival-like atmosphere along some segments of the Cicero comdor. The combination of this visual clutter, the mix of uses and the marginal image portrayed by some of the uses, results in a streetscape image that is one of clutter and congestion and general decline.

In general, the other structures along Cicero Avenue are also located on narrow lots with limited depth. Narrow lots with limited depth prevent large-scale reuse of the sites for modem commercial development and have resulted in vacancies in commercial buildings.

Along Belmont Avenue, age, obsolete site layouts and excessive site coverage have resulted in limited new commercial development and/or reinvestment in existingdevelopment. The early stages of decline that are present in the Area are evidence that the Area is in need of assistance. If assistance is not provided, the factors that are present may influence other portions of the Area and thereby cause the entire Area to become blighted.

The City proposes to use tax increment financing, as well as other economic development resources, when available, to address needs in the Area and induce the investmentof private capital. The Area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development through investment by privateenteq^riseand is not likely to do so without the adoption of the Plan.

This Eligibility Study includes the documentation on the qualifications ofthe Area for designation as a redevelopment project area. The purpose of the Plan is to provide an instrument that can be used to guide the correction of Area problems that cause the Area to qualify, attract new growth to the Area and stabilize existing

74

5/14/2008

26811

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

development in the Area.

D. Existing Land-Use And Zoning Characteristics.

At the present time, the existing land uses itemized in Table One are predominantly commercial in nature, as seventy-eight and nine-tenths percent (78.9%)of the net area (exclusive of public right-of-way) is commercial. There are no large multi-tenant retail shopping centers in the Area.

Table One, presented below contains a tabulation of land area by land-use category:

Table One. Tabulation Of Existing Land-Use.

Land-Use

Land Area      Percentage Of

Gross Acres    Gross Land Area

Percentage Of Net Land Area ^1,1

Residential      0.4

Industrial      0.4

Commercial      46.5

Institutional      13.3

Vacant/ Undeveloped Land      0.3

Subtotal -- Net Area      60.9

Public Right-of-way      38.3

TOTAL:      99.2

0.4 0.4 46.9 13.4

0.3 61.4 38.6 100.0

0.7 0.7 76.4 21.8 0.4 100.0 NA NA

Note:

(1) Ncl land area exclusive of acreage associated with public right-of-way.

75

26812

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

The majority of property within the Area is zoned for commercial or business uses as shown on (Sub)Exhibit D, Generalized Existing Zoning Map included in Attachment Two of the Appendix of the Redevelopment Plan. The only significant section of the Area not zoned in a business or commercial category is Foreman High School.

There are also several isolated residential uses in the Area. Residential structures in the Area are a mixture of single-family and multi-family buildings located along Cicero Avenue. Approximately zero and four-tenths percent (0.4%)jf the total gross land area or zero and seven-tenths percent (0.7%)of the net land area (exclusiveof public right-of-way) in the Area is residential. Along the flanks of the Area residential uses aTein close proximity to the commercial comdors that comprise the Area. The boundary separating residential and commercial uses is usuaily an alley. The lack of parking for customers of commercial uses and limited parking in residential areas has prompted the creation of several permit-parking zones adjacent to some commercial areas. In addition, one (1) institutional use (Foreman High School) is located in the Area.

ZZT.

Qualification Of The Area.

A. Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act.

The Act authorizes Illinois municipalities to redevelop locally designated deteriorated areas through tax increment financing. In order for an area to qualify as a tax increment financing district, it must first be designated as a blighted area, a conservation area (or a combination of the two (2)) or an industrial park conservation area as defined in Section 5/1 l-74.4-3(a) of the Act:

"(a) 'Blighted area' means any improved or vacant area within the boundaries of a redevelopment project area located within the territorial Limits of the municipality where, if improved, industrial, commercial and residential buildings or improvements, because ofa combination of five or more of the following factors: age; dilapidation; obsolescence; deterioration; illegal use of individual structures; presence of structures below minimum code standards; excessive vacancies: overcrowding of structures and community facilities; lack of ventilation, light or saiutary facilities; inadequate utilities; excessive land coverage; deleterious land-use or layout; depreciation of physical maintenance; or lack of community planning, is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals or welfare, or if vacant, the sound growth of the taxing districts is impaired by, (1 )a combination

76

5/14/2008

26813

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

of two or more of the following factors: obsolete platting of the vacant land; diversity of ownership of such land; tax and special assessment delinquencies on such land; flooding on all or part of such vacant land; deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas adjacent to the vacant land, or (2)the area immediately prior to becoming vacant qualified as a blighted improved area, or (3)the area consists of an unused quarry or unused quarries, or (4) the area consists of unused railyards, rail tracks or railroad rights-of-way, or (5)the area, prior to its designation, is subject to chronic flooding which adversely impacts on real property in the area and such flooding is substantially caused by one or more improvements in or in proximity to the area which improvements have been in existence for at least five years, or (6)the area consists of an unused disposal site, containing earth, stone, building debris or similar material, which were removed from construction, demolition, excavation or dredge sites, or (7)the area is not less than 50 nor more than 100 acres and 75% of which is vacant, notwithstanding the fact lhat such area has been used for commercial agricultural purposes within five years prior to the designation of the redevelopment project area, and which area meets at least one of the factors itemized in provision (1 )of this subsection (a)and the area has been designated as a town or village center by ordinance or comprehensive plan adopted prior to January 1, 1982, and the area has not been developed for that designated purpose.

(b) 'Conservation area' means any improved area within the boundaries ofa redevelopment project area located within the territorial limits of the municipality in which 50% or more ofthe structures in the area have an age of 35 years or more. Such an area is not yet a blighted area but because of a combination of three or more of the following factors: dilapidation; obsolescence; deterioration; illegal use of individual structures; presence of structures below minimum code standards; abandonment; excessive vacancies; overcrowding of structures and community facilities; lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities; inadequate utilities; excessive land coverage; deleterious land-use or layout; depreciation of physical maintenance; lack of community planning, is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals or welfare and such an area may become a blighted area."

The Act also states a t 65 ILCS 5/1 1 -74.4-3(n) that:

"***. No redevelopment plan shall be adopted unless a municipality . . . finds that the redevelopmentproject area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development through investment by private enterprise, and would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed without the adoption of the redevelopment plan."

77

26814

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Vacant areas may also qualify as blighted. In order for vacant land to qualify as blighted, it must first be found to be vacant. Vacant land as described in the statute is:

"any parcel or combination of parcels of real property without commercial, agricultural and residential buildings which has not been used for commercial agricultural purposes within five years prior to the designation of the redevelopment area unless the parcel is included in an industrial park conservation area or the parcel has been subdivided." (65 ILCS 5/1 l-74.4-3(v)) (1996State Bar Edition),as amended.

As vacant land, the property may qualify as blighted if the:

"sound growth ofthe taxing districts is impaired by (l)a combination of two or more of the following factors: obsolete platting of the vacant land; diversity of ownership of such land; tax and special assessment delinquencies on such vacant land; flooding on all or part ofsuch land; deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas adjacent to the vacant land, or (2) the area immediately prior to becoming vacant qualified as a blighted improved area, or (3)the area consists of an unused quarry or unused quames, or (4)the area consists of unused railyards, rail backs or railroad rights-of-way, or (5)thearea, prior to its designation, is subject to chronic flooding which adversely impacts on real property in the area and such flooding is substantially caused by one or more improvements in or in proximity to the area which improvements have been in existence for at least five years, or (6)the area consists of an unused disposal site, containing earth, stone, building debris or similar material which were removed from construction, demolition, excavation or dredge sites, or (7) the area is not less than 50 nor more than 100 acres and 75% of which is vacant, notwithstanding the fact that such area has been used for commercial agricultural purposes within five years prior to the designation of the redevelopment project area and which area meets at least one of the factors itemized in provision (l)of this subsection (a)and the area has been designated as a town or village center by ordinance or comprehensive plan adopted prior to January 1, 1982, and the area has not been developed for that designated purpose". (65TJJCS 5/1 l-74.4-3(a]) (1 996State Bar Edition),as amended.

On the basis ofthese criteria, the Area is considered eligible and qualifies as a conservation area within the requirements ofthe Act as documented below.

78

5/14/2008

26815

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

B.   Survey, Analysis And Distribution Of Eligibility Factors.

Exterior surveys of observable conditions were conducted of all of the properties located within the Area. An analysis was made of each of the conservation area eligibility factors contained in the Act to determine their presence in the Area. This survey examined not only the condition and use of buildings but also included conditions of streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, lighting, vacant land, underutilized land, parking facilities, landscaping, fences and walls and general maintenance. In addition, an analysis was conducted on existing site coverage, parking and land uses, and their relationship to the surrounding Area. It was determined that the Area qualifies as a conservation area under the Act.

A building-by-building analysis of the forty-nine (49) blocks was conducted to identify the eligibility factors for the Area (see Conservation Area Factors Matrix, Table Two). Each of the factors relevant to making a finding of eligibility is present as stated in the tabulations.

C.   Building Evaluation Procedure.

During the field survey noted above, all components of and improvements to the subject properties were examined to determine the presence and extent to which conservation area factors exist in the Area. Field investigators from the staff of the Consultant included a registered architect and professional planners. They conducted research and inspections of the Area to ascertain the existence and prevalence of the various factors described in the Act and Area needs. These inspectors have been trained in T.I.F. survey techniques and have vast experience in similar undertakings. The Consultant's staff was assisted by information obtained from the City of Chicago and various neighborhood groups. Based on these investigations and qualification requirements and the determination of needs and deficiencies in the Area the qualification and the boundary of the Area were determined.

