Record #: F2014-46   
Type: Report Status: Placed on File
Intro date: 6/25/2014 Current Controlling Legislative Body:
Final action: 6/25/2014
Title: Redevelopment Plan and Project for proposed Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area (TIF) (Revised Plan)
Sponsors: Dept./Agency
Topic: TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS - Washington Park T.I.F. - Designation
Attachments: 1. F2014-46.pdf
Department of Law city of chicago
 
May 30, 2014
 
 
 
 
Ms. Susana Mendoza
City Clerk
City of Chicago
121 North LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60602
 
Re:      Redevelopment Plan and Project for the proposed Washington Park
Redevelopment Project Area (Tax Increment Financing)
 
Dear Ms. Mendoza:
 
I enclose the Washington Park Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Area Plan and Project (the "Revised Plan") for the proposed Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area, Chicago, Illinois, dated May 30, 2014.
 
Please make the Plan available in your office as of this date for public inspection in accordance with the requirements of Section 5/1 l-74.4-5(a) of the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et seg,., as amended. If you have any questions with respect to this matter, please call me at 742-5763.
 
 
Enclosure
 
Sincerely.
 
Adam R. Walker
Assistant Corporation Counsel
 
cc:
 
 
M. Susan Lopez Tricia Ruffalo
 
 
 
 
121 NORTH LASALLE STREET, ROOM 600, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60602
 
 
 
 
 
WASHINGTON PARK TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REDEVELOPMENT AREA PROJECT AND PLAN
 
 
 
 
 
Prepared for: The City of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, Mayor
 
 
Department of Planning and Development Andrew J. Mooney, Commissioner
 
Prepared By: Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises, Inc. And
PGAV PLANNERS Assisted by Goodman Williams Group
O
CO
o
CO
<n~n
 
m o _
May 30, 2014
CO
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TO
m or-
 
 
 
Table of Contents
 
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION      1
SECTION 2. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION      6
SECTION 3. ELIGIBILITY OF THE PROJECT AREA FOR      11
DESIGNATION AS A CONSERVATION/BLIGHTED AREA      11
SECTION 4. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES      13
SECTION 5. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN      15
SECTION 6. REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION      17
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT      17
MIXED USE (COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL/INSTITUTIONAL)      17
SECTION 7. GENERAL LAND USE PLAN      20
SECTION 8. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FINANCING      21
SECTION 9. HOUSING IMPACT STUDY      32
SECTION 10. PROVISIONS FOR AMENDING THE PLAN      33
SECTION 11. CITY OF CHICAGO COMMITMENT TO FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES AND AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION      34
 
Appendix
 
 
ATTACHMENT ONE - LEGAL DESCRIPTION
 
ATTACHMENT TWO - MAPS AND PLAN EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A      Boundary Map of TIF Area
EXHIBIT B      Sub Area Key Map
EXHIBIT C      Existing Land Use Conditions
EXHIBIT D      Existing Conditions Maps (D1-D6)
EXHIBIT E      Vacant Land Map
EXHIBIT F      Existing Zoning Map
EXHIBIT G      Adjacent TIF / Redevelopment Areas Map
EXHIBIT H-1      Land Acquisition Map
EXHIBIT H-2      Land Acquisition List
EXHIBIT I      Generalized Land Use Plan Map
 
ATTACHMENT THREE - ELIGIBILITY STUDY ATTACHMENT FOUR - 2012 ESTIMATED EAV BY TAX PARCEL ATTACHMENT FIVE - PHOTO APPENDIX OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ATTACHMENT SIX - HOUSING IMPACT STUDY
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
 
This document presents a Tax Increment Financing ("TIF") Redevelopment Plan and Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Plan") pursuant to the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et seq.) as amended, (the "Act") for the Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") located in the City of Chicago, Illinois (the "City"). The Project Area can be separated into three sections: 1. Washington Park (the "Park") is bounded by 51st and 60th Streets on the north and south, and Cottage Grove Avenue and Martin Luther King Drive on the east and west; 2. the neighborhood section which is generally bounded by Martin Luther King Drive and Washington Park on the east, the Dan Ryan Expressway on the west, Garfield Boulevard on the north and 63rd Street on the south; and 3. the industrial area south of 63rd Street to the Chicago Skyway, west of Prairie Avenue. The neighborhood section is roughly one (1) mile north to south and 0.8 miles east to west, centered on 59th Street and Michigan Avenue. The Park is roughly 1.2 miles north to south and 0.5 miles east to west, centered just north of the intersection of Morgan Drive and Rainey Drive. The industrial section is roughly two-thirds of a mile north to south and a third of a mile east to west, with a significant section of this area used as railway siding.
The Project Area consists of 988.4 acres in 2,272 parcels. There are 2,785 unique parcel identification numbers (PINS) represented in the 2,272 total parcels. The Project Area includes 241.8 acres for public rights-of-way for streets, alleyways, rail lines, and highways, leaving approximately 746.6 acres of usable land (either presently developed or vacant). The boundaries of the Project Area are described in the Plan Appendix, Attachment One - Legal Description and are geographicallyshown in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit A - Boundary Map of TIF Area.
The Plan summarizes the analyses and findings of Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises, Inc. and subconsultants, PGAV PLANNERS and the Goodman Williams Group (jointly hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant") and, unless otherwise noted, is the responsibility of the Consultant. The City is entitled to rely on the findings and conclusions of this Plan in designating the Project Area as a redevelopment project area under the Act. 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 of the Plan and the related eligibility study in proceeding with the designation of the Project Area and the adoption and implementation of the Plan, and 2) on the fact that the Consultant has obtained the necessary information so that the Plan and the related eligibility study will comply with the Act.
The Plan presents certain factors, research and analysis undertaken to document the eligibility of the Project Area for designation as a "conservation area" for the improved portion of the Project Area and a "blighted area" for the vacant portion of the Project Area. The need for public intervention, along with goals and objectives, land use policies, and other policy materials are presented in the Plan. The results of a study documenting the eligibility of the Project Area as a conservation area for the improved portion of the Project Area and a blighted area for the vacant portion of the Project Area are presented in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Three -Eligibility Study.
 
2014
Page 1
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Tax Increment Financing
The Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (the "Act") permits municipalities to induce redevelopment of eligible "blighted," "conservation" or "industrial park conservation areas" in accordance with an adopted redevelopment plan. The Act stipulates specific procedures that must be adhered to in designating a redevelopment project area. One of those procedures is the determination that the area meets the statutory eligibility requirements. Under 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(p), the Act defines a "redevelopment project area" as:
"... an area designated by the municipality, which is not less in the aggregate than 1-1/2 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 combination of both blighted areas and conservation areas."
 
In adopting the Act, the Illinois State Legislature found that:
  1. ...there exists in many municipalities within this State blighted, conservation and industrial park conservation areas...(at 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-2(a)); and
  2. .the eradication of blighted areas and treatment and improvement of conservation areas by redevelopment projects is hereby declared to be essential to the public interest (at 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-2(b)).
 
The legislative findings were made on the basis that the presence of blight, or conditions that lead to blight, is detrimental to the safety, health, welfare and morals of the public. The Act specifies certain requirements that must be met before a municipality may proceed with implementing a redevelopment project in order to ensure that the exercise of these powers is proper and in the public interest.
The municipality must first determine that the proposed redevelopment area qualifies for designation as a "blighted area," "conservation area," "industrial park conservation area" or a combination "blighted and conservation areas." Based on the conditions present, the Eligibility Study concludes that the improved portion of the Project Area qualifies for designation as a conservation area and the vacant portion of the Project Area qualifies for designation as a blighted area under the Act.
Redevelopment projects are defined as any public or private development projects undertaken in furtherance of the objectives of the redevelopment plan and in accordance with 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 equalized assessed value (EAV) of real property within the redevelopment project area over and above the "Certified Initial EAV" of such real property. Any increase in EAV is then multiplied by the current tax rate to arrive at the Incremental Property Taxes. A decline in current EAV 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 redevelopment project area. In addition,
 
2014
Page 2
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
a municipality may pledge towards payment of such 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'ariy 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
  5. any other taxes or anticipated receipts that the municipality may lawfully pledge.
Tax Increment Financing does not generate tax revenues. This financing mechanism allows the municipality to capture, for a certain number of years, the new tax 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. This revenue is then reinvested in the area through rehabilitation, developer subsidies, public improvements and other eligible redevelopment activities. All taxing districts continue to receive property taxes levied on the initial valuation of properties within the redevelopment project area. Additionally, taxing districts 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 and such excess Incremental Property Taxes are not otherwise required, pledged or otherwise designated for other redevelopment projects. Taxing districts also benefit from the increased property tax base after redevelopment project costs and obligations are paid.
The City authorized an evaluation to determine whether a portion of the City, to be known as the Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area, qualifies for designation as a combination conservation area/blighted area pursuant to the provisions contained in the Act. If the Project Area is so qualified, the City requested the preparation of a redevelopment plan for the Project Area in accordance with the requirements of the Act.
 
2014
Page 3
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Overview of the Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
The Project Area is approximately 988.4 acres, including 241.8 acres for public rights-of-way for streets and alleyways and a portion of the Dan Ryan Expressway. Excluding public rights-of-way the Project Area consists of 746.6 acres situated in 2,272 parcels. There are 2,785 unique parcel identification numbers (PINS) represented in the 2,272 total parcels. The Project Area is the shape of a square, and includes a 351-acre recreational park, residential uses to the east, north and portions west of the expressway in addition to small commercial nodes and industrial uses in the south, north and west borders. The Project Area is located approximately seven (7) miles south of Chicago's downtown in the Washington Park community area. The Project Area includes eight (8) 2010 U.S. Census Tracts: 4003, 4004, 4005, 4008, 8345, 8346, 8361, and 8425; of which, only tract 4004 has shown population growth from 2000 to 2010.
 
The vast majority (92%) of the buildings within the Project Area are well over 35 years of age. Many of the commercial properties are in need of minor repairs in order to improve their appearance, property values, and to remain viable. The majority of the Project Area was developed prior to the existence of a comprehensive plan and prior to present day development standards. This is most apparent in the excessive land coverage and lack of provisions for off-street parking found throughout the Project Area. The Plan seeks to respond to problem conditions within the Project Area and reflects a commitment by the City to improve and revitalize the area.
In addition to over 50% of the buildings within the Project Area being 35 years or older, the improved tax blocks within the Project Area are characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "conservation area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act:
  1. Deterioration
  2. Inadequate utilities
  3. Deleterious land use or layout
  4. Lack of community planning
  5. Declining or sub-par EAV growth
 
The vacant parcels within the Project Area are characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "blighted area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act:
  1. Diversity of ownership
  2. Deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas
  3. Declining or sub-par EAV growth
In terms of net land area (total land area less public right-of-way and parcels used as street or rail right-of-way), approximately 16% of the Project Area is vacant land. If Washington Park and Dyett High School are excluded from the tabulation, vacant land accounts for about 31% of the net land area, or 952 individual parcels; 42% of the total parcels. Almost a third of the land in the Project Area, not including Washington Park/Dyett High School, is vacant land and is evidence of the extent of disinvestment. A case could also be made for excluding the industrial area south of 63rd Street from these vacant land calculations, which would only increase the percentage of vacant land in the Project Area. As a result of these conditions, the Project Area
 
2014
Page 4
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
is in need of redevelopment. In recognition of the unrealized potential of the Project Area, the City is taking action to facilitate its revitalization.
The Project Area, as a whole, has not been subject to growth and development by private enterprise and would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed without the adoption of the Plan. The Eligibility Study, in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Three - Eligibility Study, concludes that the property in this area is experiencing deterioration and a lack of sufficient investment. The analysis of conditions within the Project Area indicates the improved portion of the Project Area qualifies as a conservation area, and the vacant portion of the Project Area qualifies as a blighted area.
 
The purpose of the Plan is to create a mechanism to allow for the development of new commercial, mixed-use and community facilities on existing parcels and/or the improvement of existing commercial, mixed use, and residential properties; and the general improvement of the area's physical environment and infrastructure. The development of the Project Area is expected to encourage economic revitalization within the community and the surrounding area.
The Plan has been formulated in accordance with the provisions of the Act. This document is a guide to all proposed public and private actions in the Project Area that are assisted with tax increment financing.
 
2014
Page 5
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 2. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION Brief History of the Community
The Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area sits within the greater Washington Park Community Area. Washington Park is located approximately seven (7) miles south of the Chicago Loop. The Project Area includes eight (8) 2010 U.S. Census Tracts: 4003, 4004, 4005, 4008, 8345, 8346, 8361, and 8425; of which, only tract 4004 has shown population growth from 2000 to 2010. The 351-acre recreational Washington Park along with the Walter H. Dyett High School site separates the Project Area from the more affluent eastern neighborhood of Hyde Park.
Settled by the Irish and German railroad and meat packing workers in the 1860s and 1870s, Washington Park was a growing community for much of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. By the 1890s German Jews began-moving into east Washington Park and a small number of African Americans settled into the working class districts south of Garfield (55th) and west of State Street. Wealthy American born whites settled on the wide avenues that ran north towards the Loop. In 1893, confirmation that the Columbian Exposition would be held in Jackson Park also brought another influx to the community's population.
The development of the recreational park began in 1869 and was known as South Park until 1881. The park was later renamed Washington Park. After years of lobbying by prominent south side residents, the Illinois State Legislature authorized the creation of a five-member, governor appointed South Park Commission. Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux centered the park on a 100-acre greensward with surrounding walking trails, trees and shrubs. Olmsted and Vaux planned for a bandstand and refectory, a promenade, carriage roads and gathering places in the park. The park would be part of the boulevard system that linked the park north to the central business district. In addition, the architects' plans called for dredging and filling in wetlands in the park and the opening up of a canal between the park and Lake Michigan.
Transportation was the catalyst for much of the growth experienced by the south side neighborhoods; particularly in the Washington Park community during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. By 1887 cable cars reached as far south as 63rd Street on State Street and 67th Street on Cottage Grove Avenue. The "L" train system reached farther south than the Washington Park community by 1907. Cable cars, trains, and the wide boulevards provided easy access to Chicago's Loop for south side residents. Today, public transportation and highway access are still widely available to residents and visitors of Washington Park.
The site for the Race Riots of 1919, the Washington Park community was the home of many clashes between blacks and whites. The cultural institutions and churches have closely reflected the community's racial transition from one of the most racially diverse Chicago communities to a predominantly African American population. Greek Orthodox residents built SS. Constantine and Helen in 1909 and in 1948 the building was inhabited by an entirely African American Episcopal congregation. Many other churches in the Washington Park community such as St. Anselm Church in the 1930s, B'nai Shalom Temple Israel in 1925, were built in the early 20th century and sold to entirely African American congregations by the mid-1900s.St.
 
2014
Page 6
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Mary's African Methodist Episcopal Church is the oldest black congregation in the Project Area and was established in 1897.
The early 1960s saw the construction of two of the Chicago Housing Authority's ("CHA") larger projects; Washington Park Homes and the Robert Taylor Homes. With the construction of these two projects, Washington Park had one of the highest concentrations of public housing in the United States. The Robert Taylor Homes consisted of 28 16-story high rises. When built, the homes planned for 11,000 residents, but at its peak housed up to 27,000 residents at once. The Robert Taylor Homes marked a failure for the CHA as socioeconomic problems perpetuated throughout the 1980s and 1990s and the City neglected property and building maintenance or building code updates. In 1996, HOPE VI federal funds were granted for off-site replacement housing for Robert Taylor Home residents. All apartments were planned to be vacated by 2005 and the last of the Robert Taylor buildings was demolished on March 8, 2007.
 
Current Land Use and Community Facilities
The eastern side of the Project Area is made up of Washington Park in addition to higher density residential uses. On the eastern boundary of the Project Area is Hyde Park, an affluent south side neighborhood that is home to the University of Chicago. Students and faculty have resided in Hyde Park for decades. As the demand for housing grows due to the growing number of university students, visitors and university faculty, they may choose to move to surrounding neighborhoods such as Washington Park. At the west end of the Project Area is the Englewood Community Area, which, until recently, was best known for the Englewood Mall. The Mall has recently been replaced by the Kennedy King College and the neighborhood has experienced a surge in housing demand and property values.
At intersections within and surrounding the Project Area, there are small commercial nodes. There are also some isolated industrial uses interspersed within the residential/commercial areas. Industrial corridors are located on the western border near Interstate Highway 90/94 (Dan Ryan Expressway) and also near the southwest boundary. Residential neighborhoods are also located on the western side of the. Dan Ryan and to the north of the Project Area.
The Project Area includes a Chicago Fire Department station, located at the intersection of 59th Street and South Lafayette Avenue. While the Project Area offers some community facilities, there are no Chicago Police Department stations, public libraries or hospitals located within the boundaries of the Project Area.
Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use Map shows a lack of community parks within the boundaries of the Project Area. In 1959 the Chicago Park District took one (1) parcel of property and created the Loraine Hansberry Park which provides limited open space to the residents within the Project Area. During the 1990's, the Chicago Park District replaced the existing basketball court (at Loraine Hansberry Park) with a children's playground. The children in the neighborhoods have little access to local neighborhood parks. While there are three (3) pre-kindergarten thru eighth grade schools within the Project Area, only one provides a school playground for children. Two (2) of the schools are community schools, while the third is a charter school. There is a prominent need for more neighborhood park space within the Project Area.
 
2014
Page 7
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Additionally, over the course of the last few decades, residential buildings have been demolished as the buildings deteriorated and were vacated. These parcels were "blighted before vacant". The City has developed the Red X program to identify properties with structural or interior hazards with a red "X" sign. These hazards can include, but are not limited to, building deterioration or damage from previous fires, structural hazards when components of the building have been removed, and collapse hazards due to the integrity of chimney tops, parapet walls, roof systems and or stair systems being compromised. The red "X" serves as an indicator to first responders to the existence of the hazards. Further, the presence of the red "X" makes it unlawful for any person to enter the building without first notifying the fire commissioner. The vacant land that remains speaks to the poor building conditions before the demolition, the challenges of the Area, and also presents a resource and opportunity for in-fill development and revitalization.
 
Landmark and Historic Buildings
The Washington Park Community Area is home to several architecturally or historically significant buildings. Washington Park, itself, was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2004 as United States' Registered Historic District and includes all contributing buildings and structures located within the park. The City's Park Boulevard System, including Garfield Boulevard, is in the process of being nominated for the National Register of Historic Places.
In 1995, the Commission on Chicago Landmarks completed an inventory of architecturally and historically significant structures. This inventory, called the Chicago Historic Resources Survey ("CHRS"), was a decade-long research effort to analyze the historic and architectural importance of all buildings constructed in the City prior to 1940. The CHRS database identifies each property's date of construction, architect, building style and type, Chicago Landmark status, inclusion in the Illinois Historic Structures Survey, and property identification numbers (PIN). A color-coded ranking system was used to identify historic and architectural significance relative to age, degree of external physical integrity, and level of possible significance.
According to the City of Chicago Landmarks Division, the following buildings in the Project Area are listed as category "Orange" on the CHRS. Orange properties possess some architectural feature or historical association that made them potentially significant in the context of the surrounding community. While there are other historic properties nearby the Project Area, the following list of 36 properties is representative of the "Orange"-coded CHRS properties in, or immediately adjacent to, the proposed TIF boundary.
  1. 40 E. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (Schulze Baking Co.)
  2. 301 E. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (office)
  3. 119-125 W. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (religious building/church)
  4. 320 E. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (Garfield elevated train station)
  5. 341-343 E. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (Rum-Boogie Club)
  6. 5206 - 5310 S. Cottage Grove (General Richard L. Jones Armory)
  7. 5644 S. Cottage Grove (DuSable Museum of African American History)
  8. 5700 - 5740 S. Cottage Grove (railroad stable and roundhouse)
  9. 5114 - 5128 S. King Dr. (Chicago Orphan Asylum)
  10. 5228 S. King Dr. (residence)
  11. 5644 S. King Dr. (multi-unit residential building)
  12. 5922 S. King Dr. (Jesse Binga House)
 
2014
Page 8
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
  2. 6116-6134 S. King Dr. (South Park Terrace Apartment Building)
  3. 6160 - 6212 S. King Dr. (Washington Park Terrace Apartment Building)
  4. 5613 - 5659 S. La Salle St(industrial building)
  5. 5621 - 5623 S. Lafayette Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  6. 5740 S. Lafayette Ave. (single family residence)
  7. 5760 S. Lafayette Ave. (John Raber House)
  8. 5510 - 5514 S. Michigan Ave. (Mulvey Apartment Building)
  9. 5516 S. Michigan Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  10. 5600 - 5602 S. Michigan Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  11. 6055 - 6059 S. Michigan Ave. (St. Anselm Church)
  12. 6101 -6115 S. Michigan Ave. (religious building/church)
  13. 6144 S. Michigan Ave. (single family residence)
  14. 5611 S. Perry Ave. (single family residence)
  15. 6002 S. Prairie Ave. (Ring Lardner Residence)
  16. 6137 - 6201 S. Prairie Ave. (utility building)
  17. 5520 S. State St. (commercial/Residential)
  18. 5955 - 5961 S. State St. (multi-unit residential and commercial building)
  19. 5502 - 5512 S. Wabash Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  20. 5646 S. Wabash Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  21. 5648 S. Wabash Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  22. 5656 - 5658 S. Wabash Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  23. 5916 S. Wabash Ave. (single family residence)
  24. 5527 S. Wentworth Ave. (commercial/residential building)
36.      6067 - 6077 S. Wentworth Ave. (warehouse)
 
While there are many "Orange" buildings listed on the CHRS, with the exception of Washington Park, there are no buildings in the Project Area registered on the National Register of Historic Buildings. The historic Raber House, located at 5760 S. Lafayette Avenue, was designated as an official Chicago Landmark in 1996.
 
Transportation Characteristics
Street System
Regional - The Project Area offers exceptional access to transportation routes both within the boundaries and entrance/exit routes to and from the Project Area as well as to and from other parts of the City of Chicago and the region. The western edge of the Project Area is bordered by Interstate Highway 90/94 (Dan Ryan Expressway) with entrance/exit ramps at 55th Street, 57th Street, 59th Street, and 63rd Street. Access to the expressway is also available traveling northbound on Wentworth Avenue and southbound on Wells Street. State Street provides entrance/exit ramps to the Chicago Skyway.
Local - For residents and visitors who choose to drive into, out of, and around the Project Area, there are many major thoroughfares linking the Project Area to other parts of the City. Within the Project Area, the major thoroughfares include north-south routes: Martin Luther King Drive ("King Drive"), Michigan Avenue, Indiana Avenue, Cottage Grove Avenue and State Street; and east-west routes: Garfield Boulevard and 63rd Street. Due to the location of the Dan Ryan Expressway at the western boundary of the Project Area, east and west access across the expressway is limited to Garfield Boulevard, 57th, 59th, and 63rd Streets.
 
2014
Page 9
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Public Transportation
The Chicago Transit Authority ("CTA") has many terminals located within the Project Area. CTA's Red and Green lines travel north/south to connect the Project Area to Chicago's Loop located seven (7) miles north, and farther south to Chicago's southern neighborhoods. Within the boundaries, the CTA Red Line stops at Garfield Boulevard and 63rd Street, along the Dan Ryan Expressway. The CTA Green Line provides two stops along King Drive; at Garfield Boulevard and at 63rd Street. Within a few blocks of the Project Area boundaries, the CTA Red Line stops at 47th Street, 51st. Street, and at the intersection of 63rd Street and Cottage Grove Avenue.
 
CTA buses also service the interior with many stops in close proximity to the Project Area. There are eight (8) bus lines with stops within the Project Area with three (3) additional express buses and three (3) bus lines with stops adjacent to the Project Area that service residents and visitors within the Project Area's boundaries. CTA bus routes within the boundaries of the Project Area are listed below:
Bus # Route
3/X3      North-south route along King Drive
4/X4      North-south route along Cottage Grove Avenue
15      East-west along 51st Street
24      Northbound route on Wentworth Avenue and south on Yale Avenue
29      North-south route on State Street
55/X55      East-west route along Garfield Boulevard
59      East-west route along 60th and 61st Streets
63      East-west route along 63rd Street
 
The following CTA buses stop in close proximity to the Project Area: #2, #15, #51, and #170. The CTA buses, in conjunction with CTA's Red and Green Lines, provide excellent public transportation options for residents and visitors within the Project Area.
 
Pedestrian Transportation
Pedestrian traffic in and throughout the Project Area is concentrated along the major arterial streets, with Garfield Boulevard, 51st Street, King Drive and Cottage Grove Avenue having the largest concentrations. The higher concentration of pedestrian traffic in these areas is associated with commuters utilizing the CTA bus and rail lines along this route and access to the recreational opportunities.found' in Washington Park. Concentration of pedestrian traffic is also associated with schools located within the Project Area. Most pedestrian traffic around schools is present during the peak periods before and after school hours.
There are sidewalks on most of the streets within the Project Area that connect pedestrians from north to south and east to west. The major thoroughfares provide crosswalks at intersections for pedestrian safety. Many of the sidewalks in the Project Area are cracked and uneven; neglect of sidewalk maintenance may make it difficult for children, elderly and/or handicapped individuals to use sidewalks as a form of transportation.
 
2014
Page 10
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 3. ELIGIBILITY OF THE PROJECT AREA FORDESIGNATION AS A CONSERVATION/BLIGHTED AREA
 
The Project Area, on the whole, has not been subject to significant growth and development through investment by private enterprise. Based on the conditions present, the Project Area is not likely to be comprehensively or effectively developed without the adoption of the Plan. A series of studies were undertaken to establish whether the land in the Project Area is eligible for designation in accordance with the requirements of the Act. This analysis, documented in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Three - Eligibility Study concluded that the Project Area so qualifies.
The improved parcels within the Project Area are characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "conservation area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act:
  • the predominance of buildings that are 35 years of age or older (92% of buildings)1;
  • deteriorated buildings (63% of buildings);
  • deteriorated site improvements (29% of parcels);
  • deteriorated street and/or sidewalk pavement (86% of sub-areas);
  • dilapidated buildings (4%, of buildings);
  • obsolete buildings (10% of buildings);
primary buildings with excessive vacancies (20%);
  • excessive land coverage (30% of improved parcels);
  • inadequate utilities (76% of sub-areas);
  • deleterious land use or layout (48% of sub-areas);
  • lack of community planning (62% of sub-areas); and,
  • demonstrates declining and sub-par EAV growth.
See Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit B - Sub Area Key.
The vacant parcels within the Project Area, which constitutes approximately 120.6 acres (31% of net land area, not including The Park), represented on 952 parcels and by 21 sub-areas for this Plan. The vacant portion of the Project Area is characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "blighted area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act: •   obsolete platting (37% of parcels);
  • diversity of ownership (43% of sub-areas);
  • tax delinquencies (21 % of vacant parcels; 50% of taxable vacant parcels);
    • deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas (94% of vacant parcels); and,
  • demonstrates declining or sub-par EAV growth.
For more detail on the basis for eligibility and definitions of these terms, refer to the Eligibility Study in Plan Appendix, Attachment Three - Eligibility Study.
Historic Equalized Assessed Values (EAV's) for the Project Area, the rate of EAV growth for the City and the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA for the period between 2008 and 2013 are considered to identify development
 
1 This is 42% greater than the statutory requirement. Under the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, for designation of an area as a Conservation Area, 50% or more of the buildings must be 35 years of age or older.
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page 11
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
activity and determine assessed value trends. As discussed in Section ll-B of Attachment Three - Eligibility Study, analysis of historic EAV for the Project Area indicated that the Project Area's EAV has declined in 2010, 2011, and 2012 and has also experienced growth at a rate less than that of the balance of the City and less than the annual Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA in those same years. Between 2008 and 2013, the EAV of the Project Area decreased from $119.5 million to $76.5 million (see Table 2-3 in Plan Appendix, Attachment Three - Eligibility Study). The table demonstrates that:
  1. In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the proposed Project Area has declined;
  2. In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the proposed Project Area has been less than the EAV growth of the remainder of the City; and,
  3. In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the proposed Project Area has been less than the CPI-U pf the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA.
While any one of the above conditions regarding property valuation is sufficient under the TIF Act to demonstrate evidence of a declining EAV, all 3 conditions are present in the proposed Project Area. A continuation of this minimal level of private investment may exacerbate deterioration and other conservation conditions within the Project Area. There is little incentive for commercial and residential developers to initiate new projects or make major investments in the Project Area, without public financial assistance that may include the use of tax increment financing.
Despite small incremental improvements scattered throughout the Project Area, there exist conditions that continue to threaten the public safety, health and welfare of the Project Area. While not an eligibility factor under the Act, crime statistics also provide evidence that these threatening conditions are present in the Project Area. Recent crime statistics (Chicago Tribune -2014, May 19. Retrieved from http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicaqo/community/ for the month of April 2014, obtained from the City of Chicago Data Portal) indicate the Washington Park Community Area currently ranks 7th among Chicago's 77 community areas in violent crime reports; 2nd for property crime reports; and 10th for quality of life crime reports. Other crime data sources may differ, but all indicated that the Washington Park Community Area has a high rate of crime. Furthermore, the presence of factors indicated by the Act include deteriorated, obsolete structures; building vacancies; inadequate utilities; land use incompatibilities; deteriorated streets and sidewalks; declining or sub-par EAV growth; and the predominance of underutilized, vacant and tax exempt or tax delinquent properties in the Project Area and may result in continued disinvestment that will not be overcome without action by the City. These conditions have been previously documented in this report. All properties within the Project Area will benefit from the TIF program.
 
2014
Page 12
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 4. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
 
The following goals and objectives are provided to guide the decisions and activities that will facilitate the revitalization of the Project Area: They generally reflect existing City policies in all or portions of the Project Area. These goals and objectives can be achieved through effective use of local, state and federal tools. They are meant to guide the review and development of future projects in the Project Area.
General Goals
  • Reduce or eliminate the conditions that qualify the Project Area as a Conservation/Blighted area.
  • Strengthen the economic well-being of the Project Area and the City by enhancing properties and the local tax base to their fullest potential.
  • Create new jobs and retain existing jobs for residents in the Project Area.
  • Improve the quality of life for the residents by creating viable commercial area.
  • Create an environment within the Project Area that will contribute to the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the Project Area and the City.
  • Preserve and enhance the historic or architecturally significant properties in the Project Area.
  • Improve and enhance access to transportation flow and public transportation facilities.
  • Improve the public infrastructure in the Project Area.
  • Encourage the participation of minorities and women in the redevelopment process of the Project Area.
Redevelopment Objectives
To achieve the general goals of this Plan, the following redevelopment objectives have been established:
  • Encourage private investment in new development and rehabilitation of buildings in the Project Area.
  • Revitalize and restore the physical and economic conditions in this once thriving neighborhood by removing structurally substandard buildings, obsolete building types, deleterious uses, and other blighting influences.
  • Assemble City-owned vacant lots and other underutilized land into viable disposition parcels in order to provide sites for development.
  • Use City programs, where appropriate, to create a unified identity that would enhance the marketability of the Project Area.
  • Improve the transportation access, traffic flow and safety particularly along 63rd Street, State Street and Michigan Avenue to accommodate an increase in both pedestrian and vehicular traffic to the businesses.
  • Encourage private investment in new development and rehabilitation of buildings in the Project Area.
  • Provide public infrastructure improvements throughout the Project Area. Replace and repair streets, alleys, sidewalks, and curbs, where necessary.
  • Provide public and private' infrastructure and streetscape improvements and other available assistance necessary to promote commercial (office and retail) uses in the Project Area.
 
2014
Page 13
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
  • Establish job training and job readiness programs to provide residents within and near the Project Area with skills necessary to secure jobs.
  • Attract new sales tax and real estate tax dollars to the City of Chicago.
 
2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page 14
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 5. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
The City proposes to achieve its redevelopment goals and objectives for the Project Area through the use of public financing techniques, including tax increment financing, and by undertaking some or all of the following actions:
 
Property Assembly, Site Preparation and Environmental Remediation
To meet the goals and objectives of the Plan, the City may acquire and assemble property throughout the Project Area. Land assemblage by the City may be by purchase, exchange, donation, lease, eminent domain or through the Tax Reactivation Program, and may be for the purpose 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.
Plan Appendix, Attachment 2, Exhibit H-1, Land Acquisition Overview Map indicates the parcels currently proposed to be acquired for redevelopment in the Project Area. Plan Appendix, Attachment 2, Exhibit H-2 contains Land Acquisition by Block and Parcel Identification Number which portrays the acquisition properties in more detail.
In connection with the City exercising its power to acquire real property not currently identified in Plan Appendix, Attachment 2, 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 (or any successor commission) and authorized by the City Council. Acquisition of such real property as may be authorized by the City Council does not constitute a change in the nature of this plan.
For properties described in Plan Appendix, Attachment 2: (1) the acquisition of occupied properties by the City shall commence within four years from the date of the publication of the ordinance approving the Plan; (2) the acquisition of vacant properties by the City shall commence within ten years from the date of publication of the ordinance authorizing the acquisition. In either case, acquisition shall be deemed to have commenced with the sending of an offer letter. After the expiration of the applicable period, the City may acquire such property pursuant to this Plan under the Act according to its customary procedures as described in the preceding paragraph.
Affordable Housing
The City requires that developers who receive TIF assistance for market rate housing set aside 20% of the units to meet affordability criteria established by the City's Department of Planning and Development or any successor agency. Generally, this means the affordable for-sale units should be priced at a level that is affordable to persons earning no more than 100% of the area median income, and affordable rental units should be affordable to persons earning no more than 60% of the area median income.
Intergovernmental and Redevelopment Agreements
The City may enter into redevelopment agreements or intergovernmental agreements with private entities or public entities to construct, rehabilitate, renovate or restore private or
 
2014
Page 15
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
public improvements on one (1) or several parcels (collectively referred to as "Redevelopment Projects"). Such redevelopment agreements may be needed to support the rehabilitation or construction of allowable private improvements, in accordance with the Plan; incur costs or reimburse developers for other eligible redevelopment project costs as provided in the Act in implementing the Plan; and provide public improvements and facilities which may include, but are not limited to utilities, street closures, transit improvements, streetscape enhancements, signalization, parking, surface right-of-way improvements, public schools and parks.
Terms of redevelopment as part of this redevelopment project may be incorporated in the appropriate redevelopment agreements. For example, the City may agree to reimburse a developer for incurring certain eligible redevelopment project costs under the Act. Such agreements may contain specific development controls as allowed by the Act.
Financial Impact on Taxing Districts
The Act requires an assessment of any financial impact of the Project Area on, or any increased demand for services from any taxing district affected by the Plan and a description of any program to address such financial impacts or increased demand. The City intends to monitor development in the Project 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.
Costs Eligible for Payment with TIF Funds Include:
Analysis, Professional Services and Administrative Activities
The City may undertake or engage professional consultants, engineers, architects, attorneys, and others to conduct various analyses, studies, administrative or legal services to establish, implement, and manage the Plan.
Financing Costs Pursuant to the Act
Interest on any obligations issued under the Act accruing during the estimated period of construction of the redevelopment project and other financing costs may be paid from the incremental tax revenues pursuant to the provisions of the Act.
Interest Costs Pursuant to the Act
Pursuant to the Act, the City may allocate a portion of the incremental tax revenues to pay or reimburse developers for interest costs incurred in connection with redevelopment activities in order to enhance the redevelopment potential of the Project Area.
Construction of New Low-Income Housing Pursuant to the Act
Pursuant to the Act, the City may pay from incremental tax revenues up to 50% of the cost of construction of new housing units to be occupied by low-income and very low-income households as defined in Section 3 of the Illinois Affordable Housing Act. The cost of construction of those units may be derived from the proceeds of bonds issued by the City under this act or other constitutional or statutory or from other sources of municipal revenue that may be reimbursed from incremental tax revenues or the proceeds of bonds issued to finance the construction of that housing.
 
2014
Page 16
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
SECTION 6. REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Plan seeks to maintain and enhance most of the existing land uses with a focus on residential and mixed use (defined as commercial, residential, and/or institutional uses) redevelopment. A mix of commercial and light industrial uses is planned for the frontage of Wentworth Avenue and portions of State Street. The construction of new infrastructure is seen as an essential part of needed redevelopment due to the documentation of inadequate utilities in much of the Project Area.
The plan recognizes that new investment in residential, institutional, commercial and mixed-use property is needed to improve the appearance, vibrancy, and overall economic health of the Project Area. Such investment will create the high quality environment that is required to sustain a revitalization of the Project Area. The major physical improvements anticipated as a result of implementing the proposed Plan are outlined below.
 
Residential Development
Residential uses may take the form of various single-family and multi-family developments, with density and height restrictions consistent with existing zoning. Open space and neighborhood-oriented community facilities are also acceptable in these residential areas along most frontages on Wabash, Michigan and Indiana Avenues. Since a majority of the existing Project Area is residential, the Plan seeks to promote residential infill on vacant properties and also encourages site assembly to allow for larger multi-family residential development where permitted. In areas where there are multiple adjacent vacant parcels and/or vacant residential buildings that are so deteriorated that demolition may become necessary in the near future, the Plan encourages site assembly for redevelopment of larger, multi-family residential development and infill housing.
As set forth in the Act, if the redevelopment plan for a redevelopment project area would result in the displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units, or if the redevelopment project area contains 75 or more inhabited residential units and a municipality is unable to certify that no displacement will occur, the municipality must prepare a housing impact study and incorporated the study in the redevelopment project plan.
 
The Project Area contains 3,590 inhabited residential units. The Plan provides for the development or redevelopment of several portions of the Project Area that may contain occupied residential units. As a result, it is possible that by implementation of this Plan, the displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units could occur.
The results of the housing impact study section are described in a separate report which presents certain factual information required by the Act. The report, prepared by the Consultant, is entitled Washington Park Project Area Tax Increment Financing Housing Impact Study, and is located in Plan Appendix, Attachment Six. Mixed Use (Commercial/Residential/lnstitutional),
The Plan recognizes that attractive new commercial development, coupled with stabilization and expansion of existing businesses, will encourage investment in residential property as well as provide a diverse mix of job opportunities for the residents of the Project Area. Additionally, the Plan seeks widespread residential development which will ultimately create an increased demand for commercial and retail uses. Currently, there are opportunities for several retail and
 
2014
Page 17
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
commercial corridors along the frontages of State Street, Michigan Avenue, Calumet Avenue and King Drive to compliment and promote expansion of existing smaller commercial nodes.
On State Street and Michigan Avenue there exists a diverse mix of commercial, retail and residential uses on the same block and many times on adjacent properties. Mixed use redevelopment is therefore encouraged along the frontages of State Street and Michigan Avenue, with the exception of the slated construction of a new park space south of 57th Place at State Street, to revitalize and strengthen these commercial corridors that serve residents and businesses in and around the Project Area.
Community organizations have expressed a particular desire for more restaurants, cultural venues, and retail merchandisers. In addition to providing an opportunity for retail development along State Street and Michigan Avenue, the Plan seeks to promote mixed use redevelopment along the west side of King Drive and along Calumet Avenue. Many of the existing multi-family housing units are currently vacant. Additionally, there are numerous vacant tax parcels. The Plan seeks to promote new commercial .redevelopment along these streets to create productive and vibrant commercial corridors that would provide a variety of job opportunities for existing and future residents of the Project Area.
Commercial and Light Industrial
The Plan seeks to promote the growth of existing commercial and light industrial uses within the Project Area and to encourage and attract new enterprises along Wentworth Avenue and along State Street south of 59th Street as welj as those areas south of 63rd Street where needed.
Parks and Open Space
There are plans to develop park space within the Project Area at the intersection of 57th Place and State Street. This new park space will be constructed around the Chicago Landmark Raber House which is located at 5760 S. Lafayette Avenue.
Public Improvements
The creation of public infrastructure is needed to complement and attract private sector investment. Infrastructure improvements planned for the Project Area may include, but are not limited to, the following:
  • Repair existing sidewalks, street furniture, street lighting, highlighting of pedestrian crosswalks, and other pedestrian-friendly amenities;
  • Repair curbs, gutters and pedestrian walkways within Washington Park.
  • Creation of additional neighborhood park space at the intersection of 57th Place and State Street.
  • Implementation of streetscape and building design guidelines that meet modern development needs and standards.
  • New street lighting and streetscape improvements along State Street, Michigan Avenue, Indiana Avenue, and King Drive in the Project Area, as well as installation of similar lighting where deemed necessary for health and safety.
  • Physical buffers or barriers between light industrial, intensive commercial uses and residential areas (such as fences, trees, bushes or other vegetation), to the extent possible;
  • Installation of additional traffic signals, signage, and traffic calming mechanisms where necessary;
 
2014
Page 18
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
•   Improvements that promote the use of public transportation and for transit-related facilities, including CTA bus and rail transit improvements.
 
2014
Page 19
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 7. GENERAL LAND USE PLAN
Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit I - Generalized Land Use Plan, identifies land use policies to be pursued in the implementation of the Plan. The Generalized Land Use Plan is intended to serve as a guide for land use improvements and developments within the Project Area.
The land uses proposed for the Project Area are consistent with the redevelopment goals of this Plan and are consistent with existing zoning. The Generalized Land Use Plan is intended to serve as a broad guide for land use and redevelopment policy. The Plan is general in nature to allow adequate flexibility to respond to shifts in the market and private investment.
The principal land use categories planned for the Project Area are residential and Mixed Use (Commercial, Residential, and/or Industrial). Residential uses may take the form of various single-family and multi-family developments, with density and height restrictions consistent with existing zoning. Open space and neighborhood-oriented community facilities and institutional uses are also acceptable in these residential areas.
Mixed use designation is intended in the eastern corridors of the Project Area - along State Street, Michigan Avenue, Calumet Avenue, and King Drive. The mixed use category allows for commercial, residential and/or institutional uses. The Plan seeks to enhance and promote existing and new commercial/residential development in the eastern section of the Project Area in addition to major north/south arterial streets. These corridors offer the best environment for creating a pedestrian-friendly zone with a broad mix of retail merchants such as restaurants, coffee shops, bakeries, specialty food stores and book stores.
New commercial and light industrial uses are particularly encouraged for properties fronting on Wentworth Avenue and LaSalle Street, as these streets offer the best environment for creating new commercial uses in this area as well as maintaining and providing expansion opportunities for existing light industrial uses already located near the "L" tracks and in those areas south of 63rd Street.
Additional park space is planned within the Project Area at the intersection of 57th Place and State Street. The plan also encourages any necessary improvements to the existing Washington Park.
These land use strategies are intended to direct development toward the most appropriate land use pattern for the various portions of the Project Area and enhance the overall development of the Project Area in accordance with the goals and objectives of the Plan. Locations of specific uses, or public infrastructure improvements, may vary from the Generalized Land Use Plan as a result of more detailed planning and site design activities. Such variations are permitted without amendment to the Plan as long as they are consistent with the Plan's goals and objectives and the land uses and zoning approved by the Chicago Plan Commission.
 
2014
Page 20
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
SECTION 8. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FINANCING
 
Tax increment financing is an economic development tool designed to facilitate the development of blighted areas and to arrest decline in areas that may become blighted without public intervention. It is expected that tax increment financing will be an important tool, but not the only one, of financing improvements and providing development incentives in the Project Area throughout its 23-year life.
Tax increment financing can only be used when private investment would not reasonably be expected to occur without public assistance. The Act sets forth the range of public assistance that may be provided.
It is anticipated that expenditures for redevelopment project costs will be carefully staged in a reasonable and proportional basis to coincide with expenditures for redevelopment by private developers and the projected availability of tax increment revenues.
 
The various redevelopment expenditures that are eligible for payment or reimbursement under the Act are reviewed below. Following this review is a list of estimated redevelopment project costs that are deemed to be necessary to implement this Plan (the "Redevelopment Project Costs").
In the event the Act is amended after the date of the approval of this Plan by the City Council of the City of Chicago to (a) include new eligible redevelopment project costs, 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 interest costs that may be paid under 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(11)), this Plan shall.be deemed to incorporate such additional, expanded or increased eligible costs as Redevelopment Project Costs under the Plan, to the extent permitted by the Act. In the event of such amendment(s) to the Act, the City may add any new eligible redevelopment project costs as a line item in Table 8.1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs or otherwise adjust the line items in Table 8.1 without amendment to this Plan, to the extent permitted by the Act. In no instance, however, shall such additions or adjustments result in any increase in the total Redevelopment Project Costs without a further amendment to this Plan.
 
Eligible Redevelopment Project Costs
Redevelopment project costs include the sum total of all reasonable or necessary costs incurred, estimated to be incurred, or incidental to this Plan pursuant the Act. Such costs may include, without limitation, the following:
  1. Costs of studies and surveys, development of plans and specifications, implementation and administration of the Plan including, but not limited to, staff and professional service costs for architectural, engineering, legal, financial, planning or other services (excluding lobbying expenses), provided that no charges for professional services are based on a percentage of the tax increment collected;
  2. The cost of marketing sites within the Project Area to prospective businesses, developers and investors;
 
2014
Page 21
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
    2. Property assembly costs, including, but not limited to, acquisition of land and other property, real or personal, or rights or interests therein, demolition of buildings, site preparation, site improvements 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, repair or remodeling of existing public or private buildings, fixtures and leasehold improvements; and the cost of replacing an existing public building, if pursuant to the implementation of a 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; including any direct cost or indirect costs relating to Green Globes or LEED certified construction elements or construction elements with an equivalent certification;
    4. Costs of the construction of public works or improvements, including any direct or indirect costs relating to Green Globes or LEED certified construction elements or construction elements with an equivalent certification subject to the limitations in Section 11-74.4-3(q)(4) of the Act;
    5. Costs of job training and retraining projects including the cost of "welfare-to-work" programs implemented by businesses located within the Project Area.
    6. 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 a period not exceeding 36 months following completion and including reasonable reserves related thereto;
    7. 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 Plan.
  2. Relocation costs to the extent that the City determines that relocation costs shall be paid or is required to make payment of relocation costs by federal or state law or by Section 74.4-3(n)(7) of the Act (see "Relocation" section, Plan Appendix, Attachment Six, Housing Impact Study, Addenda);
    1. Payment in lieu of taxes, as defined in the Act;
11.      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 (1) or more taxing districts, 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 the Project Area; and (ii) when incurred by a taxing district or taxing districts other than the City, are set forth in a written agreement by or among the City and the taxing district or taxing districts, which
 
2014
Page 22
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
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 of the program and sources of funds to pay for the same, and the term 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, 110 ILCS 805/3-37, 805/3-38, 805/3-40 and 805/3-40.1, and by school districts of costs pursuant to Sections 10-22.20aand 10-23.3a of the School Code, 105 ILCS 5/10-22.20a and 5/10-23.3a.
  1. 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;
    • such payments in any one (1) year may not exceed 30% of the annual interest costs incurred by the redeveloper with regard to the redevelopment project during that year;
    • if there are not sufficient funds available in the special tax allocation fund 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 of such interest payments paid pursuant to the Act may not exceed 30% of the total: (i) cost paid or incurred by the redeveloper for such redevelopment project; (ii) redevelopment project costs excluding any property assembly costs and any relocation costs incurred by the City pursuant to the Act; and
    • up to 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.
  • Unless specifically authorized by the Act, the cost of construction of new privately-owned buildings shall not be an eligible redevelopment project cost,
  • An elementary, secondary or unit school district's increased costs attributable to assisted housing units will be reimbursed as provided in the Act;
  • Instead of the eligible costs provided for in (12) above, the City may pay up to 50% of the cost of construction, renovation and/or rehabilitation of all low-income and very low-income housing units (for ownership 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-income and very low-income households, only the low- and very low-income households shall be eligible for benefits under the Act; and
  • The cost of day care services for children of employees from low-income families working for businesses located within the Project Area and all or a portion of the cost of operation of day care centers established by Project Area businesses to serve employees from low-income families working in businesses located in the Project Area. For the purposes of this paragraph, "low-income families" means families whose annual income does not exceed 80% of the City, county or regional median income as
 
2014
Page 23
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
determined from time to time by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
17. A public library district's increased costs attributable to assisted housing units will be reimbursed as set forth in the Act.
18. If a special service area has been established pursuant to the Special Service Area Tax Act, 35 ILCS 235/0.01 ef sec/., then any tax increment revenues derived from the tax imposed pursuant to the Special Service Area Tax Act may be used within the Project Area for the purposes permitted by the Special Service Area Tax Act as well as the purposes permitted by the Act.
 
Estimated Project Costs
A range of activities and improvements may be required to implement the Plan. The proposed eligible activities and their estimated costs over the life of the Project Area are briefly described below and shown in Table 8.1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs.
  1. Professional services including planning studies, legal, surveys, real estate marketing costs, fees and other costs related to the implementation and administration of the Plan. This budget element provides for studies and survey costs for planning and implementation of the project, including planning and legal fees, architectural and engineering, development site marketing, and financial and special service costs. (Estimated cost: $750,000)
  2. Property assembly costs, including, but not limited to, acquisition of land and other property, real or personal, or rights or interests therein, and other appropriate and eligible costs needed to prepare the property for redevelopment. These costs may include the reimbursement of acquisition costs incurred by the City and private developers. Land acquisition may include acquisition of both improved and vacant property in order to create development sites, accommodate public rights-of-way or to provide other public facilities needed to achieve the goals and objectives of the Plan. Property assembly costs also include: demolition of existing improvements, including clearance of blighted properties or clearance required to prepare sites for new development, site preparation, including grading, and other appropriate and eligible site activities needed to facilitate new construction, and environmental remediation costs associated with property assembly which are required to render the property suitable for redevelopment. (Estimated cost: $3,000,000)
  3. Costs of Rehabilitation, reconstruction, repair or remodeling of existing public or private buildings and fixtures; and up to 50% of the cost of construction of low-income and very low-income housing units. (Estimated cost: $13,250,000)
  4. Costs of Construction of public improvements, infrastructure and facilities. These improvements are intended to improve access within the Project Area, stimulate private investment and address other identified public improvement needs, and may include all or a portion of a taxing district's eligible costs, including increased costs of the Board of Education attributable to assisted housing units within the Project Area in accordance with the requirements of the Act. (Estimated cost: $5,000,000)
 
      1      1      
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page 24
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
  2. Relocation costs. (Estimated cost: $1,000,000)
  3. Job Training, Re-training, and Welfare-to-Work Programs. (Estimated cost: $1,000,000)
  4. Interest costs related to redevelopment projects, pursuant to the provisions of the Act. (Estimated cost: $500,000) •
 8.      Provision of day care services as provided in the Act. (Estimated cost: $500,000)
The estimated total of all eligible project costs over the life of the Redevelopment Project Area is approximately $25,000,000. All project cost estimates are in 2014 dollars. Any bonds or other tax increment allocation revenue obligations issued to finance portions of the Redevelopment Project may include an amount of proceeds sufficient to pay customary and reasonable charges associated with issuance of such obligations, as well as to provide for capitalized interest and reasonably required reserves, The total project cost figure excludes any costs for the issuance of bonds. Adjustments to estimated line items, which are upper estimates for these costs, are expected and may be made without amendment to the Plan.
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. While development in within the Project Area will greatly influence the budget available, the Consultants are unaware of any pending projects at this time.
 
2014
Page 25
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
TABLE 8.1
ESTIMATED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COSTS
 
Eligible Expense
Estimated Cost
1. Analysis, Administration, Studies, Surveys, Legal, Marketing, etc.
$750,000
2. Property Assembly including Acquisition, Site Prep and Demolition, Environmental Remediation
$3,000,000
3. Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, Fixtures and Leasehold Improvements, Affordable Housing'Construction and Rehabilitation Cost
$13,250,000
4. Public Works & Improvements, including streets and utilities, parks and open space, public facilities (schools & other public facilities)2
$5,000,000
5. Relocation Costs
$1,000,000
6. Job Training, Retraining, Welfare-to-Work
$1,000,000
7. Interest Subsidy
$500,000
8. Day Care Services
$500,000
TOTAL REDEVELOPMENT COSTS3 4
$25,000,0005
 
 
 
2      This category may also include paying for or reimbursing (i) an elementary, secondary or unit school district's increased costs attributed to assisted housing units, and (ii) capital costs of taxing districts impacted by the redevelopment Project Area. As permitted by the Act, to the extent the City by written agreement accepts and approves the same, the City may pay or reimburse all or a portion of a taxing district's capital costs resulting from a redevelopment project necessarily incurred or to be incurred within a taxing district in furtherance or the objectives of the Plan.
3      Total Redevelopment Project Costs represent an upper limit on expenditures that are to be 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 are may be made in line items without amendment to this Plan, to the extent permitted by the Act.
4      The amount of the Total Redevelopment Project Costs that can be incurred in the Project Area will be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated from the Project Area only by a public right-of-way, that are permitted under the Act to be paid, and are paid, from the incremental property taxes generated in the Project Area, but will not be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in the Project Area which are paid from incremental property taxes generated in contiguous redevelopment project areas or those separated from the Project Area only by a Public right-of-way.
5      All costs are in 2014 dollars and may be increased by five percent (5%) after adjusting for inflation reflected in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) 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 Cost identified above.
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page 26
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Sources of Funds
 
The funds necessary to pay for Redevelopment Project Costs and secure municipal obligations issued for such costs are to be derived primarily from Incremental Property Taxes. Other sources of funds which may be used to pay for Redevelopment Project Costs or secure municipal obligations are land disposition proceeds, state and federal grants, investment income, private financing, and other legally permissible funds as the City may deem appropriate. The City may incur redevelopment project costs which are paid for from funds of the City other than incremental taxes, and the City may then be reimbursed for such costs from incremental taxes. Also, the City may permit the utilization of guarantees, deposits and other forms of security made available by private sector developers.
Additionally, the City may utilize revenues, other than State sales tax increment revenues, received under the Act from one redevelopment project area for eligible costs in another redevelopment project area that is either contiguous to, or is separated only by a public right-of-way from, the redevelopment project area from which the revenues are received.
The Project Area may be contiguous to or separated by only 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 Project Area to pay eligible redevelopment project costs, or obligations issued to pay such costs, in other contiguous redevelopment project areas, or project areas separated only by a public right-of-way, and vice versa. The amount of revenue from the Project Area made available to support such contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated only by a public right-of-way, when added to all amounts used to pay eligible redevelopment project costs within the Project Area, shall not at any time exceed the total redevelopment project costs described in this Plan.
The Project 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 5/11-74.6-1 et seq.). If the City finds that the goals, objectives and financial success of such contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated only by a public right-of-way, are interdependent with those of the Project Area, the City may determine that it is in the best interests of the City and the furtherance of the purposes of the Plan that net revenues from the Project 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 Project 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 Project Area and such areas. The amount of revenue from the Project Area so made available, when added to all amounts used to pay eligible redevelopment project costs within the Project Area, or other areas described in the preceding paragraph, shall not at any time exceed the total redevelopment project costs described in Table 8.1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs.
Development of the Project Area would not be reasonably expected to occur without the use of the incremental revenues provided by the Act. Redevelopment project costs include those eligible project costs set forth in the Act. Tax increment financing or other public sources will be used only to the extent needed to secure commitments for private redevelopment activity.
 
2014
Page 27
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Nature and Term of Obligations to be Issued
The City may issue obligations secured by Incremental Property Taxes pursuant to Section 11-74.4-7 of the Act. To enhance the security of a municipal obligation, the City may pledge its full faith and credit through the issuance of general obligation bonds. Additionally, the City may provide other legally permissible credit enhancements to any obligations issued pursuant to the Act.
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 twenty-third calendar year following the year in which the ordinance approving the Project Area is adopted (i.e., assuming City Council approval of the Project Area and Plan in 2014, by December 31, 2038). Also, the final maturity date of any such obligations which are issued may not be later than 20 years from their respective dates of issue. One (1) or more series of obligations may be sold at one (1) or more times in order to implement this Plan. Obligations may be issued on a parity or subordinated basis.
In addition to paying Redevelopment Project Costs, Incremental Property Taxes may be used for the scheduled retirement of obligations, mandatory or optional redemptions, establishment of debt service reserves and bond sinking funds. To the extent that Incremental Property Taxes are not needed for these purposes, and are not otherwise required, pledged, earmarked or otherwise designated for the payment of Redevelopment Project Costs, any excess Incremental Property Taxes shall then become available for distribution annually to taxing districts having jurisdiction over the Project Area in the manner provided by the Act.
 
Most Recent Equalized Assessed Valuation
The purpose of identifying the most recent equalized assessed valuation ("EAV") of the Project Area is to provide an estimate of the initial EAV, which the Cook County Clerk will certify for the purpose of annually calculating the incremental EAV and Incremental Property Taxes of the Project Area. The 2012 EAV of all taxable parcels within the Project Area is approximately $76,534,773. This total EAV amount, by Property Index Number ("PIN"), is summarized in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Four - Estimated EAV by Tax Parcel. The EAV is subject to verification by the Cook County Clerk. After verification, the final figure shall be certified by the Cook County Clerk, and shall become the Certified Initial EAV from which all Incremental Property Taxes in the Project Area will be calculated by Cook County. The Plan has utilized the EAVs for the 2012 tax year. If the 2013 EAV shall become available prior to the date of the adoption of the Plan by the City Council, the City may update the Plan by replacing the 2012 EAV with the 2013 EAV.
 
Anticipated Equalized Assessed Valuation
By tax year 2037 (collection year 2038) and following substantial completion of the Washington Park Redevelopment Plan, the EAV of the Project Area is estimated to be approximately $105 million. This estimated value is based on several key assumptions, including: 1) redevelopment in the project area will occur over the next five (5) to ten years; 2) several existing low value uses will be redeveloped with new development and underutilized buildings will experience renovation and/or increased occupancy; 3) an estimated inflation rate in EAV of 0.71 percent through 2037 (somewhat less than the historic CPI-U), realized in triennial assessment years
 
2014
Page 28
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
only; and 4) for all future years, EAV is calculated using the 2013 state equalization factor for Cook County of 2.6621.
 
Financial Impact on Taxing Districts
The Act requires an assessment of any financial impact of the Project Area on, or any increased demand for services from, any taxing district affected by the Plan and a description of any program to address such financial impacts or increased demand. The City intends to monitor development in the Project 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 taxing districts will be eligible to levy taxes on properties located within the Project Area:
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, etc.
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.
School Districts for the City of Chicago: General responsibilities of the School Districts include the provision, maintenance and operations of educational facilities and the provision of educational services for kindergarten through twelfth grade.
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 of the public.
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago: The Water Reclamation District provides the main trunk lines for the collection of wastewater from the City and for the treatment and disposal thereof.
The proposed revitalization of the Project Area would be expected to create moderate demands on public services. The renovation or development of new residential property on underutilized parcels, deteriorated commercial parcels, or currently vacant residential units could increase the demand for school services as well as parks and other population-based services.
Within the land use designations on the Generalized Land Use Plan (Plan Appendix, Attachment Two - Exhibit I) that allow for mixed use which includes residential uses, approximately 500 new dwelling units could be constructed over the next 5 to 10 years. The total population of the Project Area could increase from the current number of residents. The number of school age children in the Project Area is also likely to increase as a result of
 
2014
Page 29
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
residential redevelopment. At this time, as there are schools within the surrounding areas which may or may not be currently running at capacity, TIF sources may possibly be used to accommodate increased enrollment in existing schools or to build new schools should the need arise.
The proposed residential and commercial redevelopment may increase the demand for improved water and sewer services and similar types of infrastructure, including the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District. As discussed below, the Project Budget's $11 million for "Public Works and Improvements" is intended, in part, to address such improved service and infrastructure needs.
Redevelopment of the Project Area may result in changes to the level of required public services. The required level of these public services will depend upon the uses that are ultimately included within the Project Area. Although the specific nature and timing of the private investment expected to be attracted to the Project Area cannot be precisely quantified at this time, a general assessment of financial impact can be made based upon the level of development and timing anticipated by the proposed Plan.
When completed, developments in the Project Area will generate property tax revenues for all taxing districts. Other revenues may also accrue to the City in the form of sales tax, business fees and licenses, and utility user fees. The costs of some services such as water and sewer service, building inspections, etc. are typically covered by user charges. However, others are not and should be subtracted from the estimate of property tax revenues to assess the net financial impact of the Plan on the affected taxing districts.
For the taxing districts levying taxes on property within the Project Area, increased service demands are expected to occur. Prior to the completion of the Plan, certain taxing districts may experience an increased demand for services. However, upon completion of the Plan, all taxing districts are expected to share the benefits of a substantially improved tax base.
In anticipation of the increased demand, $11 million has been allocated to public improvements, including "taxing district capital costs" to address potential demands associated with implementing the Plan.
Real estate tax revenues resulting from increases in the EAV, over and above the Certified Initial EAV established with the adoption of the Plan, will be used to pay eligible redevelopment costs in the Project Area. Following termination of the Project Area, the real estate tax revenues attributable to the increase in the EAV over the Certified Initial EAV, will be distributed to all taxing districts levying taxes against property located in the Project Area. Successful implementation of the Plan is expected to result in new development and private investment on a scale sufficient to overcome blighted conditions and substantially improve the long-term economic value of the Project Area.
 
Completion of the Redevelopment Project and Retirement of Obligations to Finance Redevelopment Project Costs
The Plan will be completed, and all obligations issued to finance redevelopment costs shall be retired, no later than December 31st 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
 
2014
Page 30
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
calendar year following the year in which the ordinance approving the Plan is adopted (assuming adoption in 2014, by December 31, 2038).
 
2014
Page 31
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 9. HOUSING IMPACT STUDY
 
As set forth in the Act, if the redevelopment plan for a redevelopment project area would result in the displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units, or if the redevelopment project area contains 75 or more inhabited residential units and a municipality is unable to certify that no displacement will occur, the municipality must prepare a housing impact study and incorporate the study in the Redevelopment Project Plan.
The Project Area contains 4,375 inhabited residential units. The Plan provides for the development or redevelopment of several portions of the Project Area that may contain occupied residential units. As a result, it is possible that by implementation of this Plan, the displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units could occur.
The results of the housing impact study are described in a separate report which presents certain factual information required by the Act. The Report, prepared by the Consultant, is entitled Redevelopment Project Area Tax Increment Financing Program Housing Impact Study and is attached as Plan Appendix, Attachment Six to this Plan.
 
2014
Page 32
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
SECTION 10. PROVISIONS FOR AMENDING THE PLAN
 
The Plan may be amended pursuant to the provisions of the Act.
 
2014
Page 33
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 11. CITY OF CHICAGO COMMITMENT TO FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
 
The City is committed to and will affirmatively implement the following principles with respect to this Plan:
  1. The assurance of equal opportunity in all personnel and employment actions with respect to the Redevelopment Project, including but not limited to: hiring, training, transfer, promotion, discipline, fringe benefits, salary, employment working conditions, termination, etc., without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, marital status, parental status, military discharge status, source of income, or housing status.
  2. Redevelopers must meet the City of Chicago's standards for participation of 24 percent Minority Business Enterprises and 4 percent Woman Business Enterprises and the City Resident Construction Worker Employment Requirement as required in redevelopment agreements.
  3. This commitment to affirmative action and nondiscrimination will ensure that all members of the protected groups are sought out to compete for all job openings and promotional opportunities.
  4. Redevelopers will meet City standards for any applicable prevailing wage rate as ascertained by the Illinois Department of Labor to all project employees.
The City shall have the right in its sole discretion to exempt certain small business, residential property owners and developers from the above.
 
2014
Page 34
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project       City of Chicago
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT ONE -LEGAL DESCRIPTION
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
THAT PART OF SECTIONS 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 21 AND 22 IN TOWNSHIP 38 NORTH, RANGE
14 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE
SOUTH 16 FEET OF LOT 6 OF SOUERBRY & GRUS' SUBDIVISION IN THE
NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 16 AFORESAID RECORDED SEPTEMBER 24, 1868
AS DOCUMENT 183534; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY
LINE OF GARFIELD BLVD. TO THE WEST LINE OF THE CHICAGO, ROCK
ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF THE CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TO THE NORTH LINE OF
SECTION 16; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 16 TO THE EAST
LINE OF THE CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE CHICAGO,
ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF GARFIELD BLVD.; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF GARFIELD BLVD. TO A POINT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN BLOCK 2 IN YERBY'S SUBDIVISION RECORDED OCTOBER 17, 1857 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 93105 SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF INDIANA AVE; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF INDIANA AVENUE TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 55TH PLACE SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN SUBDIVISION OF LOT 25, 26, 27 OF BLOCK 2 OF YERBY'S SUBDIVISION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 25, 1889 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 1160736; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 55TH PLACE TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 16 FEET OF LOT 2 IN BLOCK 2 OF HANCE'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST 16 FEET OF LOT 2 AND ITS SOUTHERLY EXTENSION TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE ALLEY LYING SOUTH OF 55TH PLACE; THENCE EAST TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 11 FEET OF LOT 11 IN BLOCK 2 OF HANCE'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST 11 FEET OF LOT 11 TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 56TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 56TH STREET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 18 FEET OF LOT 12 IN BLOCK 2 OF HANCE'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST 18 FEET OF LOT .12 TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE ALLEY LYING NORTH OF 56TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID ALLEY TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 23 FEET OF LOT 1 IN BLOCK 2 OF HANCE'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST 23 FEET OF LOT 1 TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 55TH PLACE; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 55TH PLACE TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. DRIVE (SOUTH PARK AVE); THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. DRIVE (SOUTH PARK AVE) TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 51ST STREET; THENCE WEST TO THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WEST LINE OF SOUTH PARK AVENUE AS LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST % OF SECTION 10 AFORESAID; THENCE NORTH TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 51ST STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 51ST STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COTTAGE GROVE AVENUE EXTENDED NORTH; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COTTAGE GROVE AVENUE TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH STREET; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. DRIVE (SOUTH PARK AVENUE); THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. DRIVE (SOUTH PARK AVENUE) TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 63RD STREET ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST
 
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page Al-1
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
CORNER OF LOT 10 IN BLOCK 2 IN SONNENSCHEIN & SOLOMON'S SUBDIVISION RECORDED APRIL 20, 1891 AS DOCUMENT 1453254; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 63RD STREET TO THE CENTER LINE OF PRAIRIE AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID CENTER LINE OF PRAIRIE AVENUE TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 12 IN SUBDIVISION OF THE EAST 72 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 12 IN SUBDIVISION OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST V* OF SECTION 22 TO THE EAST LINE OF INDIANA AVENUE; THENCE WESTERLY TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID AND THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE STREET; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE STREET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3 IN 64th AND STATE STREETS SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE NORTHWEST % OF THE NORTHWEST % OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 327.80 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 3 IN 64th AND STATE STREETS SUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN CITY PRODUCTS CORPORATION SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST "A OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 25.67 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 187.50 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 88.99 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1 SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH SECTION 22; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 27 IN BRACKETT'S RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 TO 30 IN JUNCTION GROVE, ARTEMUS WHITE AND FRANCIS B. DODSWORTH'S SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/i OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 27 AND LOT 28 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 28 IN BRACKETT'S RESUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 28 AFORESAID TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 28 BEING ALSO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 66™ STREET; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 66™ STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE STREET; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE STREET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 66™ STREET AS LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST V* OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 66™ STREET TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF PERRY AVENUE; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF PERRY AVENUE TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF VACATED PERRY AVENUE AS VACATED BY DOC. 89170528; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF VACATED PERRY AVENUE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF LOT 1 BEING 49.50 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 1 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION OF LOTS 3 AND 4 OF BLOCK 13 OF SKINNER AND JUDD'S SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTHEAST V* OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID; THENCE WEST ALONG A LINE BEING 49.50 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1 TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID
 
2014
Page Al-2
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
LOT 1; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 AND ITS NORTHERLY EXTENSION TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8 IN BLOCK 13 IN SKINNER AND JUDD'S SUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 8 A DISTANCE OF 86 FEET; THENCE NORTH TO THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 8 AT A POINT BEING 86 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 8 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 8 AND ITS SOUTHWESTERLY EXTENSION TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 65th STREET AS LOCATED IN THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID; THENCE WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 65th STREET. TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE DAN RYAN EXPRESSWAY ALSO BEING A POINT 182.80 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 5 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION OF LOTS 4, 5 AND 6 OF BLOCK 8 OF SKINNER AND JUDD'S SUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE DAN RYAN EXPRESSWAY TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 8 IN BLOCK 3 IN SKINNER AND JUDD'S SUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE EAST TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 40 FEET OF LOT 8 LYING 50.76 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 40 FEET OF LOT 8 AFORESAID EXTENDED NORTH TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 64th SREET; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 64™ STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF YALE AVENUE; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF YALE AVENUE TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 63rd STREET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 34 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF 63RD STREET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 30 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 30 IN BLOCK 3 A DISTANCE OF 38 FEET; THENCE NORTHEAST TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 31 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION SAID POINT BEING 12 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 31; THENCE NORTH TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF A PUBLIC ALLEY LYING NORTH OF 63RD STREET SAID POINT ALSO BEING A POINT ON LOT 22 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE PUBLIC ALLEY, TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE VACATED ALLEY IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF THE VACATED PUBLIC ALLEY TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF ENGLEWOOD AVENUE; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF ENGLEWOOD AVENUE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 22 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 35 IN BLOCK 2 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 20 FOOT ALLEY; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID ALLEY TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 17 IN BLOCK 1 OF IRA J. NICHOLS SUBDIVISION;
THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 17 AND THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 15 AND 16 IN BLOCK 1 TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH SAID BLOCK 1; THENCE NORTHWEST
ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EAST LINE OF THE 20 FOOT VACATED ALLEY IN BLOCK 1 OF IRA J. NICHOLS SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID VACATED ALLEY TO THE SOUTH LINE
 
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page Al-3
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
OF AN ALLEY SOUTH OF 61st PLACE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 9 IN BLOCK 7 IN ASSESSOR'S DIVISION OF OUTLOTS 17 TO 21 OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES' SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF A PUBLIC ALLEY LYING EAST OF PRINCETON AVENUE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 61ST PLACE; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF 61ST PLACE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 20 FEET OF LOT 8 IN THE SUBDIVISION OF THE WEST 300 FEET OF PART OF BLOCK 5 OF ASSESSOR'S DIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE WEST 20 FEET OF LOT 8 TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE ALLEY LYING NORTH OF 61ST PLACE; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID ALLEY TO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 4 IN ASSESSOR'S DIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 4 TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 61 ST STREET; THENCE NORTH TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF THE SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH 148.56 FEET OF OUTLOT 18 AND THE EAST 1/2 OF LOT 19 OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES' SUBDIVISION SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 61ST STREET; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 17 TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 16 FOOT ALLEY IN SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH 148.56 FEET OF THE E 72 RECORDED AUGUST 22, 1881 DOCUMENT 344112; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID 16 FOOT ALLEY; THENCE EAST ALONG THE. NORTH LINE OF SAID ALLEY TO A POINT 11.12 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 24 IN THE SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH 148.56 FEET OF OUTLOT 18 AND THE EAST 1/2 OF LOT 19 OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES' SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY TO A POINT 7.32 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 24 SAID NORTHEAST CORNER ALSO BEING THE INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH PLACE; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH PLACE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 25 FEET OF LOT 26 IN D.C. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION EXTENDED TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH PLACE; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE AND ITS SOUTHERLY EXTENSION AND |TS NORTHERLY EXTENSION TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF A 16 FOOT PUBLIC ALLEY IN D.C. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE EAST TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 11 FEET OF LOT 16 IN D.C. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60™ STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60™ STREET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION OF PART OF BLOCK 5 IN ASSESSOR'S DIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF LOT 7 TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE ALLEY LYING NORTH OF 60TH STREET; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 16 FOOT PUBLIC ALLEY TO A POINT WITH THE EXTENSION OF THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 50 FEET OF LOT 11 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 59TH PLACE; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 59TH PLACE TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 19 IN BLOCK 1 IN MICHAEL REICH'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOTS 19 & 29 IN BLOCK 1 TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 59TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 59TH STREET TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF WENTWORTH AVENUE; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF WENTWORTH AVENUE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
 
2014
Page Al-4
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT TWO -MAPS AND PLAN EXHIBITS A-l
 
 
 
 
■UU* 100 Nrilli Li5r."J« SUM, Suim 1S'.5 ■ On:tfi. fiixl*
 
Exhibit A - Boundary Map of TIF Area
 
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area      *&£3§gS'r #
City of Chicago, Illinois      P^W PLAN®31E&§
 
 
 
 
[QQ] 100 North LiSA SSKI. StM5:5 • Chup. Cirrts K*0?
 
 
Exhibit B - Sub Area Key
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
a3
L^__i      i_i till      I a      li. i—iwjji:-
P  I -Ir-^-i—iiirirxingiiJiiiLi.!      rsi P—|
 
i !. i rt      r—1 i  i  i p^ii—-i       ■      i—■
Legend
^22 Single-Family Residential
| Redevelopment Project Area Boundary Industrial
$^$$$| Two-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Commercial Office Commercial Retail Commercial Service
Mixed Use
 
'GO] IOC North USnh        Sub W'i • axxfi, Llinoli 6060?
 
Exhibit C - Existing Land Use
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
'OG} IOOHorttiLiEdaSIiKLSuxlA15>QKX)a,CinnbbOB02
 
 
Exhibit Dl - Existing Conditions (Northwest)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
TT
in
 
□    Obsolete Platting
Diversity of Ownership
Legend
^^^^Redevelopment Project Area Boundary      O      Site Deterioration      «      Excessive Coverage
  • Over 35 Years of Age      *      Dilapidation      V      Vacant ^
  • Deterioration      ■      Obsolete      +      Deterioration in Neighboring /^y^ Deleterious Land Use or Layout
 
 
 
 
 
 
'GO'. IOC Haiti LiSJbiSuKl Sua 1511 • Ukjqu. anolj £0602
 
 
Exhibit D2 - Existing Conditions (Northeast)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
May 2014
 
 
 
Exhibit D3 - Existing Conditions (Southwest)      nr.;.' .w.„ i/t.       ,^„.;^-^. .%„■.
A^-wmCA      LJJl IO0NWIiLjStlii5lift1lSuiBjlS,.5.artxp.WTrtjB0eC'2
 
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area t,v*«tss' City of Chicago, Illinois PG^VPLAB^EBtS
 
J Redevelopment Project Area Boundary    O    Site Deterioration    *    Excessive Coverage      □    Obsolete Platting
*      Over 35 Years of Age      *     Dilapidation      V    Vacant      Diversity of Ownership
•      Deterioration      ■    Obsolete      +    Deterioration in Neighboring y^/*^ Deleterious Land Use or Layout
 
 
 
 
—       
 
 
 
 
. (555) (ST?
N
May 2014
m
YY/Y/Zs
 
 
jCJUH IR3KDrttiuSnlBSkK1.Su:bl3l!i>aioguIRinniieUQOZ
 
Exhibit D4 - Existing Conditions (Southeast)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
'GUI 10? Nutti LiSflta SU*\ SuiSt ifi--5 • Orjfju, lilKris 61602
 
 
Exhibit D5 - Existing Conditions (Park)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
• QQJ inQNu1hLiSr&>5bwl.Su!L>lS,.5 • Ukiju.IkncdsEOC02
 
 
Exhibit D6 - Existing Conditions (Addition)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
May 2014
vmmm i amp
 
'OQj 100 HutiLk&i* ShMl, Si"- IS15 • Cltfuou, Dnnil 606C2
 
 
Exhibit E - Vacant Land
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
 
 
Exhibit F - Existing Zoning
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
iHILT; 10G Norm LiSrfrt SSwl, S*3; Ui5 ■ Qrajo, CmLs B0S02
 
 
Exhibit G - Adjacent TIF / Redevelopment Areas
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
•UL-Tj 110 Nrxttl LcSr.!lP Ht*d.       ISl'j ■ Chi:.,:. Mini, 60n*J
 
Exhibit H-l - Land Acquisiton
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
5/30/2014
EXHIBIT H-2
LAND ACQUISITION LIST
 
 
■ ■ #. ■
PIN
1
20-15-101-011-0000
2
20-15-101-012-0000
3
20-15-101-014-0000
4
20-15-101-015-0000
5
20-15-101-017-0000
6
20-15-109-039-0000
7
20-15-109-040-0000
8
20-15-109-041-0000
9
20-15-116-024-0000
10
20-15-122-021-0000
11
20-15-123-011-0000
12
20-15-123-012-0000
13
20-15-310-007-0000
14
20-15-310-029-0000
15
20-15-312-001-0000
16
20-15-312-002-0000
17
20-15-312-003-0000
18
20-15-312-004-0000
19
20-15-312-005-0000
20
20-15-312-012-0000
21
20-15-312-013-0000
22
20-15-312-014-0000
23
20-15-312-015-0000
24
20-15-312-016-0000
 
# •
PIN. ■■
25
20-15-312-018-0000
26
20-15-312-019-0000
27
20-15-312-021-0000
28
20-15-312-022-0000
29
20-15-312-023-0000
30
20-15-312-024-0000
31
20-15-312-044-0000
32
20-15-312-046-0000
33
20-16-218-018-0000
34
20-16-218-021-0000
35
20-16-218-022-0000
36
20-16-218-035-0000
37
20-16-218-036-0000
38
20-16-218-037-0000
39
20-16-218-045-0000
40
20-16-218-051-0000
41
20-16-218-061-0000
42
20-16-219-001-0000
43
20-16-219-016-0000
44
20-16-219-028-0000
45
20-16-219-052-0000
46
20-16-220-003-0000
47
20-16-220-005-0000
#■
PIN:
48
20-16-220-032-0000
49
20-16-220-033-0000
50
20-16-221-004-0000
51
20-16-221-006-0000
52
20-16-221-007-0000
53
20-16-221-008-0000
54
20-16-221-030-0000
55
20-16-221-032-0000
56
20-16-221-033-0000
57
20-16-221-035-0000
58
20-16-221-049-0000
59
20-16-414-023-0000
60
20-16-414-035-0000
61
20-16-414-036-0000
62
20-16-414-049-0000
63
20-16-414-050-0000
64
20-15-312-017-0000
65
20-15-312-038-0000
66
20-15-316-001-0000
67
20-15-316-002-0000
68
20-16-218-044-0000
69
20-16-218-056-0000
70
20-16-221-034-0000
 
 
May 2014
 
 
 
 
 
Exhibit I - General Land Use Plan
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
fi*"l!*~1j \*rtKMt_!'/t,_t Suifftfrn 'wtfrt-firi'xtx, >'/»*'. • OCR 100 Wrti LiStto Sfcort, Sutu 1515 • QtCJji. Girrts 606CI
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT THREE -ELIGIBILITY STUDY
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WASHINGTON PARK TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REDEVELOPMENT AREA PROJECT AND PLAN
 
ELIGIBILITY STUDY
 
 
 
Prepared for: The City of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, Mayor
 
 
Department of Planning and Development Andrew J. Mooney, Commissioner
 
 
 
 
Prepared By: Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises, Inc. And
PGAV PLANNERS Assisted by Goodman Williams Group
 
 
 
 
May 28, 2014
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
I. Introduction
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises ("ERSE") in conjunction with PGAV PLANNERS (the "Consultant") has been retained by the City of Chicago (the "City") to prepare a Tax Increment Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the proposed redevelopment project area known as the Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area"). Prior to preparation of the Redevelopment Plan, the Consultant undertook various surveys and investigations of the Project Area to determine whether the Project Area qualifies for designation as a tax increment financing district, pursuant to the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et seq., as amended ("the Act").
This report includes the analyses and findings of the Consultant's work, which is the responsibility of the Consultant. This assignment is the responsibility of the Consultant which 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 Project Area as a redevelopment project area under the Act, and 2) on the fact that ERSE has obtained the necessary information to conclude that the Project Area can be designated as a redevelopment project area in compliance with the Act.
Following this introduction, Section II presents background information of the Project Area including the geographic location, description of current conditions and area data; Section III documents the building condition assessment and qualifications of the Project Area as a combination conservation area and vacant blighted area under the Act; and Section IV, Summary and Conclusions, documents the findings of the Eligibility Study.
This Eligibility Study is a part of the overall tax increment redevelopment plan (the "Plan") for the Project Area. Other portions of the Plan contain information and documentation as required by the Act for a redevelopment plan. '
 
2014
A3 - 1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION A.    Location and Size of Project Area
The Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area is located about seven (7) miles south of Downtown Chicago. The Project Area can be separated into three sections: 1. Washington Park (the "Park") is bounded by 51st and 60th Streets on the north and south, and Cottage Grove Avenue and Martin Luther King Drive on the east and west; 2. the neighborhood section which is generally bounded by Martin Luther King Drive and Washington Park on the east, the Dan Ryan Expressway on the west, Garfield Boulevard on the north and 63rd Street on the south; and 3. the industrial area south of 63rd Street to the Chicago Skyway, west of Prairie Avenue. The neighborhood section is roughly one (1) mile north to south and 0.8 miles east to west, centered on 59th Street and Michigan Avenue. The Park is roughly 1.2 miles north to south and 0.5 miles east to west, centered just north of the intersection of Morgan Drive and Rainey Drive. The industrial section is roughly two-thirds of a mile north to south and a third of a mile east to west, with a significant section of this area used as railway siding.
The Project Area contains approximately 988.4 acres in 2,272 parcels. The Project Area includes 241.8 acres for public rights-of-way for streets, alleyways, rail lines, and highways, leaving approximately 746.6 acres of usable land (either presently developed or vacant).
The boundaries of the Project Area are described in the Plan Appendix, Attachment One -Legal Description and are geographically shown on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit A - Boundary Map of TIF Area. The existing land uses are identified on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use Map.
 
B.    Description of Current Conditions Surrounding Area Characteristics
The Project Area sits within the greater Washington Park community, located approximately seven (7) miles south of the Chicago Loop. The Project Area includes eight (8) 2010 U.S. Census Tracts: 4003, 4004, 4005, 4008, 8345, 8346, 8361, and 8425; of which, only tract 4004 has shown population growth from 2000 to 2010. The 352-acre Washington Park and Walter H. Dyett High School site separates the Project Area from the more affluent eastern neighborhood of Hyde Park.
Transportation was the catalyst for much of the growth experienced by the south side neighborhoods; particularly in the Washington Park community during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. By 1887 cable cars reached as far south as 63rd Street on State Street and 67th on Cottage Grove Avenue. The "L" train system reached farther south than the Washington Park community by 1907. Cable cars, trains, and the wide boulevards provided easy access to Chicago's Loop for south side residents. Today, public transportation and highway access are still widely available to residents and visitors of Washington Park.
The Project Area is bordered by higher density residential uses. On the eastern boundary of the Washington Park Community Area is Hyde Park, an affluent south side neighborhood that is home to the University of Chicago. Students and faculty have resided in Hyde Park for decades. As the demand for housing grows around the growing university students, visitors and
 
2014
A3 - 2
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
university faculty may choose to move to surrounding neighborhoods such as Washington Park. To the west of the Project Area is the Englewood Community Area, which, until recently, was best known for the Englewood Mall. The Mall has recently been replaced by the Kennedy King College and the neighborhood has experienced a much needed surge in housing demand and property values.
At intersections within and surrounding the Project Area, there are small commercial nodes. There are also some isolated industrial uses interspersed within the residential/commercial areas. Industrial corridors within the Project Area are located near Interstate Highway 90/94 (Dan Ryan Expressway) and south of 63rd Street. Residential neighborhoods are also located on the western side of the Dan Ryan Expressway and to the north of the Project Area.
Existing Land Use
A tabulation of land area by land use category is provided below in Table 2-1 - Tabulation of Existing Land Use. Since almost 50% of the land area being encompassed by Washington Park and Walter H. Dyett High School, an additional table on the following page, Table 2-2 -Tabulation of Existing Land Use Excluding Washington Park, provides a tabulation of land use excluding Washington Park/Dyett High School. Table 2-2 illustrates a more accurate breakdown of existing developed land uses in the Project Area because the percent to total land uses is not skewed by the open land in Washington Park; although the industrial area to the south of 63rd street is included. The existing land uses are shown graphically on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use. Land use data for the Project Area was compiled as part of the TIF eligibility and redevelopment planning fieldwork conducted in spring and fall of 2013 and early 2014.
Table 2-1 Tabulation of Existing Land Use
 
v'-Vi.''                       • Land Area   . % 0f Net Land Use                       .:'. .    ;v. ■ ...    , ■.
(acres)    . . Land Area
Vacant Land
120.6
16.1%
Multi-Family Residential
83.8
11.2%
Public/Semi-Public (Including Walter H. Dyett High School in Washington Park - 3.8 acres)
33.1
4.4%
Industrial                    , •'
102.8
13.8%
Two-Family Residential
14.9
2.0%
Single-Family Residential
10.6
1.4%
Commercial (Retail/Service/Office)
14.1
1.9%
Mixed Use
4.0
0.5%
Utility
13.4
1.8%
Park (including parcels comprising Washington Park - 348.2 acres)
349.3
46.8%
TOTAL
746.6
100.0%
1. Land Area excludes 241.8 acres of street, alley, rail, or other public rights-of-way. Note: Percentage and acreage figures are approximated due to rounding.
 
2014
A3-3
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
In classifying land use for this TIF eligibility report, it is important to clarify the use of the term "vacant land". The Act establishes one (1) set of eligibility criteria for designation of improved land and a separate set of criteria tor designation of vacant land. The full definition of "vacant land" and the full set of criteria are provided in Section III of this study. In short, under the Act all parcels without buildings are considered "vacant".
Classification of vacant land is especially relevant given the high proportion of the Project Area that is currently vacant. In terms of net land area (total land area less public right-of-way and parcels used as street or rail right-of-way), approximately 16% of the Project Area is vacant land as shown in Table 2-1 - Tabulation of Existing Land Use. If Washington Park/Dyett High School is omitted from tabulations, as shown below in Table 2-2 - Tabulation of Existing Land Use Excluding Washington Park, vacant land accounts for about 31% of the net land area, or 952 individual parcels; 42% of the total parcels. The next largest land use categories (still excluding Washington Park) are industrial uses (about 26% of net land area), followed by multi-family residential (about 21% of net land area).
Table 2-2
Tabulation of Existing Land Use Excluding Washington Park
 
Land Use    y~':''' \ ''"'":-:.-i::':[      Land Area %.ofNet
(acres)1*      Land Area
Vacant Land
120.6
30.6%
Multi-Family Residential
83.8
21.2%
Public/Semi-Public (excludes Walter H. Dyett High School in Washington Park - 3.8 acres)
29.3
7.4%
Industrial
102.8
26.1%
Two-Family Residential
14.9
3.8%
Single-Family Residential
10.6
2.7%
Commercial (Retail/Service'/Office)
14.1
3.6%
Mixed Use
4.0
1.0%
Utility
13.4
3.4%
Park (excludes parcels comprising Washington Park - 348.2 acres)
1.1
0.3%
. ■'   total v
394.6
- 100.0%
1. Land Area excluding Washington Park^ street, alley, rail, or other public rights-of-way Note- Percentage and acreage figures are approximated due to rounding
 
Almost a third of the land in the Project Area, not including Washington Park/Dyett High School, is vacant land and is evidence of the extent of disinvestment. A case could also be made for excluding the industrial area south of 63rd Street from these vacant land calculations, which would only increase the percentage of vacant land in the Project Area. Additionally, over the course of the last few decades, residential buildings have been demolished as the buildings deteriorated and were vacated. These parcels were "blighted before vacant". The City has developed the Red X program to identify properties with structural or interior hazards with a red "X" sign. These hazards can include, but are not limited to, building deterioration or damage
 
2014
A3 - 4
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
from previous fires, structural hazards when components of the building have been removed, and collapse hazards due to the integrity of chimney tops, parapet walls, roof systems and or stair systems being compromised. The red "X" serves as an indicator to first responders to the existence of the hazards. Further, the presence of the red "X" makes it unlawful for any person to enter the building without first notifying the fire commissioner. The vacant land that remains speaks to the poor building conditions before the demolition, the challenges of the Area, and also presents a resource and opportunity for in-fill development and revitalization. Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit E - Vacant Land Map highlights the location of the vacant parcels in the Project Area and distinguishes between public and privately owned land. Of the 952 vacant parcels, 498 (52%) are owned by the City, 53 (6%) are owned by another tax-exempt entity, and the remaining 401 (42%) are privately owned. There are 2,785 unique parcel identification numbers (PINS) represented in the 2,272 total parcels. Of these PINS, 22 are railroad property and 907 are owned by other entities exempted from property tax. These 929 PINS indicate that a full third (33%) of the PINS in the Project Area are not in use by a property tax revenue generating entity.
As shown on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use Map, the
majority of the Project Area is residential in nature, with commercial uses situated near intersections and a number of smaller industrial uses scattered in the southern and western portions of the Project Area; and then industrial uses south of 63rd Street. Some of these industrial uses are directly adjacent to land used for, or zoned as, residential, which may present an obstacle to in-fill development. The residential density is generally greater in the central and eastern portions of the Project Area. Moving east toward the Park, there are fewer single-family homes and more multi-family buildings.
A total of 1,090 structures are located on the approximately 277 acres of improved land in the Project Area. Of these structures, 174 are accessory buildings, such as garages, outbuildings or other secondary structures. The improved portions of the Project Area comprise about 70% of land area, not including Washington Park and other parkland. According to field observation, 92% of buildings were judged to be more than 35 years old, which means the improved portions of the Project Area may qualify as a "conservation area" if a combination of three (3) or more conservation factors are found to be present such that the presence of those factors is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals or welfare and the area may become "blighted". These factors are defined in detail in Section III. Qualification of the Project Area.
A high proportion of buildings in the Project Area have deteriorated primary or secondary building components. Further, deteriorated conditions in the public right-of-way, including streets, sidewalk, curb and gutter; have been documented. The extent of deterioration on improved parcels is documented in detail in Section III of this report. Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions also provides documentation of deterioration and other blighting/conservation factors.
Within the Project Area, there are varying types of residential uses. The types of residential uses were identified during the building condition and land use survey conducted as part of this eligibility analysis for the Project Area. This survey, completed in 2013 and 2014, revealed that the Project Area contains about 4,375 housing units. Of those housing units, 3.7% are single unit dwellings, 7.0% are two-unit buildings, 32.8% are in 3-unit or 4-unit buildings, and 37.1% are multi-family dwellings in buildings of 5 units or more. Approximately 86% of all occupied units are rental units. Because there are likely to be residents displaced from more than 10 inhabited residential units within the boundaries of the Project Area, the municipality is required
 
2014
A3 - 5
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
to perform a Housing Impact Study as part of the feasibility report (see Subsection 11.74.4-3(n)(5)oftheAct).
The Project Area has a relative lack of quality retail/commercial uses. While commercial buildings account for 3.6% of the total land (excluding rights-of-way and the Park), the majority of commercial and retail uses that used to thrive on neighborhood street corners are now boarded-up and vacant or underutilized. Many storefronts have deteriorated over time because of long-term disinvestment in the Project Area. The deterioration that has occurred as a result has led to total vacancy of many parcels in the Project Area.
Development Activity and Assessed Value Trends
Historic Equalized Assessed Values* (EAV's) for the Project Area, the rate of EAV growth for the City, and the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA for the period between 2008 and 2013 are considered to identify development activity and determine assessed value trends. Table 2-3 - Equalized Assessed Value Trends, shown below, illustrates the comparison of the Project Area's EAV growth to both the City EAV and the CPI-U.
 
2013
 
 
Table 2-3 Equalized Assessed Value Trends 2008 ■ Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
City of Chicago, Illinois
 
Comparison of EAV Growth Rates
 
 
 
_2o_o8_
2009 ~i
2_0_10_ 2011
2012 _,_ '_20J3_~_[~
 
Project Area EAV
$119,521,985
$128,241,562
$115,965,285
$96,747,622
_$76,534,773_ $76,534,773"
% Change from Previous Year
_7.3%_ -9.6%
-16.6%_ -20.9% 0.0%
 
Balance of City EAV
_$80,858,021,035_; $84,458^566,127^ $81,971,204,778 J"
_$75,026,166_,288 1 l6§.123J85_2,494"|_ $65,173,85~2,494'"
% Change from Previous Year
_4.5% -2.9% '
-8.5%_ :13.1%_ "0.0% "
Is Area's EAV growth rate low er than the balance of the City's EAV growth rate2?
_NO_ YES
YES
_YES_" NO
 
 
 
 
i i
i
 
'Cook County Assessor data compiled by ERSE April 2013.
2Cityw ide EAV less the Project Area EAV Source is Cook County Clerk's Agency Tax Rate Reports for City of Chicago
 
Comparison to Consumer Price Index
■h Change from       CPI-U for Chicago-Gary-      Is proposed Area's EAV growth rate less than the
Project Area EAV1      Previous Year      Kenosha MSA      CPI-U for Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA2?
2008   1 $119,521,985
' ' 1      -0.5%      1 ;
2009      I $128,241,562
2010      _|       _$115,965,28s"1
2011      "T $96,747,622^
2012      | $76,534,773
7.3%        J            2.2%            |                        NO 1
-9.6%      ;      1.4%           _|                _ _ YES      "I
-16.6%      "I            2.1%           ~i                         YES J -20.9%       I            1.2%            \                         YES 1
2013   ' $76,534,773
0.0%        '            1.2%            '                        YES |
1Cook County Assessor data compiled by ERSE April 2013
2CPI-U source is U.S. Department of Labor.
 