D.   investigation And Analysis Of Conservation Area Factors.

In deteraiining whether the proposed Area meets the eligibility requirements ofthe Act, various methods of research were used in addition to the field surveys. The data include information assembled from the sources below:

79

26816

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

1. 2. Contacts with local individuals knowledgeable as to Area conditions and history, age of buildings and site improvements, methods of construction, real estate records and related items, as well as examination of existing studies and information related to the Area. In addition, aerial photographs, Sidwell block sheets, et cetera were utilized.
   3. Inspection and research as to the condition of local buildings, streets, utilities, et cetera.
   4. On-site field inspection of the proposed Area conditions by experienced property inspectors of the Consultant and others as previously noted. Personnel of the Consultant are trained in techniques and procedures of determining conditions of properties, utilities, streets, et cetera and determination of eligibility of designated areas for tax increment financing.
2. Use of accepted definitions and guidelines to determine area eligibility as established by the Illinois Department of Revenue manual in conducting eligibility compliance review for State of Illinois Tax Increment Finance Areas in 1988.

5.      Adherence to basic findings of need expressed in the Act:

1. There exists in many Illinois municipalities areas that are conservation or blighted areas, within the meaning of the Act.
2. The eradication of blighted areas and the treatment of conservation areas by redevelopment projects are essential to the public interest.
3. These findings are made on the basis that the presence of blight or conditions, which lead to blight, is detrimental to the safety, health, welfare and morals of the public.

E.  Analysis Of Conditions In The Conservation Area.

In making the determination of eligibility, each and every property or building in the Area is not required to be blighted or otherwise qualify. It is the Area as a whole that must be determined to be eligible. The following analysis details conditions which cause the Area to qualify under the Act, as a conservation area, per surveys and research undertaken by the Consultant in February and March of 1999:

30

26817

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Age Of Structures,-- Definition.

Age, although not one (1 )of the fourteen (14)blighting factors used to establish a conservation area under the Act, is used as a threshold that an area must meet to qualify. In order for an Area to qualify as a conservation area the Act requires that "fifty percent (50%)or more of the structures in the area have an age of thirty-five (35) years or more". In a conservation area, according to the Act, the determination must be made that the Area is, "not yet a blighted area", but because of the presence of certain factors, "may become a blighted area".

Age presumes the existence of problems or limiting conditions resulting from normal and continuous use of structures and exposure to the elements over a period cf many years. As a rule, older buildings typically exhibit more problems than buildings constructed in later years because of longer periods of active usage (wearand tear) and the impact of time, temperature and moisture. Additionally, older buildings tend not to be ideally suited for meeting modem-day space and development standards. These typical problematic conditions in older buildings can be the initial indicators that the factors used to qualify the Area may be present.

Summary Cf Findings Regarding Age.

The Area contains a total of one hundred seventy-three (173)main'" buildings, ofwhich seventy-seven percent (77%), orone hundred thirty-four (134)buildings are thirty-five (35)years of age or older as determined by field surveys and local research.

Thus the Area meets the threshold requirement for a conservation area in that fifty percent (50%)or more of the structures in the Area are or exceed thirty-five (35)years of age.

(1) Main buildings are defined as those buildings presently located on each parcel that were constructed to accommodate the principal land uses currently occupying the buildings (or prior uses in the case of buildings that are vacant). Accessory structures such a s freestanding garages for single-Family and or multi-family dwellings, storage sheds, communications lovers, etcetera are not included in the building counts. However, thecondilion ofthese structures was noted in considering the overall condition of Ihe improvements on each parcel.

81

26818

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

1. Dilapidation — Definition.

Dilapidation refers to an "advanced" state of disrepair of buildings or improvements, or the lack of necessary repairs, resulting in the building or improvement falling into a state of decay. Dilapidation as a factor is based upon the documented presence and reasonable distribution of buildings and improvements that are in an advanced state of disrepair. At a minimum, dilapidated buildings should be those with critical defects in primary structural components (roof,bearingwalls, floor structure and foundation),buildingsystems (heating, ventilation, lighting, and plumbing) and secondary structural components in such combination and extent that:

1. major repair is required; or
2. the defects are so serious and so extensive that the buildings must be removed.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Dilapidation.

Of the one hundred seventy-three (173) buildings in the Area, nineteen (19) buildings, or eleven percent (11%), were found to be in an advanced state of disrepair. The exterior field survey of main buildings in the Area found structures with critical defects in primary structural components such as roofs, bearing walls, floor structure and foundations and in secondary structural components to an extent that major repair or the removal of such buildings is required.

2. Obsolescence — Definition.

An obsolete building or improvement is one which is becoming obsolete or going out of use — not entirely disused, but gradually becoming so. Thus, obsolescence is the condition or process of falling into disuse.

Obsolescence, as a factor, is based upon the documented presence and reasonable distribution of buildings and other site improvements evidencing such obsolescence. Examples include:

a. Functional Obsolescence: Structures are typically built for specific uses or purposes and their design, location, height and space arrangement are each intended for a specific occupancy at a given time. Buildings are obsolete when they contain characteristics or deficiencies that limit the use and marketability of such buildings. The characteristics may include

82

5/14/2008

26819

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

loss in value to a property resulting from an inherent deficiency existing from poor design or layout, improper orientation of building on site, et cetera, which detracts from the overall usefulness or desirability of a property. Obsolescence in such buildings is typically difficult and expensive to correct.

1. Economic Obsolescence: Economic obsolescence is normally a result of adverse conditions that cause some degree ofmarket rejection, and hence, depreciation in market values. Typically, buildings classified as dilapidated and buildings that contain vacant space are characterized by problem conditions, which may not be economically curable, resulting in net rental losses and/or depreciation in market value.
2. Obsolete Platting: Obsolete platting would include parcels of limited or narrow size and configuration or parcels cf irregular size or shape that would be difficult to develop on a planned basis and in a manner compatible with contemporary standards and requirements. Plats that created in adequate right-of-way widths tbrstreets, alleys and other public rights-of-way or which omitted easements for public utilities should also be considered obsolete.
3. Obsolete Site Improvements: Site improvements, including sewer and water lines, public utility lines (gas, electric and telephone), roadways, parkingareas, parking structures, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, lighting, et cetera, may also evidence obsolescence in terms of their relationship to contemporary development standards for such improvements. Factors of this obsolescence may include inadequate utility capacities, outdated designs, et cetera.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Obsolescence.

The field survey of main buildings and parcels in the Area found that certain buildings and parcels exhibitcharacteristics of obsolescence. Obsolete buildings or site improvements comprised sixty percent (60%)or one hundred four (1 04) of the one hundred seventy-three ( 1 73) buildings in the Area. Obsolete site improvements in the form of secondary structures exist throughout the Area.

3. Deterioration -- Definition.

Deterioration refers to physical deficiencies or disrepair in buildings or site improvements requiring treatment or repair. While deterioration may be evident in basically sound buildings (i.e., lack of painting, loose or missing materials, or

83

26820

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

holes and cracks over limited areas),such deterioration can be corrected through normal maintenance. Such deterioration would not be sufficiently advanced to warrant classifying a building as being deteriorated or deteriorating within the purposes of the Act.

Deterioration, which is not easily correctable in the course of normal maintenance, may also be evident in buildings. Such buildings may be classified as deteriorating or in an advanced stage of deterioration, depending upon the degree or extent of defects. This would include buildings with major defects in the secondary building components (i.e., doors, windows, porches, gutters and downspouts, fascia materials, et cetera), and major defects in primary building components (i.e., foundations, frames, roofs, et cetera), respectively.

The conditions of roadways, alleys, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, off-streetparking and surface storage areas may also evidence deterioration in the form of surface cracking, crumbling, potholes, depressions, loose paving materials, weeds protruding through the surface, et cetera.

Deterioration is the presence of structural and non-structural defects which are not correctable by normal maintenance efforts, but which require rehabilitation.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Deterioration.

Throughout the Area, deteriorating conditions were recorded on twenty-three percent (23%) or thirty-nine (39) of the one hundred seventy-three (173) buildings. The exterior field survey of main buildings in the Area found structures with major defects in thesecondary structural components, including windows, doors, gutters, downspouts, porches, chimneys, fascia materials, parapet walls, et cetera. There were also numerous secondary structures ejuiibiting deterioration on exterior building facades.

In addition, several sections of streets, sidewalks and curbs in the Area also exhibit signs of deterioration. These include:

Sidewalks and sections of curb along Cicero Avenue and Belmont Avenue were observed to be broken or crocked to an extent that would require replacement.

84

5/14/2008

26821

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

4. Illegal Use Of Individual Structures — Definition.

This factor applies to the use of structures in violation of applicable national, state or local laws, and not to legal, nonconforming uses. Examples of illegal uses may.include, but not be limited to, the following:

1. illegal home occupations;
   1. conduct of any illegal vice, activities such as gambling or drug manufacture;
   2. uses not in conformance with local zoning codes and not previously grandfathered in as legal nonconforming uses;
   3. uses involving manufacture, sale, storage or use of dangerous explosives and firearms.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Illegal Use Of Individual Structures.

Illegal use of individual structures was recorded in two percent (2%)or four (4) of the one hundred seventy-three (173) buildings in the Area.

5. Presence Of Structures Below Minimum Code Standards — Definition.

Structures below minimum code standards include all structures that do not meet the standards of zoning, subdivision, and State building laws and regulations. The principal purposes ofsuch codes are to require buildings to be constructed in such a way as to sustain safety of loads expected from various types of occupancy, to be safe for occupancy against fire and similar hazards, and/or establish minimum standards essential for safe and sanitary habitation. Structures below minimum code are characterized by defects or deficiencies that threaten health and safety.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Presence Of Structures Below Mirriinum Code Standards.