2014
A3-6
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
The upper half of Table 2-3 also shows that between 2008 and 2013, the EAV of the Project Area decreased from $119.5 million to $76.5 million. The table demonstrates that; 1) In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the Project Area has declined; 2) In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the Project Area has been less than the EAV growth of the remainder of the City; and, 3) In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the Project Area has been less than the CPI-U of the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA.
There are 2,785 PINS represented in the 2,272 total parcels. As noted, 929 (33%) of these PINS are owned by an entity exempted from property tax. In 2012 a total of 424 PINS (15%), represented by 211 parcels were delinquent in the payment of property taxes; 200 of these parcels were also vacant.
Prior Redevelopment Efforts
Four (4) existing TIF redevelopment project areas are adjacent to the Project Area. The Englewood Neighborhood TIF (T-106) borders the Project Area to the south-west, the 67th/Wentworth TIF (T-174) extends into the Project Area to the south, the West Woodlawn TIF (T-171) was established on the south-eastern boundary, and the 47th/State TIF (T-136) borders along the north and western boundary of Washington Park. The boundaries of the adjacent TIF redevelopment project areas are identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit G - Adjacent TIF/Redevelopment Areas Map.
The South Side Empowerment Zone covers a portion of the Project Area from the northern boundary to the southern boundary and from the eastern boundary west to State Street. The Englewood Enterprise Zone (#6) covers most of the Project Area. The Enterprise Zone omits only a section of the Project Area between 60th and 62nd Streets, east of State Street.
 
2014
A3-7
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
III.     QUALIFICATION OF THE PROJECT 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), or an industrial park conservation area as defined at 5/11-74.4-3(a) of the Act. Based on the criteria set forth in the Act, the improved portion of the Area was determined to qualify as a conservation area, and the vacant portion of the Area was determined to qualify as a blighted area.
As set forth in the Act a conservation area is:
"conservation area means any improved area within the boundaries of a redevelopment project area located within the territorial limits of the municipality in which 50% or more of the 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 (3) or more of the following factors is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals or welfare and such an area may become a blighted area:
  1. Dilapidation. An advanced state of disrepair or neglect of necessary repairs to the primary structural components of buildings or improvements in such a combination that a documented building condition analysis determines that major repair is required or the defects are so serious and so extensive that the buildings must be removed.
  2. Obsolescence. The condition or process of falling into disuse. Structures have become ill-suited for the original use.
  3. Deterioration. With respect to buildings, defects including, but not limited to, major defects in the secondary building components such as doors, windows, porches, gutters and downspouts, and fascia. With respect to surface improvements, that the condition of roadways, alleys, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, off-street parking, and surface storage areas evidence deterioration, including, but not limited to, surface cracking, crumbling, potholes, depressions, loose paving material, and weeds protruding through paved surfaces.
  4. Presence of structures below minimum code standards. All structures that do not meet the standards of zoning, subdivision, building, fire, and other governmental codes applicable to property, but not including housing and property maintenance cddes.
  5. Illegal use of individual structures. The use of structures in violation of applicable federal, State, or local laws, exclusive of those applicable to the presence of structures below minimum code standards.
  6. Excessive vacancies. The. presence of buildings that are unoccupied or underutilized and that represent an adverse influence on the area because of the frequency, extent, or duration of the vacancies.
 
2014
A3 - 8
 
Ernest It. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
  2. Lack of ventilation, light, or sanitary facilities. The absence of adequate ventilation for light or air circulation in spaces or rooms without windows, or that require the removal of dust, odor, gas, smoke, or other noxious airborne materials. Inadequate natural light and ventilation means the absence or inadequacy of skylights or windows for interior spaces or rooms and improper window sizes and amounts by room area to window area ratios. Inadequate sanitary facilities refers to the absence or inadequacy of garbage storage and enclosure, bathroom facilities, hot water and kitchens, and structural inadequacies preventing ingress and egress to and from all rooms and units within a building.
(8)      Inadequate utilities. Underground and overhead utilities such as storm sewers and storm drainage, sanitary sewers, water lines, and gas, telephone, and electrical services that are shown to be inadequate. Inadequate utilities are those that are:
  1. of insufficient capacity to serve the uses in the redevelopment project area,
  2. deteriorated, antiquated, obsolete, or in disrepair, or (Hi) lacking within the redevelopment project area.
  3. Excessive land coverage and overcrowding of structures and community facilities. The over-intensive use of property and the crowding of buildings and accessory facilities onto a site. Examples of problem conditions warranting the designation of an area as one exhibiting excessive land coverage are: the presence of buildings either improperly situated on parcels or located on parcels of inadequate size and shape in relation to present-day standards of development for health and safety and the presence of multiple buildings on a single parcel. For there to be a finding of excessive land coverage, these parcels must exhibit one (1) or more of the following conditions: insufficient provision for light and air within or around buildings, increased threat of spread of fire due to the close proximity of buildings, lack of adequate or proper access to a public right-of-way, lack of reasonably required off-street parking, or inadequate provision for loading and service.
  4. Deleterious land use or layout. The existence of incompatible land-use relationships, buildings occupied by inappropriate mixed-uses, or uses considered to be noxious, offensive, or unsuitable for the surrounding area.
    1. Lack of community planning. The proposed redevelopment project area was developed prior to or without the benefit or guidance of a community plan. This means that the development occurred prior to the adoption by the municipality of a comprehensive or other community plan or that the plan was not followed at the time of the area's development. This factor must be documented by evidence of adverse or incompatible land-use relationships, inadequate street layout, improper subdivision, parcels of inadequate shape and size to meet contemporary development standards, or other evidence demonstrating an absence of effective community planning.
 
2014
A3 - 9
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
  2. The area has incurred Illinois Environmental Protection Agency or United States Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs for, or a study conducted by an independent consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation has determined a need for, the clean-up of hazardous waste, hazardous substances, or underground storage tanks required by State or federal law, provided that the remediation costs constitute a material impediment to the development or redevelopment of the redevelopment project area.
(13)      The total equalized assessed value of the proposed redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the balance of the municipality for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the United States Department of Labor or successor agency for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available."
As set forth in the Act, a blighted area is:
"any improved or vacant area within the boundaries of a redevelopment project area located within the territorial limits of the municipality where:
 
 
(2) If vacant, the sound growth of the redevelopment project area is impaired by a combination of two (2) or more of the following factors, each of which is (i) present, with that presence documented, to a meaningful extent so that a municipality may reasonably find that the factor is clearly present within the intent of the Act and (ii) reasonably distributed throughout the vacant part of the redevelopment project area to which it pertains:
  1. Obsolete platting of vacant land that results in parcels of limited or narrow size or configurations of parcels of irregular size or shape that would be difficult to develop on a planned basis and in a manner compatible with contemporary standards and requirements, or platting that failed to create rights-of-way for streets or alleys or that crated inadequate right-of-way widths for streets, alleys,, or other public rights-of-way or that omitted easement for public, utilities.
  2. Diversity of ownership of parcels of vacant land sufficient in number to retard or impede the ability to assemble the land for development.
  3. Tax and special assessment delinquencies exist or the property has been the subject of tax sales under the Property Tax Code within the last five (5) years.
  4. Deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas adjacent to the vacant land.
  5. The area has incurred Illinois Environmental Protection Agency or United State Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs for, or a study conducted by an independent consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation has determined a need for, the clean-up of
 
2014
A3 - 10
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
hazardous waste, hazardous substances, or underground storage tanks required by State or federal law, provided that the remediation costs constitute a material impediment to the development or redevelopment of the redevelopment project area. (F) The total equalized assessed value of the proposed redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years prior to the year in which the redevelopment project area is designated or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the balance of the municipality for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the United States Department of Labor or successor agency for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years prior to the year in which the redevelopment project area is designated.
(3) If vacant, the sound growth of the redevelopment project area is impaired by one of the following factors that (i) is present, with that presence documented, to a meaningful extent so that a municipality may reasonably find that the factor is clearly present within the intent of the Act and (ii) is reasonably distributed throughout the vacant part of the redevelopment project area to which it pertains:
    1. The area consists of one or more unused quarries, mines, or strip mine ponds.
  2. The area consists of unused rail yards, rail tracks, or railroad rights-of-way.
    1. The area, prior to its designation, is subject to chronic flooding that adversely impacts on real property in the area as certified by a registered professional engineer or appropriate regulatory agency.
    2. The area consist of an unused or illegal disposal site containing earth, stone, building debris, or similar materials that were removed from construction, demolition, excavation, or dredge sites.
    3. Prior to the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 91st General Assembly, the area is not less than 50 nor more than 100 acres and 75% of which is vacant (notwithstanding that the area has been used for commercial agricultural purposes within five (5) years prior to the designation of the redevelopment project area), and the area meets at least one (1) of the factors itemized in paragraph (1) of this subsection, 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.
    4. The area qualified as a blighted improved area immediately prior to becoming vacant, unless there has been substantial private investment in the immediately surrounding area."
 
B.      Survey, Analysis and Distribution of Eligibility Factors
A parcel-by-parcel analysis of the Project Area was conducted to identify the presence of TIF eligibility factors. The condition of each parcel and structure in the Project Area was documented using a tablet computer with GIS software. Field survey data was compiled and analyzed to investigate the presence and distribution of each of the TIF eligibility factors.
 
2014
A3 - 11
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Eligibility factor data was collected for individual parcels and is aggregated into 21 sub-areas (each approximately four blocks) for analysis and presentation in two tables: Table 3-1 -Conservation Factors Matrix for Improved Land, and Table 3-2 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land. The conditions recorded in Table 3-1 and Table 3-2 are depicted graphically in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit D - Existing Conditions Map (due to map scaling, the Existing Conditions Map displays the Project Area divided into six sections and labeled as Exhibit D1 through D6). Examples of the conditions are also documented in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions.
The improved portion of the Project Area contains 1,090 structures and constitutes approximately 70% of the land area, not including Washington Park. The Project Area is characterized by the following conditions:
  • the predominance of buildings that are 35 years of age or older (92% of buildings)1;
  • deteriorated buildings (63% of buildings);
  • deteriorated site improvements (29% of parcels);
  • deteriorated street and/or sidewalk pavement (86% of sub-areas);
  • dilapidated buildings (4% of buildings);
  • obsolete.buildings (10% of buildings);
primary buildings with excessive vacancies (20%);
    • excessive land coverage (30% of improved parcels); inadequate utilities (76% of sub-areas);
  • deleterious land use or layout (48% of sub-areas);
  • lack of community planning (62% of sub-areas); and,
  • demonstrates declining and subpar EAV growth.
The vacant portion of the Project Area constitutes approximately 120.6 acres (30% of net land area, not including Washington Park), represented on 952 parcels and by 21 sub-areas for this Eligibility Study. The vacant portion of the Project Area is characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "blighted area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act:
  • obsolete platting (37% of parcels);
  • diversity of ownership (43% of sub-areas);
  • tax delinquencies (21 % of vacant parcels; 50% of taxable vacant parcels);
    • deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas (94% of vacant parcels); and,
  • demonstrates declining or subpar EAV growth.
 
C.    Evaluation Procedure
The Consultant conducted exterior surveys of observable conditions on all properties, buildings, and public and private improvements located in the Project Area. These inspectors have been trained in TIF survey techniques and have extensive experience in similar undertakings.
The surveys examined not only the condition and use of buildings, but also included surveys of streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, lighting, vacant land, underutilized land, parking facilities,
 
1 This is 42% greater than the statutory requirement. Under the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, for designation of an area as a Conservation Area, 50% or more of the buildings must be 35 years of age or older.
 
2014
A3 - 12
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
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. Investigators also researched historic photos and were assisted by information obtained from the City. The boundary and qualification of the Project Area was determined by the field investigations, eligibility requirements described in the Act, and the needs and deficiencies of the Project Area.
 
D.    Investigation and Analysis of Factors
In determining whether or not the Project Area meets the eligibility requirements of the Act, various methods of research were used in addition to the field surveys. The data includes information assembled from the sources below:
  1. Contacts with local individuals knowledgeable as to the Project Area conditions and history, age of buildings and site improvements, methods of construction, real estate records and related items, and other information related to the Project Area was used. In addition, aerial photographs, Sidwell block sheets, City utility atlases, electronic permitting data, etc. were also utilized.
  2. Inspection and research as to the condition of local buildings, streets, utilities, etc.
  3. On-site field inspection of the Project 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, etc. and determination of eligibility of areas for tax increment financing.
  4. Use of accepted definitions as provided for in the Act.
  5. Adherence to basic findings of need as established by the Illinois General Assembly in establishing tax increment financing which became effective on January 10, 1977. These are:
    1. There exists in many Illinois municipalities, areas that are conservation or blighted areas, within the meaning of the TIF statute.
    2. The eradication of blighted areas and the treatment of conservation areas by redevelopment projects are essential to the public interest.
  2. 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.
 
Table 3-1 - Conservation Factors Matrix for Improved Land, provided on the following page documents the conditions in the Project Area.
 
2014
A3 - 13
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
c
 
 
a 6
U
M _><
n 'C a a 3 S
E2 £ o +» u «
c o
 
 
o CJ
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CD
'5* bi
Ph oi
«1
CD .3
a 3
a.
o o
CD OX) O
 
O
bC
a
 
<
us
CD
00
V.OOI
V.OOL
00
to
100%
CM CD
V.OOI
r-
oo
V.OOI
■■' ;
63'/.
Ol
CD 00
 
V.0I
NO
o
o
o
CM
NO
76%
00 T
o
CM CO
YES|
T01
1,128
cm
US A
cr>
2,080
2,272
CD
en
i—
1,090
1,006
4,3.76
3,789
CM
•'
t-
s
CM
m ca
CO
CO
CO
o
CO CM
o
o
US 00
us eo «
CO
o
o
CO
 
 
CI
O
o
CO
Ol
 
o
■>*■
CM
o
o
 
 
 
t—
o
o
 
o
o
o
O
o
o
o
o
E-
CD
 
CO CM
c-
in
CO
CD
o
CD
 
o
o
 
 
 
 
o
o
 
o
o
o
CO
o
o
o
o
CO
CO
cm
in
CD CO
o
CM
o
CM
O
CM
CM
o
 
 
tr-
 
 
o
 
o
o
 
 
o
 
o
 
V.
 
o
CO
 
CM CO
O
o
o
 
O
o
 
 
 
 
 
o
CM
o
o
 
CM
o
o
o
 
<y
 
o
o
 
 
o
o
o
O
o
o
 
 
io
CO
o
 
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
a.
m
CO
CD
o
m
in
CM
 
m
CM
CM
SO o
o
CO
 
CM
00
 
CM
CO
o
o
 
CM
 
 
o
 
o
r—
CO
CM PI
r-
CD CO
CD Ol
Ol
CO
l—
CD
CD
CO
m
CM
o m
 
 
T
CO
 
cm
CO
o
o
 
CI
 
 
o
 
z
O)
m
CO
o
o
CM
CM
CI CM
CO
CM CO
o
CO
o
rr
IT-CO
 
!h ■
CO
^
 
o
 
o
o
CO
CO
 
 
o
 
E
oO
m »n
CO
CO
Ol
m
00
CM CD
o
CD
CO 0O C»
CO C-i
 
Tj"
CD
 
 
o
o
o
CM
o
CI
 
o
o
 
 
t~
c~
TT
Ol
in
CO
o
CO
CO
CO Ol
CO 00
r~ o in
1-7
 
CO
■V
CM CM
 
o
CM
o
o
CM
CD
 
o
o
o
 
CD
m
-3"
CO
m
o ci
in
Ol
CM
~
CO
Ol T
o
CD
 
 
CO
CD
 
CM
 
o
p
CD
CM
 
 
o
 
 
CD
m
CO CO
 
CD CO
CO
m
CD CI
CM
OO CM
O CO
o m
CM CO
 
CI
in
 
c»
■V
o
o
CI
O CI
 
 
o
 
 
OO
I—
I—
CI CO
>n in
T
CM
m
CD
O CO
CO
in
 
o
 
m
CO
 
■V
CO
o
o
CO
l-
C-l
 
 
o
 
s
Ol
oo
CD
Ol
CO
o
CO
O
CO
m
CD
m
CD CO
CI
CO
 
CO
CO
 
CI
 
o
o
cq
CM
 
o
o
o
o
CD Ol
o
CO
O
CD CM
CD CI
CO
Ol
m
Ol
CO CM
=
CO
Ol CO
 
 
CO
■«?
CO
 
CO
Ol
o
o
*T CM
CO CI
 
o
o
o
&H
CO
in
C-1
CD CJ
CO CM
CO CD
CO
CD
 
Ol CO CJ
in
CM
 
 
CM
in
m
CM
 
 
CM
o
o
OO
CD CO
 
 
o
 
H
CO
o
Ol
m
t-
CM
CO
t»
Ol
in
m
CD
CM CD
CD O
CD CO
 
t-
CD CM
 
c~
CD
o
o
CO
o
CO
 
 
o
 
Q
cm
CO CO
CO
m c-
CO
t—
CO CO
m
CO
in
CO
CM CO
CO
 
O CO
CO
 
o
o
o
o
-tf
CO
 
o
o
o
O
CO CO
o
CO
o
CD CD
Ol
in
CO
o
CI
in
OO
CO
CD CM
CI
o
CM
 
:-{)'■■■' w
■ 02 O H
■. O
-.2
' a
■-Z
.'■■'J O' , Ed >
o as a. S
 
ei
 
CM
CM
o
o
OJ
CO
 
o
o
o
CO
Ol
m
CO
 
CM O
CO
o
CD
in
 
CD
CD
Ol l-
co
m
CO
 
CC CI
 
 
o
CM
o
o
o
CO
 
o
o
 
<
o
CO
CD
rr~ CM
CO
CO CM
o
CO
CO
CO Ol
CM CO
m
Ol
 
CO
t-
CO
 
CI
(M
o
o
CJ
CD
-«r
 
 
o
 
Sub-Area
No. of improved parcels 1
No of vacant parcels
Parcels ih ROW.
Total parcels (net ROW parcels)
Total parcels
No of primary buildings
No of secondary buildings
Total Buildings
No of buildings 35 years or older 1
Housing units
Occupied housing units
Sub-Area count
No of deteriorated buildings
No. of parcels with site improvements that are deteriorated
Deteriorated street and/or sidewalk pavement (by sub-area)
No. of dilapidated buildings 1
No of obsolete buildings 1
No of structures below minimum code 1
No of buildings lacking ventilation, light or sanitation facilities
No of building with illegal uses 1
No. of primary buildings with excessive vacancies 1
No. of parcels with excessive land coverage or overcrowding of structures
Inadequate utilities (by sub-area)
Deleterious land use or layout (by sub-area) 1
Environmental Clean-up 1
Lack of community planning (by sub-area)
Declining or Sub-par EAV Growth 1
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
2014 PGAVPLANNERS
A3 - 14
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
E.      Eligibility Factors - Improved Area
In making the determination of eligibility, each and every property or building in the Project Area is not required to be blighted or otherwise qualify. It is the Project Area as a whole that must be determined to be eligible.
The report stated below details conditions that cause the Project Area to qualify under the Act as a conservation area, per surveys and research undertaken by the Consultant in 2013 and 2014:
Age of Structures
Age, although not one of the 13 factors used to establish a conservation area under the Act, is used as a threshold that an area must meet in order to qualify.
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 of many years. As a rule, older buildings typically exhibit more problems than buildings constructed in later years because of longer periods of active usage ("wear and tear") and the impact of time, temperature and moisture. Additionally, older buildings tend not to be ideally suited for meeting modern-day space and development standards. These typical problematic conditions in older buildings can be the initial indicators that the factors used to qualify may be present.
Summary of Findings Regarding Age:
There are 1,090 buildings in the Project Area (including accessory structures such as garages and secondary buildings). Of these buildings, 1006 (92%) are 35 years of age or older as determined by field surveys and local research. In many instances buildings are significantly older than 35 year of age; the vast majority of buildings were constructed prior to World War II. The Project Area meets the threshold requirement for a conservation area in that more than 50% of the structures exceed 35 years of age.
1. Dilapidation
Dilapidation as a factor is based upon the documented presence and reasonable distribution of buildings in an advanced state of disrepair. In order for a building to be classified as dilapidated, as the term is defined in the Act, major defects to the primary structural components of the building must be evident, or evident structural defects must be so extensive that the buildings must be removed. A small number of structures in the Project Area have critical defects in primary structural components, such as leaning or bowing load-bearing walls, severely sagging roofs, damaged floor structures, or foundations exhibiting major cracks or displacement.
Summary of Findings Regarding Dilapidation:
Of the 1,090 buildings in the Project Area, 43 buildings, (4%), were found to exhibit primary structural components in an advanced state of disrepair.
 
2014
A3 - 15
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
2. Obsolescence
An obsolete building or improvement is one which no longer serves its intended use. The Act defines obsolescence as "the condition or process of falling into disuse. Structures have become ill-suited for the original use." Obsolescence, as a factor, is based upon the documented presence and reasonable distribution of buildings and other site improvements evidencing such obsolescence. Examples include:
  1. 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 loss in value to a property resulting from an inherent deficiency existing from poor design or layout, improper orientation of the building on site, etc., which detracts from the overall usefulness or desirability of a property. Obsolescence in such buildings is typically difficult and expensive to correct.
  2. Economic Obsolescence: Economic obsolescence is normally a result of adverse conditions that cause some degree of market 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.
  3. Obsolete site improvements: Site improvements, including sewer and water lines, public utility lines (gas, electric and telephone), roadways, parking areas, parking structures, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, lighting, etc., 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, etc.
Throughout the Project Area, there are buildings that have a size, layout, or construction type that are indicative of obsolescence. Vacant storefronts, vacant upper-stories, underutilized properties, undersized commercial buildings, lack of parking or loading space, deteriorated buildings, and inadequate site improvements are all found in the Project Area and are indicators of obsolescence. Some structures are clearly now used for purposes other than the building's designed and original use.
Summary of Findings Regarding Obsolescence:
The field survey of buildings in the Project Area found that certain buildings exhibit characteristics of obsolescence. Obsolete buildings comprised approximately 10% or 106 of the 1,090 buildings in the Project Area. These obsolete buildings include:
  • Long-term vacant commercial and industrial structures (e.g. 6115 S. Prairie Avenue, 5822 State Street, 6238 Wabash Avenue) that have been rejected by the local real-estate market could be indicative of functional or economic obsolescence.
  • Industrial buildings that have become ill-suited for their original use (e.g. 6155 S. Prairie Avenue). Industrial structures of this age are ill-suited for modern industrial
 
2014
A3 - 16
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
techniques due to factors such as inadequate floor area, excessive roof supports, inadequate utilities, poor energy efficiency, and constrictive vehicular access. These conditions could be indicative of functional or economic obsolescence as well as obsolete site improvements.
  • Residential buildings that house more dwelling units than originally intended (multiple examples on LaSalle Street, Perry Avenue, and Michigan Avenue). Single-family housing that has been converted to multi-family units or another use demonstrates functional obsolescence and the buildings are not being used as originally intended. See Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, page A5-1.
  • Obsolete site improvements also exist in the Project Area and are generally associated with the commercial and industrial buildings. Examples of inadequate improvements include poor sidewalk conditions (Plan Appendix, Attachment Five — Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, page A5-17 to A5-19) and deteriorated fencing (e.g. 5841 Wabash Avenue, 6028 S. Perry Avenue, 6115 S. Prairie Avenue. See Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, pages A5-1, A5-2, and A5-13).
  1. Deterioration
Deterioration refers to physical deficiencies or disrepair in buildings or site improvements requiring treatment or repair. Conditions that are not easily correctable in the course of normal maintenance were classified as deteriorated. Such buildings may be classified as deteriorating or in an advanced stage of deterioration, depending upon the degree or extent of the defects. Buildings with major defects in the secondary building components (e.g., damaged doors and door frames, broken windows, window frames and muntins, dented or damaged metal siding, gutters and downspouts damaged or missing, weathered fascia materials, cracks in masonry walls, spalling masonry surfaces, etc.) were observed in the Project Area. Many of the structures located in the Project Area exhibited these conditions. In addition, roadways, off-street parking and surface storage areas also evidenced deterioration such as cracking on paved surfaces, potholes, depressions, loose paving materials, weeds protruding through the surface, etc.
Summary of Findings Regarding Deterioration:
Throughout the Project Area, deteriorating conditions were recorded on 687 (63%) of the 1,090 buildings. The exterior field survey of primary buildings in the Project Area found major defects in secondary building components, including windows, doors, gutters, downspouts, siding, fascia materials, parapet walls, etc. 332 (29%) of the improved parcels in the Project Area demonstrated deteriorated site improvements. Deteriorated public improvements (street pavement, curb and gutter, and sidewalk) were observed on 18 (86%) of the 21 sub-areas in the Project Area.
  1. Presence of Structures Below Minimum Code Standards
Structures below minimum code standards include all structures that do not meet the standards of zoning, subdivision, State building laws and regulations. The principal purposes of such codes are to require buildings to be constructed in
 
2014
A3 - 17
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
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 presume to threaten health and safety.
Summary of Findings Regarding Presence of Structures Below Minimum Code Standards:
Considering the age of buildings in the Project Area, it is certain that many of the buildings are below the minimum code standards currently in force by the City of Chicago. However, in order to substantiate these conditions both interior and exterior inspections of the properties by qualified professionals would be required. Rather than attempt such an evaluation, the Consultant relied on City data on documented code violations.
 
The Department of Planning and Development provided electronic data on code violation records for the Project Area. These records included thousands of building or property maintenance code compliance issues documented through the Department of Buildings tracking system between 2004 and 2013. Code violations were recorded for 216 separate addresses for buildings in the Project Area (20% of all primary buildings).
Because the data are based on property address rather than PIN, code violation data is not presented at the sub-area level in Table 3-1 - Conservation Factors Matrix for Improved Land. It should also be recognized that the code violations documented through the City's record system are only a fraction of the code deficiencies in the Project Area. The predominance of structures in excess of 60 years of age indicates that most of the buildings in the. Project Area likely have some characteristics that do not meet the City's current building or zoning requirements. However, due to this unsubstantiated data, this factor cannot be verified as present for this Eligibility Study.
5. Illegal Use of Individual Structures
This factor applies to the use of structures in violation of applicable national, State or local laws. Examples of illegal uses may include, but not be limited to, the following:
  1. illegal home occupations;
  2. conduct of any illegal vice activities such as gambling or drug manufacture;
  3. uses not in conformance with local zoning codes and not previously grand fathered in as legal nonconforming uses;
d.      uses involving manufacture, sale, storage or use of dangerous explosives
. and firearms.
Summary of Findings Regarding Illegal Use of Individual Structures:
This factor was not documented in the Project Area.
 
2014
A3 - 18
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
6. Excessive Vacancies
Establishing the presence of this factor requires documenting unoccupied or underutilized buildings that represent an adverse influence on the Project Area because of the frequency, extent, or duration of such vacancies. It includes properties which evidence no apparent effort directed toward occupancy or utilization and partial vacancies.
Summary of Findings Regarding Excessive Vacancies:
During the field investigation, and subsequent updates, of the Project Area a total of 185 primary buildings were observed to contain vacant floor space. Based on the condition of some of the vacant buildings, (boarded-up windows, deteriorated interior finishes, lack of lighting, outdated signage, etc.) it is evident that a number of these buildings have been vacant for an extended period of time. The appearance of vacant buildings within the Project Area indicates underutilization of existing structures and may lead to a tendency of vacancies to spread quickly throughout the Project Area.
Examples of vacant residential structures can be seen in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions. Residential vacancies are especially abundant on Lafayette Avenue between Garfield Boulevard and 57th Street. Where there are improved parcels in this stretch, many multi-unit and single family residential structures stand boarded-up and vacant. Vacant residential buildings represent an adverse influence on the Project Area by causing a decrease in the value of surrounding property.
In addition to the number of vacant residential units in the Project Area, many commercial buildings are boarded-up and vacant, as well. The Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions includes examples of vacant commercial buildings. The extent and duration of vacancies at these locations and other vacant commercial parcels within the Project Area, combined with the lack of investment in commercial development indicate that the frequency of vacancies will likely persist and spread.
Vacancies are generally distributed equally among commercial and residential structures within the Project Area, and many are owned by the City of Chicago as shown in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit E - Vacant Land Map. From the field investigation, it appears that a high concentration of privately owned vacancies occurs in the north/west-central sub-areas of A, B, E, F, I, J, and K, as identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit B - Sub Area Key Map. This distribution of vacancies results in a significant blighting effect on surrounding properties. Without intervention, vacancies are tikely to persist and begin to negatively impact surrounding properties. The field investigation indicates that 185 primary buildings, 20% of the 916 total primary buildings, have vacancy of floor space, and It appears that many primary structures have been abandoned without use for an extended period of time.
 
2014
A3 - 19
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
7.      Lack of Ventilation, Light or Sanitary Facilities
Many older structures fail to provide adequate ventilation, light or sanitary facilities. This is also a characteristic often found in illegal or improper building conversions and in commercial buildings converted to residential usage. Lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities are presumed to adversely affect the health of building occupants (i.e., residents, employees or visitors).
Summary of Findings Regarding Lack of Ventilation, Light or Sanitary Facilities:
The exterior field survey of main buildings in the Project Area did not result in documentation of structures without adequate mechanical ventilation, natural light and proper window area ratios.
  1. Inadequate Utilities
Inadequate utilities refers to deficiencies in the capacity or condition of utilities which service a property or area, including, but not limited to, storm water drainage, water supply, electrical power, sanitary sewers, gas and electricity.
Summary of Findings Regarding Inadequate Utilities:
The Bureau of Engineering Services in the City's Department of Water Management provided the consultant with data on the condition of sanitary sewer mains and water lines in the Project Area. Many of the water mains serving the Project Area are deficient in terms of either age or size. According to the City's Bureau of Engineering Services, all 6-inch cast iron water mains are obsolete and in need of replacement with ductile iron mains of at least eight (8) inches in diameter. Undersized water mains are found in the majority of the Project Area's sub-areas. The projected service life of water mains is 100 years. Some sections of water line in the Project Area are more than 120 years old, and the Project Area's sub-areas are served by water mains that exceed their expected service life.
Sanitary sewer data was also reviewed by the Consultant. Many sections of sewer line exceed 100 years of age. Based on the age and condition of lines, 12 sections of sanitary sewer main in the Project Area have been identified as candidates forrelining (a less costly alternative to replacement). These relining projects, along with three (3) sewer improvement projects identified through hydraulic studies, are distributed throughout the Project Area.
Obsolete, undersized and deficient water lines are indicated on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit D - Existing Condition Maps with a dashed line pattern. These deficient utilities are distributed throughout the Project Area and present in 16 (76%) of the 21 sub-areas.
 
2014
A3-20
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
9. Excessive Land Coverage and Overcrowding of Structures and Community Facilities
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 because problems associated with lack of parking or loading areas can negatively impact adjoining properties.
Summary of Findings Regarding Excessive Land Coverage and Overcrowding of Structures and Community Facilities:
Structures exhibiting 100% lot coverage with party or fire walls separating one structure from the next is a historical fact of high-density urban development. This situation is common throughout the industrial and commercial corridors in the western portion of the Project Area, and in the southern residential sub-areas. The incidence of excessive land coverage in the Project Area is high both as a result of inadequate spacing between buildings and inadequate parking.
Numerous commercial and industrial businesses are located in structures that cover 100% of their respective lots. Other businesses are utilizing 100% of their lots 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. This has prompted overflow parking and truck traffic associated with normal business operations to utilize surrounding residential areas for parking and access. This is common along Wentworth Avenue and La Salle Street. Furthermore, delivery trucks were observed to be blocking alleys and streets while performing normal delivery operations or accessing shipping facilities.
In addition, numerous residential structures exhibited excessive land coverage and overcrowding of structures. Along Wabash Avenue, LaSalle Street and State Street between 58 Street and 60th Street are numerous buildings where the buildings are spaced too closely or buildings are improperly situated on their sites. Residences that were originally built as single family homes have been converted into multi-unit residences. The result of overcrowding of structures in the residential corridors throughout the Project Area is increased demand for parking on residential streets. 30%, or 335 of the 1,128 improved parcels in the Project Area, revealed some evidence of excessive land coverage or overcrowding of structures and community facilities. Although this factor exists in the Project Area as shown in Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, pages A5-1, A5-2, and A5-6, this Eligibility Study considers no finding regarding Excessive Land Coverage.
 
2014
A3-21
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
10. Deleterious Land Use or Layout
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:
In locations such as the Project Area where its character has evolved over the years, industrial, commercial and residential uses are often in close proximity to one another. It is not unusual to find small pockets or isolated residential buildings within a predominantly industrial area or an industrial use in a residential area. Although these buildings may be considered, because of age and continuous occupancy, as legal nonconforming uses (whose existence and use is thereby "grandfathered"), they are, nonetheless, incompatible land uses inasmuch as the predominant character of the Project Area is influenced by these differing uses.
As illustrated in Exhibit C - Existing Land Use, the Project Area is primarily residential with interspersed pockets of' industrial corridors in the western sub-areas, as well as an industrial area to the south. The combination of limited on-site parking and high density industrial and commercial development in close proximity to primarily residential uses causes conflict in traffic, parking, safety, and environmental conditions that has promoted deleterious use of land in some portions of the Project Area. For example, a food manufacturing company, located on South Perry Avenue is located in a predominantly residential part of the Project Area as seen in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions. Parallel streets adjacent to Perry Avenue, Lafayette and LaSalle Streets, contain mostly residential parcels or vacant parcels zoned residential. The food manufacturer's location in a predominantly residential neighborhood is an example of deleterious land uses and land use relationships within the Project Area.
Additionally, the presence of other commercial or industrial uses within residential land uses or abandoned equipment and vehicles, as seen in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions at 5612 S. LaSalle Street, the vehicle storage shown on Wentworth Avenue, or the automotive repair business located on South State Street qualify as deleterious or incompatible land uses. Commercial uses are typically not encouraged within primarily residential neighborhoods. The garage on the residential parcel located at 5612 S. LaSalle Street is being used for tire storage and is a noxious and offensive land use to neighboring residential property owners. The storage of abandoned vehicles on Wentworth Avenue is another example of deleterious land use. The location of the automotive repair business at 6053 S. State Street adjacent to residential land uses further exhibit's the presence of deleterious land uses distributed throughout the Project Area.
Deleterious land uses and land use relationships were located within 48%, or ten (10) of the 21 sub-areas identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit B - Sub Area Key Map.
 
2014
A3-22
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
11. Lack of Community Planning
This may be counted as a factor if the proposed area was developed prior to, or without the benefit or guidance of, a community plan. This means that no community plan existed, 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. Streets, alleys, and intersections that are too narrow or awkwardly configured to accommodate traffic movements.
  2. Inadequate street and utility layout.
  3. Tracts of land that are too small or have awkward configurations that would not meet contemporary development standards.
  4. Properties lack adequate access to public streets.
  5. Industrial land use and zoning adjacent to or within heavily developed residential areas without ample buffer areas.
  6. Commercial and industrial properties that are too small to adequately accommodate appropriate off-street parking and loading requirements.
  7. The presence of deteriorated structures, code violations and other physical conditions that are further evidence of an absence of effective community planning.
Summary of Findings Regarding Lack of Community Planning:
Much of the Project Area was developed originally from the late 1800's to the mid-1900's. As evidenced by limited lot sizes for commercial uses, placement and orientation of buildings with total or near-total lot coverage, and lack of provisions for off-street parking, loading and' service, the development of the area occurred without consideration of a comprehensive community plan with adequate guidelines for the overall community area development.
It should be noted that the Study Area has benefited from community planning in recent times. However, many of the conditions that now plague the area are the result of original development, which occurred without the benefit of sound community planning. Therefore, while significant planning investment has been made in the Study Area over recent decades, original development done without the benefit of sound community planning has contributed significantly to the Study Area's current problems.
As previously noted in this analysis, many properties in the Project Area are affected by narrow streets, lack of parking that has led to excessive land coverage, incompatible land-uses, and inadequate utilities. Additionally, there is evidence of deteriorating building conditions and numerous code violations. As seen in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, pages A5-2, A5-8, and A5-9 show examples of large commercial or industrial properties in potential conflict with residential areas and that may not meet contemporary development standards. In the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, pages
 
2014
A3-23
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
A5-18 and A5-19, deteriorated infrastructure is shown as well as many areas with standing water that also indicates inadequate storm water utilities. Many parcels have been left vacant where previously there had been structural improvements. Increased disinvestment and lack of demand has resulted in the vacancy of structures and many buildings have subsequently been demolished. The lack of new construction after demolition can also be attributed to a lack of community planning in the Project Area. As indicated previously, there is a general lack of commercial uses throughout the Project Area. While Garfield Boulevard, State Street and Prairie Avenue had once served as commercial corridors for the Project Area, many of the previously existing businesses have been replaced by vacant or boarded-up storefronts. For example, at 5859 South State Street a previously open commercial structure is now boarded and vacant. This example shows the presence of deteriorated structures and other conditions that indicate the absence of community planning. The lack of effective community planning has led to continued disinvestment in the Project Area as well as increased commercial and residential vacancies.
Lack of community planning was observed in 62% or 13 of the 21 sub-areas identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit B - Sub Area Key Map.
  1. Environmental Remediation Costs
If an area has incurred Illinois or United States Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs for, or a study conducted by an independent consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation has determined a need for, the clean-up of hazardous waste, hazardous substances, or underground storage tanks required by State or federal law, provided that the remediation costs constitute a material impediment to the development of the redevelopment project area then this factor may be counted.
Summary of Findings Regarding Environmental Remediation Costs:
This factor was not identified in the Project Area. However, field observation reveals that several properties may be affected by environmental contamination.
  1. Declining or Lagging Rate of Growth of Total Equalized Assessed Valuation
If the total equalized assessed value of the proposed redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available, or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the balance of the municipality for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available, or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the United States Department of Labor or successor agency for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available then this factor may be counted.
 
2014
A3 - 24
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Summary of Findings Regarding Declining or Lagging Rate of Growth of Total Equalized Assessed Valuation:
As discussed in Section ll-B, Development Activity and Assessed Value Trends, of
this Eligibility Study, analysis of historic EAV for the Project Area indicates that the EAV of the Project Area has declined in 2010, 2011, and 2012 and has also experienced growth at a rate less than that of the balance of the City and less than the annual Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA in those same years.
F.      Conclusion of Investigation of Eligibility Factors for the Improved Portion of the
Redevelopment Project Area
The presence of deteriorated buildings; deteriorated site improvements and public rights-of-way; inadequate utilities; deleterious land use relationships; lack of community planning; and declining or sub-par EAV growth are all indications of detrimental conditions in the Project Area. Furthermore, these conditions are present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the improved portions of.the Project Area. The presence of these TIF eligibility factors underscores the lack of private investment in the Project Area.
 
The tax increment program and redevelopment plan include measures designed to reduce or eliminate the deficiencies, which cause the improved portion of the Project Area to qualify as a conservation area consistent with the strategy of the City of Chicago for revitalizing other designated redevelopment areas and industrial corridors. As documented in this investigation and analysis, it is clear that a number of eligibility factors affect the Project Area. The presence of these factors qualifies the improved portion of the Project Area as a conservation area.
G.      Analysis of Undeveloped or Vacant Property
For the purpose of qualification for TIF, the term "vacant land" is defined in the TIF Act as follows:
Any parcel or combination of parcels of real property without industrial, commercial, and residential buildings which has not been used for commercial agricultural purposes within five (5) years prior to the designation of the redevelopment project area.
Approximately 120.6 acres of the 394.6-acre Area (30.6% of the net land area excluding Washington Park/Dyett High School) is considered vacant by this definition. Vacant land is identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use Map and highlighted in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit E - Vacant Land Map. The blighting factors present on vacant parcels are summarized on Table 3-2 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land on the following page.
 
2014
A3-25
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
IB
T3
a a
a
t«
u
CS
>
u
«2
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CD -3
S 3
.5 b
3
o
c
-(-» u es fa
a
lac u> cd
03 S=
 
TOTAL
it"
■A
CO
"rr
o
 
100%
100%
VACANT LAND FACTORS (2 or More):                        •    *                                                                             .    r    : ...
NO
NO
NO
5?
CO
"sT
\»
Ol
o>
5?
YES
r
K~- i 1
u
. o
t» C4 O Ex1
ss ■■"
r
Wt
< \2
%0
%0
%0
%0
CM
Ol
 
Ol
 
 
cr>
cr>
o
CO
oa
CO
cn
OO
 
 
 
 
o
o
 
1Department of Law city of chicago
 
May 30, 2014
 
 
 
 
Ms. Susana Mendoza
City Clerk
City of Chicago
121 North LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60602
 
Re:      Redevelopment Plan and Project for the proposed Washington Park
Redevelopment Project Area (Tax Increment Financing)
 
Dear Ms. Mendoza:
 
I enclose the Washington Park Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Area Plan and Project (the "Revised Plan") for the proposed Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area, Chicago, Illinois, dated May 30, 2014.
 
Please make the Plan available in your office as of this date for public inspection in accordance with the requirements of Section 5/1 l-74.4-5(a) of the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et seg,., as amended. If you have any questions with respect to this matter, please call me at 742-5763.
 
 
Enclosure
 
Sincerely.
 
Adam R. Walker
Assistant Corporation Counsel
 
cc:
 
 
M. Susan Lopez Tricia Ruffalo
 
 
 
 
121 NORTH LASALLE STREET, ROOM 600, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60602
 
 
 
 
 
WASHINGTON PARK TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REDEVELOPMENT AREA PROJECT AND PLAN
 
 
 
 
 
Prepared for: The City of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, Mayor
 
 
Department of Planning and Development Andrew J. Mooney, Commissioner
 
Prepared By: Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises, Inc. And
PGAV PLANNERS Assisted by Goodman Williams Group
O
CO
o
CO
<n~n
 
m o _
May 30, 2014
CO
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TO
m or-
 
 
 
Table of Contents
 
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION      1
SECTION 2. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION      6
SECTION 3. ELIGIBILITY OF THE PROJECT AREA FOR      11
DESIGNATION AS A CONSERVATION/BLIGHTED AREA      11
SECTION 4. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES      13
SECTION 5. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN      15
SECTION 6. REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION      17
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT      17
MIXED USE (COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL/INSTITUTIONAL)      17
SECTION 7. GENERAL LAND USE PLAN      20
SECTION 8. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FINANCING      21
SECTION 9. HOUSING IMPACT STUDY      32
SECTION 10. PROVISIONS FOR AMENDING THE PLAN      33
SECTION 11. CITY OF CHICAGO COMMITMENT TO FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES AND AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION      34
 
Appendix
 
 
ATTACHMENT ONE - LEGAL DESCRIPTION
 
ATTACHMENT TWO - MAPS AND PLAN EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A      Boundary Map of TIF Area
EXHIBIT B      Sub Area Key Map
EXHIBIT C      Existing Land Use Conditions
EXHIBIT D      Existing Conditions Maps (D1-D6)
EXHIBIT E      Vacant Land Map
EXHIBIT F      Existing Zoning Map
EXHIBIT G      Adjacent TIF / Redevelopment Areas Map
EXHIBIT H-1      Land Acquisition Map
EXHIBIT H-2      Land Acquisition List
EXHIBIT I      Generalized Land Use Plan Map
 
ATTACHMENT THREE - ELIGIBILITY STUDY ATTACHMENT FOUR - 2012 ESTIMATED EAV BY TAX PARCEL ATTACHMENT FIVE - PHOTO APPENDIX OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ATTACHMENT SIX - HOUSING IMPACT STUDY
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
 
This document presents a Tax Increment Financing ("TIF") Redevelopment Plan and Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Plan") pursuant to the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et seq.) as amended, (the "Act") for the Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") located in the City of Chicago, Illinois (the "City"). The Project Area can be separated into three sections: 1. Washington Park (the "Park") is bounded by 51st and 60th Streets on the north and south, and Cottage Grove Avenue and Martin Luther King Drive on the east and west; 2. the neighborhood section which is generally bounded by Martin Luther King Drive and Washington Park on the east, the Dan Ryan Expressway on the west, Garfield Boulevard on the north and 63rd Street on the south; and 3. the industrial area south of 63rd Street to the Chicago Skyway, west of Prairie Avenue. The neighborhood section is roughly one (1) mile north to south and 0.8 miles east to west, centered on 59th Street and Michigan Avenue. The Park is roughly 1.2 miles north to south and 0.5 miles east to west, centered just north of the intersection of Morgan Drive and Rainey Drive. The industrial section is roughly two-thirds of a mile north to south and a third of a mile east to west, with a significant section of this area used as railway siding.
The Project Area consists of 988.4 acres in 2,272 parcels. There are 2,785 unique parcel identification numbers (PINS) represented in the 2,272 total parcels. The Project Area includes 241.8 acres for public rights-of-way for streets, alleyways, rail lines, and highways, leaving approximately 746.6 acres of usable land (either presently developed or vacant). The boundaries of the Project Area are described in the Plan Appendix, Attachment One - Legal Description and are geographicallyshown in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit A - Boundary Map of TIF Area.
The Plan summarizes the analyses and findings of Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises, Inc. and subconsultants, PGAV PLANNERS and the Goodman Williams Group (jointly hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant") and, unless otherwise noted, is the responsibility of the Consultant. The City is entitled to rely on the findings and conclusions of this Plan in designating the Project Area as a redevelopment project area under the Act. 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 of the Plan and the related eligibility study in proceeding with the designation of the Project Area and the adoption and implementation of the Plan, and 2) on the fact that the Consultant has obtained the necessary information so that the Plan and the related eligibility study will comply with the Act.
The Plan presents certain factors, research and analysis undertaken to document the eligibility of the Project Area for designation as a "conservation area" for the improved portion of the Project Area and a "blighted area" for the vacant portion of the Project Area. The need for public intervention, along with goals and objectives, land use policies, and other policy materials are presented in the Plan. The results of a study documenting the eligibility of the Project Area as a conservation area for the improved portion of the Project Area and a blighted area for the vacant portion of the Project Area are presented in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Three -Eligibility Study.
 
2014
Page 1
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Tax Increment Financing
The Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (the "Act") permits municipalities to induce redevelopment of eligible "blighted," "conservation" or "industrial park conservation areas" in accordance with an adopted redevelopment plan. The Act stipulates specific procedures that must be adhered to in designating a redevelopment project area. One of those procedures is the determination that the area meets the statutory eligibility requirements. Under 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(p), the Act defines a "redevelopment project area" as:
"... an area designated by the municipality, which is not less in the aggregate than 1-1/2 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 combination of both blighted areas and conservation areas."
 
In adopting the Act, the Illinois State Legislature found that:
  1. ...there exists in many municipalities within this State blighted, conservation and industrial park conservation areas...(at 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-2(a)); and
  2. .the eradication of blighted areas and treatment and improvement of conservation areas by redevelopment projects is hereby declared to be essential to the public interest (at 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-2(b)).
 
The legislative findings were made on the basis that the presence of blight, or conditions that lead to blight, is detrimental to the safety, health, welfare and morals of the public. The Act specifies certain requirements that must be met before a municipality may proceed with implementing a redevelopment project in order to ensure that the exercise of these powers is proper and in the public interest.
The municipality must first determine that the proposed redevelopment area qualifies for designation as a "blighted area," "conservation area," "industrial park conservation area" or a combination "blighted and conservation areas." Based on the conditions present, the Eligibility Study concludes that the improved portion of the Project Area qualifies for designation as a conservation area and the vacant portion of the Project Area qualifies for designation as a blighted area under the Act.
Redevelopment projects are defined as any public or private development projects undertaken in furtherance of the objectives of the redevelopment plan and in accordance with 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 equalized assessed value (EAV) of real property within the redevelopment project area over and above the "Certified Initial EAV" of such real property. Any increase in EAV is then multiplied by the current tax rate to arrive at the Incremental Property Taxes. A decline in current EAV 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 redevelopment project area. In addition,
 
2014
Page 2
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
a municipality may pledge towards payment of such 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'ariy 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
  5. any other taxes or anticipated receipts that the municipality may lawfully pledge.
Tax Increment Financing does not generate tax revenues. This financing mechanism allows the municipality to capture, for a certain number of years, the new tax 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. This revenue is then reinvested in the area through rehabilitation, developer subsidies, public improvements and other eligible redevelopment activities. All taxing districts continue to receive property taxes levied on the initial valuation of properties within the redevelopment project area. Additionally, taxing districts 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 and such excess Incremental Property Taxes are not otherwise required, pledged or otherwise designated for other redevelopment projects. Taxing districts also benefit from the increased property tax base after redevelopment project costs and obligations are paid.
The City authorized an evaluation to determine whether a portion of the City, to be known as the Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area, qualifies for designation as a combination conservation area/blighted area pursuant to the provisions contained in the Act. If the Project Area is so qualified, the City requested the preparation of a redevelopment plan for the Project Area in accordance with the requirements of the Act.
 
2014
Page 3
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Overview of the Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
The Project Area is approximately 988.4 acres, including 241.8 acres for public rights-of-way for streets and alleyways and a portion of the Dan Ryan Expressway. Excluding public rights-of-way the Project Area consists of 746.6 acres situated in 2,272 parcels. There are 2,785 unique parcel identification numbers (PINS) represented in the 2,272 total parcels. The Project Area is the shape of a square, and includes a 351-acre recreational park, residential uses to the east, north and portions west of the expressway in addition to small commercial nodes and industrial uses in the south, north and west borders. The Project Area is located approximately seven (7) miles south of Chicago's downtown in the Washington Park community area. The Project Area includes eight (8) 2010 U.S. Census Tracts: 4003, 4004, 4005, 4008, 8345, 8346, 8361, and 8425; of which, only tract 4004 has shown population growth from 2000 to 2010.
 
The vast majority (92%) of the buildings within the Project Area are well over 35 years of age. Many of the commercial properties are in need of minor repairs in order to improve their appearance, property values, and to remain viable. The majority of the Project Area was developed prior to the existence of a comprehensive plan and prior to present day development standards. This is most apparent in the excessive land coverage and lack of provisions for off-street parking found throughout the Project Area. The Plan seeks to respond to problem conditions within the Project Area and reflects a commitment by the City to improve and revitalize the area.
In addition to over 50% of the buildings within the Project Area being 35 years or older, the improved tax blocks within the Project Area are characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "conservation area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act:
  1. Deterioration
  2. Inadequate utilities
  3. Deleterious land use or layout
  4. Lack of community planning
  5. Declining or sub-par EAV growth
 
The vacant parcels within the Project Area are characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "blighted area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act:
  1. Diversity of ownership
  2. Deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas
  3. Declining or sub-par EAV growth
In terms of net land area (total land area less public right-of-way and parcels used as street or rail right-of-way), approximately 16% of the Project Area is vacant land. If Washington Park and Dyett High School are excluded from the tabulation, vacant land accounts for about 31% of the net land area, or 952 individual parcels; 42% of the total parcels. Almost a third of the land in the Project Area, not including Washington Park/Dyett High School, is vacant land and is evidence of the extent of disinvestment. A case could also be made for excluding the industrial area south of 63rd Street from these vacant land calculations, which would only increase the percentage of vacant land in the Project Area. As a result of these conditions, the Project Area
 
2014
Page 4
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
is in need of redevelopment. In recognition of the unrealized potential of the Project Area, the City is taking action to facilitate its revitalization.
The Project Area, as a whole, has not been subject to growth and development by private enterprise and would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed without the adoption of the Plan. The Eligibility Study, in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Three - Eligibility Study, concludes that the property in this area is experiencing deterioration and a lack of sufficient investment. The analysis of conditions within the Project Area indicates the improved portion of the Project Area qualifies as a conservation area, and the vacant portion of the Project Area qualifies as a blighted area.
 
The purpose of the Plan is to create a mechanism to allow for the development of new commercial, mixed-use and community facilities on existing parcels and/or the improvement of existing commercial, mixed use, and residential properties; and the general improvement of the area's physical environment and infrastructure. The development of the Project Area is expected to encourage economic revitalization within the community and the surrounding area.
The Plan has been formulated in accordance with the provisions of the Act. This document is a guide to all proposed public and private actions in the Project Area that are assisted with tax increment financing.
 
2014
Page 5
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 2. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION Brief History of the Community
The Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area sits within the greater Washington Park Community Area. Washington Park is located approximately seven (7) miles south of the Chicago Loop. The Project Area includes eight (8) 2010 U.S. Census Tracts: 4003, 4004, 4005, 4008, 8345, 8346, 8361, and 8425; of which, only tract 4004 has shown population growth from 2000 to 2010. The 351-acre recreational Washington Park along with the Walter H. Dyett High School site separates the Project Area from the more affluent eastern neighborhood of Hyde Park.
Settled by the Irish and German railroad and meat packing workers in the 1860s and 1870s, Washington Park was a growing community for much of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. By the 1890s German Jews began-moving into east Washington Park and a small number of African Americans settled into the working class districts south of Garfield (55th) and west of State Street. Wealthy American born whites settled on the wide avenues that ran north towards the Loop. In 1893, confirmation that the Columbian Exposition would be held in Jackson Park also brought another influx to the community's population.
The development of the recreational park began in 1869 and was known as South Park until 1881. The park was later renamed Washington Park. After years of lobbying by prominent south side residents, the Illinois State Legislature authorized the creation of a five-member, governor appointed South Park Commission. Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux centered the park on a 100-acre greensward with surrounding walking trails, trees and shrubs. Olmsted and Vaux planned for a bandstand and refectory, a promenade, carriage roads and gathering places in the park. The park would be part of the boulevard system that linked the park north to the central business district. In addition, the architects' plans called for dredging and filling in wetlands in the park and the opening up of a canal between the park and Lake Michigan.
Transportation was the catalyst for much of the growth experienced by the south side neighborhoods; particularly in the Washington Park community during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. By 1887 cable cars reached as far south as 63rd Street on State Street and 67th Street on Cottage Grove Avenue. The "L" train system reached farther south than the Washington Park community by 1907. Cable cars, trains, and the wide boulevards provided easy access to Chicago's Loop for south side residents. Today, public transportation and highway access are still widely available to residents and visitors of Washington Park.
The site for the Race Riots of 1919, the Washington Park community was the home of many clashes between blacks and whites. The cultural institutions and churches have closely reflected the community's racial transition from one of the most racially diverse Chicago communities to a predominantly African American population. Greek Orthodox residents built SS. Constantine and Helen in 1909 and in 1948 the building was inhabited by an entirely African American Episcopal congregation. Many other churches in the Washington Park community such as St. Anselm Church in the 1930s, B'nai Shalom Temple Israel in 1925, were built in the early 20th century and sold to entirely African American congregations by the mid-1900s.St.
 
2014
Page 6
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Mary's African Methodist Episcopal Church is the oldest black congregation in the Project Area and was established in 1897.
The early 1960s saw the construction of two of the Chicago Housing Authority's ("CHA") larger projects; Washington Park Homes and the Robert Taylor Homes. With the construction of these two projects, Washington Park had one of the highest concentrations of public housing in the United States. The Robert Taylor Homes consisted of 28 16-story high rises. When built, the homes planned for 11,000 residents, but at its peak housed up to 27,000 residents at once. The Robert Taylor Homes marked a failure for the CHA as socioeconomic problems perpetuated throughout the 1980s and 1990s and the City neglected property and building maintenance or building code updates. In 1996, HOPE VI federal funds were granted for off-site replacement housing for Robert Taylor Home residents. All apartments were planned to be vacated by 2005 and the last of the Robert Taylor buildings was demolished on March 8, 2007.
 
Current Land Use and Community Facilities
The eastern side of the Project Area is made up of Washington Park in addition to higher density residential uses. On the eastern boundary of the Project Area is Hyde Park, an affluent south side neighborhood that is home to the University of Chicago. Students and faculty have resided in Hyde Park for decades. As the demand for housing grows due to the growing number of university students, visitors and university faculty, they may choose to move to surrounding neighborhoods such as Washington Park. At the west end of the Project Area is the Englewood Community Area, which, until recently, was best known for the Englewood Mall. The Mall has recently been replaced by the Kennedy King College and the neighborhood has experienced a surge in housing demand and property values.
At intersections within and surrounding the Project Area, there are small commercial nodes. There are also some isolated industrial uses interspersed within the residential/commercial areas. Industrial corridors are located on the western border near Interstate Highway 90/94 (Dan Ryan Expressway) and also near the southwest boundary. Residential neighborhoods are also located on the western side of the. Dan Ryan and to the north of the Project Area.
The Project Area includes a Chicago Fire Department station, located at the intersection of 59th Street and South Lafayette Avenue. While the Project Area offers some community facilities, there are no Chicago Police Department stations, public libraries or hospitals located within the boundaries of the Project Area.
Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use Map shows a lack of community parks within the boundaries of the Project Area. In 1959 the Chicago Park District took one (1) parcel of property and created the Loraine Hansberry Park which provides limited open space to the residents within the Project Area. During the 1990's, the Chicago Park District replaced the existing basketball court (at Loraine Hansberry Park) with a children's playground. The children in the neighborhoods have little access to local neighborhood parks. While there are three (3) pre-kindergarten thru eighth grade schools within the Project Area, only one provides a school playground for children. Two (2) of the schools are community schools, while the third is a charter school. There is a prominent need for more neighborhood park space within the Project Area.
 
2014
Page 7
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Additionally, over the course of the last few decades, residential buildings have been demolished as the buildings deteriorated and were vacated. These parcels were "blighted before vacant". The City has developed the Red X program to identify properties with structural or interior hazards with a red "X" sign. These hazards can include, but are not limited to, building deterioration or damage from previous fires, structural hazards when components of the building have been removed, and collapse hazards due to the integrity of chimney tops, parapet walls, roof systems and or stair systems being compromised. The red "X" serves as an indicator to first responders to the existence of the hazards. Further, the presence of the red "X" makes it unlawful for any person to enter the building without first notifying the fire commissioner. The vacant land that remains speaks to the poor building conditions before the demolition, the challenges of the Area, and also presents a resource and opportunity for in-fill development and revitalization.
 
Landmark and Historic Buildings
The Washington Park Community Area is home to several architecturally or historically significant buildings. Washington Park, itself, was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2004 as United States' Registered Historic District and includes all contributing buildings and structures located within the park. The City's Park Boulevard System, including Garfield Boulevard, is in the process of being nominated for the National Register of Historic Places.
In 1995, the Commission on Chicago Landmarks completed an inventory of architecturally and historically significant structures. This inventory, called the Chicago Historic Resources Survey ("CHRS"), was a decade-long research effort to analyze the historic and architectural importance of all buildings constructed in the City prior to 1940. The CHRS database identifies each property's date of construction, architect, building style and type, Chicago Landmark status, inclusion in the Illinois Historic Structures Survey, and property identification numbers (PIN). A color-coded ranking system was used to identify historic and architectural significance relative to age, degree of external physical integrity, and level of possible significance.
According to the City of Chicago Landmarks Division, the following buildings in the Project Area are listed as category "Orange" on the CHRS. Orange properties possess some architectural feature or historical association that made them potentially significant in the context of the surrounding community. While there are other historic properties nearby the Project Area, the following list of 36 properties is representative of the "Orange"-coded CHRS properties in, or immediately adjacent to, the proposed TIF boundary.
  1. 40 E. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (Schulze Baking Co.)
  2. 301 E. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (office)
  3. 119-125 W. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (religious building/church)
  4. 320 E. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (Garfield elevated train station)
  5. 341-343 E. 55th St./Garfield Blvd. (Rum-Boogie Club)
  6. 5206 - 5310 S. Cottage Grove (General Richard L. Jones Armory)
  7. 5644 S. Cottage Grove (DuSable Museum of African American History)
  8. 5700 - 5740 S. Cottage Grove (railroad stable and roundhouse)
  9. 5114 - 5128 S. King Dr. (Chicago Orphan Asylum)
  10. 5228 S. King Dr. (residence)
  11. 5644 S. King Dr. (multi-unit residential building)
  12. 5922 S. King Dr. (Jesse Binga House)
 
2014
Page 8
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
  2. 6116-6134 S. King Dr. (South Park Terrace Apartment Building)
  3. 6160 - 6212 S. King Dr. (Washington Park Terrace Apartment Building)
  4. 5613 - 5659 S. La Salle St(industrial building)
  5. 5621 - 5623 S. Lafayette Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  6. 5740 S. Lafayette Ave. (single family residence)
  7. 5760 S. Lafayette Ave. (John Raber House)
  8. 5510 - 5514 S. Michigan Ave. (Mulvey Apartment Building)
  9. 5516 S. Michigan Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  10. 5600 - 5602 S. Michigan Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  11. 6055 - 6059 S. Michigan Ave. (St. Anselm Church)
  12. 6101 -6115 S. Michigan Ave. (religious building/church)
  13. 6144 S. Michigan Ave. (single family residence)
  14. 5611 S. Perry Ave. (single family residence)
  15. 6002 S. Prairie Ave. (Ring Lardner Residence)
  16. 6137 - 6201 S. Prairie Ave. (utility building)
  17. 5520 S. State St. (commercial/Residential)
  18. 5955 - 5961 S. State St. (multi-unit residential and commercial building)
  19. 5502 - 5512 S. Wabash Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  20. 5646 S. Wabash Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  21. 5648 S. Wabash Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  22. 5656 - 5658 S. Wabash Ave. (multi-unit residential building)
  23. 5916 S. Wabash Ave. (single family residence)
  24. 5527 S. Wentworth Ave. (commercial/residential building)
36.      6067 - 6077 S. Wentworth Ave. (warehouse)
 
While there are many "Orange" buildings listed on the CHRS, with the exception of Washington Park, there are no buildings in the Project Area registered on the National Register of Historic Buildings. The historic Raber House, located at 5760 S. Lafayette Avenue, was designated as an official Chicago Landmark in 1996.
 
Transportation Characteristics
Street System
Regional - The Project Area offers exceptional access to transportation routes both within the boundaries and entrance/exit routes to and from the Project Area as well as to and from other parts of the City of Chicago and the region. The western edge of the Project Area is bordered by Interstate Highway 90/94 (Dan Ryan Expressway) with entrance/exit ramps at 55th Street, 57th Street, 59th Street, and 63rd Street. Access to the expressway is also available traveling northbound on Wentworth Avenue and southbound on Wells Street. State Street provides entrance/exit ramps to the Chicago Skyway.
Local - For residents and visitors who choose to drive into, out of, and around the Project Area, there are many major thoroughfares linking the Project Area to other parts of the City. Within the Project Area, the major thoroughfares include north-south routes: Martin Luther King Drive ("King Drive"), Michigan Avenue, Indiana Avenue, Cottage Grove Avenue and State Street; and east-west routes: Garfield Boulevard and 63rd Street. Due to the location of the Dan Ryan Expressway at the western boundary of the Project Area, east and west access across the expressway is limited to Garfield Boulevard, 57th, 59th, and 63rd Streets.
 
2014
Page 9
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Public Transportation
The Chicago Transit Authority ("CTA") has many terminals located within the Project Area. CTA's Red and Green lines travel north/south to connect the Project Area to Chicago's Loop located seven (7) miles north, and farther south to Chicago's southern neighborhoods. Within the boundaries, the CTA Red Line stops at Garfield Boulevard and 63rd Street, along the Dan Ryan Expressway. The CTA Green Line provides two stops along King Drive; at Garfield Boulevard and at 63rd Street. Within a few blocks of the Project Area boundaries, the CTA Red Line stops at 47th Street, 51st. Street, and at the intersection of 63rd Street and Cottage Grove Avenue.
 
CTA buses also service the interior with many stops in close proximity to the Project Area. There are eight (8) bus lines with stops within the Project Area with three (3) additional express buses and three (3) bus lines with stops adjacent to the Project Area that service residents and visitors within the Project Area's boundaries. CTA bus routes within the boundaries of the Project Area are listed below:
Bus # Route
3/X3      North-south route along King Drive
4/X4      North-south route along Cottage Grove Avenue
15      East-west along 51st Street
24      Northbound route on Wentworth Avenue and south on Yale Avenue
29      North-south route on State Street
55/X55      East-west route along Garfield Boulevard
59      East-west route along 60th and 61st Streets
63      East-west route along 63rd Street
 
The following CTA buses stop in close proximity to the Project Area: #2, #15, #51, and #170. The CTA buses, in conjunction with CTA's Red and Green Lines, provide excellent public transportation options for residents and visitors within the Project Area.
 
Pedestrian Transportation
Pedestrian traffic in and throughout the Project Area is concentrated along the major arterial streets, with Garfield Boulevard, 51st Street, King Drive and Cottage Grove Avenue having the largest concentrations. The higher concentration of pedestrian traffic in these areas is associated with commuters utilizing the CTA bus and rail lines along this route and access to the recreational opportunities.found' in Washington Park. Concentration of pedestrian traffic is also associated with schools located within the Project Area. Most pedestrian traffic around schools is present during the peak periods before and after school hours.
There are sidewalks on most of the streets within the Project Area that connect pedestrians from north to south and east to west. The major thoroughfares provide crosswalks at intersections for pedestrian safety. Many of the sidewalks in the Project Area are cracked and uneven; neglect of sidewalk maintenance may make it difficult for children, elderly and/or handicapped individuals to use sidewalks as a form of transportation.
 
2014
Page 10
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 3. ELIGIBILITY OF THE PROJECT AREA FORDESIGNATION AS A CONSERVATION/BLIGHTED AREA
 
The Project Area, on the whole, has not been subject to significant growth and development through investment by private enterprise. Based on the conditions present, the Project Area is not likely to be comprehensively or effectively developed without the adoption of the Plan. A series of studies were undertaken to establish whether the land in the Project Area is eligible for designation in accordance with the requirements of the Act. This analysis, documented in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Three - Eligibility Study concluded that the Project Area so qualifies.
The improved parcels within the Project Area are characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "conservation area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act:
  • the predominance of buildings that are 35 years of age or older (92% of buildings)1;
  • deteriorated buildings (63% of buildings);
  • deteriorated site improvements (29% of parcels);
  • deteriorated street and/or sidewalk pavement (86% of sub-areas);
  • dilapidated buildings (4%, of buildings);
  • obsolete buildings (10% of buildings);
primary buildings with excessive vacancies (20%);
  • excessive land coverage (30% of improved parcels);
  • inadequate utilities (76% of sub-areas);
  • deleterious land use or layout (48% of sub-areas);
  • lack of community planning (62% of sub-areas); and,
  • demonstrates declining and sub-par EAV growth.
See Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit B - Sub Area Key.
The vacant parcels within the Project Area, which constitutes approximately 120.6 acres (31% of net land area, not including The Park), represented on 952 parcels and by 21 sub-areas for this Plan. The vacant portion of the Project Area is characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "blighted area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act: •   obsolete platting (37% of parcels);
  • diversity of ownership (43% of sub-areas);
  • tax delinquencies (21 % of vacant parcels; 50% of taxable vacant parcels);
    • deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas (94% of vacant parcels); and,
  • demonstrates declining or sub-par EAV growth.
For more detail on the basis for eligibility and definitions of these terms, refer to the Eligibility Study in Plan Appendix, Attachment Three - Eligibility Study.
Historic Equalized Assessed Values (EAV's) for the Project Area, the rate of EAV growth for the City and the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA for the period between 2008 and 2013 are considered to identify development
 
1 This is 42% greater than the statutory requirement. Under the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, for designation of an area as a Conservation Area, 50% or more of the buildings must be 35 years of age or older.
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page 11
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
activity and determine assessed value trends. As discussed in Section ll-B of Attachment Three - Eligibility Study, analysis of historic EAV for the Project Area indicated that the Project Area's EAV has declined in 2010, 2011, and 2012 and has also experienced growth at a rate less than that of the balance of the City and less than the annual Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA in those same years. Between 2008 and 2013, the EAV of the Project Area decreased from $119.5 million to $76.5 million (see Table 2-3 in Plan Appendix, Attachment Three - Eligibility Study). The table demonstrates that:
  1. In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the proposed Project Area has declined;
  2. In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the proposed Project Area has been less than the EAV growth of the remainder of the City; and,
  3. In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the proposed Project Area has been less than the CPI-U pf the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA.
While any one of the above conditions regarding property valuation is sufficient under the TIF Act to demonstrate evidence of a declining EAV, all 3 conditions are present in the proposed Project Area. A continuation of this minimal level of private investment may exacerbate deterioration and other conservation conditions within the Project Area. There is little incentive for commercial and residential developers to initiate new projects or make major investments in the Project Area, without public financial assistance that may include the use of tax increment financing.
Despite small incremental improvements scattered throughout the Project Area, there exist conditions that continue to threaten the public safety, health and welfare of the Project Area. While not an eligibility factor under the Act, crime statistics also provide evidence that these threatening conditions are present in the Project Area. Recent crime statistics (Chicago Tribune -2014, May 19. Retrieved from http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicaqo/community/ for the month of April 2014, obtained from the City of Chicago Data Portal) indicate the Washington Park Community Area currently ranks 7th among Chicago's 77 community areas in violent crime reports; 2nd for property crime reports; and 10th for quality of life crime reports. Other crime data sources may differ, but all indicated that the Washington Park Community Area has a high rate of crime. Furthermore, the presence of factors indicated by the Act include deteriorated, obsolete structures; building vacancies; inadequate utilities; land use incompatibilities; deteriorated streets and sidewalks; declining or sub-par EAV growth; and the predominance of underutilized, vacant and tax exempt or tax delinquent properties in the Project Area and may result in continued disinvestment that will not be overcome without action by the City. These conditions have been previously documented in this report. All properties within the Project Area will benefit from the TIF program.
 
2014
Page 12
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 4. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
 
The following goals and objectives are provided to guide the decisions and activities that will facilitate the revitalization of the Project Area: They generally reflect existing City policies in all or portions of the Project Area. These goals and objectives can be achieved through effective use of local, state and federal tools. They are meant to guide the review and development of future projects in the Project Area.
General Goals
  • Reduce or eliminate the conditions that qualify the Project Area as a Conservation/Blighted area.
  • Strengthen the economic well-being of the Project Area and the City by enhancing properties and the local tax base to their fullest potential.
  • Create new jobs and retain existing jobs for residents in the Project Area.
  • Improve the quality of life for the residents by creating viable commercial area.
  • Create an environment within the Project Area that will contribute to the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the Project Area and the City.
  • Preserve and enhance the historic or architecturally significant properties in the Project Area.
  • Improve and enhance access to transportation flow and public transportation facilities.
  • Improve the public infrastructure in the Project Area.
  • Encourage the participation of minorities and women in the redevelopment process of the Project Area.
Redevelopment Objectives
To achieve the general goals of this Plan, the following redevelopment objectives have been established:
  • Encourage private investment in new development and rehabilitation of buildings in the Project Area.
  • Revitalize and restore the physical and economic conditions in this once thriving neighborhood by removing structurally substandard buildings, obsolete building types, deleterious uses, and other blighting influences.
  • Assemble City-owned vacant lots and other underutilized land into viable disposition parcels in order to provide sites for development.
  • Use City programs, where appropriate, to create a unified identity that would enhance the marketability of the Project Area.
  • Improve the transportation access, traffic flow and safety particularly along 63rd Street, State Street and Michigan Avenue to accommodate an increase in both pedestrian and vehicular traffic to the businesses.
  • Encourage private investment in new development and rehabilitation of buildings in the Project Area.
  • Provide public infrastructure improvements throughout the Project Area. Replace and repair streets, alleys, sidewalks, and curbs, where necessary.
  • Provide public and private' infrastructure and streetscape improvements and other available assistance necessary to promote commercial (office and retail) uses in the Project Area.
 
2014
Page 13
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
  • Establish job training and job readiness programs to provide residents within and near the Project Area with skills necessary to secure jobs.
  • Attract new sales tax and real estate tax dollars to the City of Chicago.
 
2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page 14
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 5. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
The City proposes to achieve its redevelopment goals and objectives for the Project Area through the use of public financing techniques, including tax increment financing, and by undertaking some or all of the following actions:
 
Property Assembly, Site Preparation and Environmental Remediation
To meet the goals and objectives of the Plan, the City may acquire and assemble property throughout the Project Area. Land assemblage by the City may be by purchase, exchange, donation, lease, eminent domain or through the Tax Reactivation Program, and may be for the purpose 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.
Plan Appendix, Attachment 2, Exhibit H-1, Land Acquisition Overview Map indicates the parcels currently proposed to be acquired for redevelopment in the Project Area. Plan Appendix, Attachment 2, Exhibit H-2 contains Land Acquisition by Block and Parcel Identification Number which portrays the acquisition properties in more detail.
In connection with the City exercising its power to acquire real property not currently identified in Plan Appendix, Attachment 2, 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 (or any successor commission) and authorized by the City Council. Acquisition of such real property as may be authorized by the City Council does not constitute a change in the nature of this plan.
For properties described in Plan Appendix, Attachment 2: (1) the acquisition of occupied properties by the City shall commence within four years from the date of the publication of the ordinance approving the Plan; (2) the acquisition of vacant properties by the City shall commence within ten years from the date of publication of the ordinance authorizing the acquisition. In either case, acquisition shall be deemed to have commenced with the sending of an offer letter. After the expiration of the applicable period, the City may acquire such property pursuant to this Plan under the Act according to its customary procedures as described in the preceding paragraph.
Affordable Housing
The City requires that developers who receive TIF assistance for market rate housing set aside 20% of the units to meet affordability criteria established by the City's Department of Planning and Development or any successor agency. Generally, this means the affordable for-sale units should be priced at a level that is affordable to persons earning no more than 100% of the area median income, and affordable rental units should be affordable to persons earning no more than 60% of the area median income.
Intergovernmental and Redevelopment Agreements
The City may enter into redevelopment agreements or intergovernmental agreements with private entities or public entities to construct, rehabilitate, renovate or restore private or
 
2014
Page 15
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
public improvements on one (1) or several parcels (collectively referred to as "Redevelopment Projects"). Such redevelopment agreements may be needed to support the rehabilitation or construction of allowable private improvements, in accordance with the Plan; incur costs or reimburse developers for other eligible redevelopment project costs as provided in the Act in implementing the Plan; and provide public improvements and facilities which may include, but are not limited to utilities, street closures, transit improvements, streetscape enhancements, signalization, parking, surface right-of-way improvements, public schools and parks.
Terms of redevelopment as part of this redevelopment project may be incorporated in the appropriate redevelopment agreements. For example, the City may agree to reimburse a developer for incurring certain eligible redevelopment project costs under the Act. Such agreements may contain specific development controls as allowed by the Act.
Financial Impact on Taxing Districts
The Act requires an assessment of any financial impact of the Project Area on, or any increased demand for services from any taxing district affected by the Plan and a description of any program to address such financial impacts or increased demand. The City intends to monitor development in the Project 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.
Costs Eligible for Payment with TIF Funds Include:
Analysis, Professional Services and Administrative Activities
The City may undertake or engage professional consultants, engineers, architects, attorneys, and others to conduct various analyses, studies, administrative or legal services to establish, implement, and manage the Plan.
Financing Costs Pursuant to the Act
Interest on any obligations issued under the Act accruing during the estimated period of construction of the redevelopment project and other financing costs may be paid from the incremental tax revenues pursuant to the provisions of the Act.
Interest Costs Pursuant to the Act
Pursuant to the Act, the City may allocate a portion of the incremental tax revenues to pay or reimburse developers for interest costs incurred in connection with redevelopment activities in order to enhance the redevelopment potential of the Project Area.
Construction of New Low-Income Housing Pursuant to the Act
Pursuant to the Act, the City may pay from incremental tax revenues up to 50% of the cost of construction of new housing units to be occupied by low-income and very low-income households as defined in Section 3 of the Illinois Affordable Housing Act. The cost of construction of those units may be derived from the proceeds of bonds issued by the City under this act or other constitutional or statutory or from other sources of municipal revenue that may be reimbursed from incremental tax revenues or the proceeds of bonds issued to finance the construction of that housing.
 
2014
Page 16
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
SECTION 6. REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Plan seeks to maintain and enhance most of the existing land uses with a focus on residential and mixed use (defined as commercial, residential, and/or institutional uses) redevelopment. A mix of commercial and light industrial uses is planned for the frontage of Wentworth Avenue and portions of State Street. The construction of new infrastructure is seen as an essential part of needed redevelopment due to the documentation of inadequate utilities in much of the Project Area.
The plan recognizes that new investment in residential, institutional, commercial and mixed-use property is needed to improve the appearance, vibrancy, and overall economic health of the Project Area. Such investment will create the high quality environment that is required to sustain a revitalization of the Project Area. The major physical improvements anticipated as a result of implementing the proposed Plan are outlined below.
 
Residential Development
Residential uses may take the form of various single-family and multi-family developments, with density and height restrictions consistent with existing zoning. Open space and neighborhood-oriented community facilities are also acceptable in these residential areas along most frontages on Wabash, Michigan and Indiana Avenues. Since a majority of the existing Project Area is residential, the Plan seeks to promote residential infill on vacant properties and also encourages site assembly to allow for larger multi-family residential development where permitted. In areas where there are multiple adjacent vacant parcels and/or vacant residential buildings that are so deteriorated that demolition may become necessary in the near future, the Plan encourages site assembly for redevelopment of larger, multi-family residential development and infill housing.
As set forth in the Act, if the redevelopment plan for a redevelopment project area would result in the displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units, or if the redevelopment project area contains 75 or more inhabited residential units and a municipality is unable to certify that no displacement will occur, the municipality must prepare a housing impact study and incorporated the study in the redevelopment project plan.
 
The Project Area contains 3,590 inhabited residential units. The Plan provides for the development or redevelopment of several portions of the Project Area that may contain occupied residential units. As a result, it is possible that by implementation of this Plan, the displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units could occur.
The results of the housing impact study section are described in a separate report which presents certain factual information required by the Act. The report, prepared by the Consultant, is entitled Washington Park Project Area Tax Increment Financing Housing Impact Study, and is located in Plan Appendix, Attachment Six. Mixed Use (Commercial/Residential/lnstitutional),
The Plan recognizes that attractive new commercial development, coupled with stabilization and expansion of existing businesses, will encourage investment in residential property as well as provide a diverse mix of job opportunities for the residents of the Project Area. Additionally, the Plan seeks widespread residential development which will ultimately create an increased demand for commercial and retail uses. Currently, there are opportunities for several retail and
 
2014
Page 17
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
commercial corridors along the frontages of State Street, Michigan Avenue, Calumet Avenue and King Drive to compliment and promote expansion of existing smaller commercial nodes.
On State Street and Michigan Avenue there exists a diverse mix of commercial, retail and residential uses on the same block and many times on adjacent properties. Mixed use redevelopment is therefore encouraged along the frontages of State Street and Michigan Avenue, with the exception of the slated construction of a new park space south of 57th Place at State Street, to revitalize and strengthen these commercial corridors that serve residents and businesses in and around the Project Area.
Community organizations have expressed a particular desire for more restaurants, cultural venues, and retail merchandisers. In addition to providing an opportunity for retail development along State Street and Michigan Avenue, the Plan seeks to promote mixed use redevelopment along the west side of King Drive and along Calumet Avenue. Many of the existing multi-family housing units are currently vacant. Additionally, there are numerous vacant tax parcels. The Plan seeks to promote new commercial .redevelopment along these streets to create productive and vibrant commercial corridors that would provide a variety of job opportunities for existing and future residents of the Project Area.
Commercial and Light Industrial
The Plan seeks to promote the growth of existing commercial and light industrial uses within the Project Area and to encourage and attract new enterprises along Wentworth Avenue and along State Street south of 59th Street as welj as those areas south of 63rd Street where needed.
Parks and Open Space
There are plans to develop park space within the Project Area at the intersection of 57th Place and State Street. This new park space will be constructed around the Chicago Landmark Raber House which is located at 5760 S. Lafayette Avenue.
Public Improvements
The creation of public infrastructure is needed to complement and attract private sector investment. Infrastructure improvements planned for the Project Area may include, but are not limited to, the following:
  • Repair existing sidewalks, street furniture, street lighting, highlighting of pedestrian crosswalks, and other pedestrian-friendly amenities;
  • Repair curbs, gutters and pedestrian walkways within Washington Park.
  • Creation of additional neighborhood park space at the intersection of 57th Place and State Street.
  • Implementation of streetscape and building design guidelines that meet modern development needs and standards.
  • New street lighting and streetscape improvements along State Street, Michigan Avenue, Indiana Avenue, and King Drive in the Project Area, as well as installation of similar lighting where deemed necessary for health and safety.
  • Physical buffers or barriers between light industrial, intensive commercial uses and residential areas (such as fences, trees, bushes or other vegetation), to the extent possible;
  • Installation of additional traffic signals, signage, and traffic calming mechanisms where necessary;
 
2014
Page 18
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
•   Improvements that promote the use of public transportation and for transit-related facilities, including CTA bus and rail transit improvements.
 
2014
Page 19
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 7. GENERAL LAND USE PLAN
Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit I - Generalized Land Use Plan, identifies land use policies to be pursued in the implementation of the Plan. The Generalized Land Use Plan is intended to serve as a guide for land use improvements and developments within the Project Area.
The land uses proposed for the Project Area are consistent with the redevelopment goals of this Plan and are consistent with existing zoning. The Generalized Land Use Plan is intended to serve as a broad guide for land use and redevelopment policy. The Plan is general in nature to allow adequate flexibility to respond to shifts in the market and private investment.
The principal land use categories planned for the Project Area are residential and Mixed Use (Commercial, Residential, and/or Industrial). Residential uses may take the form of various single-family and multi-family developments, with density and height restrictions consistent with existing zoning. Open space and neighborhood-oriented community facilities and institutional uses are also acceptable in these residential areas.
Mixed use designation is intended in the eastern corridors of the Project Area - along State Street, Michigan Avenue, Calumet Avenue, and King Drive. The mixed use category allows for commercial, residential and/or institutional uses. The Plan seeks to enhance and promote existing and new commercial/residential development in the eastern section of the Project Area in addition to major north/south arterial streets. These corridors offer the best environment for creating a pedestrian-friendly zone with a broad mix of retail merchants such as restaurants, coffee shops, bakeries, specialty food stores and book stores.
New commercial and light industrial uses are particularly encouraged for properties fronting on Wentworth Avenue and LaSalle Street, as these streets offer the best environment for creating new commercial uses in this area as well as maintaining and providing expansion opportunities for existing light industrial uses already located near the "L" tracks and in those areas south of 63rd Street.
Additional park space is planned within the Project Area at the intersection of 57th Place and State Street. The plan also encourages any necessary improvements to the existing Washington Park.
These land use strategies are intended to direct development toward the most appropriate land use pattern for the various portions of the Project Area and enhance the overall development of the Project Area in accordance with the goals and objectives of the Plan. Locations of specific uses, or public infrastructure improvements, may vary from the Generalized Land Use Plan as a result of more detailed planning and site design activities. Such variations are permitted without amendment to the Plan as long as they are consistent with the Plan's goals and objectives and the land uses and zoning approved by the Chicago Plan Commission.
 
2014
Page 20
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
SECTION 8. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FINANCING
 
Tax increment financing is an economic development tool designed to facilitate the development of blighted areas and to arrest decline in areas that may become blighted without public intervention. It is expected that tax increment financing will be an important tool, but not the only one, of financing improvements and providing development incentives in the Project Area throughout its 23-year life.
Tax increment financing can only be used when private investment would not reasonably be expected to occur without public assistance. The Act sets forth the range of public assistance that may be provided.
It is anticipated that expenditures for redevelopment project costs will be carefully staged in a reasonable and proportional basis to coincide with expenditures for redevelopment by private developers and the projected availability of tax increment revenues.
 
The various redevelopment expenditures that are eligible for payment or reimbursement under the Act are reviewed below. Following this review is a list of estimated redevelopment project costs that are deemed to be necessary to implement this Plan (the "Redevelopment Project Costs").
In the event the Act is amended after the date of the approval of this Plan by the City Council of the City of Chicago to (a) include new eligible redevelopment project costs, 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 interest costs that may be paid under 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(11)), this Plan shall.be deemed to incorporate such additional, expanded or increased eligible costs as Redevelopment Project Costs under the Plan, to the extent permitted by the Act. In the event of such amendment(s) to the Act, the City may add any new eligible redevelopment project costs as a line item in Table 8.1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs or otherwise adjust the line items in Table 8.1 without amendment to this Plan, to the extent permitted by the Act. In no instance, however, shall such additions or adjustments result in any increase in the total Redevelopment Project Costs without a further amendment to this Plan.
 
Eligible Redevelopment Project Costs
Redevelopment project costs include the sum total of all reasonable or necessary costs incurred, estimated to be incurred, or incidental to this Plan pursuant the Act. Such costs may include, without limitation, the following:
  1. Costs of studies and surveys, development of plans and specifications, implementation and administration of the Plan including, but not limited to, staff and professional service costs for architectural, engineering, legal, financial, planning or other services (excluding lobbying expenses), provided that no charges for professional services are based on a percentage of the tax increment collected;
  2. The cost of marketing sites within the Project Area to prospective businesses, developers and investors;
 
2014
Page 21
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
    2. Property assembly costs, including, but not limited to, acquisition of land and other property, real or personal, or rights or interests therein, demolition of buildings, site preparation, site improvements 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, repair or remodeling of existing public or private buildings, fixtures and leasehold improvements; and the cost of replacing an existing public building, if pursuant to the implementation of a 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; including any direct cost or indirect costs relating to Green Globes or LEED certified construction elements or construction elements with an equivalent certification;
    4. Costs of the construction of public works or improvements, including any direct or indirect costs relating to Green Globes or LEED certified construction elements or construction elements with an equivalent certification subject to the limitations in Section 11-74.4-3(q)(4) of the Act;
    5. Costs of job training and retraining projects including the cost of "welfare-to-work" programs implemented by businesses located within the Project Area.
    6. 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 a period not exceeding 36 months following completion and including reasonable reserves related thereto;
    7. 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 Plan.
  2. Relocation costs to the extent that the City determines that relocation costs shall be paid or is required to make payment of relocation costs by federal or state law or by Section 74.4-3(n)(7) of the Act (see "Relocation" section, Plan Appendix, Attachment Six, Housing Impact Study, Addenda);
    1. Payment in lieu of taxes, as defined in the Act;
11.      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 (1) or more taxing districts, 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 the Project Area; and (ii) when incurred by a taxing district or taxing districts other than the City, are set forth in a written agreement by or among the City and the taxing district or taxing districts, which
 
2014
Page 22
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
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 of the program and sources of funds to pay for the same, and the term 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, 110 ILCS 805/3-37, 805/3-38, 805/3-40 and 805/3-40.1, and by school districts of costs pursuant to Sections 10-22.20aand 10-23.3a of the School Code, 105 ILCS 5/10-22.20a and 5/10-23.3a.
  1. 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;
    • such payments in any one (1) year may not exceed 30% of the annual interest costs incurred by the redeveloper with regard to the redevelopment project during that year;
    • if there are not sufficient funds available in the special tax allocation fund 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 of such interest payments paid pursuant to the Act may not exceed 30% of the total: (i) cost paid or incurred by the redeveloper for such redevelopment project; (ii) redevelopment project costs excluding any property assembly costs and any relocation costs incurred by the City pursuant to the Act; and
    • up to 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.
  • Unless specifically authorized by the Act, the cost of construction of new privately-owned buildings shall not be an eligible redevelopment project cost,
  • An elementary, secondary or unit school district's increased costs attributable to assisted housing units will be reimbursed as provided in the Act;
  • Instead of the eligible costs provided for in (12) above, the City may pay up to 50% of the cost of construction, renovation and/or rehabilitation of all low-income and very low-income housing units (for ownership 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-income and very low-income households, only the low- and very low-income households shall be eligible for benefits under the Act; and
  • The cost of day care services for children of employees from low-income families working for businesses located within the Project Area and all or a portion of the cost of operation of day care centers established by Project Area businesses to serve employees from low-income families working in businesses located in the Project Area. For the purposes of this paragraph, "low-income families" means families whose annual income does not exceed 80% of the City, county or regional median income as
 
2014
Page 23
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
determined from time to time by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
17. A public library district's increased costs attributable to assisted housing units will be reimbursed as set forth in the Act.
18. If a special service area has been established pursuant to the Special Service Area Tax Act, 35 ILCS 235/0.01 ef sec/., then any tax increment revenues derived from the tax imposed pursuant to the Special Service Area Tax Act may be used within the Project Area for the purposes permitted by the Special Service Area Tax Act as well as the purposes permitted by the Act.
 
Estimated Project Costs
A range of activities and improvements may be required to implement the Plan. The proposed eligible activities and their estimated costs over the life of the Project Area are briefly described below and shown in Table 8.1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs.
  1. Professional services including planning studies, legal, surveys, real estate marketing costs, fees and other costs related to the implementation and administration of the Plan. This budget element provides for studies and survey costs for planning and implementation of the project, including planning and legal fees, architectural and engineering, development site marketing, and financial and special service costs. (Estimated cost: $750,000)
  2. Property assembly costs, including, but not limited to, acquisition of land and other property, real or personal, or rights or interests therein, and other appropriate and eligible costs needed to prepare the property for redevelopment. These costs may include the reimbursement of acquisition costs incurred by the City and private developers. Land acquisition may include acquisition of both improved and vacant property in order to create development sites, accommodate public rights-of-way or to provide other public facilities needed to achieve the goals and objectives of the Plan. Property assembly costs also include: demolition of existing improvements, including clearance of blighted properties or clearance required to prepare sites for new development, site preparation, including grading, and other appropriate and eligible site activities needed to facilitate new construction, and environmental remediation costs associated with property assembly which are required to render the property suitable for redevelopment. (Estimated cost: $3,000,000)
  3. Costs of Rehabilitation, reconstruction, repair or remodeling of existing public or private buildings and fixtures; and up to 50% of the cost of construction of low-income and very low-income housing units. (Estimated cost: $13,250,000)
  4. Costs of Construction of public improvements, infrastructure and facilities. These improvements are intended to improve access within the Project Area, stimulate private investment and address other identified public improvement needs, and may include all or a portion of a taxing district's eligible costs, including increased costs of the Board of Education attributable to assisted housing units within the Project Area in accordance with the requirements of the Act. (Estimated cost: $5,000,000)
 
      1      1      
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page 24
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
  2. Relocation costs. (Estimated cost: $1,000,000)
  3. Job Training, Re-training, and Welfare-to-Work Programs. (Estimated cost: $1,000,000)
  4. Interest costs related to redevelopment projects, pursuant to the provisions of the Act. (Estimated cost: $500,000) •
 8.      Provision of day care services as provided in the Act. (Estimated cost: $500,000)
The estimated total of all eligible project costs over the life of the Redevelopment Project Area is approximately $25,000,000. All project cost estimates are in 2014 dollars. Any bonds or other tax increment allocation revenue obligations issued to finance portions of the Redevelopment Project may include an amount of proceeds sufficient to pay customary and reasonable charges associated with issuance of such obligations, as well as to provide for capitalized interest and reasonably required reserves, The total project cost figure excludes any costs for the issuance of bonds. Adjustments to estimated line items, which are upper estimates for these costs, are expected and may be made without amendment to the Plan.
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. While development in within the Project Area will greatly influence the budget available, the Consultants are unaware of any pending projects at this time.
 