Throughout the Area, structures below minimum code were recorded in seventeen percent (17%)or thirty (30)of the one hundred seventy-three (173) buildings in the Area. The exterior field survey of main buildings in the Area found structures not in conformance with local zoning and building codes and

85

26822

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

structures not safe for occupancy because of fire and similar hazards

6. Abandonment — Definition.

Abandonment usually refers to the relinquishing of all rights, title, claim and possession with intention of not reclaiming the property or resuming its ownership, possession or enjoyment. However, in some cases a determination of abandonment is appropriate if the occupant walks away without legally relinquishing title. For example,a structure not occupied for twelve (12)months should probably be characterized as abandoned.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Abandonment.

The field investigation indicated two (2) buildings or one percent (l%)Df the total one hundred seventy-three (173) buildings were abandoned. These buildings appeared to have been vacant for more than twelve (12)months. It should be noted that these buildings represent a portion of the total vacant floor space in the Area.

7. Excessive Vacancies ~ Definition.

Establishing the presence of this factor requires the identification, documentation and mapping of the presence of vacant buildings which are unoccupied or underutilized and which represent an adverse influence on the Area because of the frequency, extent or duration of such vacancies, lt includes properties which evidence no apparent effort directed toward occupancy or utilization and partial vacancies.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Excessive Vacancies.

The field investigation indicates that fourteen (14) buildings, eight percent (8%)»f the total one hundred seventy-three (173)buildings, exhibited excessive vacancy of floor space. There is in excess of sixty thousand (60,000)square feet ofvacantcommercialfloor space in the Area. In some instances this vacant floor space has not been utilized for extended time periods.

8C

5/14/2008

26823

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

8. Overcrowding Of Structures And Community Facilities — Definition.

Overcrowding of structures and community facilities refers to utilization of public or private buildings, facilities or properties beyond their reasonable or legally permitted capacity. Overcrowding is frequently found in buildings and improvements originally designed for a specific use and later converted to accommodate a more intensive use of activities without adequate provision for minimum floor area requirements, privacy, ingress and egress, loading and services, capacity of building systems, et cetera.

Summary   Of   Findings   Regarding   Overcrowding   Of   Structures And Community Facilities.

Throughout the Area, overcrowding of structures was observed in two percent (2%)or four (4)of the one hundred seventy-three (173)buildings in the Area.

9.  Lack Of Ventilation, Light Or Sanitary Facilities--Definition.

Many older structures fail to provide adequate ventilation, Light or sanitary facilities. This is also a characteristic often found in illegal or improper buuding conversions and in commercial buudings converted to residential usage. Lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities is presumed to adversely affect the health of building occupants (i.e., residents, employees or visitors).

Typical requirements for ventilation, Light and sanitary facilities include:

1. adequate mechanical ventilation for air circulation in spaces/rooms without windows (i.e., bathrooms, dust, odor or smoke-producing activity areas);
2. adequate natural light and ventilation by means of skylights or windows for interior rooms/spaces, and proper window sizes and amounts by room area to window area ratios;
3. adequate sanitary facilities (i.e., garbage storage/enclosure, bathroom facilities, hot water and kitchen); and
4. adequate ingress and egress to and from all rooms and units.

87

26824

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Summary Of Findings Regarding Lack Of Ventilation, Light Or Sanitary Facilities.

No evidence of this factor was documented in the Area.

10.  Inadequate Utilities ~ Definition.

Inadequate utilities refers to deficiencies in the capacity or condition of utilities which service a property or area, including, but not limited to, storm drainage, water supply, electrical power, sanitary sewers, gas and electricity.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Inadequate Utilities. No evidence of this factor was documented in the Area.

11.  Excessive Land Coverage — Definition.

This factor may be documented by showing instances where building coverage is excessive. Excessive coverage refers to the over-intensive use of property and the crowding of buildings and accessory facilities onto a site. Problem conditions include buildings either improperly situated on the parcel or located on parcels of inadequate size and/or shape in relation to present-day standards of development for health and safety, and multiple buildings on a single parcel. The resulting inadequate conditions include such factors as insufficient provision for light and air, increased threat of fire due to close proximity to nearby buildings, lack of adequate or proper access to a public right-of-way, lack of required off-street parking, and inadequate provision for loading or service. Excessive land coverage has an adverse or blighting effect on nearby development as problems associated with lack of parking or loading areas impact adjoining properties.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Excessive Land Coverage.

Structures exhibiting one hundred percent (100%)ot coverage with party or firewalls separating one (1) structure from the next is a historical fact of high-density urban development. This is a common situation found throughout the Area.

88

5/14/2008

26825

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Numerous commercial businesses are located in structures that cover one hundred percent (TOO%)cf their respective lots. Other businesses are utilizing one hundred percent (100%) of their lot for business operations. These conditions typically do not allow for off-street loading facilities for shipping operations or do not provide parking for patrons and employees. The impact of this is that often parking occurs on adjacent residential streets or patrons are discouraged from shopping in some areas due to the lack of adequate parking, in addition, delivery trucks were observed off-loading goods at the curb. In addition, trucks associated with delivery of vehicles to the auto-related uses along Cicero Avenue were observed off-loading vehicles in the middle of Cicero Avenue as part of what appeared to be normal delivery operations.

In the Area, seventy-onepercent (71%)orone hundred twenty-two (122)of the one hundred seventy-three (173) structures revealed significant evidence of excessive land coverage.

12.   Deleterious Land-Use Or Layout — Definition.

Deleterious land uses include all instances of incompatible land-use relationships, buildings occupied by inappropriate mixed-uses, or uses which may be considered noxious, offensive or environmentally unsuitable.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Deleterious Land-Use Or Layout.

As in many communities which evolved over the years, commercial uses have merged with residential uses in the Area, lt is not unusual to find small pockets of isolated residential buildings within a predominantly commercial area. Although these areas may be excepted by virtue ofage ("grandfather") clauses as legal non-conforaiing uses, they are, nonetheless, incompatible land uses inasmuch as the predominant character of the Area is commercial. As noted previously, seventy-sixand four-tenths percent (76.4%) ofthe net acreage ofthe Area (minus streets and public rights-of-way) is used for commercial purposes. The Area contains approximately four (4)residential structures. Along Cicero Avenue,second (2^Bd) floorresidential uses areprcsent in some of the commercial buildings that are more than one (l)story. This is indicative of building design during the period in which many of the Area buildings were built, ln urban centers, commercial buildings were typically designed so that shop owners could live above their stores, ln addition, there are commercial uses that are inappropriate for this type of commercial corridor. Examples would include locations with outside storage, truck deliveries or operations that are deleterious to the residential neighborhoods that border the comdors. The combination of limited on-siteparking and high density commercial and residential development

89

26826

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

in close proximity causes conflicts in traffic, parking and environmental conditions that has promoted deleterious use of land in some portions of the Area. Ten percent (10%)or seventeen (17) of the one hundred seventy-three (173)structures in the Area were considered to be deleterious uses.

13.  Depreciation Of Physical Maintenance — Definition.

This factor considers the effects of deferred maintenance and the lack of maintenance cf buildings, improvements and grounds comprising the Area. Evidence to show the presence of this factor may include, but is not limited to, the following:

1. Buudings: unpainted or unfinished surfaces; paint peeling; loose or missing materials; sagging or bowing walls, floors, roofs and porches; cracks; broken windows; loose gutters and downspouts; loose or missing shingles; damaged building areas still in disrepair; et cetera. This information may be collected as part of the building condition surveys undertaken to document the existence of dilapidation and deterioration.
2. Front yards, side yards, back yards and vacant parcels: accumulation of trash and debris; broken sidewalks; lack of vegetation; lack of paving and dust control; potholes, standing water; fences in disrepair; lack of mowing and pruning of vegetation, el cetera.
3. Public or private utilities:   Utilities that are subject to interruption of service due to on-going maintenance problems such as leaks or breaks, power outages or shut-downs, or inadequate levels of service, et cetera.
4. Streets, alleys and parkingareas: potholes; broken or crumblingsurfaces; broken curbs and/or gutters; areas of loose or missing materials; standing water, et cetera.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Depreciation Of Physical Maintenance.

Depreciation of physical maintenance is widespread throughout the Area. A majority of the parcels in the Area exhibit characteristics that show a depreciation of physical maintenance. Ofthe one hundred seventy-three (173) main buildings in the Area, seventy-five percent (75%br one hundred twenty-nine (129) of the buildings are impacted by a depreciation of physical maintenance, based on the field surveys conducted. These are combined characteristics in building and site improvements.

90

5/14/2008

26827

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Many parking and yard areas in the Area exhibit signs cf depreciation cf physical maintenance due to deteriorating paving or lack cf sealing; debris storage, abandoned vehicles, lack cf mowing and pruning of vegetation.

14.  Lack Of Community Plaxming — Definition.

This may be counted asa factor if the Area developed prior to or without the benefit or guidance of a community plan. This means that no coinmunity plan existed or it was considered inadequate, and/or was virtually ignored during the time of the Area's development. Indications of a lack of community planning include:

1. One-way street systems that exist with little regard for overall systematic traffic planning.
2. Street parkingexistingon streets that are too narrow to accommodate two-way traffic and street parking.
3. Numerous commercial/industrial properties exist that are too small to adequately accommodate appropriate off-street parking and loading requirements.

Summary Of Findings Regarding Lack Of Coinmunity Planning.

The field investigation indicates that seventy-one percent (71 %)or one hundred twenty-two ( 122)of the one hundred seventy-three (173) main buildings in the Area exhibit a lack of community planning.