2014
Page 25
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
TABLE 8.1
ESTIMATED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COSTS
 
Eligible ExpenseEstimated Cost1. Analysis, Administration, Studies, Surveys, Legal, Marketing, etc.$750,0002. Property Assembly including Acquisition, Site Prep and Demolition, Environmental Remediation$3,000,0003. Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, Fixtures and Leasehold Improvements, Affordable Housing'Construction and Rehabilitation Cost$13,250,0004. Public Works & Improvements, including streets and utilities, parks and open space, public facilities (schools & other public facilities)2$5,000,0005. Relocation Costs$1,000,0006. Job Training, Retraining, Welfare-to-Work$1,000,0007. Interest Subsidy$500,0008. Day Care Services$500,000TOTAL REDEVELOPMENT COSTS3 4$25,000,0005
 
 
2      This category may also include paying for or reimbursing (i) an elementary, secondary or unit school district's increased costs attributed to assisted housing units, and (ii) capital costs of taxing districts impacted by the redevelopment Project Area. As permitted by the Act, to the extent the City by written agreement accepts and approves the same, the City may pay or reimburse all or a portion of a taxing district's capital costs resulting from a redevelopment project necessarily incurred or to be incurred within a taxing district in furtherance or the objectives of the Plan.
3      Total Redevelopment Project Costs represent an upper limit on expenditures that are to be 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 are may be made in line items without amendment to this Plan, to the extent permitted by the Act.
4      The amount of the Total Redevelopment Project Costs that can be incurred in the Project Area will be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated from the Project Area only by a public right-of-way, that are permitted under the Act to be paid, and are paid, from the incremental property taxes generated in the Project Area, but will not be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in the Project Area which are paid from incremental property taxes generated in contiguous redevelopment project areas or those separated from the Project Area only by a Public right-of-way.
5      All costs are in 2014 dollars and may be increased by five percent (5%) after adjusting for inflation reflected in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) 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 Cost identified above.
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page 26
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Sources of Funds
 
The funds necessary to pay for Redevelopment Project Costs and secure municipal obligations issued for such costs are to be derived primarily from Incremental Property Taxes. Other sources of funds which may be used to pay for Redevelopment Project Costs or secure municipal obligations are land disposition proceeds, state and federal grants, investment income, private financing, and other legally permissible funds as the City may deem appropriate. The City may incur redevelopment project costs which are paid for from funds of the City other than incremental taxes, and the City may then be reimbursed for such costs from incremental taxes. Also, the City may permit the utilization of guarantees, deposits and other forms of security made available by private sector developers.
Additionally, the City may utilize revenues, other than State sales tax increment revenues, received under the Act from one redevelopment project area for eligible costs in another redevelopment project area that is either contiguous to, or is separated only by a public right-of-way from, the redevelopment project area from which the revenues are received.
The Project Area may be contiguous to or separated by only 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 Project Area to pay eligible redevelopment project costs, or obligations issued to pay such costs, in other contiguous redevelopment project areas, or project areas separated only by a public right-of-way, and vice versa. The amount of revenue from the Project Area made available to support such contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated only by a public right-of-way, when added to all amounts used to pay eligible redevelopment project costs within the Project Area, shall not at any time exceed the total redevelopment project costs described in this Plan.
The Project 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 5/11-74.6-1 et seq.). If the City finds that the goals, objectives and financial success of such contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated only by a public right-of-way, are interdependent with those of the Project Area, the City may determine that it is in the best interests of the City and the furtherance of the purposes of the Plan that net revenues from the Project 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 Project 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 Project Area and such areas. The amount of revenue from the Project Area so made available, when added to all amounts used to pay eligible redevelopment project costs within the Project Area, or other areas described in the preceding paragraph, shall not at any time exceed the total redevelopment project costs described in Table 8.1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs.
Development of the Project Area would not be reasonably expected to occur without the use of the incremental revenues provided by the Act. Redevelopment project costs include those eligible project costs set forth in the Act. Tax increment financing or other public sources will be used only to the extent needed to secure commitments for private redevelopment activity.
 
2014
Page 27
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Nature and Term of Obligations to be Issued
The City may issue obligations secured by Incremental Property Taxes pursuant to Section 11-74.4-7 of the Act. To enhance the security of a municipal obligation, the City may pledge its full faith and credit through the issuance of general obligation bonds. Additionally, the City may provide other legally permissible credit enhancements to any obligations issued pursuant to the Act.
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 twenty-third calendar year following the year in which the ordinance approving the Project Area is adopted (i.e., assuming City Council approval of the Project Area and Plan in 2014, by December 31, 2038). Also, the final maturity date of any such obligations which are issued may not be later than 20 years from their respective dates of issue. One (1) or more series of obligations may be sold at one (1) or more times in order to implement this Plan. Obligations may be issued on a parity or subordinated basis.
In addition to paying Redevelopment Project Costs, Incremental Property Taxes may be used for the scheduled retirement of obligations, mandatory or optional redemptions, establishment of debt service reserves and bond sinking funds. To the extent that Incremental Property Taxes are not needed for these purposes, and are not otherwise required, pledged, earmarked or otherwise designated for the payment of Redevelopment Project Costs, any excess Incremental Property Taxes shall then become available for distribution annually to taxing districts having jurisdiction over the Project Area in the manner provided by the Act.
 
Most Recent Equalized Assessed Valuation
The purpose of identifying the most recent equalized assessed valuation ("EAV") of the Project Area is to provide an estimate of the initial EAV, which the Cook County Clerk will certify for the purpose of annually calculating the incremental EAV and Incremental Property Taxes of the Project Area. The 2012 EAV of all taxable parcels within the Project Area is approximately $76,534,773. This total EAV amount, by Property Index Number ("PIN"), is summarized in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Four - Estimated EAV by Tax Parcel. The EAV is subject to verification by the Cook County Clerk. After verification, the final figure shall be certified by the Cook County Clerk, and shall become the Certified Initial EAV from which all Incremental Property Taxes in the Project Area will be calculated by Cook County. The Plan has utilized the EAVs for the 2012 tax year. If the 2013 EAV shall become available prior to the date of the adoption of the Plan by the City Council, the City may update the Plan by replacing the 2012 EAV with the 2013 EAV.
 
Anticipated Equalized Assessed Valuation
By tax year 2037 (collection year 2038) and following substantial completion of the Washington Park Redevelopment Plan, the EAV of the Project Area is estimated to be approximately $105 million. This estimated value is based on several key assumptions, including: 1) redevelopment in the project area will occur over the next five (5) to ten years; 2) several existing low value uses will be redeveloped with new development and underutilized buildings will experience renovation and/or increased occupancy; 3) an estimated inflation rate in EAV of 0.71 percent through 2037 (somewhat less than the historic CPI-U), realized in triennial assessment years
 
2014
Page 28
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
only; and 4) for all future years, EAV is calculated using the 2013 state equalization factor for Cook County of 2.6621.
 
Financial Impact on Taxing Districts
The Act requires an assessment of any financial impact of the Project Area on, or any increased demand for services from, any taxing district affected by the Plan and a description of any program to address such financial impacts or increased demand. The City intends to monitor development in the Project 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 taxing districts will be eligible to levy taxes on properties located within the Project Area:
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, etc.
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.
School Districts for the City of Chicago: General responsibilities of the School Districts include the provision, maintenance and operations of educational facilities and the provision of educational services for kindergarten through twelfth grade.
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 of the public.
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago: The Water Reclamation District provides the main trunk lines for the collection of wastewater from the City and for the treatment and disposal thereof.
The proposed revitalization of the Project Area would be expected to create moderate demands on public services. The renovation or development of new residential property on underutilized parcels, deteriorated commercial parcels, or currently vacant residential units could increase the demand for school services as well as parks and other population-based services.
Within the land use designations on the Generalized Land Use Plan (Plan Appendix, Attachment Two - Exhibit I) that allow for mixed use which includes residential uses, approximately 500 new dwelling units could be constructed over the next 5 to 10 years. The total population of the Project Area could increase from the current number of residents. The number of school age children in the Project Area is also likely to increase as a result of
 
2014
Page 29
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
residential redevelopment. At this time, as there are schools within the surrounding areas which may or may not be currently running at capacity, TIF sources may possibly be used to accommodate increased enrollment in existing schools or to build new schools should the need arise.
The proposed residential and commercial redevelopment may increase the demand for improved water and sewer services and similar types of infrastructure, including the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District. As discussed below, the Project Budget's $11 million for "Public Works and Improvements" is intended, in part, to address such improved service and infrastructure needs.
Redevelopment of the Project Area may result in changes to the level of required public services. The required level of these public services will depend upon the uses that are ultimately included within the Project Area. Although the specific nature and timing of the private investment expected to be attracted to the Project Area cannot be precisely quantified at this time, a general assessment of financial impact can be made based upon the level of development and timing anticipated by the proposed Plan.
When completed, developments in the Project Area will generate property tax revenues for all taxing districts. Other revenues may also accrue to the City in the form of sales tax, business fees and licenses, and utility user fees. The costs of some services such as water and sewer service, building inspections, etc. are typically covered by user charges. However, others are not and should be subtracted from the estimate of property tax revenues to assess the net financial impact of the Plan on the affected taxing districts.
For the taxing districts levying taxes on property within the Project Area, increased service demands are expected to occur. Prior to the completion of the Plan, certain taxing districts may experience an increased demand for services. However, upon completion of the Plan, all taxing districts are expected to share the benefits of a substantially improved tax base.
In anticipation of the increased demand, $11 million has been allocated to public improvements, including "taxing district capital costs" to address potential demands associated with implementing the Plan.
Real estate tax revenues resulting from increases in the EAV, over and above the Certified Initial EAV established with the adoption of the Plan, will be used to pay eligible redevelopment costs in the Project Area. Following termination of the Project Area, the real estate tax revenues attributable to the increase in the EAV over the Certified Initial EAV, will be distributed to all taxing districts levying taxes against property located in the Project Area. Successful implementation of the Plan is expected to result in new development and private investment on a scale sufficient to overcome blighted conditions and substantially improve the long-term economic value of the Project Area.
 
Completion of the Redevelopment Project and Retirement of Obligations to Finance Redevelopment Project Costs
The Plan will be completed, and all obligations issued to finance redevelopment costs shall be retired, no later than December 31st 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
 
2014
Page 30
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
calendar year following the year in which the ordinance approving the Plan is adopted (assuming adoption in 2014, by December 31, 2038).
 
2014
Page 31
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 9. HOUSING IMPACT STUDY
 
As set forth in the Act, if the redevelopment plan for a redevelopment project area would result in the displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units, or if the redevelopment project area contains 75 or more inhabited residential units and a municipality is unable to certify that no displacement will occur, the municipality must prepare a housing impact study and incorporate the study in the Redevelopment Project Plan.
The Project Area contains 4,375 inhabited residential units. The Plan provides for the development or redevelopment of several portions of the Project Area that may contain occupied residential units. As a result, it is possible that by implementation of this Plan, the displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units could occur.
The results of the housing impact study are described in a separate report which presents certain factual information required by the Act. The Report, prepared by the Consultant, is entitled Redevelopment Project Area Tax Increment Financing Program Housing Impact Study and is attached as Plan Appendix, Attachment Six to this Plan.
 
2014
Page 32
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
SECTION 10. PROVISIONS FOR AMENDING THE PLAN
 
The Plan may be amended pursuant to the provisions of the Act.
 
2014
Page 33
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
SECTION 11. CITY OF CHICAGO COMMITMENT TO FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
 
The City is committed to and will affirmatively implement the following principles with respect to this Plan:
  1. The assurance of equal opportunity in all personnel and employment actions with respect to the Redevelopment Project, including but not limited to: hiring, training, transfer, promotion, discipline, fringe benefits, salary, employment working conditions, termination, etc., without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, marital status, parental status, military discharge status, source of income, or housing status.
  2. Redevelopers must meet the City of Chicago's standards for participation of 24 percent Minority Business Enterprises and 4 percent Woman Business Enterprises and the City Resident Construction Worker Employment Requirement as required in redevelopment agreements.
  3. This commitment to affirmative action and nondiscrimination will ensure that all members of the protected groups are sought out to compete for all job openings and promotional opportunities.
  4. Redevelopers will meet City standards for any applicable prevailing wage rate as ascertained by the Illinois Department of Labor to all project employees.
The City shall have the right in its sole discretion to exempt certain small business, residential property owners and developers from the above.
 
2014
Page 34
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project       City of Chicago
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT ONE -LEGAL DESCRIPTION
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
THAT PART OF SECTIONS 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 21 AND 22 IN TOWNSHIP 38 NORTH, RANGE
14 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE
SOUTH 16 FEET OF LOT 6 OF SOUERBRY & GRUS' SUBDIVISION IN THE
NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 16 AFORESAID RECORDED SEPTEMBER 24, 1868
AS DOCUMENT 183534; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY
LINE OF GARFIELD BLVD. TO THE WEST LINE OF THE CHICAGO, ROCK
ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF THE CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TO THE NORTH LINE OF
SECTION 16; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 16 TO THE EAST
LINE OF THE CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE CHICAGO,
ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF GARFIELD BLVD.; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF GARFIELD BLVD. TO A POINT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN BLOCK 2 IN YERBY'S SUBDIVISION RECORDED OCTOBER 17, 1857 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 93105 SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF INDIANA AVE; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF INDIANA AVENUE TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 55TH PLACE SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN SUBDIVISION OF LOT 25, 26, 27 OF BLOCK 2 OF YERBY'S SUBDIVISION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 25, 1889 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 1160736; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 55TH PLACE TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 16 FEET OF LOT 2 IN BLOCK 2 OF HANCE'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST 16 FEET OF LOT 2 AND ITS SOUTHERLY EXTENSION TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE ALLEY LYING SOUTH OF 55TH PLACE; THENCE EAST TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 11 FEET OF LOT 11 IN BLOCK 2 OF HANCE'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST 11 FEET OF LOT 11 TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 56TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 56TH STREET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 18 FEET OF LOT 12 IN BLOCK 2 OF HANCE'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST 18 FEET OF LOT .12 TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE ALLEY LYING NORTH OF 56TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID ALLEY TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 23 FEET OF LOT 1 IN BLOCK 2 OF HANCE'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST 23 FEET OF LOT 1 TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 55TH PLACE; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 55TH PLACE TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. DRIVE (SOUTH PARK AVE); THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. DRIVE (SOUTH PARK AVE) TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 51ST STREET; THENCE WEST TO THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WEST LINE OF SOUTH PARK AVENUE AS LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST % OF SECTION 10 AFORESAID; THENCE NORTH TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 51ST STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 51ST STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COTTAGE GROVE AVENUE EXTENDED NORTH; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COTTAGE GROVE AVENUE TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH STREET; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. DRIVE (SOUTH PARK AVENUE); THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. DRIVE (SOUTH PARK AVENUE) TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 63RD STREET ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST
 
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page Al-1
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
CORNER OF LOT 10 IN BLOCK 2 IN SONNENSCHEIN & SOLOMON'S SUBDIVISION RECORDED APRIL 20, 1891 AS DOCUMENT 1453254; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 63RD STREET TO THE CENTER LINE OF PRAIRIE AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID CENTER LINE OF PRAIRIE AVENUE TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 12 IN SUBDIVISION OF THE EAST 72 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 12 IN SUBDIVISION OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST V* OF SECTION 22 TO THE EAST LINE OF INDIANA AVENUE; THENCE WESTERLY TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID AND THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE STREET; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE STREET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3 IN 64th AND STATE STREETS SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE NORTHWEST % OF THE NORTHWEST % OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 327.80 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 3 IN 64th AND STATE STREETS SUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN CITY PRODUCTS CORPORATION SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST "A OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 25.67 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 187.50 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 88.99 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1 SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH SECTION 22; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 27 IN BRACKETT'S RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 TO 30 IN JUNCTION GROVE, ARTEMUS WHITE AND FRANCIS B. DODSWORTH'S SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/i OF SECTION 22 AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 27 AND LOT 28 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 28 IN BRACKETT'S RESUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 28 AFORESAID TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 28 BEING ALSO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 66™ STREET; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 66™ STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE STREET; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE STREET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 66™ STREET AS LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST V* OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 66™ STREET TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF PERRY AVENUE; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF PERRY AVENUE TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF VACATED PERRY AVENUE AS VACATED BY DOC. 89170528; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF VACATED PERRY AVENUE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF LOT 1 BEING 49.50 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 1 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION OF LOTS 3 AND 4 OF BLOCK 13 OF SKINNER AND JUDD'S SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTHEAST V* OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID; THENCE WEST ALONG A LINE BEING 49.50 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1 TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID
 
2014
Page Al-2
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
LOT 1; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 AND ITS NORTHERLY EXTENSION TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8 IN BLOCK 13 IN SKINNER AND JUDD'S SUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 8 A DISTANCE OF 86 FEET; THENCE NORTH TO THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 8 AT A POINT BEING 86 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 8 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 8 AND ITS SOUTHWESTERLY EXTENSION TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 65th STREET AS LOCATED IN THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 21 AFORESAID; THENCE WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 65th STREET. TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE DAN RYAN EXPRESSWAY ALSO BEING A POINT 182.80 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 5 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION OF LOTS 4, 5 AND 6 OF BLOCK 8 OF SKINNER AND JUDD'S SUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE DAN RYAN EXPRESSWAY TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 8 IN BLOCK 3 IN SKINNER AND JUDD'S SUBDIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE EAST TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 40 FEET OF LOT 8 LYING 50.76 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 40 FEET OF LOT 8 AFORESAID EXTENDED NORTH TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 64th SREET; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 64™ STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF YALE AVENUE; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF YALE AVENUE TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 63rd STREET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 34 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF 63RD STREET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 30 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 30 IN BLOCK 3 A DISTANCE OF 38 FEET; THENCE NORTHEAST TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 31 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION SAID POINT BEING 12 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 31; THENCE NORTH TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF A PUBLIC ALLEY LYING NORTH OF 63RD STREET SAID POINT ALSO BEING A POINT ON LOT 22 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE PUBLIC ALLEY, TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE VACATED ALLEY IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF THE VACATED PUBLIC ALLEY TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF ENGLEWOOD AVENUE; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF ENGLEWOOD AVENUE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 22 IN BLOCK 3 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 35 IN BLOCK 2 IN I.J. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 20 FOOT ALLEY; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID ALLEY TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 17 IN BLOCK 1 OF IRA J. NICHOLS SUBDIVISION;
THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 17 AND THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 15 AND 16 IN BLOCK 1 TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH SAID BLOCK 1; THENCE NORTHWEST
ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EAST LINE OF THE 20 FOOT VACATED ALLEY IN BLOCK 1 OF IRA J. NICHOLS SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID VACATED ALLEY TO THE SOUTH LINE
 
2014      Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
Page Al-3
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
OF AN ALLEY SOUTH OF 61st PLACE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 9 IN BLOCK 7 IN ASSESSOR'S DIVISION OF OUTLOTS 17 TO 21 OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES' SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF A PUBLIC ALLEY LYING EAST OF PRINCETON AVENUE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 61ST PLACE; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF 61ST PLACE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 20 FEET OF LOT 8 IN THE SUBDIVISION OF THE WEST 300 FEET OF PART OF BLOCK 5 OF ASSESSOR'S DIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE WEST 20 FEET OF LOT 8 TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE ALLEY LYING NORTH OF 61ST PLACE; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID ALLEY TO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 4 IN ASSESSOR'S DIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 4 TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 61 ST STREET; THENCE NORTH TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF THE SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH 148.56 FEET OF OUTLOT 18 AND THE EAST 1/2 OF LOT 19 OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES' SUBDIVISION SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 61ST STREET; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 17 TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 16 FOOT ALLEY IN SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH 148.56 FEET OF THE E 72 RECORDED AUGUST 22, 1881 DOCUMENT 344112; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID 16 FOOT ALLEY; THENCE EAST ALONG THE. NORTH LINE OF SAID ALLEY TO A POINT 11.12 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 24 IN THE SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH 148.56 FEET OF OUTLOT 18 AND THE EAST 1/2 OF LOT 19 OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES' SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY TO A POINT 7.32 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 24 SAID NORTHEAST CORNER ALSO BEING THE INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH PLACE; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH PLACE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 25 FEET OF LOT 26 IN D.C. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION EXTENDED TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60TH PLACE; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE AND ITS SOUTHERLY EXTENSION AND |TS NORTHERLY EXTENSION TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF A 16 FOOT PUBLIC ALLEY IN D.C. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE EAST TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 11 FEET OF LOT 16 IN D.C. NICHOL'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60™ STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 60™ STREET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION OF PART OF BLOCK 5 IN ASSESSOR'S DIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF LOT 7 TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE ALLEY LYING NORTH OF 60TH STREET; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 16 FOOT PUBLIC ALLEY TO A POINT WITH THE EXTENSION OF THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 50 FEET OF LOT 11 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION AFORESAID; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 59TH PLACE; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 59TH PLACE TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 19 IN BLOCK 1 IN MICHAEL REICH'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOTS 19 & 29 IN BLOCK 1 TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 59TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 59TH STREET TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF WENTWORTH AVENUE; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF WENTWORTH AVENUE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
 
2014
Page Al-4
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT TWO -MAPS AND PLAN EXHIBITS A-l
 
 
 
 
■UU* 100 Nrilli Li5r."J« SUM, Suim 1S'.5 ■ On:tfi. fiixl*
 
Exhibit A - Boundary Map of TIF Area
 
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area      *&£3§gS'r #
City of Chicago, Illinois      P^W PLAN®31E&§
 
 
 
 
[QQ] 100 North LiSA SSKI. StM5:5 • Chup. Cirrts K*0?
 
 
Exhibit B - Sub Area Key
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
a3
L^__i      i_i till      I a      li. i—iwjji:-
P  I -Ir-^-i—iiirirxingiiJiiiLi.!      rsi P—|
 
i !. i rt      r—1 i  i  i p^ii—-i       ■      i—■
Legend
^22 Single-Family Residential
| Redevelopment Project Area Boundary Industrial
$^$$$| Two-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Commercial Office Commercial Retail Commercial Service
Mixed Use
 
'GO] IOC North USnh        Sub W'i • axxfi, Llinoli 6060?
 
Exhibit C - Existing Land Use
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
'OG} IOOHorttiLiEdaSIiKLSuxlA15>QKX)a,CinnbbOB02
 
 
Exhibit Dl - Existing Conditions (Northwest)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
TT
in
 
□    Obsolete Platting
Diversity of Ownership
Legend
^^^^Redevelopment Project Area Boundary      O      Site Deterioration      «      Excessive Coverage
  • Over 35 Years of Age      *      Dilapidation      V      Vacant ^
  • Deterioration      ■      Obsolete      +      Deterioration in Neighboring /^y^ Deleterious Land Use or Layout
 
 
 
 
 
 
'GO'. IOC Haiti LiSJbiSuKl Sua 1511 • Ukjqu. anolj £0602
 
 
Exhibit D2 - Existing Conditions (Northeast)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
May 2014
 
 
 
Exhibit D3 - Existing Conditions (Southwest)      nr.;.' .w.„ i/t.       ,^„.;^-^. .%„■.
A^-wmCA      LJJl IO0NWIiLjStlii5lift1lSuiBjlS,.5.artxp.WTrtjB0eC'2
 
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area t,v*«tss' City of Chicago, Illinois PG^VPLAB^EBtS
 
J Redevelopment Project Area Boundary    O    Site Deterioration    *    Excessive Coverage      □    Obsolete Platting
*      Over 35 Years of Age      *     Dilapidation      V    Vacant      Diversity of Ownership
•      Deterioration      ■    Obsolete      +    Deterioration in Neighboring y^/*^ Deleterious Land Use or Layout
 
 
 
 
—       
 
 
 
 
. (555) (ST?
N
May 2014
m
YY/Y/Zs
 
 
jCJUH IR3KDrttiuSnlBSkK1.Su:bl3l!i>aioguIRinniieUQOZ
 
Exhibit D4 - Existing Conditions (Southeast)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
'GUI 10? Nutti LiSflta SU*\ SuiSt ifi--5 • Orjfju, lilKris 61602
 
 
Exhibit D5 - Existing Conditions (Park)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
• QQJ inQNu1hLiSr&>5bwl.Su!L>lS,.5 • Ukiju.IkncdsEOC02
 
 
Exhibit D6 - Existing Conditions (Addition)
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
May 2014
vmmm i amp
 
'OQj 100 HutiLk&i* ShMl, Si"- IS15 • Cltfuou, Dnnil 606C2
 
 
Exhibit E - Vacant Land
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
 
 
Exhibit F - Existing Zoning
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
iHILT; 10G Norm LiSrfrt SSwl, S*3; Ui5 ■ Qrajo, CmLs B0S02
 
 
Exhibit G - Adjacent TIF / Redevelopment Areas
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
•UL-Tj 110 Nrxttl LcSr.!lP Ht*d.       ISl'j ■ Chi:.,:. Mini, 60n*J
 
Exhibit H-l - Land Acquisiton
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
 
 
5/30/2014
EXHIBIT H-2
LAND ACQUISITION LIST
 
 
■ ■ #. ■PIN120-15-101-011-0000220-15-101-012-0000320-15-101-014-0000420-15-101-015-0000520-15-101-017-0000620-15-109-039-0000720-15-109-040-0000820-15-109-041-0000920-15-116-024-00001020-15-122-021-00001120-15-123-011-00001220-15-123-012-00001320-15-310-007-00001420-15-310-029-00001520-15-312-001-00001620-15-312-002-00001720-15-312-003-00001820-15-312-004-00001920-15-312-005-00002020-15-312-012-00002120-15-312-013-00002220-15-312-014-00002320-15-312-015-00002420-15-312-016-0000
# •PIN. ■■2520-15-312-018-00002620-15-312-019-00002720-15-312-021-00002820-15-312-022-00002920-15-312-023-00003020-15-312-024-00003120-15-312-044-00003220-15-312-046-00003320-16-218-018-00003420-16-218-021-00003520-16-218-022-00003620-16-218-035-00003720-16-218-036-00003820-16-218-037-00003920-16-218-045-00004020-16-218-051-00004120-16-218-061-00004220-16-219-001-00004320-16-219-016-00004420-16-219-028-00004520-16-219-052-00004620-16-220-003-00004720-16-220-005-0000#■PIN:4820-16-220-032-00004920-16-220-033-00005020-16-221-004-00005120-16-221-006-00005220-16-221-007-00005320-16-221-008-00005420-16-221-030-00005520-16-221-032-00005620-16-221-033-00005720-16-221-035-00005820-16-221-049-00005920-16-414-023-00006020-16-414-035-00006120-16-414-036-00006220-16-414-049-00006320-16-414-050-00006420-15-312-017-00006520-15-312-038-00006620-15-316-001-00006720-15-316-002-00006820-16-218-044-00006920-16-218-056-00007020-16-221-034-0000
 
May 2014
 
 
 
 
 
Exhibit I - General Land Use Plan
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois
fi*"l!*~1j \*rtKMt_!'/t,_t Suifftfrn 'wtfrt-firi'xtx, >'/»*'. • OCR 100 Wrti LiStto Sfcort, Sutu 1515 • QtCJji. Girrts 606CI
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT THREE -ELIGIBILITY STUDY
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WASHINGTON PARK TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REDEVELOPMENT AREA PROJECT AND PLAN
 
ELIGIBILITY STUDY
 
 
 
Prepared for: The City of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, Mayor
 
 
Department of Planning and Development Andrew J. Mooney, Commissioner
 
 
 
 
Prepared By: Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises, Inc. And
PGAV PLANNERS Assisted by Goodman Williams Group
 
 
 
 
May 28, 2014
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
I. Introduction
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises ("ERSE") in conjunction with PGAV PLANNERS (the "Consultant") has been retained by the City of Chicago (the "City") to prepare a Tax Increment Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the proposed redevelopment project area known as the Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area"). Prior to preparation of the Redevelopment Plan, the Consultant undertook various surveys and investigations of the Project Area to determine whether the Project Area qualifies for designation as a tax increment financing district, pursuant to the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et seq., as amended ("the Act").
This report includes the analyses and findings of the Consultant's work, which is the responsibility of the Consultant. This assignment is the responsibility of the Consultant which 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 Project Area as a redevelopment project area under the Act, and 2) on the fact that ERSE has obtained the necessary information to conclude that the Project Area can be designated as a redevelopment project area in compliance with the Act.
Following this introduction, Section II presents background information of the Project Area including the geographic location, description of current conditions and area data; Section III documents the building condition assessment and qualifications of the Project Area as a combination conservation area and vacant blighted area under the Act; and Section IV, Summary and Conclusions, documents the findings of the Eligibility Study.
This Eligibility Study is a part of the overall tax increment redevelopment plan (the "Plan") for the Project Area. Other portions of the Plan contain information and documentation as required by the Act for a redevelopment plan. '
 
2014
A3 - 1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION A.    Location and Size of Project Area
The Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area is located about seven (7) miles south of Downtown Chicago. The Project Area can be separated into three sections: 1. Washington Park (the "Park") is bounded by 51st and 60th Streets on the north and south, and Cottage Grove Avenue and Martin Luther King Drive on the east and west; 2. the neighborhood section which is generally bounded by Martin Luther King Drive and Washington Park on the east, the Dan Ryan Expressway on the west, Garfield Boulevard on the north and 63rd Street on the south; and 3. the industrial area south of 63rd Street to the Chicago Skyway, west of Prairie Avenue. The neighborhood section is roughly one (1) mile north to south and 0.8 miles east to west, centered on 59th Street and Michigan Avenue. The Park is roughly 1.2 miles north to south and 0.5 miles east to west, centered just north of the intersection of Morgan Drive and Rainey Drive. The industrial section is roughly two-thirds of a mile north to south and a third of a mile east to west, with a significant section of this area used as railway siding.
The Project Area contains approximately 988.4 acres in 2,272 parcels. The Project Area includes 241.8 acres for public rights-of-way for streets, alleyways, rail lines, and highways, leaving approximately 746.6 acres of usable land (either presently developed or vacant).
The boundaries of the Project Area are described in the Plan Appendix, Attachment One -Legal Description and are geographically shown on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit A - Boundary Map of TIF Area. The existing land uses are identified on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use Map.
 
B.    Description of Current Conditions Surrounding Area Characteristics
The Project Area sits within the greater Washington Park community, located approximately seven (7) miles south of the Chicago Loop. The Project Area includes eight (8) 2010 U.S. Census Tracts: 4003, 4004, 4005, 4008, 8345, 8346, 8361, and 8425; of which, only tract 4004 has shown population growth from 2000 to 2010. The 352-acre Washington Park and Walter H. Dyett High School site separates the Project Area from the more affluent eastern neighborhood of Hyde Park.
Transportation was the catalyst for much of the growth experienced by the south side neighborhoods; particularly in the Washington Park community during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. By 1887 cable cars reached as far south as 63rd Street on State Street and 67th on Cottage Grove Avenue. The "L" train system reached farther south than the Washington Park community by 1907. Cable cars, trains, and the wide boulevards provided easy access to Chicago's Loop for south side residents. Today, public transportation and highway access are still widely available to residents and visitors of Washington Park.
The Project Area is bordered by higher density residential uses. On the eastern boundary of the Washington Park Community Area is Hyde Park, an affluent south side neighborhood that is home to the University of Chicago. Students and faculty have resided in Hyde Park for decades. As the demand for housing grows around the growing university students, visitors and
 
2014
A3 - 2
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
university faculty may choose to move to surrounding neighborhoods such as Washington Park. To the west of the Project Area is the Englewood Community Area, which, until recently, was best known for the Englewood Mall. The Mall has recently been replaced by the Kennedy King College and the neighborhood has experienced a much needed surge in housing demand and property values.
At intersections within and surrounding the Project Area, there are small commercial nodes. There are also some isolated industrial uses interspersed within the residential/commercial areas. Industrial corridors within the Project Area are located near Interstate Highway 90/94 (Dan Ryan Expressway) and south of 63rd Street. Residential neighborhoods are also located on the western side of the Dan Ryan Expressway and to the north of the Project Area.
Existing Land Use
A tabulation of land area by land use category is provided below in Table 2-1 - Tabulation of Existing Land Use. Since almost 50% of the land area being encompassed by Washington Park and Walter H. Dyett High School, an additional table on the following page, Table 2-2 -Tabulation of Existing Land Use Excluding Washington Park, provides a tabulation of land use excluding Washington Park/Dyett High School. Table 2-2 illustrates a more accurate breakdown of existing developed land uses in the Project Area because the percent to total land uses is not skewed by the open land in Washington Park; although the industrial area to the south of 63rd street is included. The existing land uses are shown graphically on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use. Land use data for the Project Area was compiled as part of the TIF eligibility and redevelopment planning fieldwork conducted in spring and fall of 2013 and early 2014.
Table 2-1 Tabulation of Existing Land Use
 
v'-Vi.''                       • Land Area   . % 0f Net Land Use                       .:'. .    ;v. ■ ...    , ■.
(acres)    . . Land AreaVacant Land120.616.1%Multi-Family Residential83.811.2%Public/Semi-Public (Including Walter H. Dyett High School in Washington Park - 3.8 acres)33.14.4%Industrial                    , •'102.813.8%Two-Family Residential14.92.0%Single-Family Residential10.61.4%Commercial (Retail/Service/Office)14.11.9%Mixed Use4.00.5%Utility13.41.8%Park (including parcels comprising Washington Park - 348.2 acres)349.346.8%TOTAL746.6100.0%1. Land Area excludes 241.8 acres of street, alley, rail, or other public rights-of-way. Note: Percentage and acreage figures are approximated due to rounding.
 
2014
A3-3
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
In classifying land use for this TIF eligibility report, it is important to clarify the use of the term "vacant land". The Act establishes one (1) set of eligibility criteria for designation of improved land and a separate set of criteria tor designation of vacant land. The full definition of "vacant land" and the full set of criteria are provided in Section III of this study. In short, under the Act all parcels without buildings are considered "vacant".
Classification of vacant land is especially relevant given the high proportion of the Project Area that is currently vacant. In terms of net land area (total land area less public right-of-way and parcels used as street or rail right-of-way), approximately 16% of the Project Area is vacant land as shown in Table 2-1 - Tabulation of Existing Land Use. If Washington Park/Dyett High School is omitted from tabulations, as shown below in Table 2-2 - Tabulation of Existing Land Use Excluding Washington Park, vacant land accounts for about 31% of the net land area, or 952 individual parcels; 42% of the total parcels. The next largest land use categories (still excluding Washington Park) are industrial uses (about 26% of net land area), followed by multi-family residential (about 21% of net land area).
Table 2-2
Tabulation of Existing Land Use Excluding Washington Park
 
Land Use    y~':''' \ ''"'":-:.-i::':[      Land Area %.ofNet
(acres)1*      Land AreaVacant Land120.630.6%Multi-Family Residential83.821.2%Public/Semi-Public (excludes Walter H. Dyett High School in Washington Park - 3.8 acres)29.37.4%Industrial102.826.1%Two-Family Residential14.93.8%Single-Family Residential10.62.7%Commercial (Retail/Service'/Office)14.13.6%Mixed Use4.01.0%Utility13.43.4%Park (excludes parcels comprising Washington Park - 348.2 acres)1.10.3%. ■'   total v394.6- 100.0%1. Land Area excluding Washington Park^ street, alley, rail, or other public rights-of-way Note- Percentage and acreage figures are approximated due to rounding
 
Almost a third of the land in the Project Area, not including Washington Park/Dyett High School, is vacant land and is evidence of the extent of disinvestment. A case could also be made for excluding the industrial area south of 63rd Street from these vacant land calculations, which would only increase the percentage of vacant land in the Project Area. Additionally, over the course of the last few decades, residential buildings have been demolished as the buildings deteriorated and were vacated. These parcels were "blighted before vacant". The City has developed the Red X program to identify properties with structural or interior hazards with a red "X" sign. These hazards can include, but are not limited to, building deterioration or damage
 
2014
A3 - 4
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
from previous fires, structural hazards when components of the building have been removed, and collapse hazards due to the integrity of chimney tops, parapet walls, roof systems and or stair systems being compromised. The red "X" serves as an indicator to first responders to the existence of the hazards. Further, the presence of the red "X" makes it unlawful for any person to enter the building without first notifying the fire commissioner. The vacant land that remains speaks to the poor building conditions before the demolition, the challenges of the Area, and also presents a resource and opportunity for in-fill development and revitalization. Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit E - Vacant Land Map highlights the location of the vacant parcels in the Project Area and distinguishes between public and privately owned land. Of the 952 vacant parcels, 498 (52%) are owned by the City, 53 (6%) are owned by another tax-exempt entity, and the remaining 401 (42%) are privately owned. There are 2,785 unique parcel identification numbers (PINS) represented in the 2,272 total parcels. Of these PINS, 22 are railroad property and 907 are owned by other entities exempted from property tax. These 929 PINS indicate that a full third (33%) of the PINS in the Project Area are not in use by a property tax revenue generating entity.
As shown on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use Map, the
majority of the Project Area is residential in nature, with commercial uses situated near intersections and a number of smaller industrial uses scattered in the southern and western portions of the Project Area; and then industrial uses south of 63rd Street. Some of these industrial uses are directly adjacent to land used for, or zoned as, residential, which may present an obstacle to in-fill development. The residential density is generally greater in the central and eastern portions of the Project Area. Moving east toward the Park, there are fewer single-family homes and more multi-family buildings.
A total of 1,090 structures are located on the approximately 277 acres of improved land in the Project Area. Of these structures, 174 are accessory buildings, such as garages, outbuildings or other secondary structures. The improved portions of the Project Area comprise about 70% of land area, not including Washington Park and other parkland. According to field observation, 92% of buildings were judged to be more than 35 years old, which means the improved portions of the Project Area may qualify as a "conservation area" if a combination of three (3) or more conservation factors are found to be present such that the presence of those factors is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals or welfare and the area may become "blighted". These factors are defined in detail in Section III. Qualification of the Project Area.
A high proportion of buildings in the Project Area have deteriorated primary or secondary building components. Further, deteriorated conditions in the public right-of-way, including streets, sidewalk, curb and gutter; have been documented. The extent of deterioration on improved parcels is documented in detail in Section III of this report. Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions also provides documentation of deterioration and other blighting/conservation factors.
Within the Project Area, there are varying types of residential uses. The types of residential uses were identified during the building condition and land use survey conducted as part of this eligibility analysis for the Project Area. This survey, completed in 2013 and 2014, revealed that the Project Area contains about 4,375 housing units. Of those housing units, 3.7% are single unit dwellings, 7.0% are two-unit buildings, 32.8% are in 3-unit or 4-unit buildings, and 37.1% are multi-family dwellings in buildings of 5 units or more. Approximately 86% of all occupied units are rental units. Because there are likely to be residents displaced from more than 10 inhabited residential units within the boundaries of the Project Area, the municipality is required
 
2014
A3 - 5
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
to perform a Housing Impact Study as part of the feasibility report (see Subsection 11.74.4-3(n)(5)oftheAct).
The Project Area has a relative lack of quality retail/commercial uses. While commercial buildings account for 3.6% of the total land (excluding rights-of-way and the Park), the majority of commercial and retail uses that used to thrive on neighborhood street corners are now boarded-up and vacant or underutilized. Many storefronts have deteriorated over time because of long-term disinvestment in the Project Area. The deterioration that has occurred as a result has led to total vacancy of many parcels in the Project Area.
Development Activity and Assessed Value Trends
Historic Equalized Assessed Values* (EAV's) for the Project Area, the rate of EAV growth for the City, and the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA for the period between 2008 and 2013 are considered to identify development activity and determine assessed value trends. Table 2-3 - Equalized Assessed Value Trends, shown below, illustrates the comparison of the Project Area's EAV growth to both the City EAV and the CPI-U.
 
2013
 
 
Table 2-3 Equalized Assessed Value Trends 2008 ■ Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
City of Chicago, Illinois
 
Comparison of EAV Growth Rates
 
 
 
_2o_o8_
2009 ~i
2_0_10_ 2011
2012 _,_ '_20J3_~_[~
 
Project Area EAV
$119,521,985
$128,241,562
$115,965,285
$96,747,622
_$76,534,773_ $76,534,773"
% Change from Previous Year
_7.3%_ -9.6%
-16.6%_ -20.9% 0.0%
 
Balance of City EAV
_$80,858,021,035_; $84,458^566,127^ $81,971,204,778 J"
_$75,026,166_,288 1 l6§.123J85_2,494"|_ $65,173,85~2,494'"
% Change from Previous Year
_4.5% -2.9% '
-8.5%_ :13.1%_ "0.0% "
Is Area's EAV growth rate low er than the balance of the City's EAV growth rate2?
_NO_ YES
YES
_YES_" NO
 
 
 
 
i i
i
 
'Cook County Assessor data compiled by ERSE April 2013.
2Cityw ide EAV less the Project Area EAV Source is Cook County Clerk's Agency Tax Rate Reports for City of Chicago
 
Comparison to Consumer Price Index
■h Change from       CPI-U for Chicago-Gary-      Is proposed Area's EAV growth rate less than the
Project Area EAV1      Previous Year      Kenosha MSA      CPI-U for Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA2?
2008   1 $119,521,985' ' 1      -0.5%      1 ;2009      I $128,241,562
2010      _|       _$115,965,28s"1
2011      "T $96,747,622^
2012      | $76,534,7737.3%        J            2.2%            |                        NO 1
-9.6%      ;      1.4%           _|                _ _ YES      "I
-16.6%      "I            2.1%           ~i                         YES J -20.9%       I            1.2%            \                         YES 12013   ' $76,534,7730.0%        '            1.2%            '                        YES |1Cook County Assessor data compiled by ERSE April 2013
2CPI-U source is U.S. Department of Labor.
 
2014
A3-6
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
The upper half of Table 2-3 also shows that between 2008 and 2013, the EAV of the Project Area decreased from $119.5 million to $76.5 million. The table demonstrates that; 1) In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the Project Area has declined; 2) In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the Project Area has been less than the EAV growth of the remainder of the City; and, 3) In at least 3 of the past 5 years, the EAV growth of the Project Area has been less than the CPI-U of the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA.
There are 2,785 PINS represented in the 2,272 total parcels. As noted, 929 (33%) of these PINS are owned by an entity exempted from property tax. In 2012 a total of 424 PINS (15%), represented by 211 parcels were delinquent in the payment of property taxes; 200 of these parcels were also vacant.
Prior Redevelopment Efforts
Four (4) existing TIF redevelopment project areas are adjacent to the Project Area. The Englewood Neighborhood TIF (T-106) borders the Project Area to the south-west, the 67th/Wentworth TIF (T-174) extends into the Project Area to the south, the West Woodlawn TIF (T-171) was established on the south-eastern boundary, and the 47th/State TIF (T-136) borders along the north and western boundary of Washington Park. The boundaries of the adjacent TIF redevelopment project areas are identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit G - Adjacent TIF/Redevelopment Areas Map.
The South Side Empowerment Zone covers a portion of the Project Area from the northern boundary to the southern boundary and from the eastern boundary west to State Street. The Englewood Enterprise Zone (#6) covers most of the Project Area. The Enterprise Zone omits only a section of the Project Area between 60th and 62nd Streets, east of State Street.
 
2014
A3-7
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
III.     QUALIFICATION OF THE PROJECT 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), or an industrial park conservation area as defined at 5/11-74.4-3(a) of the Act. Based on the criteria set forth in the Act, the improved portion of the Area was determined to qualify as a conservation area, and the vacant portion of the Area was determined to qualify as a blighted area.
As set forth in the Act a conservation area is:
"conservation area means any improved area within the boundaries of a redevelopment project area located within the territorial limits of the municipality in which 50% or more of the 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 (3) or more of the following factors is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals or welfare and such an area may become a blighted area:
  1. Dilapidation. An advanced state of disrepair or neglect of necessary repairs to the primary structural components of buildings or improvements in such a combination that a documented building condition analysis determines that major repair is required or the defects are so serious and so extensive that the buildings must be removed.
  2. Obsolescence. The condition or process of falling into disuse. Structures have become ill-suited for the original use.
  3. Deterioration. With respect to buildings, defects including, but not limited to, major defects in the secondary building components such as doors, windows, porches, gutters and downspouts, and fascia. With respect to surface improvements, that the condition of roadways, alleys, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, off-street parking, and surface storage areas evidence deterioration, including, but not limited to, surface cracking, crumbling, potholes, depressions, loose paving material, and weeds protruding through paved surfaces.
  4. Presence of structures below minimum code standards. All structures that do not meet the standards of zoning, subdivision, building, fire, and other governmental codes applicable to property, but not including housing and property maintenance cddes.
  5. Illegal use of individual structures. The use of structures in violation of applicable federal, State, or local laws, exclusive of those applicable to the presence of structures below minimum code standards.
  6. Excessive vacancies. The. presence of buildings that are unoccupied or underutilized and that represent an adverse influence on the area because of the frequency, extent, or duration of the vacancies.
 
2014
A3 - 8
 
Ernest It. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
  2. Lack of ventilation, light, or sanitary facilities. The absence of adequate ventilation for light or air circulation in spaces or rooms without windows, or that require the removal of dust, odor, gas, smoke, or other noxious airborne materials. Inadequate natural light and ventilation means the absence or inadequacy of skylights or windows for interior spaces or rooms and improper window sizes and amounts by room area to window area ratios. Inadequate sanitary facilities refers to the absence or inadequacy of garbage storage and enclosure, bathroom facilities, hot water and kitchens, and structural inadequacies preventing ingress and egress to and from all rooms and units within a building.
(8)      Inadequate utilities. Underground and overhead utilities such as storm sewers and storm drainage, sanitary sewers, water lines, and gas, telephone, and electrical services that are shown to be inadequate. Inadequate utilities are those that are:
  1. of insufficient capacity to serve the uses in the redevelopment project area,
  2. deteriorated, antiquated, obsolete, or in disrepair, or (Hi) lacking within the redevelopment project area.
  3. Excessive land coverage and overcrowding of structures and community facilities. The over-intensive use of property and the crowding of buildings and accessory facilities onto a site. Examples of problem conditions warranting the designation of an area as one exhibiting excessive land coverage are: the presence of buildings either improperly situated on parcels or located on parcels of inadequate size and shape in relation to present-day standards of development for health and safety and the presence of multiple buildings on a single parcel. For there to be a finding of excessive land coverage, these parcels must exhibit one (1) or more of the following conditions: insufficient provision for light and air within or around buildings, increased threat of spread of fire due to the close proximity of buildings, lack of adequate or proper access to a public right-of-way, lack of reasonably required off-street parking, or inadequate provision for loading and service.
  4. Deleterious land use or layout. The existence of incompatible land-use relationships, buildings occupied by inappropriate mixed-uses, or uses considered to be noxious, offensive, or unsuitable for the surrounding area.
    1. Lack of community planning. The proposed redevelopment project area was developed prior to or without the benefit or guidance of a community plan. This means that the development occurred prior to the adoption by the municipality of a comprehensive or other community plan or that the plan was not followed at the time of the area's development. This factor must be documented by evidence of adverse or incompatible land-use relationships, inadequate street layout, improper subdivision, parcels of inadequate shape and size to meet contemporary development standards, or other evidence demonstrating an absence of effective community planning.
 
2014
A3 - 9
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
  2. The area has incurred Illinois Environmental Protection Agency or United States Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs for, or a study conducted by an independent consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation has determined a need for, the clean-up of hazardous waste, hazardous substances, or underground storage tanks required by State or federal law, provided that the remediation costs constitute a material impediment to the development or redevelopment of the redevelopment project area.
(13)      The total equalized assessed value of the proposed redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the balance of the municipality for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the United States Department of Labor or successor agency for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available."
As set forth in the Act, a blighted area is:
"any improved or vacant area within the boundaries of a redevelopment project area located within the territorial limits of the municipality where:
 
 
(2) If vacant, the sound growth of the redevelopment project area is impaired by a combination of two (2) or more of the following factors, each of which is (i) present, with that presence documented, to a meaningful extent so that a municipality may reasonably find that the factor is clearly present within the intent of the Act and (ii) reasonably distributed throughout the vacant part of the redevelopment project area to which it pertains:
  1. Obsolete platting of vacant land that results in parcels of limited or narrow size or configurations of parcels of irregular size or shape that would be difficult to develop on a planned basis and in a manner compatible with contemporary standards and requirements, or platting that failed to create rights-of-way for streets or alleys or that crated inadequate right-of-way widths for streets, alleys,, or other public rights-of-way or that omitted easement for public, utilities.
  2. Diversity of ownership of parcels of vacant land sufficient in number to retard or impede the ability to assemble the land for development.
  3. Tax and special assessment delinquencies exist or the property has been the subject of tax sales under the Property Tax Code within the last five (5) years.
  4. Deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas adjacent to the vacant land.
  5. The area has incurred Illinois Environmental Protection Agency or United State Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs for, or a study conducted by an independent consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation has determined a need for, the clean-up of
 
2014
A3 - 10
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
hazardous waste, hazardous substances, or underground storage tanks required by State or federal law, provided that the remediation costs constitute a material impediment to the development or redevelopment of the redevelopment project area. (F) The total equalized assessed value of the proposed redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years prior to the year in which the redevelopment project area is designated or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the balance of the municipality for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the United States Department of Labor or successor agency for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years prior to the year in which the redevelopment project area is designated.
(3) If vacant, the sound growth of the redevelopment project area is impaired by one of the following factors that (i) is present, with that presence documented, to a meaningful extent so that a municipality may reasonably find that the factor is clearly present within the intent of the Act and (ii) is reasonably distributed throughout the vacant part of the redevelopment project area to which it pertains:
    1. The area consists of one or more unused quarries, mines, or strip mine ponds.
  2. The area consists of unused rail yards, rail tracks, or railroad rights-of-way.
    1. The area, prior to its designation, is subject to chronic flooding that adversely impacts on real property in the area as certified by a registered professional engineer or appropriate regulatory agency.
    2. The area consist of an unused or illegal disposal site containing earth, stone, building debris, or similar materials that were removed from construction, demolition, excavation, or dredge sites.
    3. Prior to the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 91st General Assembly, the area is not less than 50 nor more than 100 acres and 75% of which is vacant (notwithstanding that the area has been used for commercial agricultural purposes within five (5) years prior to the designation of the redevelopment project area), and the area meets at least one (1) of the factors itemized in paragraph (1) of this subsection, 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.
    4. The area qualified as a blighted improved area immediately prior to becoming vacant, unless there has been substantial private investment in the immediately surrounding area."
 
B.      Survey, Analysis and Distribution of Eligibility Factors
A parcel-by-parcel analysis of the Project Area was conducted to identify the presence of TIF eligibility factors. The condition of each parcel and structure in the Project Area was documented using a tablet computer with GIS software. Field survey data was compiled and analyzed to investigate the presence and distribution of each of the TIF eligibility factors.
 
2014
A3 - 11
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Eligibility factor data was collected for individual parcels and is aggregated into 21 sub-areas (each approximately four blocks) for analysis and presentation in two tables: Table 3-1 -Conservation Factors Matrix for Improved Land, and Table 3-2 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land. The conditions recorded in Table 3-1 and Table 3-2 are depicted graphically in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit D - Existing Conditions Map (due to map scaling, the Existing Conditions Map displays the Project Area divided into six sections and labeled as Exhibit D1 through D6). Examples of the conditions are also documented in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions.
The improved portion of the Project Area contains 1,090 structures and constitutes approximately 70% of the land area, not including Washington Park. The Project Area is characterized by the following conditions:
  • the predominance of buildings that are 35 years of age or older (92% of buildings)1;
  • deteriorated buildings (63% of buildings);
  • deteriorated site improvements (29% of parcels);
  • deteriorated street and/or sidewalk pavement (86% of sub-areas);
  • dilapidated buildings (4% of buildings);
  • obsolete.buildings (10% of buildings);
primary buildings with excessive vacancies (20%);
    • excessive land coverage (30% of improved parcels); inadequate utilities (76% of sub-areas);
  • deleterious land use or layout (48% of sub-areas);
  • lack of community planning (62% of sub-areas); and,
  • demonstrates declining and subpar EAV growth.
The vacant portion of the Project Area constitutes approximately 120.6 acres (30% of net land area, not including Washington Park), represented on 952 parcels and by 21 sub-areas for this Eligibility Study. The vacant portion of the Project Area is characterized by the following statutory qualifying factors for a "blighted area" under Section 5/11-74.4-3(b) of the Act:
  • obsolete platting (37% of parcels);
  • diversity of ownership (43% of sub-areas);
  • tax delinquencies (21 % of vacant parcels; 50% of taxable vacant parcels);
    • deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas (94% of vacant parcels); and,
  • demonstrates declining or subpar EAV growth.
 
C.    Evaluation Procedure
The Consultant conducted exterior surveys of observable conditions on all properties, buildings, and public and private improvements located in the Project Area. These inspectors have been trained in TIF survey techniques and have extensive experience in similar undertakings.
The surveys examined not only the condition and use of buildings, but also included surveys of streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, lighting, vacant land, underutilized land, parking facilities,
 
1 This is 42% greater than the statutory requirement. Under the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, for designation of an area as a Conservation Area, 50% or more of the buildings must be 35 years of age or older.
 
2014
A3 - 12
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
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. Investigators also researched historic photos and were assisted by information obtained from the City. The boundary and qualification of the Project Area was determined by the field investigations, eligibility requirements described in the Act, and the needs and deficiencies of the Project Area.
 
D.    Investigation and Analysis of Factors
In determining whether or not the Project Area meets the eligibility requirements of the Act, various methods of research were used in addition to the field surveys. The data includes information assembled from the sources below:
  1. Contacts with local individuals knowledgeable as to the Project Area conditions and history, age of buildings and site improvements, methods of construction, real estate records and related items, and other information related to the Project Area was used. In addition, aerial photographs, Sidwell block sheets, City utility atlases, electronic permitting data, etc. were also utilized.
  2. Inspection and research as to the condition of local buildings, streets, utilities, etc.
  3. On-site field inspection of the Project 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, etc. and determination of eligibility of areas for tax increment financing.
  4. Use of accepted definitions as provided for in the Act.
  5. Adherence to basic findings of need as established by the Illinois General Assembly in establishing tax increment financing which became effective on January 10, 1977. These are:
    1. There exists in many Illinois municipalities, areas that are conservation or blighted areas, within the meaning of the TIF statute.
    2. The eradication of blighted areas and the treatment of conservation areas by redevelopment projects are essential to the public interest.
  2. 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.
 
Table 3-1 - Conservation Factors Matrix for Improved Land, provided on the following page documents the conditions in the Project Area.
 
2014
A3 - 13
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
c
 
 
a 6
U
M _><
n 'C a a 3 S
E2 £ o +» u «
c o
 
 
o CJ
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CD
'5* bi
Ph oi
«1
CD .3
a 3
a.
o o
CD OX) O
 
O
bC
a
 
<usCD00V.OOIV.OOL00to100%CM CDV.OOIr-
ooV.OOI■■' ;63'/.OlCD 00V.0INOooo
CMNO76%00 ToCM COYES|T011,128cm
US Acr>2,0802,272CD
eni—1,0901,0064,3.763,789CM•'t-
sCM
m caCOCOCO
oCO CMooUS 00us eo «COooCOCIOoCOOlo■>*■CMoot—oo
oooOoooo
E-CDCO CMc-in
COCDoCDoooo
oooCOoooo
COCOcminCD COoCMoCMO
CMCMotr-o
oooo
V.oCOCM COOooOooCM
ooCMooo
<yoooooOooioCOoo
oooooooo
a.m
COCDominCMm
CMCMSO oo
CO
CM00CMCO
ooCMo
or—
COCM PIr-CD COCD OlOlCOl—
CDCDCO
mCM
o mTCOcmCO
ooCIo
zO)
mCO
ooCMCMCI CMCOCM COo
COo
rrIT-CO!h ■CO^o
ooCOCOo
EoOm »nCOCOOlm00CM CDo
CDCO 0O C»CO C-i
Tj"CDo
ooCMo
CIoo
t~c~TTOlin
COo
COCOCO OlCO 00r~ o in1-7
CO
■VCM CMoCM
ooCMCDooo
CD
m-3"
COmo ciin
OlCM~COOl ToCDCOCDCM
opCDCMo
CD
mCO COCD COCO
mCD CICMOO CMO COo mCM CO
CIinc»■V
ooCIO CIo
OO
I—I—CI CO>n inT
CMmCDO COCO
ino
mCO■VCO
ooCOl-
C-lo
sOlooCDOlCO
oCOOCO
mCD
mCD COCI
CO
COCOCI
oocqCMooo
oCD Olo
COOCD CMCD CICO
Olm
OlCO CM=COOl COCO■«?
COCOOl
oo*T CMCO CIooo
&HCOinC-1CD CJCO CMCO CDCOCDOl CO CJin
CMCM
inm
CMCM
ooOOCD COo
HCOo
Olmt-
CMCO
t»Ol
inmCDCM CDCD OCD CO
t-CD CMc~CD
ooCOo
COo
QcmCO COCOm c-CO
t—CO COmCO
inCOCM COCO
O COCOoo
oo-tfCOooo
OCO COo
COoCD CDOlin
COo
CIin
OOCOCD CMCI
o
CM:-{)'■■■' w
■ 02 O H
■. O
-.2
' a
■-Z
.'■■'J O' , Ed >
o as a. SeiCMCM
ooOJCOooo
COOl
mCOCM OCO
oCD
inCDCDOl l-
com
CO
CC CIoCM
oooCOoo
<oCOCDrr~ CMCO
CO CMo
COCOCO OlCM COmOl
CO
t-COCI(M
ooCJCD
-«ro
Sub-AreaNo. of improved parcels 1No of vacant parcelsParcels ih ROW.Total parcels (net ROW parcels)Total parcelsNo of primary buildingsNo of secondary buildingsTotal BuildingsNo of buildings 35 years or older 1Housing unitsOccupied housing unitsSub-Area count
No of deteriorated buildingsNo. of parcels with site improvements that are deterioratedDeteriorated street and/or sidewalk pavement (by sub-area)No. of dilapidated buildings 1No of obsolete buildings 1No of structures below minimum code 1No of buildings lacking ventilation, light or sanitation facilitiesNo of building with illegal uses 1No. of primary buildings with excessive vacancies 1No. of parcels with excessive land coverage or overcrowding of structuresInadequate utilities (by sub-area)Deleterious land use or layout (by sub-area) 1Environmental Clean-up 1Lack of community planning (by sub-area)Declining or Sub-par EAV Growth 1
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
2014 PGAVPLANNERS
A3 - 14
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
E.      Eligibility Factors - Improved Area
In making the determination of eligibility, each and every property or building in the Project Area is not required to be blighted or otherwise qualify. It is the Project Area as a whole that must be determined to be eligible.
The report stated below details conditions that cause the Project Area to qualify under the Act as a conservation area, per surveys and research undertaken by the Consultant in 2013 and 2014:
Age of Structures
Age, although not one of the 13 factors used to establish a conservation area under the Act, is used as a threshold that an area must meet in order to qualify.
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 of many years. As a rule, older buildings typically exhibit more problems than buildings constructed in later years because of longer periods of active usage ("wear and tear") and the impact of time, temperature and moisture. Additionally, older buildings tend not to be ideally suited for meeting modern-day space and development standards. These typical problematic conditions in older buildings can be the initial indicators that the factors used to qualify may be present.
Summary of Findings Regarding Age:
There are 1,090 buildings in the Project Area (including accessory structures such as garages and secondary buildings). Of these buildings, 1006 (92%) are 35 years of age or older as determined by field surveys and local research. In many instances buildings are significantly older than 35 year of age; the vast majority of buildings were constructed prior to World War II. The Project Area meets the threshold requirement for a conservation area in that more than 50% of the structures exceed 35 years of age.
1. Dilapidation
Dilapidation as a factor is based upon the documented presence and reasonable distribution of buildings in an advanced state of disrepair. In order for a building to be classified as dilapidated, as the term is defined in the Act, major defects to the primary structural components of the building must be evident, or evident structural defects must be so extensive that the buildings must be removed. A small number of structures in the Project Area have critical defects in primary structural components, such as leaning or bowing load-bearing walls, severely sagging roofs, damaged floor structures, or foundations exhibiting major cracks or displacement.
Summary of Findings Regarding Dilapidation:
Of the 1,090 buildings in the Project Area, 43 buildings, (4%), were found to exhibit primary structural components in an advanced state of disrepair.
 
2014
A3 - 15
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
2. Obsolescence
An obsolete building or improvement is one which no longer serves its intended use. The Act defines obsolescence as "the condition or process of falling into disuse. Structures have become ill-suited for the original use." Obsolescence, as a factor, is based upon the documented presence and reasonable distribution of buildings and other site improvements evidencing such obsolescence. Examples include:
  1. 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 loss in value to a property resulting from an inherent deficiency existing from poor design or layout, improper orientation of the building on site, etc., which detracts from the overall usefulness or desirability of a property. Obsolescence in such buildings is typically difficult and expensive to correct.
  2. Economic Obsolescence: Economic obsolescence is normally a result of adverse conditions that cause some degree of market 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.
  3. Obsolete site improvements: Site improvements, including sewer and water lines, public utility lines (gas, electric and telephone), roadways, parking areas, parking structures, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, lighting, etc., 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, etc.
Throughout the Project Area, there are buildings that have a size, layout, or construction type that are indicative of obsolescence. Vacant storefronts, vacant upper-stories, underutilized properties, undersized commercial buildings, lack of parking or loading space, deteriorated buildings, and inadequate site improvements are all found in the Project Area and are indicators of obsolescence. Some structures are clearly now used for purposes other than the building's designed and original use.
Summary of Findings Regarding Obsolescence:
The field survey of buildings in the Project Area found that certain buildings exhibit characteristics of obsolescence. Obsolete buildings comprised approximately 10% or 106 of the 1,090 buildings in the Project Area. These obsolete buildings include:
  • Long-term vacant commercial and industrial structures (e.g. 6115 S. Prairie Avenue, 5822 State Street, 6238 Wabash Avenue) that have been rejected by the local real-estate market could be indicative of functional or economic obsolescence.
  • Industrial buildings that have become ill-suited for their original use (e.g. 6155 S. Prairie Avenue). Industrial structures of this age are ill-suited for modern industrial
 
2014
A3 - 16
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
techniques due to factors such as inadequate floor area, excessive roof supports, inadequate utilities, poor energy efficiency, and constrictive vehicular access. These conditions could be indicative of functional or economic obsolescence as well as obsolete site improvements.
  • Residential buildings that house more dwelling units than originally intended (multiple examples on LaSalle Street, Perry Avenue, and Michigan Avenue). Single-family housing that has been converted to multi-family units or another use demonstrates functional obsolescence and the buildings are not being used as originally intended. See Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, page A5-1.
  • Obsolete site improvements also exist in the Project Area and are generally associated with the commercial and industrial buildings. Examples of inadequate improvements include poor sidewalk conditions (Plan Appendix, Attachment Five — Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, page A5-17 to A5-19) and deteriorated fencing (e.g. 5841 Wabash Avenue, 6028 S. Perry Avenue, 6115 S. Prairie Avenue. See Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, pages A5-1, A5-2, and A5-13).
  1. Deterioration
Deterioration refers to physical deficiencies or disrepair in buildings or site improvements requiring treatment or repair. Conditions that are not easily correctable in the course of normal maintenance were classified as deteriorated. Such buildings may be classified as deteriorating or in an advanced stage of deterioration, depending upon the degree or extent of the defects. Buildings with major defects in the secondary building components (e.g., damaged doors and door frames, broken windows, window frames and muntins, dented or damaged metal siding, gutters and downspouts damaged or missing, weathered fascia materials, cracks in masonry walls, spalling masonry surfaces, etc.) were observed in the Project Area. Many of the structures located in the Project Area exhibited these conditions. In addition, roadways, off-street parking and surface storage areas also evidenced deterioration such as cracking on paved surfaces, potholes, depressions, loose paving materials, weeds protruding through the surface, etc.
Summary of Findings Regarding Deterioration:
Throughout the Project Area, deteriorating conditions were recorded on 687 (63%) of the 1,090 buildings. The exterior field survey of primary buildings in the Project Area found major defects in secondary building components, including windows, doors, gutters, downspouts, siding, fascia materials, parapet walls, etc. 332 (29%) of the improved parcels in the Project Area demonstrated deteriorated site improvements. Deteriorated public improvements (street pavement, curb and gutter, and sidewalk) were observed on 18 (86%) of the 21 sub-areas in the Project Area.
  1. Presence of Structures Below Minimum Code Standards
Structures below minimum code standards include all structures that do not meet the standards of zoning, subdivision, State building laws and regulations. The principal purposes of such codes are to require buildings to be constructed in
 
2014
A3 - 17
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
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 presume to threaten health and safety.
Summary of Findings Regarding Presence of Structures Below Minimum Code Standards:
Considering the age of buildings in the Project Area, it is certain that many of the buildings are below the minimum code standards currently in force by the City of Chicago. However, in order to substantiate these conditions both interior and exterior inspections of the properties by qualified professionals would be required. Rather than attempt such an evaluation, the Consultant relied on City data on documented code violations.
 
The Department of Planning and Development provided electronic data on code violation records for the Project Area. These records included thousands of building or property maintenance code compliance issues documented through the Department of Buildings tracking system between 2004 and 2013. Code violations were recorded for 216 separate addresses for buildings in the Project Area (20% of all primary buildings).
Because the data are based on property address rather than PIN, code violation data is not presented at the sub-area level in Table 3-1 - Conservation Factors Matrix for Improved Land. It should also be recognized that the code violations documented through the City's record system are only a fraction of the code deficiencies in the Project Area. The predominance of structures in excess of 60 years of age indicates that most of the buildings in the. Project Area likely have some characteristics that do not meet the City's current building or zoning requirements. However, due to this unsubstantiated data, this factor cannot be verified as present for this Eligibility Study.
5. Illegal Use of Individual Structures
This factor applies to the use of structures in violation of applicable national, State or local laws. Examples of illegal uses may include, but not be limited to, the following:
  1. illegal home occupations;
  2. conduct of any illegal vice activities such as gambling or drug manufacture;
  3. uses not in conformance with local zoning codes and not previously grand fathered in as legal nonconforming uses;
d.      uses involving manufacture, sale, storage or use of dangerous explosives
. and firearms.
Summary of Findings Regarding Illegal Use of Individual Structures:
This factor was not documented in the Project Area.
 
2014
A3 - 18
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
6. Excessive Vacancies
Establishing the presence of this factor requires documenting unoccupied or underutilized buildings that represent an adverse influence on the Project Area because of the frequency, extent, or duration of such vacancies. It includes properties which evidence no apparent effort directed toward occupancy or utilization and partial vacancies.
Summary of Findings Regarding Excessive Vacancies:
During the field investigation, and subsequent updates, of the Project Area a total of 185 primary buildings were observed to contain vacant floor space. Based on the condition of some of the vacant buildings, (boarded-up windows, deteriorated interior finishes, lack of lighting, outdated signage, etc.) it is evident that a number of these buildings have been vacant for an extended period of time. The appearance of vacant buildings within the Project Area indicates underutilization of existing structures and may lead to a tendency of vacancies to spread quickly throughout the Project Area.
Examples of vacant residential structures can be seen in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions. Residential vacancies are especially abundant on Lafayette Avenue between Garfield Boulevard and 57th Street. Where there are improved parcels in this stretch, many multi-unit and single family residential structures stand boarded-up and vacant. Vacant residential buildings represent an adverse influence on the Project Area by causing a decrease in the value of surrounding property.
In addition to the number of vacant residential units in the Project Area, many commercial buildings are boarded-up and vacant, as well. The Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions includes examples of vacant commercial buildings. The extent and duration of vacancies at these locations and other vacant commercial parcels within the Project Area, combined with the lack of investment in commercial development indicate that the frequency of vacancies will likely persist and spread.
Vacancies are generally distributed equally among commercial and residential structures within the Project Area, and many are owned by the City of Chicago as shown in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit E - Vacant Land Map. From the field investigation, it appears that a high concentration of privately owned vacancies occurs in the north/west-central sub-areas of A, B, E, F, I, J, and K, as identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit B - Sub Area Key Map. This distribution of vacancies results in a significant blighting effect on surrounding properties. Without intervention, vacancies are tikely to persist and begin to negatively impact surrounding properties. The field investigation indicates that 185 primary buildings, 20% of the 916 total primary buildings, have vacancy of floor space, and It appears that many primary structures have been abandoned without use for an extended period of time.
 
2014
A3 - 19
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
7.      Lack of Ventilation, Light or Sanitary Facilities
Many older structures fail to provide adequate ventilation, light or sanitary facilities. This is also a characteristic often found in illegal or improper building conversions and in commercial buildings converted to residential usage. Lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities are presumed to adversely affect the health of building occupants (i.e., residents, employees or visitors).
Summary of Findings Regarding Lack of Ventilation, Light or Sanitary Facilities:
The exterior field survey of main buildings in the Project Area did not result in documentation of structures without adequate mechanical ventilation, natural light and proper window area ratios.
  1. Inadequate Utilities
Inadequate utilities refers to deficiencies in the capacity or condition of utilities which service a property or area, including, but not limited to, storm water drainage, water supply, electrical power, sanitary sewers, gas and electricity.
Summary of Findings Regarding Inadequate Utilities:
The Bureau of Engineering Services in the City's Department of Water Management provided the consultant with data on the condition of sanitary sewer mains and water lines in the Project Area. Many of the water mains serving the Project Area are deficient in terms of either age or size. According to the City's Bureau of Engineering Services, all 6-inch cast iron water mains are obsolete and in need of replacement with ductile iron mains of at least eight (8) inches in diameter. Undersized water mains are found in the majority of the Project Area's sub-areas. The projected service life of water mains is 100 years. Some sections of water line in the Project Area are more than 120 years old, and the Project Area's sub-areas are served by water mains that exceed their expected service life.
Sanitary sewer data was also reviewed by the Consultant. Many sections of sewer line exceed 100 years of age. Based on the age and condition of lines, 12 sections of sanitary sewer main in the Project Area have been identified as candidates forrelining (a less costly alternative to replacement). These relining projects, along with three (3) sewer improvement projects identified through hydraulic studies, are distributed throughout the Project Area.
Obsolete, undersized and deficient water lines are indicated on Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit D - Existing Condition Maps with a dashed line pattern. These deficient utilities are distributed throughout the Project Area and present in 16 (76%) of the 21 sub-areas.
 
2014
A3-20
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
9. Excessive Land Coverage and Overcrowding of Structures and Community Facilities
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 because problems associated with lack of parking or loading areas can negatively impact adjoining properties.
Summary of Findings Regarding Excessive Land Coverage and Overcrowding of Structures and Community Facilities:
Structures exhibiting 100% lot coverage with party or fire walls separating one structure from the next is a historical fact of high-density urban development. This situation is common throughout the industrial and commercial corridors in the western portion of the Project Area, and in the southern residential sub-areas. The incidence of excessive land coverage in the Project Area is high both as a result of inadequate spacing between buildings and inadequate parking.
Numerous commercial and industrial businesses are located in structures that cover 100% of their respective lots. Other businesses are utilizing 100% of their lots 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. This has prompted overflow parking and truck traffic associated with normal business operations to utilize surrounding residential areas for parking and access. This is common along Wentworth Avenue and La Salle Street. Furthermore, delivery trucks were observed to be blocking alleys and streets while performing normal delivery operations or accessing shipping facilities.
In addition, numerous residential structures exhibited excessive land coverage and overcrowding of structures. Along Wabash Avenue, LaSalle Street and State Street between 58 Street and 60th Street are numerous buildings where the buildings are spaced too closely or buildings are improperly situated on their sites. Residences that were originally built as single family homes have been converted into multi-unit residences. The result of overcrowding of structures in the residential corridors throughout the Project Area is increased demand for parking on residential streets. 30%, or 335 of the 1,128 improved parcels in the Project Area, revealed some evidence of excessive land coverage or overcrowding of structures and community facilities. Although this factor exists in the Project Area as shown in Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, pages A5-1, A5-2, and A5-6, this Eligibility Study considers no finding regarding Excessive Land Coverage.
 
2014
A3-21
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
10. Deleterious Land Use or Layout
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:
In locations such as the Project Area where its character has evolved over the years, industrial, commercial and residential uses are often in close proximity to one another. It is not unusual to find small pockets or isolated residential buildings within a predominantly industrial area or an industrial use in a residential area. Although these buildings may be considered, because of age and continuous occupancy, as legal nonconforming uses (whose existence and use is thereby "grandfathered"), they are, nonetheless, incompatible land uses inasmuch as the predominant character of the Project Area is influenced by these differing uses.
As illustrated in Exhibit C - Existing Land Use, the Project Area is primarily residential with interspersed pockets of' industrial corridors in the western sub-areas, as well as an industrial area to the south. The combination of limited on-site parking and high density industrial and commercial development in close proximity to primarily residential uses causes conflict in traffic, parking, safety, and environmental conditions that has promoted deleterious use of land in some portions of the Project Area. For example, a food manufacturing company, located on South Perry Avenue is located in a predominantly residential part of the Project Area as seen in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions. Parallel streets adjacent to Perry Avenue, Lafayette and LaSalle Streets, contain mostly residential parcels or vacant parcels zoned residential. The food manufacturer's location in a predominantly residential neighborhood is an example of deleterious land uses and land use relationships within the Project Area.
Additionally, the presence of other commercial or industrial uses within residential land uses or abandoned equipment and vehicles, as seen in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions at 5612 S. LaSalle Street, the vehicle storage shown on Wentworth Avenue, or the automotive repair business located on South State Street qualify as deleterious or incompatible land uses. Commercial uses are typically not encouraged within primarily residential neighborhoods. The garage on the residential parcel located at 5612 S. LaSalle Street is being used for tire storage and is a noxious and offensive land use to neighboring residential property owners. The storage of abandoned vehicles on Wentworth Avenue is another example of deleterious land use. The location of the automotive repair business at 6053 S. State Street adjacent to residential land uses further exhibit's the presence of deleterious land uses distributed throughout the Project Area.
Deleterious land uses and land use relationships were located within 48%, or ten (10) of the 21 sub-areas identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit B - Sub Area Key Map.
 
2014
A3-22
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
11. Lack of Community Planning
This may be counted as a factor if the proposed area was developed prior to, or without the benefit or guidance of, a community plan. This means that no community plan existed, 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. Streets, alleys, and intersections that are too narrow or awkwardly configured to accommodate traffic movements.
  2. Inadequate street and utility layout.
  3. Tracts of land that are too small or have awkward configurations that would not meet contemporary development standards.
  4. Properties lack adequate access to public streets.
  5. Industrial land use and zoning adjacent to or within heavily developed residential areas without ample buffer areas.
  6. Commercial and industrial properties that are too small to adequately accommodate appropriate off-street parking and loading requirements.
  7. The presence of deteriorated structures, code violations and other physical conditions that are further evidence of an absence of effective community planning.
Summary of Findings Regarding Lack of Community Planning:
Much of the Project Area was developed originally from the late 1800's to the mid-1900's. As evidenced by limited lot sizes for commercial uses, placement and orientation of buildings with total or near-total lot coverage, and lack of provisions for off-street parking, loading and' service, the development of the area occurred without consideration of a comprehensive community plan with adequate guidelines for the overall community area development.
It should be noted that the Study Area has benefited from community planning in recent times. However, many of the conditions that now plague the area are the result of original development, which occurred without the benefit of sound community planning. Therefore, while significant planning investment has been made in the Study Area over recent decades, original development done without the benefit of sound community planning has contributed significantly to the Study Area's current problems.
As previously noted in this analysis, many properties in the Project Area are affected by narrow streets, lack of parking that has led to excessive land coverage, incompatible land-uses, and inadequate utilities. Additionally, there is evidence of deteriorating building conditions and numerous code violations. As seen in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, pages A5-2, A5-8, and A5-9 show examples of large commercial or industrial properties in potential conflict with residential areas and that may not meet contemporary development standards. In the Plan Appendix, Attachment Five - Photo Appendix of Existing Conditions, pages
 
2014
A3-23
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
A5-18 and A5-19, deteriorated infrastructure is shown as well as many areas with standing water that also indicates inadequate storm water utilities. Many parcels have been left vacant where previously there had been structural improvements. Increased disinvestment and lack of demand has resulted in the vacancy of structures and many buildings have subsequently been demolished. The lack of new construction after demolition can also be attributed to a lack of community planning in the Project Area. As indicated previously, there is a general lack of commercial uses throughout the Project Area. While Garfield Boulevard, State Street and Prairie Avenue had once served as commercial corridors for the Project Area, many of the previously existing businesses have been replaced by vacant or boarded-up storefronts. For example, at 5859 South State Street a previously open commercial structure is now boarded and vacant. This example shows the presence of deteriorated structures and other conditions that indicate the absence of community planning. The lack of effective community planning has led to continued disinvestment in the Project Area as well as increased commercial and residential vacancies.
Lack of community planning was observed in 62% or 13 of the 21 sub-areas identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit B - Sub Area Key Map.
  1. Environmental Remediation Costs
If an area has incurred Illinois or United States Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs for, or a study conducted by an independent consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation has determined a need for, the clean-up of hazardous waste, hazardous substances, or underground storage tanks required by State or federal law, provided that the remediation costs constitute a material impediment to the development of the redevelopment project area then this factor may be counted.
Summary of Findings Regarding Environmental Remediation Costs:
This factor was not identified in the Project Area. However, field observation reveals that several properties may be affected by environmental contamination.
  1. Declining or Lagging Rate of Growth of Total Equalized Assessed Valuation
If the total equalized assessed value of the proposed redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available, or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the balance of the municipality for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available, or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the United States Department of Labor or successor agency for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available then this factor may be counted.
 
2014
A3 - 24
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Summary of Findings Regarding Declining or Lagging Rate of Growth of Total Equalized Assessed Valuation:
As discussed in Section ll-B, Development Activity and Assessed Value Trends, of
this Eligibility Study, analysis of historic EAV for the Project Area indicates that the EAV of the Project Area has declined in 2010, 2011, and 2012 and has also experienced growth at a rate less than that of the balance of the City and less than the annual Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA in those same years.
F.      Conclusion of Investigation of Eligibility Factors for the Improved Portion of the
Redevelopment Project Area
The presence of deteriorated buildings; deteriorated site improvements and public rights-of-way; inadequate utilities; deleterious land use relationships; lack of community planning; and declining or sub-par EAV growth are all indications of detrimental conditions in the Project Area. Furthermore, these conditions are present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the improved portions of.the Project Area. The presence of these TIF eligibility factors underscores the lack of private investment in the Project Area.
 
The tax increment program and redevelopment plan include measures designed to reduce or eliminate the deficiencies, which cause the improved portion of the Project Area to qualify as a conservation area consistent with the strategy of the City of Chicago for revitalizing other designated redevelopment areas and industrial corridors. As documented in this investigation and analysis, it is clear that a number of eligibility factors affect the Project Area. The presence of these factors qualifies the improved portion of the Project Area as a conservation area.
G.      Analysis of Undeveloped or Vacant Property
For the purpose of qualification for TIF, the term "vacant land" is defined in the TIF Act as follows:
Any parcel or combination of parcels of real property without industrial, commercial, and residential buildings which has not been used for commercial agricultural purposes within five (5) years prior to the designation of the redevelopment project area.
Approximately 120.6 acres of the 394.6-acre Area (30.6% of the net land area excluding Washington Park/Dyett High School) is considered vacant by this definition. Vacant land is identified in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit C - Existing Land Use Map and highlighted in the Plan Appendix, Attachment Two, Exhibit E - Vacant Land Map. The blighting factors present on vacant parcels are summarized on Table 3-2 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land on the following page.
 
2014
A3-25
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
IB
T3
a a
a
t«
u
CS
>
u
«2
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CD -3
S 3
.5 b
3
o
c
-(-» u es fa
a
lac u> cd
03 S=
 
TOTALit"
■ACO
"rro100%100%VACANT LAND FACTORS (2 or More):                        •    *                                                                             .    r    : ...NONONO5?
CO
"sT\»
Olo>5?YESr
K~- i 1
u
. o
t» C4 O Ex1
ss ■■"
r
Wt
< \2%0%0%0%0
1,128CMOl
2,080Ol
o
U3 OOcr>cr>o
CO
oaCO
cn
OO
oo»
Ol
CO
o
o
Oi
 
co
O
o
o
 
o
o
o
CO
CO
CO
6-i
CO
 
CO
cm
1—1
I—
(—1
 
100%
 
o
 
o
o
CO
CO
CO
o
WJ
CO
 
 
5?
CO
CO CO
 
 
so O
to
 
o
 
Ol
o
CO
CO
CO
CO
W
■^r
CO
CO
s
 
 
CO
o
o
o
 
CO
o
o
o
o
CO
 
-*?*
o
o
CO
 
 
o
cb
o
o
 
o
o
CO
CO
CO
CO
 
CO
CO
CO
CO
 
 
.—1
\°
CO
CO
CO
 
CO
1—1
o
o
o
CO
CO
o
L—
to
Ol CM
c—
CM
OO
 
Ol
oS
o
o
 
Ol
CM
o
o
CO
CO
CO
z
CTS
CO
o
so L—
CM
 
 
OO
o
CO
 
CM lO
o
o
CO
CO
CO
S
OO
us
CO
 
CO
I—1
 
1ft
Ol
 
 
 
Lto
LO
o
o
CO
CO
CO
 
t—
c—
r—1
 
OS
oa
 
 
Ol
 
 
 
 
CO
o
CO
CO
CO
 
CO
CO
 
So
CO
CO
 
Ol
s?
CO
o
 
 
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
 
CO iO
CO OO
 
%09
en
CO
 
co
lO
00%
 
 
 
o
OO
CO
CO
CO
o
o
-
OO
t—
t— r—
to
so CO -
id
 
CO
t~-
 
 
 
CO
CO
o
o
CO
o
 
 
OO
CO
 
 
 
 
OO
o
o
 
□o
CO
CO
CO
CO
o
o
CO
co
CO
CO
CM
CO CM
 
 
CO
 
co
 
CO CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
 
OO
 
CM
\°
os CO CO
CO Ol
 
i—i
Ol
 
 
 
 
CO
o
CO
CO
o
w
CO
CO
crs
 
o
L—
IT-CM
 
L— Ol i—1
os CO
 
 
 
o
o
o
o
o
o
Q
CM T
CO CO
 
so "TP
tj<
ICO t—
 
CO
\0
O
CO
 
 
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
O
CO CO
CO CO
o
CO
CO OS
 
 
\o
 
CO
 
TT1 CM
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
pq
 
CO
 
i£ Ol
Ol
CO
 
 
sO
OS
CO
 
 
t—
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
<
^f1
CO
CO
 
\° CM CO
t— c—
Ol
 
CO CO
CO CO
 
CO
 
OS
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
Sub-Area
No. of improved parcels
No. of vacant parcels
Parcels in R.O.W.
Proportion of parcels vacant
Total parcels (net R.O.W. parcels)
Sub-Area count
Obsolete Platting (by parcel)
Obsolete Platting (% of vacant parcels)
Obsolete Platting (sub-area > 10%)
Diversity of Ownership (by sub-area)
Tax Delinquencies
Deterioration of Struct. Or Site Improvements in Neighboring Areas
Environmental Clean-up
Declining or Sub-par EAV Growth
Unused Quam*. Mines, Rail, etc.
Blighted Before Vacant
Chronic Flooding
Unused or Illegal Disposal Site
 
 
2014
A3-26
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Using GIS software the Consultant evaluated the Project Area's vacant land in terms of the conditions listed in Table 3-2 during field surveys and subsequent analyses. The data was consolidated by sub-area for each of the factors relevant to making a finding of eligibility.
Vacant Blighted Area Category 1 Factors:
Obsolete Platting, Diversity of Ownership, Tax Delinquencies, Deterioration of Structures in Neighboring Areas, Environmental Remediation, Declining or Sub-Par E.A.V. (2 or More)
Vacant land may qualify as a blighted area if any two (2) of the six (6) Vacant Blighted Area Category 1 Factors are present or if any one (1) of the Vacant Blighted Area Category 2 Factors is present.
Summary of Findings Regarding Obsolete Platting:
The result of obsolete platting of vacant land is parcels of limited or narrow size or configurations of parcels of irregular size or shape that would be difficult to develop on a planned basis and in a manner compatible with contemporary standards and requirements, or platting that failed to create rights-of-way for streets or alleys or that created inadequate right-of-way widths for streets, alleys, or other public rights-of-way or that omitted easement for public utilities.
This Eligibility Study considers no finding regarding Obsolete Platting in the Project Area.
Summary of Findings Regarding Diversity of Ownership:
Diversity of ownership refers to parcels of vacant land owned by so large a number of individuals or entities that the ability to assemble the land for development is retarded or impeded. As indicated above, some assembly of parcels has taken place over time. However, an analysis of common ownership grouping reveals that there remain diverse ownership conditions in 9 of the Area's 21 sub-areas (43%). This diversity of ownership in the Project Area will present an obstacle to redevelopment of the Project Area.
Summary of Findings Regarding Tax Delinquencies:
There are 952 vacant parcels in the Project Area. 498 (52%) of these vacant parcels are owned by the City and another 53 (6%) are owned by other entities exempt from property tax, leaving a total of 401 (42%) vacant, privately owned, tax revenue generating parcels. The ability of these parcels to generate property tax revenue is critical and represents increased revenue potential for the Project Area. For the 2012 tax year, there were 200 (21%) vacant parcels found to be delinquent. Although not an impact on the qualifying factor, it is also important to note that of the 401 vacant, privately owned, tax generating parcels, 50% were delinquent for the 2012 tax year.
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
2014 PGAVPLANNERS
A3-27
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Summary of Findings Regarding Deterioration of Structures or Site Improvements in Neighboring Areas Adjacent to the Vacant Land:
As indicated in the prior analysis of blighting factors on improved portions of the Project Area, approximately 63% of buildings exhibited deteriorated conditions and 86% of sub-areas exhibited deteriorated right-of-way conditions. It was found that 896 (94%) of the 952 vacant parcels are located adjacent to deteriorated buildings or site improvements.
Much of the vacant land in the Project Area is adjacent to or near deteriorated buildings and site improvements. These deteriorated buildings detract from the desirability and marketability of nearby vacant sites. This impediment to redevelopment can be addressed in part through the use of public-private financing mechanisms such as tax increment financing to encourage investment.
Summary of Findings Regarding Environmental Remediation:
As is noted in the discussion' of environmental remediation, this factor was not identified. It is not known whether past land uses on parcels that are now vacant created soil or groundwater contamination. No documentation of past contamination of vacant land is presently available.
Summary of Findings Regarding Declining or Sub-Par Equalized Assessment Valuation (EAV) Growth:
As indicated in the prior analysis of blighting factors on improved portions of the Project Area, analysis of historic EA V for the Project Area indicated that the EA V has declined in 2010, 2011, and 2012 and has also experienced growth at a rate less than that of the balance of the City and less than the annual Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha MSA in those same years.
With regard to the second set of vacant land factors, if the category 1 factors are not found to exist, only one (1) category 2 factor is required for eligibility. No category 2 factors were found to be present in the Project Area.
Summary of Findings Regarding Blighted Improved Area Immediately Prior to Becoming Vacant:
It is evident from aerial photography that many buildings have been demolished in the Project Area. Those familiar with the Project Area indicate that many of these buildings were deteriorated and vacant. Additionally, over the course of the last few decades, residential buildings have been demolished as the buildings deteriorated and were vacated. These parcels were "blighted before vacant". The City has developed the Red X program to identify properties with structural or interior hazards with a red "X" sign. These hazards can include, but are not limited to, building deterioration or damage from previous fires, structural hazards when components of the building have been removed, and collapse hazards due to the integrity of chimney tops, parapet walls, roof systems and or stair systems being compromised. The red "X" serves as an indicator to first responders to the existence of the hazards. Further, the presence of the red "X" makes it unlawful for any person to enter the building without first notifying the fire commissioner.   The vacant land that remains speaks to the poor building conditions
 
2014
A3-28
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
before the demolition, the challenges of the Area, and also presents a resource and opportunity for in-fill development and revitalization. Based on data from the City, 63 demolition permits have been issued in the Project Area from 2007 to 2013. However, documentation of actual building demolitions and the.conditions of these parcels prior to their becoming vacant is not available, and for the purposes of this analysis this factor was not shown as present within the Project Area on Table 3-2 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land.
Summary of Findings Regarding Unused or Illegal Disposal Site:
Garbage and littering consisting of various materials was found on scattered vacant lots around the Project Area. However, none of these sites had accumulations of materials at a sufficient quantity to classify them as "illegal disposal sites", and for the purposes of this analysis this factor was not shown on Table 3-2 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land to be present. Nonetheless, it should be noted that the prevalence of vacant lots in the Project Area, most of which are not owned by residents of the Project Area, is such that ensuring proper maintenance of vacant lots will continue to be a challenge for the neighborhood. The presence of overgrown or litter-strewn vacant lots detracts from the appearance of the Project Area and inhibits investment.
 
H.    Conclusion of Investigation of Eligibility Factors for the Vacant Portion of the Redevelopment Project Area
The discussion above, and the evidence summarized in Table 3-2 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land, indicate that the factors required to qualify the vacant portion of the Project Area as a blighted area exist, that the presence of those factors were documented to a meaningful extent so that the City may reasonably find that the factors are clearly present within the intent of the Act, and that the factors were reasonably distributed throughout the vacant portion of the Project Area.
The tax increment program and redevelopment plan include measures designed to reduce or eliminate the deficiencies which cause the Project Area to qualify consistent with the strategy of the City of Chicago for revitalizing other designated redevelopment areas and industrial corridors. As documented in this investigation and analysis, it is clear that the vacant portion of the Project Area is impacted by a number of eligibility factors. The presence of these factors qualifies the vacant portion of the Project Area as a blighted area.
 
2014
A3 - 29
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
IV.      SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions of PGAV PLANNERS are that the number, degree, and distribution of eligibility factors in the Project Area as documented in this Eligibility Study warrant: i) the designation of the improved portion of the Project Area as a conservation area, and ii) the designation of the vacant portion of the Project Area as a blighted area as set forth in the Act. Below is a table summarizing the qualifying factors that are found to exist in the Project Area.
A.      Conservation Area Statutory Factors
 
FACTOR1
EXISTING IN PROJECT AREA2
 
Age3
92% of bldgs. exceed 35 yrs. of age
1
Dilapidation
Minor extent (4% of buildings)
2
Obsolescence
Minor extent (10% of buildings)
3
Deterioration
Major extent (63% of buildings; 86% of sub-areas)
4
Presence of structures below minimum code standards
Not Verified
5
Illegal use of individual structures
Not Documented
6
Excessive vacancies
Minor extent (20% of buildings)
7
Lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities
Not Documented
8
Inadequate utilities
Major extent (76% of sub-areas)
9
Excessive land coverage or overcrowding of structures
No Finding
10
Deleterious land use or layout
Minor extent (48% of sub-areas)
11
Environmental clean-up
Not Documented
12
Lack of Community Planning
Major extent (62% of sub-areas)
13
Declining or subpar E.A.V. growth
YES
Notes:
  1. Not including Age as a factor, only three (3) factors are required by the Act to be present for eligibility as a Conservation Area. Eight (8) factors are verified present in the Project Area.
  2. Except for EAV growth, qualifying factors can be identified as being found to a major extent by their existence on more than 50% of the structures or sub-areas in the Project Area. Three (3) factors were found to exist to a major extent and four (4) other factors were found to exist to a minor extent.
  3. Age, although not a blighting factor for designation, is a threshold that must be present for an area to qualify as a Conservation Area.
 
2014
A3-30
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
B.      Blighting Factors for Vacant Areas
 
FACTOR
EXISTING IN VACANT/ UNIMPROVED PORTION OF PROJECT AREA
1
Two (2) or more of the following factors:
i.      Obsolete platting - no finding.
ii.      Diversity of ownership - minor
(Present on 43% of sub-areas)
iii.      Tax and assessment delinquencies - minor
(Present for 21% of vacant parcels)
iv.      Deterioration of Structures in Neighboring Areas - YES
(Present on 94% of vacant parcels)
v.      Environmental Remediation - not present
vi.      Declining or Subpar E.A.V. Growth - YES
or
YES
Two (2) factors required, Two (2) are present
2
Area immediately prior to becoming vacant qualified as a blighted improved area; or
Not Applicable
3
Area consists of unused quarry or quarries; or
Not Applicable
4
Area consists of unused rail yards, rail tracks or railroad right-of-way;
or
Not Applicable
5
Area prior to designation is subject to chronic flooding or contributes to downstream flooding; or
Not Applicable
6
Area consists of unused or illegal disposal site containing earth, stone, building debris or similar materials; or
Not Documented
7
Area is not less than 50 nor more than 100 acres and 75% is vacant;
Not Applicable
Note: The Project Area qualifies per statutory requirements. Only one (1) above the above seven (7) situations is required by the Act.
 
2014
A3-31
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
City of Chicago
Eligibility Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
Although it may be concluded that the mere presence of the stated eligibility factors noted above may be sufficient to make a finding of qualification as a conservation area or a vacant blighted 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. From the data presented in this report it is clear that the eligibility factors are reasonably distributed throughout the Project Area.
Despite small incremental improvements scattered throughout the Project Area, there exist conditions that continue to threaten the public safety, health and welfare of the Project Area. While not an eligibility factor under the Act, crime statistics also provide evidence that these threatening conditions are present in the Project Area. Recent crime statistics (Chicago Tribune -2014, May 19. Retrieved from http://crime.chicaqotribune.com/chicaqo/community/ for the month of April 2014, obtained from the City of Chicago Data Portal.) indicate the Washington Park Community Area currently ranks 7th among Chicago's 77 community areas in violent crime reports; 2nd for property crime reports; and 10th for quality of life crime reports. Other crime data sources may differ, but all indicated that the Washington Park Community Area has a high rate of crime. Furthermore, the presence of factors indicated by the Act include deteriorated, obsolete structures; building vacancies; inadequate utilities; land use incompatibilities; deteriorated streets and sidewalks; declining or subpar EAV growth; and the predominance of underutilized, vacant and tax exempt or tax delinquent properties in the Project Area and may result in continued disinvestment that will not be overcome without action by the City. These conditions have been previously documented in this report. All properties within the Project Area will benefit from the TIF program.
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 for the improved portion of the Project Area and a finding of a blighted area for the vacant portion of the Project Area and making this Eligibility Study a part of the public record.
The analysis contained herein was based upon data assembled by Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises and PGAV PLANNERS. The study and survey of the Project Area indicate the requirements necessary for designation as a combination conservation and blighted area, are present. Therefore, the Project Area qualifies as a combination conservation area and a vacant blighted area to be designated as a redevelopment project area and eligible for Tax Increment Financing under the Act.
 