The majority of the property within the Area developed during the 1920s and 1930s. During this period the majority of property was developed with Limited on-site parking. Patrons of commercial businesses generally walked to their destination from adjacent neighborhoods or utilized public transportation. This situation often conflicts with contemporary use of the automobile for a means of transportation and the increasein patrons utilizingshopping alternatives outside of dicir local shopping area. Because parking is generally not provided on-site, patrons are limited to utilizing on-street parking. Given that the majority of commercial uses exist on one (l)or two (2)narrow lots, parking is also limited to one (1) or two (2) spaces in front ofa commercial use. Often the commercial operation is of a nature that would require significantly more spaces than are available in front of their respective building. Ifthe spaces are being utilized, patrons are forced to utilize parkingspaces on adjacent residential streets or move

91

26828

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

further up the block thus infringing on the availability of parking for another business. In addition, on-street parking provides no provisions for handicapped access or handicapped reserved spaces thereby limiting the accessibility of some segments of the population.

Loading requirements for commercial businesses have also changed over time. Several instances were observed where goods were being off-loadedat the curb or in a travel lane of one (1 )of the streets that comprise the Area. In previous eras, delivery vehicles were often smaller and utilized access to properties via alleys. However, given the nature of some of the uses in the Area, unloading of goods is often done at the curb because delivery trucks are too large to access narrow alleys at the rear of commercial uses. One (l)example of this condition is in regard to the automotive sales lots that line Cicero Avenue. In several instances, tractor-trailers were unloading vehicles in travel lanes of Cicero Avenue due to an inability to access the alley.

In addition, there are several billboards and large signs located throughout the area. The presence of billboards is unsightly and conflicts with the neighborhood commercial nature of the Area. Tlie profusion, size and deteriorated quality of Area signage detracts from the Area's visual character.

F.   Conclusion   Of  Investigation   Of  Conservation  Area   Factors   For The Redevelopment Project Area.

The Area is impacted by a number of conservation area factors. As documented herein, the presence ofthese factors qualifies the Area asa conservation area. The Plan includes measures designed to reduce or eliminate the deficiencies which cause the Area to qualify consistent with other redevelopment project areas that the City of Chicago has implemented to revitalize commercial corridors.

The undemtilization cf commercial storefronts and lower levels of economic activity mirror the experienceof other large urban centers and further illustrates the trend line and 'deteriorating conditions of the neighborhood. Vacancies in commercial buildings and depreciation of physical maintenanceare further evidence of declining conditions in the Area. The lack of significant private investment throughout the Area and limited evidence of business reinvestment in the Area are further evidence of the need for the assistance provided by tax increment financing. To some degree, this lack of private investment may also be related to the inability of existing property owners to acquire adjacent properties and developers to assemble the properties due to the cost of acquisition of developed property.

92

26829

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

The City and the State oflllinois have designated eighteen and five-tenths percent (18.5%) of the Area as the State oflllinois Enterprise Zone Number 5. However, this designation only covers the right-of-way of Cicero Avenue and does not cover any ofthe real property within the Area.

TV.

Summary And Conclusion

The conclusion of P.G.A.V. Urban Consulting is that the number, degree and distribution of conservation area eligibility factors in the Area as documented in this Eligibility Study warrant the designation of the Area as a conservation area. The summary table below highlights the factors found to exist in the Area which cause it to qualify as a conservation area.

A.   Conservation Area Statutory Factors.

Factor"'

Existing In Area

,12)

Age¹

77% of buildings are or exceed 35 years of age

2. Dilapidation
3. Obsolescence

3.      Deterioration

Minor Extent Major Extent Minor Extent

Notes:

(J) Only three (3)factors are required by the Act lor eligibility. Twelve (12)factors are present in the Area. Four (4)fac(ors were found to exist to a major extent and eight (8) were found to exist to a minor extent.

(2) Age is not a.bbghting factor fordesignation hut rather a threshold that must be met before an area can qualify as a conservation area.

03

26830

JOURNAL—CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Factor'"

Existing In Area

2. Illegal use of individual structures

5.      Presence of structures below

ininirnurn code standards

1. Abandonment
2. Excessive vacancies
3. Overcrowding of structures and

community facilities

1. Lack cf ventilation, light or sanitary

facilities

1. Inadequate utilities
2. Excessive land coverage
3. Deleterious land-use or layout
4. Depreciation of physical maintenance
5. Lack of community planning

Minor Extent

Minor Extent Minor Extent Minor Extent . Minor Extent

Major Extent Minor Extent Major Extent

Major Extent

While it maybe concluded that the mere presence of the stated eligibility factors .noted above may be sufficient to qualify the Area as a conservation area, this evaluation was made on the basis that the factors must be present to an extent that would lead reasonable persons to conclude that public intervention is appropriate or necessary. Secondly, the conservation area eligibility factors must be reasonably distributed throughout the Area so that a non-eligible area is not arbitrarily found to be a conservation area simply because of proximity to an area which exhibits conservation area factors.

Notes:

(1) Only three (3)factors arc required by the Act for eligibility. Twelve (12)factors are present in the Area. Four (4)factors were found to exist to a major extent and eighl (5) «ere found to exist to a minor extent.

94

26831

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Research indicates that the Area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development asa result of investment by private enterpise and will not be developed without action by the City. In addition, the E.AV. growth rate of the Area has grown slower than the City as a whole since 1994. These have been previously documented. All properties within the Area will benefit from the Plan.

The conclusions presented in this Eligibility Study are those of the Consultant. The local governing body should review this Eligibility Study and, if satisfied with the summary of findings contained herein, adopt a resolution making a finding of a conservation area and making this Eligibility Study a part of the public record.

The analysis continued herein was based upon data assembled by P.G.A.V. Urban Consulting. The study and survey of the Area indicate that requirements necessary fordesignation as a conservation area arc present. Therefore, the Area qualifies as a conservation area to be designated as a redevelopmentproject area and eligible for Tax Increment Financing under the Act.

(Table Two referred to in this Eligibility Study constitutes Table Two to Revision Number 2 to Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project and is printed on page 26854  of this Journal.]

Attachment Three. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Legal Description For Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Area.

All that part of Sections 21, 22, 27 an d 28 in Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian bounded and described as follows:

beginning at the point of intersection ofthe west line ofNorth Leclaire Avenue with the north line of West Belmont Avenue; thence north along said west line ofNorth Leclaire Avenue to the north line of West School Street; thence east alongsaid north line of West School Street to the east h e ofNorth Lavergne Avenue; thence south alongsaid east line ofNorth Lavergne Avenue to the south line ofLot 24 in Block 5 in Edward's Subdivision of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 40 North,

95

26832

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian, said south line of Lot 24 in Block 5 in Edward's Subdivision being also the north line of the alley north of West Belmont Avenue; thence east along said north Line of the alley north of West Belmont Avenue to the east line ofLot 46 in Block 4 in Edward's Subdivision of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian, said east line cf Lot 46 being also the west line cf the alley west ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence north along said west line of the alley west of North Cicero Avenue to the north line of West Roscoe Street; thence east alongsaid north Line of West Roscoe Street to the east line ofLot 1 in Moms Rifkin's Subdivision of Lot 36 (except the east 125 feet of the north 60 feet and except that part ofthe east 110 feet south of the north 60 feet) in Fred H. Bartlett's Subdivision of the south two-thirds of the north half of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian; thence north along the east line ofsaid Lot 1 in Morris Rifkin's Subdivision to a north line of said Lot 1, said north line ofLot 1 being also the south Line of the north 60 feet ofLot 36 in Fred H. Bartlett's Subdivision; thence west along said north line of Lot 1 in Morris I^ifkin's Subdivision to the north most east line of said Lot 1, said east line ofLot 1 being also the west h e of the east 125 feet of the north 60 feet of Lot 36 in Fred H. Bartlett's Subdivision; thence north along said west Line of the east 125 feet of the north 60 feet ofLot 36 in Fred H. Bartlett's Subdivision and along the east 125 feet ofLot 35 in said Fred H. Bartlett's Subdivision to a line 77 feet south of and parallel with the south line of West Newport Avenue; thence east along said line 77 feet south of and parallel with the south line of West Newport Avenvie to a line 57 feet east cf and parallel with the west h e of die resubdivision of Lot 35 in F. H. Bartlett's Subdivision; thence north along said line 57 feet east of and parallel wilh the west line of the resubdivision of Lot 35 in F. H. Bartlett's Subdivision to the south line of West Newport Avenue; thence west along said south line of West Newport Avenue to the southerly extension of the west line of the east 125 feet ofLot 33 in said Fred H. Bartlett's Subdivision;thence north alongsaid southerly extension and along the west line of the east 125 feet of Lots 33 and 34 in said Fred H. Bartlett's Subdivision and along the northerly extension thereof lo the north Line of West Cornelia Avenue; thence west alongsaid north line of West Cornelia Avenue to the west line of Lots 1 through 6, inclusive, in Mionske's Resubdivision of Lot 1 in Fred H. Bartlett's Subdivision of thesouth two-uhirds of the north half ofthe southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 40 North, Range 1 3 East of the TMxd Principal Meridian; thence north alongsaid west line of Lots 1 through 6, inclusive, in Mionske's Resubdivision to the south line ofLot 1 in Block 4 in Hield and Martin's Addison Avenue Subdivision of the north one-third of the north half of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian; thence west along said south line of Lot 1 in Block 4 in Hield and Martin's Addison Avenue Subdivision to the west line ofsaid Lot 1; thencenorth alongsaid west line ofsaid Lot 1 in Block 4 in Hield and Martin's Addison