2014
A3-32
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT FOUR -2012 ESTIMATED EAV BY TAX PARCEL
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1
20104000020000
EXEMPT
2
20104000030000
EXEMPT
3
20151000010000
364,722
4
20151000020000
8,467
5
20151000050000
8,470
6
20151000060000
EXEMPT
7
20151000070000
42,662
8
20151000080000
16,937
9
20151000090000
EXEMPT
10
20151000100000
EXEMPT
11
20151000110000
780,024
12
20151000120000
13,551
13
20151000130000
64,453
14
20151000140000
EXEMPT
15
20151000150000
48,015
16
20151000170000
EXEMPT
17
20151000180000
EXEMPT
18
20151000190000
26,339
19
20151000200000.
16,937
20
20151000240000
59,695
21
20151010010000
EXEMPT
22
20151010020000
EXEMPT
23
20151010030000
41,989
24
20151010040000
119,238
25
20151010050000
84,839
26
20151010060000
EXEMPT
27
20151010070000
EXEMPT
28
20151010080000
EXEMPT
29
20151010090000
EXEMPT
30
20151010100000
27,102
31
20151010110000
27,102
32
20151010120000
13,551
33
20151010130000
57,913
34
20151010140000
13,551
35
20151010150000
13,551
36
20151010170000
39,890
37
20151010201001
23,096
38
20151010201002
16,096
39
20151010201003
23,096
40
20151010201004
23,096
41
20151020010000
EXEMPT
42
20151020020000
EXEMPT
43
20151020030000
5,081
44
20151020040000
5,081
45
20151020060000
78,402
46
20151020070000
25,991
47
20151020080000
9,876
48
20151020090000
EXEMPT
49
20151020100000
16,117
50
20151020120000
50,274
51
20151020130000
458,101
52
20151020140000
136,874
53
20151020150000
92,285
54
20151020160000
EXEMPT
55
20151020170000
29,049
56
20151020201001
32,222
57
20151020201002
26,165
58
20151020201003
26,165
59
20151020211001
30,811
60
20151020211002
37,811
61
20151020211003
30,811
 
 
Page 1 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER      2012 EAV
 
 
I B
C
62
20151020211004
30,811
63
20151050010000.
EXEMPT
64
20151050020000
EXEMPT
65
20151050030000
EXEMPT
66
20151050040000
58,267
67
20151050050000
23,261
68
20151050060000
EXEMPT
69
20151050070000
EXEMPT
70
20151050080000
52,305
71
20151050090000
EXEMPT
72
20151050100000
EXEMPT
73
20151050110000
EXEMPT
74
20151050120000
EXEMPT
75
20151050130000
14,603
76
20151050140000
271,694
77
20151050150000
EXEMPT
78
20151050160000
EXEMPT
79
20151050170000
19,883
80
20151050180000
EXEMPT
81
20151060010000
72,281
82
20151060280000
223,472
83
20151060050000
23,517
84
20151060060000
147,199
85
20151060070000
151,438
86
20151060080000
96,939
87
20151060090000
75,039
88
20151060290000
217,936
89
20151060150000
EXEMPT
90
20151060160000
12,726
91
20151060170000
63,084
92
20151060180000
EXEMPT
93
20151060190000
14,847
94
20151060200000
EXEMPT
95
20151060210000
EXEMPT
96
20151060220000
70,620
97
20151060230000
EXEMPT
98
20151060240000
8,560
99
20151060250000
EXEMPT
100
20151060260000
13,573
101
20151060270000
EXEMPT
102
20151070010000
EXEMPT
103
20151070020000
8,678
104
20151070030000
8,678
105
20151070040000
8,678
106
20151070050000
29,700
107
20151070060000
17,358
108
20151070070000
EXEMPT
109
20151070170000
EXEMPT
110
20151070180000
EXEMPT
111
20151070190000
301,829
112
20151070200000
29,761
113
20151070210000
49,609
114
20151070310000
16,937
115
20151070320000
33,538
116
20151070330000
8,131
117
20151070340000
8,467
118
20151070350000
8,467
119
20151070360000
8,467
120
20151070370000
8,521
121
20151070380000
8,417
122
20151070390000
13,568
 
 
Page 2 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
123
20151070400000
45,771
124
20151070410000
EXEMPT
125
20151070420000
24,032
126
20151070430000
57,686
127
20151070440000
34,214
128
20151070450000
45,768
129
20151070460000
39,831
130
20151070470000
13,551
131
20151070480000
0
132
20151070490000
EXEMPT
133
20151080010000
EXEMPT
134
20151080020000
51,424
135
20151080030000
37,359
136
20151080040000
52,855
137
20151080050000
32,363
138
20151080060000
44,570
139
20151080070000
0
140
20151080080000
45,330
141
20151080090000
17,213
142
20151080100000
55,486
143
20151080110000
49,794
144
20151080120000
44,023
145
20151080130000
13,551
146
20151080150000
54,415
147
20151080160000
13,551
148
20151080170000
26,270
149
20151080180000
45,406
150
20151080200000
2,663
151
20151080240000
78,966
152
20151080250000
211,767
153
20151080260000
83,579
154
20151080270000
76,012
155
20151080280000
79,763
156
20151080290000
EXEMPT
157
20151080300000
EXEMPT
158
20151080310000
46,298
159
20151080320000
187,075
160
20151080340000
54,802
161
20151080350000
45,992
162
20151080360000
13,551
163
20151080370000
27,102
164
20151080380000
80,075
165
20151080390000
89,386
166
20151080401001
43,361
167
20151080401002
23,696
168
20151080430000
18,927
169
20151080421001
20,792
170
20151080421002
20,141
171
20151080421003
20,529
172
20151090010000
121,342
173
20151090020000
121,342
174
20151090030000
84,454
175
20151090040000
73,972
176
20151090050000
EXEMPT
177
20151090060000
EXEMPT
178
20151090140000
EXEMPT
179
20151090150000
EXEMPT
180
20151090160000
68,642
181
20151090170000
53,612
182
20151090180000
40,193
 
 
Page 3 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
I B
C
183
20151090190000
4,814
184
20151090200000
0
185
20151090210000
45
186
20151090220000
11,382
187
20151090230000
45,605
188
20151090240000
38,571
189
20151090380000
EXEMPT
190
20151090390000
27,102
191
20151090400000
13,551
192
20151090410000
13,551
193
20151090420000
94,268
194
20151090430000
49,987
195
20151090440000
58,631
196
20151090450000
58,631
197
20151090460000
58,631
198
20151090470000
18,695
199
20151090480000
54,760
200
20151090490000
EXEMPT
201
20151090500000
23,306
202
20151090510000
EXEMPT
203
20151090520000
EXEMPT
204
20151090530000
EXEMPT
205
20151090540000
68,314
206
20151090550000
31,128
207
20151100010000
26,886
208
20151100020000
25,632
209
20151100030000
21,032
210
20151100040000
52,507
211
20151100050000
2,257
212
20151100060000
17,708
213
20151100080000
EXEMPT
214
20151100090000
9,924
215
20151100100000
EXEMPT
216
20151100110000
EXEMPT
217
20151100120000
EXEMPT
218
20151100130000
86,090
219
20151100140000
168,950
220
20151100150000
26,937
221
20151100160000
76,444
222
20151100190000
10,605
223
20151100210000
64,116
224
20151100240000
344,017
225
20151100250000
EXEMPT
226
20151100260000
EXEMPT
227
20151100271001
8,582
228
20151100271002
15,265
229
20151100271003
28,137
230
20151100271004
26,827
231
20151100271005
14,811
232
20151100271006
21,137
233
20151100281001
15,206
234
20151100281002
16,115
235
20151100281003
22,694
236
20151100281004
22,142
237
20151100281005
18,211
238
20151100281006
23,211
239
20151100281007
24,830
240
20151100281008
24,830
241
20151100281009
884
242
20151100281010
884
243
20151100281011
884
 
 
Page 4 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
244
20151100281012
884
245
20151100281013
884
246
20151100281014
884
247
20151100281015
884
248
20151100281016
884
249
20151100281017
884
250
20151100281018
884
251
20151100281019
884
252
20151100281020
884
253
20151100291001
46,396
254
20151100291002
25,410
255
20151100291003
34,057
256
20151100291004
38,268
257
20151100291005
20,410
258
20151100291006
34,057
259
20151100291007
2,466
260
20151100291008
2,466
261
20151100291009
2,466
262
20151100291010
1,007
263
20151100291011
1,007
264
20151100291012
1,007
265
20151100301001
22,100
266
20151100301002
22,100
267
20151100301003
17,697
268
20151100301004
29,697
269
20151100301005
24,215
270
20151100301006
31,215
271
20151100301007
32,736
272
20151100301008
32,736
273
20151100301009
3,793
274
20151100301010
3,793
275
20151100301011
3,793
276
20151100301012
3,793
277
20151100301013
3,793
278
20151100301014
3,793
279
20151100301015
3,793
280
20151100301016
3,793
281
20151100311001
28,940
282
20151100311002
35,381
283
20151100311003
35,381
284
20151100311004
35,381
285
20151100311005
39,612
286
20151100311006
37,777
287
20151100311007
37,777
288
20151100311008
28,940
289
20151100311009
34,753
290
20151100311010
34,753
291
20151100311011
36,989
292
20151100321001
44,093
293
20151100321002
29,366
294
20151100321003
31,386
295
20151110010000
EXEMPT
296
20151110020000
EXEMPT
297
20151110030000
163,844
298
20151110040000
EXEMPT
299
20151110050000
85,175
300
20151110060000
EXEMPT
301
20151110070000
EXEMPT
302
20151110080000
EXEMPT
303
20151110090000
13,551
304
20151110100000
27,102
 
 
Page 5 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
305
20151110110000
16,202
306
20151110120000-
EXEMPT
307
20151110130000
68,650
308
20151110140000
82,656
309
20151110150000
EXEMPT
310
20151110160000
EXEMPT
311
20151110170000
22,557
312
20151110180000
22,557
313
20151110190000
EXEMPT
314
20151110200000
83,340
315
20151110220000
EXEMPT
316
20151110230000
37,710
317
20151110240000
69,402
318
20151120010000
EXEMPT
319
20151120020000
58,873
320
20151120281001
19,931
321
20151120281002
22,779
322
20151120281003
31,198
323
20151120281004
25,646
324
20151120281005
26,931
325
20151120281006
29,779
326
20151120281007
30,957
327
20151120281008
25,646
328
20151120050000'
59,075
329
20151120060000
13,551
330
20151120070000
27,102
331
20151120080000
EXEMPT
332
20151120090000
27,102
333
20151120100000
83,910
334
20151120110000
30,693
335
20151120120000
64,346
336
20151120130000
EXEMPT
337
20151120140000
EXEMPT
338
20151120150000
237,920
339
20151120160000
89,288
340
20151120170000
159,857
341
20151120180000
43,442
342
20151120190000
104,890
343
20151120200000
77,673
344
20151120210000
107,449
345
20151120220000
131,695
346
20151120240000
83,570
347
20151120250000
EXEMPT
348
20151120260000
105,044
349
20151120271001
13,705
350
20151120271002
25,882
351
20151120271003
20,458
352
20151120271004
25,576
353
20151120271005
20,458
354
20151120271006
25,576
355
20151120291001
22,989
356
20151120291002
24,134
357
20151120291003
23,943
358
20151120291004
24,325
359
20151130010000
165,884
360
20151130020000.
5,903
361
20151130030000
EXEMPT
362
20151130040000
EXEMPT
363
20151130050000
EXEMPT
364
20151130060000
8,467
365
20151130070000
8,467
 
 
Page 6 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
366
20151130080000
8,467
367
20151130090000
EXEMPT
368
20151130100000
33,552
369
20151130110000
EXEMPT
370
20151130120000
EXEMPT
371
20151130130000
966
372
20151130150000
8,386
373
20151130160000
EXEMPT
374
20151130170000
25,169
375
20151130180000
EXEMPT
376
20151130200000
47,575
377
20151130210000
EXEMPT
378
20151130220000
45,117
379
20151130230000
13,467
380
20151130240000
EXEMPT
381
20151130250000
55,972
382
20151130260000
72,735
383
20151130270000
EXEMPT
384
20151130280000
EXEMPT
385
20151130290000
EXEMPT
386
20151130300000
32,124
387
20151130320000
40,903
388
20151130330000
16,226
389
20151130340000
0
390
20151130350000
EXEMPT
391
20151130360000
45,841
392
20151130380000
187,599
393
20151130390000
13,467
394
20151130400000
35,766
395
20151130410000
EXEMPT
396
20151130420000
EXEMPT
397
20151130430000
EXEMPT
398
20151130440000
3,919
399
20151130450000
33,389
400
20151130460000
36,243
401
20151130481001
30,138
402
20151130481002
31,024
403
20151130481003
27,478
404
20151140050000
EXEMPT
405
20151140060000
EXEMPT
406
20151140070000
EXEMPT
407
20151140080000
42,895
408
20151140120000
EXEMPT
409
20151140130000
EXEMPT
410
20151140140000
189,398
411
20151140150000
85,978
412
20151140160000
86,923
413
20151140180000
125,915
414
20151140190000
65,991
415
20151140200000
EXEMPT
416
20151140210000
EXEMPT
417
20151140220000
54,022
418
20151140231001
7,440
419
20151140231002
8,044
420
20151140231003
8,010
421
20151140231004
8,131
422
20151140231005
8,010
423
20151140231006
8,131
424
20151150010000
149,962
425
20151150020000
EXEMPT
426
20151150030000.
27,270
 
 
Page 7 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
427
20151150040000          . •
69,520
428
20151150050000
45,150
429
20151150060000
48,122
430
20151150080000
64,007
431
20151150090000
53,217
432
20151150120000
122,549
433
20151150130000
EXEMPT
434
20151150140000
70,900
435
20151150150000
16,160
436
20151150170000
33,115
437
20151150180000
34,023
438
20151150190000.         ' '
44,278
439
20151150200000
78,492
440
20151150210000
48,301
441
20151150220000
31,846
442
20151150230000
33,900
443
20151150240000
40,824
444
20151150250000
36,546
445
20151150270000
78,021
446
20151150280000
72,258
447
20151150300000
EXEMPT
448
20151150310000
14,309
449
20151150320000
13,635
450
20151150330000
12,704
451
20151150340000
73,170
452
20151150351001
53,792
453
20151150351002
37,328
454
20151150351003
43,251
455
20151150351004
51,500
456
20151150351005
42,328
457
20151150351006
50,251
458
20151150420000
69,615
459
20151150371001
15,150
460
20151150371002
25,769
461
20151150371003
26,706
462
20151150381001
48,862
463
20151150381002
30,101
464
20151150381003
36,032
465
20151150381004
48,862
466
20151150381005
35,101
467
20151150381006
43,032
468
20151150391001
18,943
469
20151150391002
18,943
470
20151150391003
18,943
471
20151150391004
17,636
472
20151150391005
17,633
473
20151150391006
17,633
474
20151150410000
122,939
475
20151160010000
EXEMPT
476
20151160020000
EXEMPT
477
20151160030000
155,363
478
20151160040000
EXEMPT
479
20151160050000
88,851
480
20151160060000
122,139
481
20151160070000
34,102
482
20151160080000
EXEMPT
483
20151160090000
61,339
484
20151160100000
49,359
485
20151160130000
47,990
486
20151160140000
EXEMPT
487
20151160160000
78,734
 
 
Page 8 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
488
20151160170000
EXEMPT
489
20151160180000
30,811
490
20151160190000
446
491
20151160200000
30,912
492
20151160210000
EXEMPT
493
20151160220000
EXEMPT
494
20151160230000
EXEMPT
495
20151160240000
101,187
496
20151160250000
12,934
497
20151160261001
22,737
498
20151160261002
27,068
499
20151160261003
29,237
500
20151160261004
29,237
501
20151170010000
EXEMPT
502
20151170020000
46,057
503
20151170030000
127,658
504
20151170060000
EXEMPT
505
20151170070000
EXEMPT
506
20151170090000
EXEMPT
507
20151170100000
EXEMPT
508
20151170110000
EXEMPT
509
20151170120000
61,967
510
20151170130000
12,098
511
20151170180000
EXEMPT
512
20151170190000
EXEMPT
513
20151170200000
22,725
514
20151170210000
131,656
515
20151170220000
EXEMPT
516
20151170250000
84,541
517
20151170260000
67,966
518
20151170270000
EXEMPT
519
20151170280000
35,222
520
20151170290000
33,339
521
20151170300000
32,764
522
20151170310000
34,641
523
20151170330000
5,785
524
20151170340000
8,038
525
20151170360000
11,907
526
20151170370000
4,371
527
20151170381001
37,371
528
20151170381002
6,963
529
20151170381003
6,963
530
20151170381004
6,863
531
20151170391001
64,591
532
20151170391002
64,591
533
20151170391003
64,591
534
20151170391004
64,591
535
20151170391005
64,591
536
20151170391006
64,591
537
20151170391007
64,591
538
20151170391008
64,591
539
20151170430000
109,230
540
20151170420000
248,470
541
20151180010000
184,308
542
20151180020000
18,079
543
20151180040000
39,772
544
20151180050000
EXEMPT
545
20151180060000
EXEMPT
546
20151180070000
77,757
547
20151180130000.
EXEMPT
548
20151180140000
24,746
 
 
Page 9 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
549
20151180160000
91,398
550
20151180190000
38,922
551
20151180221001
24,193
552
20151180221002
21,008
553
20151180221003
21,224
554
20151180221004
21,553
555
20151180221005
27,136
556
20151180221006
31,602
557
20151180221007
22,969
558
20151180221008
23,188
559
20151180221009
14,359
560
20151180221010
27,136
561
20151180221011
23,758
562
20151180221012
19,701
563
20151180221013
18,500
564
20151180221014
18,610
565
20151180221015
15,013
566
20151180221016
15,666
567
20151180221017
23,211
568
20151180221018
17,193
569
20151180221019
16,211
570
20151180221020
23,758
571
20151180221021
17,083
572
20151180221022
22,751
573
20151180221023
16,758
574
20151180221024
10,013
575
20151180221025
22,557
576
20151180221026
16,101
577
20151180221027
25,393
578
20151180221028
18,719
579
20151180221029
25,938
580
20151180221030
15,557
581
20151180221031
23,101
582
20151180221032
16,758
583
20151180221033
19,263
584
20151180221034
30,076
585
20151180221035
23,407
586
20151180221036
29,644
587
20151180221037
17,630
588
20151180221038
26,157
589
20151180221039
21,443
590
20151180221040
21,987
591
20151180221041
1,523
592
20151180221042
1,523
593
20151180221043
1,523
594
20151180221044
1,523
595
20151180221045
1,523
596
20151180221046
1,523
597
20151180221047
1,523
598
20151180221048
1,523
599
20151180221049
1,523
600
20151180221050
1,523
601
20151180221051
1,523
602
20151180221052
1,523
603
20151180221053'
1,523
604
20151180221054
1,523
605
20151180221055
1,523
606
20151180221056
1,523
607
20151180221057
1,523
608
20151180221058
1,523
609
20151180221059
1,523
 
 
Page 10 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
610
20151180221060
1,523
611
20151180221061
1,523
612
20151180221062
1,523
613
20151180221063
1,523
614
20151180221064
1,523
615
20151180221065
1,523
616
20151180221066
1,523
617
20151180221067
1,523
618
20151180221068
1,523
619
20151180221069
1,523
620
20151180221070
1,523
621
20151180221071
1,523
622
20151180221072
1,523
623
20151180221073
1,523
624
20151180221074
1,523
625
20151180221075
1,523
626
20151180221076.         • '
1,523
627
20151180221077
1,523
628
20151180230000
25,393
629
20151180241001
28,508
630
20151180241002
27,961
631
20151180241003
35,362
632
20151180241004
28,362
633
20151180241005
36,187
634
20151180241006
36,187
635
20151180241007
30,284
636
20151180241008
30,284
637
20151180251001
14,937
638
20151180251002
20,015
639
20151180251003
20,040
640
20151180251004
27,119
641
20151180251005
21,059
642
20151180251006
21,137
643
20151180251007
21,059
644
20151180251008
21,137
645
20151180251009
4,074
646
20151180251010
4,074
647
20151180251011
4,074
648
20151180251012
4,074
649
20151180251013
4,074
650
20151180251014
4,074
651
20151180251015
4,074
652
20151180251016
4,074
653
20151180251017
4,074
654
20151180251018
4,074
655
20151180261001
24,600
656
20151180261002
13,677
657
20151180261003
7,598
658
20151180261004
13,677
659
20151180261005
14,598
660
20151180261006
13,677
661
20151180261007
14,598
662
20151180261008
24,600
663
20151180261009
13,655
664
20151180261010
14,598
665
20151180261011
13,677
666
20151180261012
7,598
667
20151180261013
13,677
668
20151180261014
14,598
669
20151180271001
50,380
670
20151180271002
50,380
 
 
Page 11 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
671
20151180271003
18,189
672
20151180271004
25,189
673
20151180271005
25,189
674
20151180271006
25,189
675
20151180271007
2,340
676
20151180271008
2,340
677
20151180271009
2,340
678
20151180271010
2,340
679
20151180271011
2,340
680
20151180271012
2,340
681
20151180271013
2,340
682
20151180271014
2,340
683
20151180271015
2,340
684
20151180271016
2,340
685
20151180271017
2,340
686
20151180271018
2,340
687
20151180271019
2,340
688
20151180271020
2,340
689
20151180281001
44,786
690
20151180281002
37,786
691
20151180281003
37,786
692
20151180281004
37,786
693
20151180281005
30,093
694
20151180281006
44,786
695
20151180281007
44,786
696
20151180281008
44,786
697
20151180281009
37,786
698
20151180281010
37,786
699
20151180281011
37,786
700
20151180281012
37,786
701
20151180281013
20,052
702
20151180281014
37,786
703
20151180281015
35,828
704
20151180281016
44,786
705
20151180281017
44,786
706
20151180281018
37,786
707
20151180281019
37,786
708
20151180281020
37,786
709
20151180281021
44,786
710
20151180281022
38,473
711
20151180281023
44,786
712
20151180281024
44,786
713
20151180281025
44,786
714
20151180281026.
3,863
715
20151180281027
3,863
716
20151180281028
3,863
717
20151180281029
3,863
718
20151180281030
3,863
719
20151180281031
3,863
720
20151180281032
3,863
721
20151180281033
3,863
722
20151180281034
3,863
723
20151180291001
76,969
724
20151180291002
49,928
725
20151180291003-
49,928
726
20151190010000
EXEMPT
727
20151190020000
839
728
20151190030000
2,368
729
20151190040000
9,146
730
20151190050000
8,807
731
20151190060000
8,807
 
Page 12 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER      2012 EAV
 
 
 
B
C
732
20151190070000
8,467
733
20151190080000
337
734
20151190090000
9,146
735
20151190100000
6,049
736
20151190130000.
EXEMPT
737
20151190140000
59,184
738
20151190150000
EXEMPT
739
20151190160000
9,850
740
20151190170000
1,450
741
20151190180000
185,652
742
20151190190000
EXEMPT
743
20151190200000
EXEMPT
744
20151190210000
53,994
745
20151190220000
70,659
746
20151190230000
EXEMPT
747
20151190240000
14,180
748
20151190250000
33,732
749
20151190260000
46,102
750
20151190270000
48,851
751
20151190280000
5,284
752
20151190290000
37,455
753
20151190300000
19,611
754
20151190310000
56,199
755
20151190320000
1,429
756
20151190330000
EXEMPT
757
20151190340000
EXEMPT
758
20151190350000
EXEMPT
759
20151190360000
EXEMPT
760
20151190370000
EXEMPT
761
20151190380000
EXEMPT
762
20151190390000
EXEMPT
763
20151190400000
EXEMPT
764
20151190420000
58,505
765
20151190430000
9,674
766
20151200010000
133,244
767
20151200020000
20,549
768
20151200030000
EXEMPT
769
20151200040000
53,604
770
20151200050000
14,006
771
20151200060000
35,210
772
20151200070000
26,529
773
20151200080000
56,566
774
20151200090000
39,158
775
20151200100000
75,291
776
20151200110000
45,585
777
20151200120000
39,253
778
20151200130000
37,710
779
20151200140000
EXEMPT
780
20151200150000
15,083
781
20151200160000
51,937
782
20151200170000
17,238
783
20151200180000
EXEMPT
784
20151200190000
EXEMPT
785
20151200200000
EXEMPT
786
20151200250000
53,399
787
20151200260000
3,771
788
20151200280000
77,087
789
20151200290000
84,087
790
20151200300000
121,499
791
20151200310000
117,922
792
20151200320000
291,597
 
 
Page 13 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER      2012 EAV
 
 
 
B
C
793
20151200330000
170,373
794
20151200340000
204,716
795
20151200351001
24,257
796
20151200351002
19,611
797
20151200351003
26,611
798
20151200361001
33,109
799
20151200361002
35,311
800
20151200361003
44,185
801
20151210010000
EXEMPT
802
20151210020000
EXEMPT
803
20151210040000
1,624
804
20151210050000
52,476
805
20151210060000
13,551
806
20151210070000
EXEMPT
807
20151210080000
56,224
808
20151210090000
EXEMPT
809
20151210100000
149,872
810
20151210110000
87,024
811
20151210120000
44,379
812
20151210130000
83,023
813
20151210140000
77,729
814
20151210150000
EXEMPT
815
20151210160000
EXEMPT
816
20151210170000
EXEMPT
817
20151210180000
EXEMPT
818
20151210200000
27,102
819
20151210210000
60,217
820
20151210220000
50,369
821
20151210230000
EXEMPT
822
20151210240000
54,474
823
20151210250000
4,655
824
20151210260000
50,602
825
20151210270000
1,624
826
20151210280000
27,806
827
20151210290000
41,295
828
20151210300000
44,511
829
20151210310000
50,953
830
20151210320000
44,409
831
20151210330000
0
832
20151210340000
16,160
833
20151210351001
19,746
834
20151210351002
32,750
835
20151210351003
27,461
836
20151210351004
35,241
837
20151210351005
19,746
838
20151210351006
32,750
839
20151210351007
27,461
840
20151210351008
28,241
841
20151210361001
4,382
842
20151210361002
6,228
843
20151210361003
6,228
844
20151210361004
6,228
845
20151220020000
13,551
846
20151220030000
13,551
847
20151220050000
EXEMPT
848
20151220060000
13,551
849
20151220070000
50,871
850
20151220080000
57,091
851
20151220090000
13,551
852
20151220100000
EXEMPT
853
20151220110000
EXEMPT
 
 
■Page 14 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER      2012 EAV
 
 
 
B
C
854
20151220130000
56,249
855
20151220140000
43,573
856
20151220150000
45,984
857
20151220160000
57,122
858
20151220170000.
4,115
859
20151220180000
1,332
860
20151220190000
44,284
861
20151220200000
9,665
862
20151220210000
237,225
863
20151220220000
EXEMPT
864
20151220230000
EXEMPT
865
20151220240000
EXEMPT
866
20151220250000
72,993
867
20151220260000
EXEMPT
868
20151220270000
EXEMPT
869
20151220280000
56,429
870
20151220300000
47,446
871
20151220310000
1,875
872
20151220330000
EXEMPT
873
20151220340000
20,394
874
20151220420000
82,016
875
20151220430000
82,016
876
20151220440000
227,660
877
20151220371001
28,345
878
20151220371002
36,882
879
20151220371003
32,957
880
20151220371004
34,492
881
20151220381001
38,908
882
20151220381002
41,122
883
20151220381003
43,838
884
20151220381004
39,048
885
20151220391001
65,399
886
20151220391002
76,015
887
20151220391003
82,072
888
20151220391004
95,197
889
20151220401001
41,997
890
20151220401002
27,071
891
20151220401003
35,620
892
20151220411001
34,559
893
20151220411002
37,912
894
20151220411003
39,031
895
20151220411004
40,148
896
20151220411005
37,912
897
20151220411006
40,148
898
20151220411007
41,326
899
20151220411008
42,443
900
20151220411009
37,912
901
20151220411010
40,148
902
20151220411011
41,326
903
20151220411012
49,443
904
20151230010000
EXEMPT
905
20151230030000
EXEMPT
906
20151230040000
EXEMPT
907
20151230050000
62,913
908
20151230060000
49,982
909
20151230070000
EXEMPT
910
20151230080000
48,784
911
20151230090000
EXEMPT
912
20151230100000          , ■
17,653
913
20151230110000
12,373
914
20151230120000
12,541
 
 
Page 15 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
915
20151230130000
EXEMPT
916
20151230140000
EXEMPT
917
20151230150000
EXEMPT
918
20151230160000
EXEMPT
919
20151230180000
81,935
920
20151230190000
82,552
921
20151230200000
EXEMPT
922
20151230210000
EXEMPT
923
20151230220000
EXEMPT
924
20151230231001
24,100
925
20151230231002
24,100
926
20151230231003
24,137
927
20151230231004
,24,100
928
20151230231005
24,100
929
20151230231006
24,137
930
20151230231007
. 24,137
931
20151230231008
24,100
932
20151230231009
24,137
933
20151230231010
24,100
934
20151230231011
24,100
935
20151230231012
31,137
936
20151240010000
EXEMPT
937
20151240020000
17,664
938
20151240030000
EXEMPT
939
20151240040000
67,870
940
20151240060000
14,965
941
20151240070000
. EXEMPT
942
20151240080000
EXEMPT
943
20151240090000
29,964
944
20151240110000
61,314
945
20151240130000
238,476
946
20151240140000
19,886
947
20151240150000
EXEMPT
948
20151240160000
EXEMPT
949
20151240170000
66,689
950
20151240190000
EXEMPT
951
20151240200000
EXEMPT
952
20151240210000
EXEMPT
953
20151240220000
55,281
954
20151240230000
EXEMPT
955
20151240240000
EXEMPT
956
20151240260000
93,859
957
20151240270000
340,712
958
20151240280000
46,581
959
20151240290000
EXEMPT
960
20151240300000
'14,982
961
20151240321001
37,817
962
20151240321002
44,817
963
20151240321003
■ 37,822
964
20151240331001
41,004
965
20151240331002
48,004
966
20151240331003
48,004
967
20151240331004
48,004
968
20151240351001
10,574
969
20151240351002
10,574
970
20151240351003
3,984 .
971
20151240351004
10,984
972
20151240351005
10,984
973
20151240351006
10,574
974
20151240351007
13,217
975
20151240351008
9,825
 
 
Page 16 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
976
20151240361001
50,720
977
20151240361002
54,580
978
20151240361003
14,440
979
20151240361004
58,438
980
20152000010000
EXEMPT
981
20153000010000
116,085
982
20153000020000
39,169
983
20153000030000
76,197
984
20153000040000
8,518
985
20153000050000
16,867
986
20153000060000
112,165
987
20153000070000
8,349
988
20153000080000
8,349
989
20153000090000
EXEMPT
990
20153000100000
33,746
991
20153000110000
33,025
992
20153000120000
263,000
993
20153000130000
7,631
994
20153000140000
EXEMPT
995
20153000150000
EXEMPT
996
20153000160000
EXEMPT
997
20153000170000
26,995
998
20153000180000
30,084
999
20153000190000
EXEMPT
1000
20153000200000
EXEMPT
1001
20153000230000
EXEMPT
1002
20153000250000
EXEMPT
1003
20153000260000
EXEMPT
1004
20153010010000
442,903
1005
20153010020000
EXEMPT
1006
20153010030000
EXEMPT
1007
20153010040000
EXEMPT
1008
20153010050000
152,066
1009
20153010060000
EXEMPT
1010
20153010070000
EXEMPT
1011
20153010080000
EXEMPT
1012
20153010090000
EXEMPT
1013
20153010100000
EXEMPT
1014
20153010110000
18,500
1015
20153010120000
EXEMPT
1016
20153010130000
• 50,787
1017
20153010150000
80,689
1018
20153010160000
23,379
1019
20153010170000
60,579
1020
20153010180000
57,453
1021
20153010190000
83,194
1022
20153010200000
31,002
1023
20153010210000
EXEMPT
1024
20153010221001
5,305
1025
20153010221002
5,305
1026
20153010221003
5,305
1027
20153010221004
2,076
1028
20153010221005
5,230
1029
20153010221006
5,230
1030
20153010221007
5,230
1031
20153010221008
2,345
1032
20153020010000
235,670
1033
20153020020000
31,762
1034
20153020030000
EXEMPT
1035
20153020040000
82,187
1036
20153020050000
49,940
 
 
Page 17 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1037
20153020060000
37,713
1038
20153020070000
174,811
1039
20153020080000
75,706
1040
20153020090000
203,866
1041
20153020100000
21,135
1042
20153020110000
48,585
1043
20153020120000
30,974
1044
20153020130000
30,974
1045
20153020140000
71,557
1046
20153020150000
68,305
1047
20153020160000
29,125
1048
20153020170000
29,131
1049
20153020180000
135,979
1050
20153030010000
63,140
1051
20153030020000
EXEMPT
1052
20153030030000
57,007
1053
20153030040000
57,086
1054
20153030050000
10,403
1055
20153030060000
1,282
1056
20153030070000
EXEMPT
1057
20153030080000
61,311
1058
20153030090000
44,847
1059
20153030100000
45,212
1060
20153030110000
14,295
1061
20153030120000
39,649
1062
20153030130000
56,286
1063
20153030140000
45,959
1064
20153030150000
47,507
1065
20153030160000
41,153
1066
20153030170000
35,496
1067
20153030180000
41,329
1068
20153030190000
43,702
1069
20153030210000
47,516
1070
20153030220000
271,742
1071
20153030230000
56,752
1072
20153030260000
EXEMPT
1073
20153030270000
EXEMPT
1074
20153030280000
7,910
1075
20153030290000          , •
60,702
1076
20153030310000
62,178
1077
20153030320000
51,418
1078
20153030330000
78,975
1079
20153030350000
15,355
1080
20153030360000
EXEMPT
1081
20153030370000
43,341
1082
20153030390000
42,438
1083
20153030401001
32,565
1084
20153030401002
22,672
1085
20153030401003
22,672
1086
20153030411001           . '
38,428
1087
20153030411002
26,364
1088
20153030411003
19,364
1089
20153030411004
37,643
1090
20153030411005
18,809
1091
20153030411006
18,809
1092
20153030411007
26,039
1093
20153030411008
19,341
1094
20153030411009
39,177
1095
20153030411010
40,906
1096
20153030411011
49,754
1097
20153030411012-
40,415
 
 
Page 18 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1098
20153030411013
22,759
1099
20153030411014
54,712
1100
20153030411015
20,293
1101
20153030411016
13,097
1102
20153030421001
23,870
1103
20153030421002
22,187
1104
20153030421003
23,253
1105
20153030421004
17,201
1106
20153030421005
16,870
1107
20153030421006
29,187
1108
20153030421007
23,253
1109
20153030421008
30,253
1110
20153030431001
56,637
1111
20153030431002
48,534
1112
20153030431003
48,534
1113
20153040020000
59,686
1114
20153040030000
20,684
1115
20153040040000
EXEMPT
1116
20153040050000
147,561
1117
20153040060000
15,707
1118
20153040070000
39,761
1119
20153040080000
56,216
1120
20153040090000
75,493
1121
20153040100000
EXEMPT
1122
20153040110000
EXEMPT
1123
20153040120000
EXEMPT
1124
20153040130000
33,726
1125
20153040140000
33,726
1126
20153040150000
36,958
1127
20153040160000
EXEMPT
1128
20153040170000
EXEMPT
1129
20153040180000
28,320
1130
20153040190000
30,297
1131
20153040200000
EXEMPT
1132
20153040210000
83,425
1133
20153040220000
46,792
1134
20153040230000
EXEMPT
1135
20153040240000
EXEMPT
1136
20153040250000
EXEMPT
1137
20153040260000
44,023
1138
20153040270000
56,224
1139
20153040280000
11,447
1140
20153040290000
EXEMPT
1141
20153040300000
EXEMPT
1142
20153040310000
81,792
1143
20153040320000
53,682
1144
20153040330000
44,435
1145
20153040340000
30,301
1146
20153040350000
21,089
1147
20153040360000
50,961
1148
20153040370000
26,788
1149
20153040400000
123,452
1150
20153040390000
4,842
1151
20153050040000
EXEMPT
1152
20153050050000
118,927
1153
20153050060000
EXEMPT
1154
20153050070000
54,608
1155
20153050080000
EXEMPT
1156
20153050090000
EXEMPT
1157
20153050100000
42,816
1158
20153050110000
42,816
 
 
Page 19 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1159
20153050120000
42,202
1160
20153050130000
34,972
1161
20153050381001
6,772
1162
20153050381002
13,169
1163
20153050381003
28,323
1164
20153050381004
35,937
1165
20153050381005
13,169
1166
20153050381006
28,323
1167
20153050381007
11,772
1168
20153050381008
29,046
1169
20153050381009
31,967
1170
20153050381010
15,955
1171
20153050381011
28,213
1172
20153050381012
23,921
1173
20153050381013
30,547
1174
20153050381014
31,967
1175
20153050381015
22,849
1176
20153050381016
27,893
1177
20153050381017
17,137
1178
20153050381018
37,547
1179
20153050381019
31,754
1180
20153050381020
15,955
1181
20153050381021
21,000
1182
20153050381022
23,921
1183
20153050381023
30,441
1184
20153050381024
31,967
1185
20153050381025
22,849
1186
20153050381026
21,000
1187
20153050381027
16,921
1188
20153050381028
30,547
1189
20153050381029
31,860
1190
20153050381030
22,955
1191
20153050381031
21,107
1192
20153050381032
16,921
1193
20153050381033
25,074
1194
20153050381034
22,849
1195
20153050381035
28,000
1196
20153050381036
24,030
1197
20153050381037
30,441
1198
20153050381038
37,654
1199
20153050170000
68,227
1200
20153050180000
223,376
1201
20153050240000
73,588
1202
20153050290000
170,373
1203
20153050301001
25,921
1204
20153050301002
27,088
1205
20153050301003
27,088
1206
20153050301004
25,921
1207
20153050301005
27,088
1208
20153050301006
27,088
1209
20153050320000
68,863
1210
20153050330000
73,139
1211
20153050341001
13,686
1212
20153050341002
21,957
1213
20153050341003
21,957
1214
20153050341004
21,957
1215
20153050341005
23,786
1216
20153050341006
23,786
1217
20153050341007
23,786
1218
20153050341008
23,786
1219
20153050361001
7,146
 
 
Page 20 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
I B
C
1220
20153050361002
9,334
1221
20153050361003
9,334
1222
20153050361004
9,334
1223
20153050361005
9,334
1224
20153050361006
9,334
1225
20153050361007
9,334
1226
20153050371001
32,997
1227
20153050371002
28,561
1228
20153050371003
28,561
1229
20153050371004
25,997
1230
20153050371005
34,784
1231
20153050371006
27,784
1232
20153050371007
24,925
1233
20153050371008
22,602
1234
20153050371009
23,912
1235
20153050371010
23,912
1236
20153050371011
21,353
1237
20153050371012
17,538
1238
20153050371013
19,566
1239
20153050371014
19,566
1240
20153050371015
19,805
1241
20153050371016
28,410
1242
20153050371017
21,410
1243
20153050371018
17,482
1244
20153050371019
25,730
1245
20153050371020
25,730
1246
20153060010000
16,665
1247
20153060020000
16,408
1248
20153060030000
8,333
1249
20153060050000
16,665
1250
20153060060000
22,843
1251
20153060070000
42,365
1252
20153060080000
8,248
1253
20153060090000
EXEMPT
1254
20153060100000
EXEMPT
1255
20153060110000
8,333
1256
20153060120000
8,333
1257
20153060130000
EXEMPT
1258
20153060140000
87,162
1259
20153060150000
86,654
1260
20153060180000
EXEMPT
1261
20153060190000
EXEMPT
1262
20153060200000
EXEMPT
1263
20153060210000
52,815
1264
20153060230000
25,966
1265
20153060240000
36,105
1266
20153060270000
56,693
1267
20153060290000
59,647
1268
20153060340000
EXEMPT
1269
20153060350000
63,322
1270
20153060360000
28,454
1271
20153060370000
28,454
1272
20153060380000
EXEMPT
1273
20153060390000
58,909
1274
20153060410000
45,310
1275
20153060421001
25,015
1276
20153060421002
30,971
1277
20153060421003
30,971
1278
20153060421004
32,161
1279
20153070010000
EXEMPT
1280
20153070020000
EXEMPT
 
 
Page 21 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1281
20153070090000
EXEMPT
1282
20153070100000
EXEMPT
1283
20153070110000
EXEMPT
1284
20153070120000
EXEMPT
1286
20153070130000
21,536
1286
20153070140000
61,328
1287
20153070150000
22,972
1288
20153070160000
13,907
1289
20153070180000
13,495
1290
20153070190000
33,176
1291
20153070200000
102,738
1292
20153070210000
205,446
1293
20153070220000
EXEMPT
1294
20153070230000
EXEMPT
1296
20153070250000
10,896
1296
20153080020000
18,152
1297
20153080030000
12,862
1298
20153080040000
14,286
1299
20153080050000
90,739
1300
20153080060000
82,232
1301
20153080070000
82,538
1302
20153080080000
897,814
1303
20153080090000
11,904
1304
20153080100000
EXEMPT
1305
20153080110000
205,527
1306
20153080120000
60,688
1307
20153080130000
53,169
1308
20153080140000
53,767
1309
20153080150000
EXEMPT
1310
20153080160000
EXEMPT
1311
20153080171001
24,614
1312
20153080171002
19,131
1313
20153080171003
19,460
1314
20153080171004
19,378
1316
20153080171005
19,788
1316
20153080171006
25,840
1317
20153080171007
21,177
1318
20153080171008
23,059
1319
20153080171009
22,734
1320
20153080171010
22,815
1321
20153080171011
22,487
1322
20163080171012
22,978
1323
20153080171013
21,996
1324
20153080171014
20,035
1326
20153080171015
20,442
1326
20153080171016
20,442
1327
20153080171017
20,526
1328
20153080171018
26,819
1329
20153080171019
21,996
1330
20153080171020
23,385
1331
20153080171021
22,243
1332
20153080171022
22,815
1333
20153080171023
15,406
1334
20153080171024          , ■
22,894
1336
20153080171025
22,159
1336
20153080171026
20,113
1337
20153080171027
20,526
1338
20153080171028
20,360
1339
20153080171029
20,526
1340
20153080171030
19,903
1341
20153080171031
21,915
 
Page 22 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1342
20153080171032
23,141
1343
20153080171033
22,487
1344
20153080171034
22,650
1345
20153080171035.
22,487
1346
20153080171036
22,978
1347
20153080171037
21,996
1348
20153090020000
130,424
1349
20153090050000
42,519
1350
20153090110000
EXEMPT
1351
20153090150000
66,007
1352
20153090170000
13,641
1353
20153090180000
EXEMPT
1354
20153090190000
85,055
1355
20153090200000
69,815
1356
20153090210000
1,240
1357
20153090260000
EXEMPT
1358
20153090270000
8,150
1359
20153090280000
7,659
1360
20153090290000
97,256
1361
20153090300000
11,741
1362
20153090310000
261,196
1363
20153090320000
EXEMPT
1364
20153090330000
229,919
1365
20153090360000
134,938
1366
20153090351001
36,518
1367
20153090351002
45,947
1368
20153090351003
47,760
1369
20153090351004
38,591
1370
20153090351005
38,414
1371
20153090351006
38,207
1372
20153090351007
35,098
1373
20153090351008
34,150
1374
20153100010000
EXEMPT
1375
20153100020000
EXEMPT
1376
20153100040000
EXEMPT
1377
20153100050000          , ■
EXEMPT
1378
20153100060000
EXEMPT
1379
20153100070000
30,850
1380
20153100080000
58,934
1381
20153100090000
52,804
1382
20153100110000
75,025
1383
20153100120000
78,596
1384
20153100130000
EXEMPT
1385
20153100140000
EXEMPT
1386
20153100150000
EXEMPT
1387
20153100160000
EXEMPT
1388
20153100170000
EXEMPT
1389
20153100180000
EXEMPT
1390
20153100190000
EXEMPT
1391
20153100200000
74,031
1392
20153100210000
EXEMPT
1393
20153100220000
46,646
1394
20153100230000
EXEMPT
1395
20153100240000
EXEMPT
1396
20153100250000
EXEMPT
1397
20153100260000
EXEMPT
1398
20153100270000
EXEMPT
1399
20153100280000
EXEMPT
1400
20153100290000
33,067
1401
20153100301001
36,633
 
 
Page 23 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER       2012 EAV
1      '      — ■
 
 
 
B
C
1402
20153100301002
43,024
1403
20153100301003
46,102
1404
20153100301004
50,057
1405
20153100311001
111,163
1406
20153100311002
83,685
1407
20153100311003
57,456
1408
20153100311004
53,292
1409
20153100311005
57,456
1410
20153100311006
53,292
1411
20153110010000
EXEMPT
1412
20153110020000
EXEMPT
1413
20153110030000
EXEMPT
1414
20153110040000
20,983
1415
20153110050000
EXEMPT
1416
20153110060000
EXEMPT
1417
20153110070000
EXEMPT
1418
20153110080000
EXEMPT
1419
20153110090000
EXEMPT
1420
20153110100000
EXEMPT
1421
20153110110000'
EXEMPT
1422
20153110120000
EXEMPT
1423
20153110130000
EXEMPT
1424
20153110140000
EXEMPT
1425
20153110150000
68,218
1426
20153110160000
EXEMPT
1427
20153110170000
32,938
1428
20153110180000
114,679
1429
20153120010000
6,186
1430
20153120020000
3,765
1431
20153120030000
2,441
1432
20153120040000
9,514
1433
20153120050000
3,838
1434
20153120070000
EXEMPT
1435
20153120080000
EXEMPT
1436
20153120090000
EXEMPT
1437
20153120100000
EXEMPT
1438
20153120110000
EXEMPT
1439
20153120120000
EXEMPT
1440
20153120130000
EXEMPT
1441
20153120140000
EXEMPT
1442
20153120150000
EXEMPT
1443
20153120160000
EXEMPT
1444
20153120170000
EXEMPT
1445
20153120180000
EXEMPT
1446
20153120190000
EXEMPT
1447
20153120200000
EXEMPT
1448
20153120210000
EXEMPT
1449
20153120220000
EXEMPT
1450
20153120230000
EXEMPT
1451
20153120240000
14,766
1452
20153120250000
EXEMPT
1453
20153120260000
EXEMPT
1454
20153120300000
EXEMPT
1455
20153120310000
EXEMPT
1456
20153120320000
EXEMPT
1457
20153120330000
EXEMPT
1458
20153120340000
EXEMPT
1459
20153120350000
EXEMPT
1460
20153120360000
EXEMPT
1461
20153120370000
71,790
1462
20153120380000
92,837
 