96

5/14/2008

26833

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Avenue Subdivision and the northerly extension thereof and along the west line of Lots 1, 2 and 3 in Block 1 in said Hield and Martin's Addison Avenue Subdivision, and along the northerly extension thereof to the north line of West Addison Street; thence east along said north line of West Addison Street to the east line ofLot 114 in Koester and Zander's West Irving Park Subdivision of Lots 3 and 4 in the Circuit Court Partition of Section 21, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian, said east line ofLot 114 in Koester and Zander's West Irving Park Subdivision being also the west line of the alley west ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence north along said west line of the alley west of North Cicero Avenue to the westerly extension of the north line ofthe south 30 feet of Lot 61 in said Koester and Zander's West Irving Park Subdivision; thence east alongsaid westerly extension and the north line of the south 30 feet ofLot 61 in Koester and Zander's West Irving Park Subdivision to the west line of North Cicero Avenue; thence north along said west line ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the north line of the south 60 feet ofsaid Lot 61 in Koester and Zander's West Irving Park Subdivision; thence west alongsaid north line ofthe south 60 feet ofLot 61 in Koester and Zander's West Irving Park Subdivision and along the westerly extension thereof to the east line of Lot 114 in said Koester and Zander's West Irving Park Subdivision; said east line ofLot 114 being also the west line of the alley west of North Cicero Avenue; thence north along said west line of tlie alley west of North Cicero Avenue to the south line of West Grace Street; thence east alongsaid south line of West Grace Street to the west line of Lot 19 in Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition, a subdivision of parts of Blocks 19 and 22 and all of 18 and 23 to 25 in Grayland, _a subdivision in the northwest quarter of Section 22, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian, said west line ofLot 19 in Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition being also the east lineof the alley cast ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the easterly extension of the south line of Lot 20 in said Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence west alongsaid easterly extension and the south line ofLot 20 in said Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition to the east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south alongsaid east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the south line ofLot 24 in said Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence east along said south line of Lot 24 in Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition and along the easterly extension thereof to the west line ofLot 30 in said Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition, said west line ofLot 30 being also the east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line ofthe alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the easterly extension of the south line ofLot 27 in said Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence west alongsaid easterly extension and the south line ofLot 27 in said Block 4 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition to the east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the north line ofWest Warwick Avenue; thence east along said north line of West Warwick Avenue to the northerly extension ofthe west line ofLot 19 in Block 5

97

26834

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition, said west Line ofLot 19 being also the east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said northerly extension and the east line of the alley east of North Cicero Avenue to the easterly extension ofthe south Line ofLot 20 in said Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence west along said easterly extension and the south line ofLot 20 in said Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition to the east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the south line ofLot 21 in said Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence east along said south line of Lot 21 in Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition and along the easterly extension thereof to the west line ofLot 19 in said Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition, said west line ofLot 19 being also the east line ofthe alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line of the alley east of North Cicero Avenue to the easterly extension of the south line ofLot 23 in said Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence west along said easterly extension and the south line of Lot 23 in said Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition to the cast line of North Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line of North Cicero Avenue to the south line ofLot 26 in said Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence east along said south line of Lot 26 in Block 5 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition and along the easterly extension thereof to the west line ofLot 30 in said Block 5 in Gross'Milwaukee Avenue Addition, said west line of Lot 30 being also the east Line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line of the alley east of North Cicero Avenue to the easterly extension of the south line ofLot 22 in said Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence west alongsaid easterly extension and south ofthe line ofLot 22 in said Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition to the east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south alongsaid east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the south line of Lot 23 in said Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence east along said south line ofLot 23 in Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition and along the easterly extension thereof to the west line ofLot 19 in said Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition, said west line of Lot 19 being also the east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the easterly extension of the south line of Lot 24 in said Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence west along said easterly extension and the south line ofLot 24 in said Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition to the east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along-said east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the south line ofLot 28 in said Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition; thence east along said south line ofLot 28 in Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition and along the easterly extension thereof to the west line ofLot 30 in said Block 6 in Gross' Milwaukee Avenue Addition, said west line ofLot 30 being also the east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said east line ofthe alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the north line of West Addison Street; thence east alongsaid north line of West Addison Street to the northerly extension

98

5/14/2008

26835

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

ofthe west line cf Lot 7 in Block 2 in Wirth and Gilbert's Subdivision ofthe west half of the southwest quarter of Section 22, Township 40 North, Range 13 East ofthe Third Principal Meridian (except the east 40 acres thereof)said west line ofLot 7 in Block 2 in Wirth and Gilbert's Subdivision being also the east line of the alley east of North Cicero Avenue; thence south along said northerly extension and along the east line of the alley east of North Cicero Avenue to the easterly extension of the south line ofLot 58 in Koester and Zander's Subdivision of Blocks 1, 3,4,5,6 and 7 and the west half of Block 2 in Wirth and Gilbert's Subdivision of the west half of the southwest quarter of Section 22,Township 40 North, Range 13 East ofthe Third Principal Meridian; dience west along said easterly extension and the south line of Lot 58 in Koester and Zander's Subdivision to the cast line of North Cicero Avenue; thence south alongsaid east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the south line of the north 37.5 feet ofLot 59 in said Koester apd Zander's Subdivision; thence east alongsaid south line ofthe north 37.5 feet of Lot 59 in said Koester and Zander's Subdivision and along the easterly extension thereof to the west line of Lot 30 in Block 2 in Wirth and Gilbert's Subdivision of the west half of the southwest quarter of Section 22, Township 40 North, Range J 3 East of theThixd Principal Meridian, said west line ofLot 30 being also the east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south alongsaid east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the south line of West Belmont Avenue; thence west alongsaid south line of West Beimont Avenue to the west line of Lot 45 in Koester and Zander's Section Line Subdivision in the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 27, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian,said west line ofLot 45 in Koester and Zander's Section Line Subdivision being also the east line of the alley east of North Cicero Avenue; thence south alongsaid east line of the alley east of North Cicero Avenue to the south line cf West Diversey Avenue; thence west alongsaid south line of West Diversey Avenue to the west line ofLot 16 in Neil's Buck and Company Resubdivision of Lots 1 to 38 in Buchanan's Resubdivision of Lots 1 to 2 1 and 24 to 38 and the private alley in Block 4 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago, a subdivision of the southwest quarter of Section 27, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian; thence south along said west line ofLot 16 in Neil's Buck and Company Resubdivision to the south line of said Lot 16, said south line of Lot 16, being also the north line of the alley south of West Diversey Avenue; thence east along said north line of the alley south of West Diversey Avenue to the northerly extension of the west line of Lot 30 in said Neil's Buck and Company Resubdivision; thence south alongsaid northerly extension and the west line ofLot 30 in said Neil's Buck and Company Resubdivision to the north line of West Parker Avenue; thence east along said north line of West Parker Avenue to the northerly extension of the west

99

26836

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

line ofLot 39 in Vogniid and Jenisch's Resubdivision of Block 5 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago, a subdivision of the southwest quarter of Section 27, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian, said west line ofLot 39 in Vogniid and Jenisch's Resubdivision being also the east line of the alley east ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south along said northerly extension and along the east line of the alley east of North Cicero Avenue and along the southerly extension thereof to the south line of West Wrightwood Avenue; thence west along said south line of West Wrightwood Avenue to the west line of the east 19 feet cf Lot 9 in Block 13 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago, a subdivision of the southwest quarter of Section 27, Township 40 North, Range 13 East ofthe Third Principal Meridian; thence south along said west line of the east 19 feet ofLot 9 in Block 13 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago and along the southerly extension diereof to the north line of Lot 17 in said Block 13 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago, said north Line of Lot 17 being also the south line of the alley south of West Wrightwood Avenue; thence west alongsaid south line ofthe alley south of West Wrightwood Avenue to the east line ofLot 14 in said Block 13 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition lo Chicago; thencesouth alongsaid east line of Lot 14 in said Block 13 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago and along the southerly extension thereof to the south line of West Deming Place; thence west alongsaid south line of West Deming Place to the east line of Lot 22 in Block 20 in said S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago; thence south along said east line of Lot 22 in Block 20 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago to the south line thereof, said south line of Lot 22 in Block 20 in said S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago being also the north line of the alley north of West Altgeld Street; thence east alongsaid north line of the alley north of West Altgeld Street to the northerly extension of the east line of the west half of Lot 26 in said Block 20 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition lo Chicago; thencesouth alongsaid northerly extension and the east line of the west half of Lot 26 in said Block 20 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago and along the southerly extension thereof to the south line of West Altgeld Street; thence west alongsaid south line of West Altgeld Street to the west line ofLot 30 in John J. Haverkampt, Jr.'s Resubdivision of Block 21 in S. S. Hayes Kelvyn Grove Addition to Chicago; thencesouth alongsaid west line of Lot 30 in John J. Haverkampt, Jr.'s Resubdivision to the south line thereof, said south line of Lot 30 in John J. Haverkampt, Jr.'s Resubdivision being also the north line of the alley north of West Montana Street; thence west along said north h e of the alley north of West Montana Street to the east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue; thence south alongsaid east line ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the north line of West Montana Street, as said West Montana Street is laid out in the west half of the southwest quarter of Section 27, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian; thence west along the westerly extension ofsaid north line cf West Montana Street to the west line of North Cicero Avenue; thence south along said west line of North Cicero Avenue to the

100

5/14/2008

26837

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

north line cf West Montana Street, as said West Montana Street is laid out in the east half cf the southeast quarter of Section 28, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian; thence west along said north line of West Montana Street to the east line of Lot 47 in Block 13 in E. F. Kennedy's Resubdivision of Paul Stensland's Subdivision of the east half of the southeast quarter of Section 28, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian, said east line ofLot 47 in Block 13 in E. F. Kennedy's Resubdivision being also die west line ofthe alley west of North Cicero Avenue; thence north alongsaid west line ofthe alley west ofNorth Cicero Avenue to the north line of Lot 11 in Block 1 in Hield's Subdivision of Blocks 1 to 6 and 9 to 12 in Falconer's Addition to Chicago, a subdivision of the north half of the northeast quarter of Section 28, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian, said north line ofLot 11 being also the south line of the alley south of West Belmont Avenue; thence west along said south line of the alley south of West Belmont Avenue to the southerly extension of the west line of Lot 20 in Block 8 in Falconer's Addition to Chicago, a subdivision of the north half of the northeast quarter of Section 28, Township 40 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian; thence north along said southerly extension and the west line of Lot 20 in Block 8 in Falconer's Addition to Chicago to the south line cf West Belmont Avenue; thence west along said south Line of West Belmont Avenue to the west line ofLot 21 in said Block 8 in Falconer's Addition to Chicago; thencesouth alongsaid west line ofLot 21 in said Block 8 in Falconer's Addition to Chicago and along the southerly extension thereof to the north line of Lot 25 in said Block 8 in Falconer's Addition to Chicago, said north line ofLot 25 being also the south line of the alley south of West Belmont Avenue; thence west along said south line ofthe alley south of West Belmont Avenue to the southerly extension ofthe west line ofLot 20 in Block 9 in Hield's Subdivision of Blocks9,10,11 and 12 in Falconer's Addition to Chicago, a subdivision ofthe north half of the northeast quarter of Section 28, Township 40 North, Range 1 3 East of theThird PrincipalMeridian; thence north alongsaid southerly extension and the west line ofLot 20 in Block 9 in Hield's Subdivision to the south line of West Belmont Avenue; thence west along said south line of West Belmont Avenue to the east line ofNorth Leclaire Avenue; thence south along said east line ofNorth Leclaire Avenue to the easterly extension of the north line ofLot 44 in Steven's Belmont and Laramie Avenue Subdivision of Block 16 in aforesaid Falconer's Addition to Chicago, said north line of Lot 44 being also the south line ofthe alley south of West Belmont Avenue; thence west along said easterly extension to the west Line ofNorth Leclaire Avenue; thence north alongsaid west line cf North Leclaire Avenue to the point of beginning at the north line of West Belmont Avenue, all in the City of Chicago, Cook County, Illinois.

101

26838

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

(Sub)Exhibit "A" Cf Attachment Two - Maps And Plan Exhibits. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Boundary Map Of T.I.F. Area

 

3 %

3  3 3

U    p <

§ § g 5 1

102

26839

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

(Sub)Exhibit "B" Cf Attachment Two - Maps And Plan Exhibits. (lo Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax. Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Existing Land-Use Assessment Map.

 

CD

z

I i si i

<    id     id     < <

g s p < 3 H 3 ^

103

5/14/2008

26840

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO

(Sub)Exhibit "C Of Attachment Two - Maps And Plan Exhibits. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Generalized Land-Use Plan

L£G&fO

 

WARWICK

WAVELVO

PATTERSON

ADOtSOH

EXrr

cormhja

NEWOFn"

nosccc HecetsoN

SCHOOL

UB-POSE

BELMOKT

REICHB*

MART

NELSON

WELUNOTOH

OAKDALE

QSOfOE

wanwu

CXVERSEY

PAWEH

SCMUBEHT

DRUUMONO

wraGHTYVOPO

OEMNG

K.TOELD

MONTAMA

FULUEHTON

104

26841

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

(Sub)Exhibit "D" Of Attachment Two - Maps And Plan Exhibits. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Generalized Existing Zoning Map.

IbdUl

1HB

BE

IGBE

]E=z3E

JEEZ

JEEE

3t=z3E

U=C3g<D

QftACE

WARWICK

WAVQAHD

PATTERSON

AOOtSON

EDOY

cowoja,

NEWPORT

noscoe

HSGStSOK SCHOOL

ublpose BELMONT

bawry

NELSON WBLLMOTON OAKDALE OEDfME

DTVERSEY

PARKER

SCHUBSTT

OBOUUOHO

wnGHTWOCO

DEWING

JU.TCT7-D

MONT AKA

RJU-EHTON

3EE

JE ]E IE ]E

]E JE JE 3E 3E JH IE JLT JCE ]E DEE

ui i

I | | I 5 S & I f

9   3 3

105

26842

5/14/2008

JOURNAL—CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO

(Sub)Bxhibit "E" Of Attachment Two - Maps And Plan Exhibits. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Subarea Key Map.

 

3EZJBj

 

 

SCHOOL

BELMONT

FLETOCH

BAisrr

NELSON

OAMkMf QEDHGE WOLFBAV

WVEBSEY

PARKED

scHuesrr onuuuoto

VW9GHTWO00

• DSM

ALTG&D MONTANA

RJLLEHTOM

jb=rr)L_ll      dt

Jb=!l=Bf

IBHH[

SEEBE

IBBBi

3C

Die

3t- -   - h=L

JEEZ

S3

1B

3lEE3BlEE3E JE

JE

3£

QBE

3E

JE JE JE JE

E JE 3E ]E JE

BE

3E3E

3HE

JE

BSE

3EEEE3E

Id

Jtt

3BE

JLQeBE

3E

3 3 a 5 5

z    o    «   z P

O     E     U    C <

33 §

106

5/14/2008

26843

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

(Sub)Exhibit "F" Of Attachment Two - Maps And Plan Exhibits. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Enterprise Zone Map.

dhzzdh

3BE

3BE

3BE

ilLn

IFZ

IB

ItBEBf

BE

3EBE

3EBE

3L

3EBE

3EBE

3EEBE

3EEBE

 

3EBE

3EBE

3EBE

GRACE

wmta

WAVEUVO PATTERSON ADDISON

CORNEUA

NEWPORT

ROSCOE

HENDERSON

3CH0CL

wanosE BELMONT

FUHCMER

BAWTY

NELSON WELLMQTON OMMLE GEOHOE

DIVERSEY PArtCT

SCHUBERT

ORUUUONO

WRK3HTWOOO

DEUM

ALTGELD

MONTANA

FUUJERTON

Bj     U      kj M

107

26844

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To BeLmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

1998 Estimated E.A.V. By Tax Parcel (Page 1 of 9)

COUMT	ASSESSEEPiN*	1998 EAV	TAX DELINQUENT	RESIDENTIAL, BUILDING / UNIT (1)
1	1321219032	69.896
2	1321219034	60.741
a	1321219035	72.592
4	1321219036	203.355
	132121903*7	333X3		m
e	1321219038	17,984
7	1321223014	233.504		•
a	1321223015	131.603
9	1321223016	75.124
10	1321223018	80.01 S
it	1321223019	119384		*
t2. .	1321223020	80/430
13 "	1321223021	40.437
1-4	1321227030	295.315
15	1321227031	132.752
16	1321227032	127.110
17	1321227037	114.809		-
IB	1321227038	135.337		*
19	1321231027	Exempt
20	1321231028	30.235
21	1321231029	144.966
22	1321231031	45,741
23	1321231032	70.358
24	1321401053	14&664
25	1321*01054	77.881
26	1321401055	72JT7
27	1321401056 •	67.256
28	1321403023	70A40
29	1321403055	3S.916		•
30	1321403056	35.537		•
31	1321403057	108.130
32	1321403079	89.498
33	1321403080	105.616
3*	1321405066	299.780		•
35	1321405069	16.785
36	1321405070	216.357		*
37	1321405073	118.445		*
33	13214OS076	5.088	V
30	1321*07072	4€.m		*
40	1321407073	64.111		*
41	1321*07074	90.501		•
42	1321407077	111.676

108

5/14/2008

26845

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

1998 Estimated E.A.V. By Tax Parcel (Page 2 of 9)

COUNT	ASSHSSEE P1N»	1994 EAV	TAX DELINQUENT	teSlDENTlAL. BUILDING / UNIT (i).
4J	1321411032	367361
44	1321415033	29416
45	1321415034	22.928
46	132141S03S	21.598
47	1321415036	21.598
48	1321415037	2Z928
49	1321415033	*7\2BT
SO	1321415039	47,267
51	1321415O40	22.928'
52	132141S041	29.725
S3	1321410001	Exempt'
54	1321420036	190,120
55	1321420037	21.128
56	1321420038	21.917
57	1321420039	. 22J13
58	1321420040	23.925
59	1321421021	77.404
60	1321421022	TTXOS
61	1321421023	17.908
62	1321421024	16.355
63	1321421025	17575
64	1321421026	41.7S2
65	1321421027	39,203		*
66	1321421028	57.968
67	1321421029	168.107		*
68	.1321421033	. 91681
69	1321421034	92.881
TO	132)421035	1004*9
71	1321421036	S8JZ47
72	1321421037	51.380
73	1321421038	51.071
74	1321421039	26.178
75	1321421043	116.S55
76	1321421045	145.691
77	1321422035	23.119
78	13214221036	206.720		•
79	1321422037	76,811
SO	1321422038	76.811
81	1321422039	298.524
82	1321422041	538.544
83	1321422042	649.671
84	1322112001	104.330
8S	1322112006	62.849

109

26846

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

1998 Estimated E.A.V. By Tax Parcel. (Page 3 of 9)

, COUNT	ASSESSES pm *  |   1998 EAV		TAX DELINQUENT	RFIIDFNTIAL RIIILpiMft 1 tlNrr (1)
86	1322132007      | 85,681
87	1322112008      | 86.661
68	1322112009	26.578
89	1322112010	26.736
90	1322114001	27.970
91	1322114003	24.934
92	1322114004	124254
93	1322114008	5.651
94	1322114009	Eumpt
95	1322114010	Exempt
96	1322114011	Exempt
97	1322121003	60233
98	1322121005	45.793
99	1322121009	104.576
100	1322121063	45.146
ml	1322123001	23.079
102	1322123002	45,076
103	1322123003	74450
104	1322123004	21.859
105	1322123005	21.088		m
106	1322123005	21.869
107	1322123007	21.869
108	1322123008	74.077
109	1322300001	302.562
110	1322300002      | 81.600
111	1322300003      ) 49,909
112	1322300004      | 67.819
113	1322300005      | 135.142
114	1322300007      (    116298 |
115 .	1322300008	616.615		•
116	1322307001	Exempt
117	1322307002	Exempt
118	1322307003	Exempt
119	1322307004	Exempt
120	1322307005	Exempt
121	1322307006	Exempt
122	1322707035	235.750
123	1322307036	1.145.019
12*	1322307037	90,632.
125	1322312001	77.766
126	1322312O02	17.131
127	1322312003	Exempt
128	1322312004	Exempi

110

5/14/2008

26847

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

7998 Estimated E.A.V. By Tax Parcel. (Page 4 of 9)

COUNT	ASSESSES PIN *	.1998 EAV	TAX DELINQUENT	.   RESIDENTIAL BUILDING / UNIT (1)
129	1322312005	Exempt
130	1322312006	Exempt
131	1322312007	Exempt
132	1322312006	Exempt
133	1322312009	Exempt
134	1322312010	Exempi
135	1322312011	40.385
136	1322312012	35.419 .
137	1322312013	74,919		-
138	1322319003	71,594
139	1322319004	47.243
140	1322319007	190.096		■ •
141	1322319008	334X6		*
142	1322319024	378.753
143	1322319025	278.519		■
144	1322319026	91CL592
145	1327100001	113.383		*
146	1327100002	49,150	Y	*
147	1327100003	20.426	Y
148	1327100004	19.562	Y
149	1327100005	19.530	Y
ISO	1327100006	91.238
151	1327100007	91.238
1S2	1327100008	18J556
153	1327100009	19.S56
15*	1327100010	100JB36		•
155	1327100011	115.685
156	1327100012	16.031
157	1327100013	. 16y031
158	1327100014	143.154		*>
159	1327100015	16,718
160	1327100016	51.186
161	1327100017	16.718
162	1327100018	94.898		•
163	1327100019	175.046		*
164	1327108001	17.108
165	1327108002	57,412
166	1327106003	75573
167	1327108004	75573
168	1327108005	148509
169	1327108006	51.404		w
170	1327108007	157.696
171	13271OBO08	17.348

26848

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

1998 Estimated E.A.V. By Tau Parcel (Page 5 of 9)

COUNT	ASSESS EE PIN 9-	1898 EAV	TAX DELINQUENT	RESIDENTIAL BUILDING f UNIT JI)
172	1327108009	65.489
173	1327108010	48.396	y
174	1327108011	180.753	Y
175	1327108012	73,632	Y
176	1327108013	61,484	Y
177	1327108014	17.537	Y
178	1327108015	19.092	Y
179	1327108016	85280
180	1327106643	602H
181	1327115061	157.397
182	1327115002	102,150
183	1327115003	4.791
184	132711S004	16.548
185	1327115005	51.978
166	1327115006	16493		*
187	132711500?	38.427
188	1327115008	16.445
189	1327115009	16.511
190	1327115010	177.649
191	1327115011	206.620		•
192	1327115012	8.639
193	1327.115013	BO ,364		•
194	1327115014	57.937		•
1%	1327115015	71.823		•
196	1327115016	8.639
197	1327115017	78,226		•
1W	1327115018	18.326
199	1327115019	16506
200	1327122001	119,145	I
201	1327122002	119552
202	1327122003	33.941
203	1327122004	16528
204	1327122007	20282
205	1327122008	19.310
206	1327122009	18513
207	I327122DTB	15998
208	1327122019	15.998
209	1327122020	15.484
710	1327122021	47.417
211	1327122022	105.392
212	1377122023	105.394
213	1327122024	104.871
. ?'4.	1327122045	9.338	I

112

26849

5/14/2008

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

1998 Estimated E.A.V. By Tax Parcel (Page 6 of 9)

COUNT	ASSESSEE PIN 0	1999 EAV	TAX DELINQUENT'	f^lDENTLAL BUILDING 1 UNIT (1)
215	1327122046	241.446
216	1327300001	29.021
217	1327300002	26421
218	1327300040	203.439
219	1327300041	1.441
220	1327304001	35508
221	1327304002	40.705
222	1327304003	4Z255
223	1327304004	40.701
22*	132730*005	71.546
225	1327304006	20.330
226	1327304007	. 18.366
227	1327304008
228	1327304009	20430
229	1327304010	22538
230	1327306001	137521
231	1327308002	18409
232	1327308003	18.309
233	1327308004	18409
234	1327308005	48.017
235	1327308006	58.857
236	1327308007	21J084
237	1327312018	158.435
238	1327312035	33447
239	1327312036	137415		*
240	1327312037	85.129
241	1327316001	78565
242	1327316037	41461
243	1327316038	82434
244	1327320037	126495
245	1327320038	73.663
246	1327320039	. 104480
247	1328201004	70.755
248	1325201005	60565
249	1328201006	17.189
250	1323201007	8.728
251	1328201010	63.376
252	132820101*	83462
253	1328201015	95492		*
254	1328201016	111438		•
255	1328201017	38562		*
256	1328201018	38.076
257	1328201019	38.076

113

26850

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

1998 Estimated E.A.V. By Tax Parcel (Page 7 of 9)

COUNT	ASSESSEE PIN »	1998.EAV	.TAX OEUNOUEKt	RESIDENTIAL BUt£fjlNQ / UH(t (1). .
258	1328201020	38.076
259	1328201021	95400
260	1328201022	95400
261	1328201023	98447
262	1328201040	32.734
263	1328201042	74,688
264	1328201044	39578
265	1328201045	98,150
266	1328202001	57472
267	1328202002	23.467
268	<328202004	204.688
269	1328202005	204488
270	1328202006	204.688
271	1328202007	75459
272	1328202008	18.162
273	1328202003	52.457
274.	1328202010
275	1328202011	52.032
276	1328202014	55408
277	1328202015	55408
278	1328202016	89493
279	1328202017	89493
280	1328202018	Exempt
281	1328202019	17450
282	1328202020	17450
283	1328202021	17530
284	1374707072	18410 .
285	1328202040	46.792
286	1328202041	17489
287	1328283001	65462
288	1328203002	65574
289	1328203003.	38.057
290	1328203004	48457
291	1328203005	38.057
292	1328203006	38457
293	1328203007	.16457
294	1328203009	16591
295	1320303010	16591
296	1328203011	16591
297	1328203012	16.489
298	1323203013	16444
299	1328203014	16.482
300	1328203015	17.003

114

5/14/2008

26851

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

1998 Estimated E.A.V. &/ Tax Parcel (Page 8 of 9)

COUNT	ASSESS EE PIN*	1998 EAV	TAX DELINQUENT	RESIDENTIAL BUILDING / UNIT (1)
301	1328203016	28.474
302	(328203011	125336
303	t328203032	426.255
304	1328203033	1.057.777
30S	1328203034	29Z211
306	1328203035	. 26463
307	1328203036	86.682		*
308	132820303"7	11.822
309	1328303038	22433
310	1328207027	139.433		•
311	1328207028	117.065		•
312	1328207029	205.312
313	1328207030	79J07		•
314	1328207031	82.932		•
315	1328207032	251.188		•
316	132152110	10.130
317	1328211431	9.040
318	1328211032	9.040
319	1328211033	110.227		•
320	1328211034	60.157
321	1328211035	S3.606
322	1328211036	190.861
323	13215215024	141292		•
324	1328215025	16S415
325	1328215026	165460	•
326	1328219033	296.462	1
327	1328219034	258406
328	1328223027	241497	1
329	1328223028	251.796
330.	1328223029	107.689	1
331	1328223030	17.428
332	1328223031	40.073
333	1328223032	40.073
334	1328223033	45.008
335	1328227031	86.712
336	1328227032	73.264
337	1328227033	222.S59
338	1328227038	268430	1
339	1328231036	S2.43J
3<0	132*231040	137.300	1
341	1328603038	201.1S2
342	1328603039	37.152	1
343	19B403042	235.482

115

26852

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Attachment Four. (To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

1998 Estimated E.A.V. By Tax Parcel. (Page 9 of 9)

COUNT	ASSESSEEPINf	1998 EAV	TAX DELINQUENT .	RESIDENTIAL BUILDING / UNITED
3*4	1328407027	123507
345	1328407028	117.305
346	-1328407036	547571.
347	1328411041	448.220
34S	1328415026	16.604
34S	1328415027	33561
350	1328415028	71507
351	1328415029	32.603
352	1328415030	32.603
353	1328415031	71.448
354	1328415032	168.720
355	1328419024	- 79582"
356	1328419025	78512
357	1326419026	52579
358.	1328419027	28.039
359	1328419028	54554
360	1328419031 .	55.071
361	1329423032	119542
362	1328423033	80.124
363	1328423034	19.717
364	1328423035	13.814
365	1328423036	. 14.219
366	1328423037	14508
367	1328423038	13571
368	1328423039	-38410
369	1328423040	146.786
370	1328423041	146.856
371	1328427010	15285
372	1328427011	54562
373	1328427012	18.799
374	1328427013	149416		*
375	1328427018	96486		*
376	1328427020	52499
377	1328427021	63576
	TOTALS	33490.691

(1) Indicate* ttM P-LN.** associated wltti r+%itl*MLzi buildings / units that ~o«jid K«      n tj>« fM*o i»

irnpl*m«nt*d according to Exhibit C (Generalized Land Um Plan) included in Attachment Two of th* Appendix.

116

5/14/2008

26853

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Location Map.

117

(To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plans And Project)

 

26854

JOURNAL—CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 5/14/2008

Table Two.

(To Revision Number 2 To Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan And Project)

Conservation Factors Matrix.

ii		I			i
*M :ii		I	t	■
		=	-	=
	3	=	a		0
= 'Ai	e			a	0
_ = = l-.l	-	=		=	i
= 7-^s l3i		■ =			m
U • Is	•	-.	-	•	i
	•		>	-	i
t -   ; j J» Vf			-	-	t
ii " V' 3>	X	-	•	s.	c
m	*	-		-	i
- i»i3i			•		0
• ru	-	-	•	•	£
- u	=		-	a
- 1|	z			X	*
-      1 ♦	-		■	:	J
A1 -	3	-	=	1 !   1 ■-
j	„■			j : x     t : ;= ?11 a a! 1	^ - ■ • ill •! i a. X -

11

J 3

li

ii

i\

S4

3: 1 j

118

84896

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 7/30/2014

"The redevelopment project shall be completed, and all obligations issued to finance redevelopment costs shall be retired, no later than December 31 of the year in which the payment to the City treasurer as provided in the Act is to be made with respect to ad valorem taxes levied in the 23^rd calendar year following the year in which the ordinance approving the Redevelopment Project Area is adopted".

AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO BELMONT/CICERO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PROJECT.

[02014-5752]

The Committee on Finance submitted the following report:

CHICAGO, July 30, 2014.

To the President and Members of the City Council:

Your Committee on Finance, having had under consideration an ordinance approving Amendment Number 4 to the Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project, having had the same under advisement, begs leave to report and recommend that Your Honorable Body Pass the proposed ordinance transmitted herewith.

This recommendation was concurred in by a viva voce vote of the members of the committee, with no dissenting vote.

Respectfully submitted,

(Signed)   EDWARD M. BURKE,

Chairman.

On motion of Alderman Burke, the said proposed ordinance transmitted with the foregoing committee report was Passed by yeas and nays as follows:

Yeas — Aldermen Moreno, Fioretti, Dowell, Burns, Hairston, Sawyer, Harris, Beale, Pope, Balcer. Cardenas, Quinn, Burke, Foulkes, Thompson, Thomas, Lane, O'Shea. Cochran, Brookins, Munoz, Chandler, Solis, Maldonado, Burnett, Ervin, Graham. Reboyras, Suarez, Waguespack. Mell. Austin, Colon. Sposato. Mitts, Cullerton, Laurino. M. O'Connor, Reilly. Smith. Tunney, Arena. Cappleman Pawai, Osterman. Moore, Silverstein -- 47.

Nays - None.

Alderman Pope moved lo reconsider the foregoing vote. The motion was lost

119

7/30/2014

84897

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

The following is said ordinance as passed:

WHEREAS, Under ordinances adopted on January 12, 2000, and published in the Journal of the Proceedings ofthe City Council ofthe City of Chicago (the "Joumaf) for such date at pages 22866 to 22995, and under the provisions of the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4.1, et seq., as amended (the "Act"), the City Council (the "Corporate Authorities") ofthe City of Chicago (the "City"): (i) approved a redevelopment plan and project (the "Original Plan") for a portion of the City known as the "Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Project Area" (the "Area"); (ii) designated the Area as a "redevelopment project area" within the requirements of the Act; and (iii) adopted tax increment financing for the Area (the foregoing three ordinances are collectively referred to herein as the TIF Ordinances"); and

WHEREAS, Under an ordinance adopted on May 17, 2000, and published in the Journal for such date at pages 32000 to 32102, the Corporate Authorities approved an amendment to the Original Plan entitled "Revision Number 2 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project" ("Revision Number 2"); and

WHEREAS, Under an ordinance adopted on May 14, 2008, and published in the Journal for such date at pages 26744 to 26854, the Corporate Authorities approved an amendment to Revision Number 2 entitled "Revision Number 3 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project" to change the land use of certain parcels ("Revision Number 3". and together with Revision Number 2 and the Original Plan, collectively referred to as the "Plan"); and

WHEREAS. Public Act 92-263, which became effective on August 7, 2001, amended the Act to provide that, under Section 11-74.4-5(c) of the Act, amendments to a redevelopment plan which do not (1) add additional parcels of property to the proposed redevelopment project area, (2) substantially affect the general land uses proposed in the redevelopment plan, (3) substantially change the nature of the redevelopment project, (4) increase the total estimated redevelopment project cost set out in the redevelopment plan by more than 5 percent after adjustment for inflation from the date the plan was adopted, (5) add additional redevelopment project costs to the itemized list of redevelopment project costs set out in the redevelopment plan, or (6) increase the number of inhabited residential units to be displaced from the redevelopment project area, as measured from the time of creation of the redevelopment project area, to a total of more than 10, may be made without further hearing, provided that notice is given as set forth in the Act as amended; and

WHEREAS, The Corporate Authorities now desire further to amend the Plan by amending the Generalized Land-Use Plan Map, to change the proposed land use for certain other parcels, which such amendment shall not (1) add additional parcels of property to the proposed redevelopment project area, (2) substantially affect the general land uses proposed in the redevelopment plan. (3) substantially change the nature of the redevelopment project, (4) increase the total estimated redevelopment project cost set out in the redevelopment plan by more than 5 percent after adjustment for inflation from the date the plan was adopted,

120

84898

JOURNAL-CITY COUNCIL-CHICAGO 7/30/2014

(5) add additional redevelopment project costs to the itemized list of redevelopment project costs set out in the redevelopment plan, or (6) increase the number of inhabited residential units to be displaced from the redevelopment project area, as measured from the time of creation of the redevelopment project area, to a total of more than ten; now, therefore,

Be It Ordained by the City Council of the City of Chicago:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are incorporated herein and made a part hereof.

SECTION 2. Approval Of Revision Number 4 To The Plan. The amendment of the Plan to change the proposed land use for parcels located on the northwest corner of North Cicero Avenue and West George Street (bounded by North Cicero Avenue to the east, West Oakdale Avenue to the north, North Lamon Avenue to the west, and West George Street to the south), from commercial to residential, is hereby approved. (Sub)Exhibit C to the Plan, "Generalized Land-Use Plan Amended, April 2008" is hereby replaced in its entirety with (Sub)Exhibit C, "Generalized Land-Use Plan Amended, June 2014", a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Except as amended hereby, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 3. Invalidity Of Any Section. If any provision of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this ordinance.

SECTION 4. Supersedes All ordinances (including, without limitation, the TIF Ordinances), resolutions, motions or orders in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflicts.

SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage.

Exhibit 1 referred to in this ordinance reads as follows:

Exhibit 1. Amendment No. 4.

See attachment for (Sub)Exhibit C, "Generalized Land-Use Plan Amended, June 2014".

[(Sub)Exhibit C. "Generalized Land-Use Plan Amended, June 2014" attached to this Exhibit 1 printed on page 84899 of this Journal ]

121

I

7/30/2014

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

(Sub)Exhibit C (To Revision Number 4)

122

I

Generalized Land Use Plan Amended, June 2014 Belmont/Cicero Redevelopment Area

 

WHEREAS, the Corporate Authorities now desire to amend the Plan further to add redevelopment project costs (including but not limited to up to 50 percent of the cost of construction of new housing units to be occupied by low-income households and very low-income households as defined in Section 3 of the Illinois Affordable Housing Act), which such amendment shall not (1) add additional parcels of property to the proposed redevelopment project area, (2) substantially affect the general land uses proposed in the redevelopment plan, (3) substantially change the nature of the redevelopment project, (4) increase the total estimated redevelopment project cost set out in the redevelopment plan by more than 5% after adjustment for inflation from the date the plan was adopted, (5) add additional redevelopment project costs to the itemized list of redevelopment project costs set out in the redevelopment plan, or (6) increase the number of inhabited residential units to be displaced from the redevelopment project area, as measured from the time of creation of the redevelopment project area, to a total of more than 10;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO:

SECTION 1.   Recitals.   The above recitals are incorporated herein and made a part

hereof.

SECTION 2. Approval of Revision Number 5 to Plan. The "Revision Number 5 Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project," a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 (the "Revision Number 5"), is hereby approved. Except as amended hereby, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 3. Invalidity of Anv Section. If any provision of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect any ofthe remaining provisions of this ordinance.

SECTION 4. Superseder. All ordinances (including, without limitation, the TIF Ordinances), resolutions, motions or orders in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflicts.

SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage.

2

CHICAGO November 19, 2014 To the President and Members of the City Council: Your Committee on Finance having had under consideration

tf

A communication recommending a proposed substitute ordinance concerning the authority to approve Amendment Number ^to the Belmont/Cicero Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Plan and Project. \

02014-9060

Having had the same under advisement, begs leave to report and recommend that your Honorable Body pass the proposed  Ordinance Transmitted Herewith

This recommendation was concurred in by      (a (viva voce vote

of members of the committee with      dissenting vote(s

Respectfully submitted

 

(signed

Chairman

Document No.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF CHICAGO

 

 

.,4-.-,

f

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR

CITY OF CHICAGO

RAHM EMANUEL

MAYOR

November 5, 2014

TO THE HONORABLE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO

Ladies and Gentlemen:

At the request of the Commissioner of Planning and Development, I transmit herewith ordinances authorizing amendments to various TIF districts.

Your favorable consideration of these ordinances will be appreciated.

Very truly yours,

 

Mayor

 

I