 
Page 24 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1463
20153120390000
EXEMPT
1464
20153120410000
EXEMPT
1465
20153120420000
EXEMPT
1466
20153120430000
160,149
1467
20153120440000
23,682
1468
20153120450000
889
1469
20153120460000
1,852
1470
20153120470000
143,492
1471
20153120480000
5,227
1472
20153120490000
668
1473
20153130010000
35,384
1474
20153130020000
19,375
1475
20153130030000
27,256
1476
20153130040000.
27,254
1477
20153130050000
27,254
1478
20153130060000
4,660
1479
20153130070000
50,666
1480
20153130080000
71,734
1481
20153130090000
32,806
1482
20153130100000
30,373
1483
20153130110000
35,780
1484
20153130140000
EXEMPT
1485
20153130150000
EXEMPT
1486
20153130160000
EXEMPT
1487
20153130170000
EXEMPT
1488
20153130180000
EXEMPT
1489
20153130190000
EXEMPT
1490
20153130200000
EXEMPT
1491
20153130210000
EXEMPT
1492
20153130220000
EXEMPT
1493
20153130230000
EXEMPT
1494
20153130240000
EXEMPT
1495
20153130250000
EXEMPT
1496
20153130260000
EXEMPT
1497
20153130270000
EXEMPT
1498
20153130280000
EXEMPT
1499
20153130290000
EXEMPT
1500
20153130300000
1,383
1501
20153130320000
39,040
1502
20153130330000
7,544
1503
20153130340000
7,502
1504
20153130350000
7,502
1505
20153130360000
7,497
1506
20153130370000
4,497
1507
20153130380000
7,196
1508
20153130390000
28,903
1509
20153130400000
30,455
1510
20153130410000
19,460
1511
20153130420000
34,440
1512
20153130430000
10,100
1513
20153130440000
19,460
1514
20153130450000
18,315
1515
20153130460000
3,654
1516
20153130470000
178,215
1517
20153130480000
17,706
1518
20153130490000
48,004
1519
20153130500000
59,184
1520
20153130510000
55,559
1521
20153130520000
68,316
1522
20153130540000
EXEMPT
1523
20153130570000
EXEMPT
 
 
Page 25 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
I B
C
1524
20153130580000
EXEMPT
1525
20153130590000
EXEMPT
1526
20153130600000
EXEMPT
1527
20153130610000
56,538
1528
20153130620000
144,988
1529
20153130630000
12,499
1530
20153130660000
30,632
1531
20153130670000
EXEMPT
1532
20153130680000
EXEMPT
1533
20153130690000
31,827
1534
20153130700000
5,886
1535
20153130710000
EXEMPT
1536
20153140010000
EXEMPT
1537
20153140020000
EXEMPT
1538
20153140030000
EXEMPT
1539
20153140040000
EXEMPT
1540
20153140050000
52,815
1541
20153140060000
41,702
1542
20153140070000
335
1543
20153140080000
80,714
1544
20153140090000
17,035
1545
20153140100000
EXEMPT
1546
20153140110000
EXEMPT
1547
20153140120000
EXEMPT
1548
20153140130000
79,752
1549
20153140140000
81,295
1550
20153140150000
78,647
1551
20153140160000
144,244
1552
20153140170000
26,995
1553
20153140180000
43,004
1554
20153140280000
EXEMPT
1555
20153140290000
EXEMPT
1556
20153140300000
EXEMPT
1557
20153140310000
EXEMPT
1558
20153140320000
EXEMPT
1559
20153140330000
EXEMPT
1560
20153140340000
78,933
1561
20153140370000
34,318
1562
20153140380000
56,106
1563
20153140390000
26,034
1564
20153140400000.
18,663
1565
20153140410000
22,215
1566
20153140420000
51,598
1567
20153140430000
72,668
1568
20153140440000
68,067
1569
20153140450000
41,946
1570
20153140460000
59,184
1571
20153140470000
27,075
1572
20153140480000
17,117
1573
20153140490000
47,154
1574
20153140500000
47,151
1575
20153140510000
41,621
1576
20153140520000
36,953
1577
20153140530000
47,939
1578
20153140540000
47,047
1579
20153140560000
34,447
1580
20153140570000
41,548
1581
20153140580000
EXEMPT
1582
20153140610000
0
1583
20153140620000
9,886
1584
20153140630000
26,886
 
 
Page 26 of 46
 
 
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
I B
C
1585
20153140640000
19,920
1586
20153140660000
EXEMPT
1587
20153140670000
EXEMPT
1588
20153140680000
EXEMPT
1589
20153140690000
EXEMPT
1590
20153140720000
EXEMPT
1591
20153140730000
EXEMPT
1592
20153140740000
EXEMPT
1593
20153140750000
EXEMPT
1594
20153140760000
EXEMPT
1595
20153140770000
484,056
1596
20153140780000
483,057
1597
20153140790000
483,057
1598
20153140800000.
484,095
1599
20153140810000
504,284
1600
20153140830000
56,539
1601
20153150010000
187,209
1602
20153150020000
172,707
1603
20153150030000
80,756
1604
20153150040000
EXEMPT
1605
20153150050000
206,955
1606
20153150060000
3,232
1607
20153150070000
19,203
1608
20153150080000
EXEMPT
1609
20153150090000
EXEMPT
1610
20153150160000
EXEMPT
1611
20153150200000
47,802
1612
20153150210000
EXEMPT
1613
20153150350000
EXEMPT
1614
20153150360000
EXEMPT
1615
20153150370000
EXEMPT
1616
20153150380000
EXEMPT
1617
20153150390000
EXEMPT
1618
20153150400000
EXEMPT
1619
20153150420000
27,284
1620
20153150590000
EXEMPT
1621
20153150700000
26,894
1622
20153150750000
26,861
1623
20153150760000
17,846
1624
20153150770000
27,038
1625
20153150790000
EXEMPT
1626
20153150800000
EXEMPT
1627
20153150810000
EXEMPT
1628
20153150830000
315,624
1629
20153150840000
192,877
1630
20153150860000
232,216
1631
20153150880000
67,054
1632
20153160010000
41,189
1633
20153160020000
15,363
1634
20153160030000
EXEMPT
1635
20153160040000
154,546
1636
20153160060000
EXEMPT
1637
20153160070000
26,934
1638
20153160080000
289,100
1639
20153160120000
98,143
1640
20153160130000
58,954
1641
20153160140000
13,467
1642
20153160150000
13,467
1643
20153160160000
26,934
1644
20153160170000
EXEMPT
1645
20153160180000
EXEMPT
 
 
Page 27 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER       2012 EAV
 
 
I B
C
1646
20153160190000
13,467
1647
20153160200000
EXEMPT
1648
20153160210000
EXEMPT
1649
20153160220000
EXEMPT
1650
20153160230000
EXEMPT
1651
20153160240000
EXEMPT
1652
20153160250000
EXEMPT
1653
20153160270000
166,796
1654
20153160280000
EXEMPT
1655
20153160290000
38,106
1656
20153160300000
EXEMPT
1657
20153160320000
20,195
1658
20153170010000
EXEMPT
1659
20153170020000
EXEMPT
1660
20153170200000
EXEMPT
1661
20153170210000
EXEMPT
1662
20153170300000
456,033
1663
20153170310000
EXEMPT
1664
20153170320000
21,757
1665
20153170330000          ' '
492,301
1666
20153170340000
464,324
1667
20153170350000
45
1668
20153170360000
62,108
1669
20153170370000
69,890
1670
20153170380000
85,568
1671
20153170390000
135
1672
20153170400000
455,427
1673
20153170410000
68,443
1674
20153170430000
63,348
1675
20153170450000
616,567
1676
20153170470000
193,146
1677
20153170500000
EXEMPT
1678
20153170510000
EXEMPT
1679
20153170520000
EXEMPT
1680
20153170530000
EXEMPT
1681
20153170560000
113,276
1682
20153170570000
395,960
1683
20154000010000
EXEMPT
1684
20155000020000
EXEMPT
1685
20155000030000
EXEMPT
1686
20155000040000
EXEMPT
1687
20155000050000
EXEMPT
1688
20155000060000
EXEMPT
1689
20155000070000
EXEMPT
1690
20155000080000
EXEMPT
1691
20155000090000
EXEMPT
1692
20155000100000
EXEMPT
1693
20155000110000
EXEMPT
1694
20155000120000
EXEMPT
1695
20155000130000
EXEMPT
1696
20155000140000
EXEMPT
1697
20155000160000
EXEMPT
1698
20155000170000'
EXEMPT
1699
20155000180000
EXEMPT
1700
20155000190000
EXEMPT
1701
20155000200000
EXEMPT
1702
20155000210000
EXEMPT
1703
20155000220000
EXEMPT
1704
20155000240000
EXEMPT
1705
20155000250000
EXEMPT
1706
20155000260000
EXEMPT
 
 
Page 28 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER      2012 EAV
 
 
 
B
C
1707
20155000270000
EXEMPT
1708
20155000300000
EXEMPT
1709
20155000310000
EXEMPT
1710
20155000330000
EXEMPT
1711
20162040010000
EXEMPT
1712
20162040020000
EXEMPT
1713
20162040030000
34,627
1714
20162040040000
EXEMPT
1715
20162040050000
EXEMPT
1716
20162040060000
EXEMPT
1717
20162040070000
EXEMPT
1718
20162040080000
EXEMPT
1719
20162040090000
EXEMPT
1720
20162040100000
EXEMPT
1721
20162040110000
3,527
1722
20162040120000
9,797
1723
20162040130000
7,168
1724
20162040140000
EXEMPT
1725
20162040150000
EXEMPT
1726
20162040160000
7,348
1727
20162040170000
4,899
1728
20162040200000
EXEMPT
1729
20162040210000
67,292
1730
20162040220000
EXEMPT
1731
20162040230000
EXEMPT
1732
20162040240000
EXEMPT
1733
20162040250000
4,899
1734
20162040260000
16,654
1735
20162040270000
8,433
1736
20162040280000
EXEMPT
1737
20162040290000
EXEMPT
1738
20162040300000
EXEMPT
1739
20162040310000
EXEMPT
1740
20162040320000
7,696
1741
20162040330000
8,484
1742
20162040340000
31,176
1743
20162040350000
29,501
1744
20162040380000
4,899
1745
20162040390000
17,437
1746
20162040400000
4,899
1747
20162040410000
23,968
1748
20162040420000
0
1749
20162040430000
EXEMPT
1760
20162040440000
EXEMPT
1751
20162040450000
EXEMPT
1752
20162040460000
EXEMPT
1763
20162040470000
10,148
1754
20162040480000
30,371
1755
20162040490000
EXEMPT
1756
20162040500000
EXEMPT
1767
20162040510000
EXEMPT
1768
20162040520000
EXEMPT
1769
20162040530000
EXEMPT
1760
20162040540000
EXEMPT
1761
20162040550000
EXEMPT
1762
20162040560000
6,986
1763
20162040570000.
4,750
1764
20162040580000
4,652
1765
20162040590000
EXEMPT
1766
20162040600000
EXEMPT
1767
20162040630000
10,369
 
Page 29 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1768
20162040640000
11,847
1769
20162040650000
2,418
1770
20162040660000
EXEMPT
1771
20162040670000
EXEMPT
1772
20162040680000
EXEMPT
1773
20162040690000
29,880
1774
20162040700000
38,658
1775
20162050010000
23,267
1776
20162050020000
EXEMPT
1777
20162050030000
34,759
1778
20162050040000
29,509
1779
20162050050000
EXEMPT
1780
20162050060000
EXEMPT
1781
20162050070000
41,335
1782
20162050080000
EXEMPT
1783
20162050090000
21,738
1784
20162050100000
31,280
1785
20162050110000
4,899
1786
20162050120000
8,248
1787
20162050130000
EXEMPT
1788
20162050140000
EXEMPT
1789
20162050150000
EXEMPT
1790
20162050160000
EXEMPT
1791
20162050170000
EXEMPT
1792
20162050180000
EXEMPT
1793
20162050190000
26,836
1794
20162050200000
24,740
1795
20162050210000
27,840
1796
20162050220000
3,201
1797
20162050230000
3,201
1798
20162050240000
EXEMPT
1799
20162050250000
4,483
1800
20162050260000
20,052
1801
20162050270000
0
1802
20162050280000
33,889
1803
20162050290000
0
1804
20162050300000
3,201
1805
20162050310000
3,201
1806
20162050320000
3,201
1807
20162050330000
EXEMPT
1808
20162050340000
13,750
1809
20162050350000
8,234
1810
20162050360000
15,551
1811
20162050370000
3,201
1812
20162050380000
53,559
1813
20162050390000
3,201
1814
20162050400000
EXEMPT
1815
20162050410000
3,201
1816
20162050420000
EXEMPT
1817
20162050430000
3,072
1818
20162050440000
54,546
1819
20162050450000
3,818
1820
20162050460000.
3,684
1821
20162050470000
EXEMPT
1822
20162050480000
3,818
1823
20162050490000
3,818
1824
20162050550000
7,306
1825
20162050560000
EXEMPT
1826
20162050570000
EXEMPT
1827
20162050580000
3,134
1828
20162060010000
5,796
 
Page 30 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER      2012 EAV
 
 
 
B
C
1829
20162060020000
3,858
1830
20162060030000
3,858
1831
20162060040000
EXEMPT
1832
20162060050000
22,187
1833
20162060060000
EXEMPT
1834
20162060070000
3,858
1835
20162060080000
37,522
1836
20162060090000
EXEMPT
1837
20162060100000
22,411
1838
20162060110000
3,779
1839
20162060120000
EXEMPT
1840
20162060130000
EXEMPT
1841
20162060140000
3,779
1842
20162060150000
EXEMPT
1843
20162060160000.
3,779
1844
20162060170000
3,779
1845
20162060180000
3,779
1846
20162060190000
3,779
1847
20162060200000
5,917
1848
20162060210000
3,779
1849
20162060220000
3,779
1850
20162060230000
6,222
1851
20162060240000
10,560
1852
20162060250000
17,566
1853
20162060260000
EXEMPT
1854
20162060270000
16,301
1855
20162060280000
3,628
1856
20162060290000
3,779
1857
20162060300000
3,779
1858
20162060310000
3,779
1859
20162060320000
3,779
1860
20162060330000
0
1861
20162060340000
28,536
1862
20162060350000
30,068
1863
20162060360000
EXEMPT
1864
20162060370000
EXEMPT
1865
20162060380000
3,818
1866
20162060390000
3,818
1867
20162060400000
EXEMPT
1868
20162060410000
3,664
1869
20162060420000
3,818
1870
20162060430000
EXEMPT
1871
20162060440000
3,818
1872
20162060450000
2,963
1873
20162060460000
3,818
1874
20162060470000
3,818
1875
20162060480000
3,818
1876
20162060490000
EXEMPT
1877
20162060500000
EXEMPT
1878
20162060510000
EXEMPT
1879
20162060520000
EXEMPT
1880
20162060530000
EXEMPT
1881
20162060540000
EXEMPT
1882
20162060550000
EXEMPT
1883
20162060560000
EXEMPT
1884
20162060570000
3,779
1885
20162060580000
3,779
1886
20162060590000
29,619
1887
20162060600000
23,668
1888
20162060610000
30,418
1889
20162060620000
EXEMPT
 
 
Page 31 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1890
20162060630000
29,184
1891
20162060640000
17,409
1892
20162060650000
17,543
1893
20162060660000
3,779
1894
20162060670000
28,878
1895
20162060680000
3,628
1896
20162060690000
3,779
1897
20162060700000
62,896
1898
20162060710000
3,779
1899
20162060720000
EXEMPT
1900
20162060730000
EXEMPT
1901
20162060740000
EXEMPT
1902
20162060750000
62,896
1903
20162060760000
3,647
1904
20162060770000
EXEMPT
1905
20162060780000
33,370
1906
20162060790000
0
1907
20162060800000
5,594
1908
20162060810000
EXEMPT
1909
20162060820000
EXEMPT
1910
20162060830000
3,779
1911
20162060840000
44,578
1912
20162060850000
3,818
1913
20162060860000
3,818
1914
20162060870000
3,818
1915
20162070010000
7,174
1916
20162070020000
10,762
1917
20162070030000
12,561
1918
20162070040000
6,141
1919
20162070050000
3,779
1920
20162070060000
3,779
1921
20162070070000
29,731
1922
20162070080000
4,495
1923
20162070090000
EXEMPT
1924
20162070100000
3,779
1925
20162070110000
3,779
1926
20162070120000
3,779
1927
20162070130000
3,779
1928
20162070140000
3,779
1929
20162070150000
EXEMPT
1930
20162070160000
17,541
1931
20162070170000
EXEMPT
1932
20162070180000
10,815
1933
20162070190000
1,832
1934
20162070200000
6,891
1935
20162070210000
19,213
1936
20162070220000
EXEMPT
1937
20162070230000
EXEMPT
1938
20162070240000
22,049
1939
20162070250000
EXEMPT
1940
20162070260000
EXEMPT
1941
20162070270000
0
1942
20162070280000
21,014
1943
20162070290000
EXEMPT
1944
20162070300000
EXEMPT
1945
20162070310000
3,684
1946
20162070320000
29,226
1947
20162070330000
27,029
1948
20162070340000
EXEMPT
1949
20162070350000
3,818
1950
20162070360000
29,751
 
 
Page 32 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
1951
20162070370000
EXEMPT
1952
20162070380000
EXEMPT
1953
20162070390000
EXEMPT
1954
20162070400000
EXEMPT
1955
20162070410000
EXEMPT
1956
20162070420000
EXEMPT
1957
20162070430000
81,399
1958
20162070440000
38,785
1959
20162070450000
6,862
1960
20162070460000
80,487
1961
20162070470000
30,657
1962
20162070480000
EXEMPT
1963
20162070490000
25,054
1964
20162070500000
EXEMPT
1965
20162070510000
EXEMPT
1966
20162070520000
3,628
1967
20162070530000
EXEMPT
1968
20162070540000
EXEMPT
1969
20162070550000
EXEMPT
1970
20162070560000
EXEMPT
1971
20162070570000
EXEMPT
1972
20162070580000
77,437
1973
20162070590000
44,194
1974
20162070600000
81,301
1975
20162070610000
14,477
1976
20162070620000
28,379
1977
20162070630000
29,251
1978
20162070640000
14,749
1979
20162070650000
EXEMPT
1980
20162070660000
EXEMPT
1981
20162070670000
EXEMPT
1982
20162070680000
2,778
1983
20162070690000
24,440
1984
20162070700000
2,778
1985
20162070710000
EXEMPT
1986
20162070720000
EXEMPT
1987
20162070730000
EXEMPT
1988
20162070740000
EXEMPT
1989
20162070760000
EXEMPT
1990
20162070770000
EXEMPT
1991
20162070780000
19,566
1992
20162120010000
12,572
1993
20162120020000
45,277
1994
20162120030000
EXEMPT
1995
20162120040000
EXEMPT
1996
20162120050000
EXEMPT
1997
20162120060000
EXEMPT
1998
20162120070000
35,811
1999
20162120080000
EXEMPT
2000
20162120090000
EXEMPT
2001
20162120100000
EXEMPT
2002
20162120110000
EXEMPT
2003
20162120120000
31,117
2004
20162120130000
5,210
2005
20162120140000
EXEMPT
2006
20162120150000
28,151
2007
20162120160000.
19,381
2008
20162120170000
EXEMPT
2009
20162120190000
EXEMPT
2010
20162120200000
EXEMPT
2011
20162120210000
EXEMPT
 
 
Page 33 of 46
 
 
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2012
20162120220000
EXEMPT
2013
20162120231001
6,077
2014
20162120231002
6,077
2015
20162120231003
6,259
2016
20162130010000
4,677
2017
20162130020000
31,672
2018
20162130030000
25,775
2019
20162130040000
4,677
2020
20162130050000
29,739
2021
20162130060000
27,341
2022
20162130070000
4,938
2023
20162130080000
4,938
2024
20162130090000
EXEMPT
2025
20162130100000
14,626
2026
20162130110000
21,078
2027
20162130120000
EXEMPT
2028
20162130130000
RAILROAD
2029
20162130140000
13,520
2030
20162130150000
RAILROAD
2031
20162130160000
13,910
2032
20162130170000
EXEMPT
2033
20162140270000
EXEMPT
2034
20162140288001
EXEMPT
2035
20162140288002
EXEMPT
2036
20162140298001
EXEMPT
2037
20162140298002
EXEMPT
2038
20162150010000
3,765
2039
20162150020000
28,418
2040
20162150030000
3,765
2041
20162150040000
3,765
2042
20162150050000
EXEMPT
2043
20162150060000
EXEMPT
2044
20162150070000
EXEMPT
2045
20162150080000
EXEMPT
2046
20162150090000
7,546
2047
20162150100000
3,818
2048
20162150110000
21,628
2049
20162150120000
4,124
2050
20162150130000
EXEMPT
2051
20162150140000
5,648
2052
20162150150000
5,648
2053
20162150160000
5,648
2054
20162150170000
11,295
2055
20162150180000
11,455
2056
20162150190000
5,726
2057
20162150200000
5,726
2058
20162150210000
3,818
2059
20162150220000
EXEMPT
2060
20162150230000
EXEMPT
2061
20162180010000
EXEMPT
2062
20162180020000
EXEMPT
2063
20162180030000
EXEMPT
2064
20162180040000
EXEMPT
2065
20162180050000
EXEMPT
2066
20162180060000
EXEMPT
2067
20162180070000
EXEMPT
2068
20162180080000
EXEMPT
2069
20162180090000
54,451
2070
20162180100000
14,814
2071
20162180110000
EXEMPT
2072
20162180120000
44,314
 
 
Page 34 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2073
20162180130000
11,184
2074
20162180140000
15,237
2075
20162180150000
EXEMPT
2076
20162180160000
EXEMPT
2077
20162180170000
EXEMPT
2078
20162180180000
7,407
2079
20162180190000
EXEMPT
2080
20162180200000
22,459
2081
20162180210000
21,898
2082
20162180220000
85,001
2083
20162180270000
EXEMPT
2084
20162180280000
EXEMPT
2085
20162180290000
EXEMPT
2086
20162180300000
EXEMPT
2087
20162180310000
EXEMPT
2088
20162180320000
21,092
2089
20162180330000
5,207
2090
20162180340000
20,761
2091
20162180350000
10,880
2092
20162180360000
23,127
2093
20162180370000
23,042
2094
20162180380000
EXEMPT
2095
20162180390000
EXEMPT
2096
20162180400000
EXEMPT
2097
20162180410000
EXEMPT
2098
20162180420000
EXEMPT
2099
20162180430000
17,282
2100
20162180440000
6,874
2101
20162180450000
7,081
2102
20162180460000
EXEMPT
2103
20162180470000
EXEMPT
2104
20162180480000
EXEMPT
2105
20162180490000
5,207
2106
20162180500000
EXEMPT
2107
20162180510000
28,623
2108
20162180520000
25,845
2109
20162180530000
25,845
2110
20162180540000
31,956
2111
20162180550000
33,833
2112
20162180560000
4,820
2113
20162180570000
6,574
2114
20162180580000
EXEMPT
2115
20162180590000
EXEMPT
2116
20162180600000
EXEMPT
2117
20162180610000
83,893
2118
20162190010000
5,081
2119
20162190020000
EXEMPT
2120
20162190030000
EXEMPT
2121
20162190040000
16,772
2122
20162190050000
EXEMPT
2123
20162190060000
13,562
2124
20162190070000
0
2125
20162190080000
EXEMPT
2126
20162190090000
1,089
2127
20162190100000
EXEMPT
2128
20162190110000
34,402
2129
20162190120000
32,029
2130
20162190130000
EXEMPT
2131
20162190140000
EXEMPT
2132
20162190150000
EXEMPT
2133
20162190160000
27,197
 
 
Page 35 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2134
20162190170000
EXEMPT
2135
20162190180000
EXEMPT
2136
20162190190000
EXEMPT
2137
20162190200000
EXEMPT
2138
20162190210000
EXEMPT
2139
20162190220000
EXEMPT
2140
20162190230000
5,246
2141
20162190240000
5,246
2142
20162190250000
EXEMPT
2143
20162190260000
EXEMPT
2144
20162190270000.
EXEMPT
2145
20162190280000
5,592
2146
20162190290000
EXEMPT
2147
20162190300000
23,477
2148
20162190310000
37,525
2149
20162190320000
EXEMPT
2150
20162190330000
EXEMPT
2151
20162190340000
34,481
2152
20162190350000
EXEMPT
2153
20162190360000
EXEMPT
2154
20162190370000
2,430
2155
20162190380000
EXEMPT
2156
20162190390000
EXEMPT
2157
20162190400000
EXEMPT
2158
20162190410000
2,424
2159
20162190420000
EXEMPT
2160
20162190430000
EXEMPT
2161
20162190440000
EXEMPT
2162
20162190450000
EXEMPT
2163
20162190460000
24,577
2164
20162190470000
769
2165
20162190480000
120,282
2166
20162190500000
EXEMPT
2167
20162190510000
EXEMPT
2168
20162190520000
962
2169
20162190530000
EXEMPT
2170
20162190540000
EXEMPT
2171
20162190550000
EXEMPT
2172
20162200010000
EXEMPT
2173
20162200020000
EXEMPT
2174
20162200030000
4,871
2175
20162200040000
EXEMPT
2176
20162200050000
3,818
2177
20162200060000
63,227
2178
20162200070000
EXEMPT
2179
20162200080000
EXEMPT
2180
20162200090000
EXEMPT
2181
20162200100000
EXEMPT
2182
20162200110000
EXEMPT
2183
20162200120000
EXEMPT
2184
20162200130000
EXEMPT
2185
20162200140000
EXEMPT
2186
20162200150000
6,049
2187
20162200160000
EXEMPT
2188
20162200170000
5,709
2189
20162200180000
EXEMPT
2190
20162200190000
EXEMPT
2191
20162200200000
EXEMPT
2192
20162200210000
EXEMPT
2193
20162200220000
28,494
2194
20162200230000
EXEMPT
 
 
Page 36 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2195
20162200240000
EXEMPT
2196
20162200250000
EXEMPT
2197
20162200260000
EXEMPT
2198
20162200270000
EXEMPT
2199
20162200280000
3,818
2200
20162200290000
29,630
2201
20162200300000
EXEMPT
2202
20162200310000
7,926
2203
20162200320000
63,227
2204
20162200330000
3,818
2205
20162200340000
EXEMPT
2206
20162200350000
EXEMPT
2207
20162200360000
EXEMPT
2208
20162200370000
EXEMPT
2209
20162200380000
0
2210
20162200390000
EXEMPT
2211
20162200400000
EXEMPT
2212
20162200410000
4,582
2213
20162200420000
4,582
2214
20162200430000
4,582
2215
20162200440000
EXEMPT
2216
20162200450000
0
2217
20162200460000
28,224
2218
20162200470000'
28,637
2219
20162200480000
33,600
2220
20162200490000
457
2221
20162200500000
EXEMPT
2222
20162200510000
EXEMPT
2223
20162200520000
EXEMPT
2224
20162200530000
EXEMPT
2225
20162200540000
EXEMPT
2226
20162200550000
EXEMPT
2227
20162200560000
EXEMPT
2228
20162200570000
EXEMPT
2229
20162210010000
EXEMPT
2230
20162210020000
152
2231
20162210030000
EXEMPT
2232
20162210040000
3,818
2233
20162210050000
EXEMPT
2234
20162210060000
3,818
2235
20162210070000
1,908
2236
20162210080000
1,908
2237
20162210090000
EXEMPT
2238
20162210100000
EXEMPT
2239
20162210110000
EXEMPT
2240
20162210120000
EXEMPT
2241
20162210130000
EXEMPT
2242
20162210140000
EXEMPT
2243
20162210150000
EXEMPT
2244
20162210160000
EXEMPT
2245
20162210170000
EXEMPT
2246
20162210180000
3,818
2247
20162210190000
21,407
2248
20162210220000
3,818
2249
20162210230000
3,818
2250
20162210240000.
0
2251
20162210250000
38,108
2252
20162210260000
4,060
2253
20162210270000
EXEMPT
2254
20162210280000
EXEMPT
2255
20162210290000
4,646
 
 
Page 37 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER      2012 EAV
 
 
 
B
C
2256
20162210300000
37,093
2257
20162210320000
5,726
2258
20162210330000
15,184
2259
20162210340000
6,071
2260
20162210350000
6,265
2261
20162210360000
EXEMPT
2262
20162210370000
EXEMPT
2263
20162210380000
225,486
2264
20162210390000
83,169
2265
20162210400000
EXEMPT
2266
20162210410000
EXEMPT
2267
20162210420000
EXEMPT
2268
20162210430000
EXEMPT
2269
20162210440000
19,892
2270
20162210450000
131,383
2271
20162210460000
145,706
2272
20162210470000
EXEMPT
2273
20162210480000
EXEMPT
2274
20162210490000
5,726
2275
20162210500000
EXEMPT
2276
20164010110000
10,151
2277
20164010120000
EXEMPT
2278
20164010200000
EXEMPT
2279
20164010210000
EXEMPT
2280
20164010220000
EXEMPT
2281
20164010230000
EXEMPT
2282
20164010240000
EXEMPT
2283
20164010250000
EXEMPT
2284
20164010260000
EXEMPT
2285
20164010270000
EXEMPT
2286
20164010280000
EXEMPT
2287
20164010290000
EXEMPT
2288
20164010300000
EXEMPT
2289
20164010310000
EXEMPT
2290
20164010320000
EXEMPT
2291
20164010380000
EXEMPT
2292
20164010390000
EXEMPT
2293
20164010430000
EXEMPT
2294
20164010440000
EXEMPT
2295
20164010450000
EXEMPT
2296
20164030140000
EXEMPT
2297
20164030150000.
EXEMPT
2298
20164030300000
EXEMPT
2299
20164030350000
EXEMPT
2300
20164030360000
EXEMPT
2301
20164030370000
EXEMPT
2302
20164040040000
26,678
2303
20164040050000
7,166
2304
20164040070000
37,808
2305
20164040080000
7,166
2306
20164040090000
EXEMPT
2307
20164040100000
7,166
2308
20164040110000
10,151
2309
20164040120000
EXEMPT
2310
20164040130000
EXEMPT
2311
20164040140000
EXEMPT
2312
20164040150000
EXEMPT
2313
20164040180000
EXEMPT
2314
20164040190000
2,558
2315
20164040200000
EXEMPT
2316
20164040210000
31,768
 
 
Page 38 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2317
20164040220000
5,036
2318
20164040230000
EXEMPT
2319
20164040240000
5,036
2320
20164040250000
5,036
2321
20164040260000
5,036
2322
20164040270000
5,036
2323
20164040280000
34,094
2324
20164040290000
47,872
2325
20164040300000
24,064
2326
20164040310000
EXEMPT
2327
20164040320000
30,157
2328
20164040330000
29,852
2329
20164040340000
EXEMPT
2330
20164040350000
8,503
2331
20164040360000
15,113
2332
20164040370000
14,345
2333
20164040380000
5,246
2334
20164040390000
5,246
2335
20164040400000
0
2336
20164040420000
15,526
2337
20164040430000
EXEMPT
2338
20164040440000
EXEMPT
2339
20164040450000
16,598
2340
20164040470000
14,929
2341
20164040498001
EXEMPT
2342
20164040498002
3
2343
20164050010000
EXEMPT
2344
20164050030000
5,073
2345
20164050040000
50,599
2346
20164050050000
30,536
2347
20164050060000
EXEMPT
2348
20164050070000
EXEMPT
2349
20164050080000
EXEMPT
2350
20164050090000
2,721
2351
20164050100000.
35,505
2352
20164050110000
5,073
2353
20164050120000
26,288
2354
20164050130000
EXEMPT
2355
20164050140000
5,073
2356
20164050150000
20,969
2357
20164050160000
EXEMPT
2358
20164050170000
28,513
2359
20164050180000
5,283
2360
20164050190000
5,283
2361
20164050200000
11,472
2362
20164050210000
18,270
2363
20164050220000
17,420
2364
20164050230000
20,313
2365
20164050240000
7,009
2366
20164050250000
18,826
2367
20164050260000
RAILROAD
2368
20164050270000
EXEMPT
2369
20164050280000
EXEMPT
2370
20164050290000
EXEMPT
2371
20164050300000
EXEMPT
2372
20164050310000
EXEMPT
2373
20164050320000
EXEMPT
2374
20164050340000
EXEMPT
2375
20164050350000
EXEMPT
2376
20164050360000
EXEMPT
2377
20164050370000
RAILROAD
 
 
Page 39 of 46
 
 
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2378
20164050380000
11,023
2379
20164050390000
RAILROAD
2380
20164050400000
5,555
2381
20164050410000
EXEMPT
2382
20164050420000
EXEMPT
2383
20164050430000
0
2384
20164050440000
4,820
2385
20164050450000
27,576
2386
20164050460000
EXEMPT
2387
20164050470000
22,633
2388
20164050480000
4,820
2389
20164050490000
5,014
2390
20164050500000
9,212
2391
20164050510000
63,140
2392
20164050520000
64,731
2393
20164050530000
39,795
2394
20164050540000
138,524
2395
20164050550000
EXEMPT
2396
20164050560000
EXEMPT
2397
20164050570000
EXEMPT
2398
20164060010000
EXEMPT
2399
20164060020000
EXEMPT
2400
20164060030000
EXEMPT
2401
20164060040000
EXEMPT
2402
20164060050000
EXEMPT
2403
20164060060000
EXEMPT
2404
20164060070000
EXEMPT
2405
20164060080000
EXEMPT
2406
20164060090000
EXEMPT
2407
20164060100000
EXEMPT
2408
20164060110000
46,040
2409
20164060120000
9,258
2410
20164060130000
30,949
2411
20164060140000
30,949
2412
20164060150000
32,113
2413
20164060160000
22,706
2414
20164060170000
22,414
2415
20164060180000
614
2416
20164060190000
2,964
2417
20164060200000
23,009
2418
20164060210000
69,876
2419
20164060220000
70,429
2420
20164060270000
EXEMPT
2421
20164060280000
EXEMPT
2422
20164060290000
36,863
2423
20164060300000
36,097
2424
20164060310000
EXEMPT
2425
20164060320000
5,785
2426
20164060330000
0
2427
20164060340000.
8,678
2428
20164060350000
EXEMPT
2429
20164060360000
EXEMPT
2430
20164060370000
EXEMPT
2431
20164060380000
9,026
2432
20164060390000
9,026
2433
20164060400000
9,026
2434
20164060410000
9,699
2435
20164060420000
440,541
2436
20164060430000
EXEMPT
2437
20164080470000
EXEMPT
2438
20164080480000
EXEMPT
 
 
Page 40 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2439
20164080490000
EXEMPT
2440
20164100180000
41,349
2441
20164100300000
EXEMPT
2442
20164100310000
EXEMPT
2443
20164100320000
EXEMPT
2444
20164110010000
4,164
2445
20164110020000
6,770
2446
20164110030000
2,643
2447
20164110040000
16,817
2448
20164110050000
7,642
2449
20164110060000
7,642
2450
20164110070000
164,206
2451
20164110080000
38,072
2452
20164110170000
15,271
2453
20164110180000
13,848
2454
20164110190000
8,365
2455
20164110200000
8,710
2456
20164110210000
23,084
2457
20164110220000
12,052
2458
20164110230000
20,840
2459
20164110240000
30,385
2460
20164110250000
4,887
2461
20164110260000
EXEMPT
2462
20164110270000
4,887
2463
20164110280000
28,519
2464
20164110290000
4,887
2465
20164110300000
4,887
2466
20164110310000
3,431
2467
20164110320000
0
2468
20164110330000
36,739
2469
20164110340000
5,906
2470
20164110350000
EXEMPT
2471
20164110360000
31,190
2472
20164110370000
33,608
2473
20164110380000
19,731
2474
20164110390000
6,111
2475
20164110400000
6,111
2476
20164110410000
6,111
2477
20164110420000
17,627
2478
20164110450000
258,090
2479
20164110460000
EXEMPT
2480
20164110470000
EXEMPT
2481
20164110480000
EXEMPT
2482
20164120020000
4,629
2483
20164120030000
4,629
2484
20164120040000
2,315
2485
20164120050000
4,629
2486
20164120060000
4,629
2487
20164120070000
4,629
2488
20164120080000
4,629
2489
20164120090000
4,629
2490
20164120100000
EXEMPT
2491
20164120110000
31,094
2492
20164120120000
4,629
2493
20164120130000
4,629
2494
20164120140000
6,557
2495
20164120150000
4,711
2496
20164120160000
19,538
2497
20164120170000
5,207
2498
20164120180000
31,644
2499
20164120190000
5,207
 
 
Page 41 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2500
20164120200000
5,207
2501
20164120210000
5,207
2502
20164120220000
9,547
2503
20164120230000
EXEMPT
2504
20164120240000
19,235
2505
20164120250000
EXEMPT
2506
20164120260000
EXEMPT
2507
20164120270000
EXEMPT
2508
20164120280000
75,549
2509
20164120290000
74,275
2510
20164120300000
5,362
2511
20164120310000
1,072
2512
20164120320000
2,143
2513
20164120330000
48,472
2514
20164120340000
1,072
2515
20164120350000
RAILROAD
2516
20164120360000
RAILROAD
2517
20164120370000
EXEMPT
2518
20164120380000
27,944
2519
20164120390000
EXEMPT
2520
20164120400000
EXEMPT
2521
20164130010000
4,012
2522
20164130020000
4,012
2523
20164130030000
2,522
2524
20164130040000
4,124
2525
20164130460000
161,970
2526
20164130130000
4,124
2527
20164130140000
4,124
2528
20164130150000
35,889
2529
20164130160000
112,224
2530
20164130170000
11,988
2531
20164130180000
3,703
2532
20164130190000
3,703
2533
20164130200000
3,703
2534
20164130210000
3,703
2535
20164130220000
31,036
2536
20164130230000
38,005
2537
20164130240000
3,703
2538
20164130250000
30,632
2539
20164130260000
3,703
2540
20164130290000
27,812
2541
20164130300000
5,246
2542
20164130310000
34,158
2543
20164130320000
EXEMPT
2544
20164130330000
EXEMPT
2545
20164130340000
27,049
2546
20164130350000
38,911
2547
20164130360000
3,858
2548
20164130370000
25,062
2549
20164130380000
39,264
2550
20164130390000
11,192
2551
20164130400000
11,444
2552
20164130410000
11,433
2553
20164130420000
EXEMPT
2554
20164130430000
31,653
2555
20164130440000
EXEMPT
2556
20164130450000
EXEMPT
2557
20164140010000
4,012
2558
20164140040000
3,703
2559
20164140050000
3,703
2560
20164140060000
8,091
 
 
Page 42 of 46
 
 
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER      2012 EAV 5/29/2014
 
I B
C
2561
20164140070000
9,637
2562
20164140080000
29,661
2563
20164140090000
3,703
2564
20164140100000
3,703
2565
20164140110000
23,592
2566
20164140120000
29,582
2567
20164140130000
EXEMPT
2568
20164140140000
EXEMPT
2569
20164140150000
EXEMPT
2570
20164140160000
EXEMPT
2571
20164140170000
7,715
2572
20164140180000
28,943
2573
20164140190000
28,943
2574
20164140200000
EXEMPT
2575
20164140220000
EXEMPT
2576
20164140230000
5,588
2577
20164140240000
EXEMPT
2578
20164140330000
EXEMPT
2579
20164140350000
39,497
2580
20164140360000
11,573
2581
20164140370000
EXEMPT
2582
20164140380000
EXEMPT
2583
20164140390000
EXEMPT
2584
20164140400000
10,454
2585
20164140410000
31,832
2586
20164140420000
4,189
2587
20164140430000
4,242
2588
20164140440000
EXEMPT
2589
20164140450000
22,807
2590
20164140460000
EXEMPT
2591
20164140470000
EXEMPT
2592
20164140480000
EXEMPT
2593
20164140490000
11,573
2594
20164140500000
5,785
2595
20164160390000
EXEMPT
2596
20164160400000
EXEMPT
2597
20164160410000
EXEMPT
2598
20164160420000
EXEMPT
2599
20164160430000
EXEMPT
2600
20164160440000
EXEMPT
2601
20164180080000
EXEMPT
2602
20164180180000
EXEMPT
2603
20164180370000
EXEMPT
2604
20164180380000
EXEMPT
2605
20164180390000
EXEMPT
2606
20164180400000
EXEMPT
2607
20164190010000
14,884
2608
20164190040000
12,370
2609
20164190050000
12,370
2610
20164190060000
28,435
2611
20164190070000
24,740
2612
20164190080000
6,184
2613
20164190090000
19,328
2614
20164190100000
16,511
2615
20164190120000
25,408
2616
20164190210000
168,347
2617
20164190220000
4,924
2618
20164190230000
6,722
2619
20164190240000
100,550
2620
20164190250000
20,865
2621
20164190260000
85,111
 
 
Page 43 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2622
20164200090000
EXEMPT
2623
20164200100000
EXEMPT
2624
20164200320000
EXEMPT
2625
20164200350000
EXEMPT
2626
20164200370000
EXEMPT
2627
20164200380000
EXEMPT
2628
20164200390000
EXEMPT
2629
20164220020000
EXEMPT
2630
20164220100000
6,576
2631
20164220150000
EXEMPT
2632
20164220340000
EXEMPT
2633
20164220350000
EXEMPT
2634
20164220360000
EXEMPT
2635
20164220370000
EXEMPT
2636
20164230010000
EXEMPT
2637
20164230020000
EXEMPT
2638
20164230050000
EXEMPT
2639
20164230060000
EXEMPT
2640
20164230070000
EXEMPT"
2641
20164230080000
EXEMPT
2642
20164230130000
RAILROAD
2643
20164230150000
EXEMPT
2644
20164230170000
EXEMPT
2645
20164230180000
EXEMPT
2646
20164230190000
467,295
2647
20164240020000
EXEMPT
2648
20164240070000
RAILROAD
2649
20164240080000
7,746
2650
20164240100000
113,893
2651
20164240110000
22,389
2652
20165010010000
EXEMPT
2653
20165010020000
EXEMPT
2654
20165020040000
RAILROAD
2655
20165020050000
RAILROAD
2656
20165020060000
RAILROAD
2657
20165020070000
RAILROAD
2658
20212020030000
EXEMPT
2659
20212020090000
EXEMPT
2660
20212020250000
EXEMPT
2661
20212020330000
EXEMPT
2662
20212020340000
EXEMPT
2663
20212020350000
EXEMPT
2664
20212020360000
EXEMPT
2665
20212020370000
EXEMPT
2666
20212030010000
40,437
2667
20212030020000
19,541
2668
20212030030000
12,505
2669
20212030040000
14,182
2670
20212030050000
22,585
2671
20212030060000
49,749
2672
20212030070000
RAILROAD
2673
20212030080000
17,187
2674
20212030090000
10,535
2675
20212030100000
17,563
2676
20212030110000
75,055
2677
20212030120000
113,228
2678
20212030130000
43,024
2679
20212030140000
EXEMPT
2680
20212030180000
EXEMPT
2681
20212030190000
EXEMPT
2682
20212030200000
9,828
 
 
Page 44 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2683
20212030210000
6,630
2684
20212030220000
7,485
2685
20212030230000
1,389
2686
20212030240000
1,728
2687
20212030280000
EXEMPT
2688
20212030290000
EXEMPT
2689
20212030410000
EXEMPT
2690
20212030420000
EXEMPT
2691
20212030430000
482,633
2692
20212030440000
EXEMPT
2693
20212030460000
503,987
2694
20212030470000
294,153
2695
20212030480000
78,708
2696
20212030490000
RAILROAD
2697
20212030500000
RAILROAD
2698
20212060220000
EXEMPT
2699
20212060240000
EXEMPT
2700
20212070010000
214,050
2701
20212070020000
43,619
2702
20212070030000
24,367
2703
20212070040000
57,352
2704
20212070050000
19,614
2705
20212070060000
9,836
2706
20212070070000
7,443
2707
20212070080000
13,756
2708
20212070090000
216,643
2709
20212070100000
81,116
2710
20212070110000
79,073
2711
20212070120000
54,852
2712
20212070130000
47,692
2713
20212070140000
36,546
2714
20212070150000
107,589
2715
20212110400000
EXEMPT
2716
20212110410000
EXEMPT
2717
20212110420000
EXEMPT
2718
20212120320000
EXEMPT
2719
20212120330000
EXEMPT
2720
20212130010000
EXEMPT
2721
20212130020000
EXEMPT
2722
20212130030000
EXEMPT
2723
20212130050000
EXEMPT
2724
20212130060000
EXEMPT
2725
20212130070000
EXEMPT
2726
20212130200000
EXEMPT
2727
20212130210000
EXEMPT
2728
20212130220000
EXEMPT
2729
20212130230000
EXEMPT
2730
20212130240000
EXEMPT
2731
20212130250000
EXEMPT
2732
20212130260000
EXEMPT
2733
20212130270000
EXEMPT
2734
20212130280000
EXEMPT
2735
20212130290000
EXEMPT
2736
20212130300000
EXEMPT
2737
20212130410000
EXEMPT
2738
20212130420000
EXEMPT
2739
20212130430000
EXEMPT
2740
20215020030000
EXEMPT
2741
20221000020000
236,015
2742
20221000070000
552,902
2743
20221000100000
808
 
 
Page 45 of 46
 
 
5/29/2014
2012 EAV
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
 
 
 
B
C
2744
20221000120000
EXEMPT
2745
20221000140000
137,415
2746
20221000150000
43,074
2747
20221000160000
223,183
2748
20221000170000
3,179
2749
20221000180000
6,579
2750
20221000190000
EXEMPT
2751
20221000210000
RAILROAD
2752
20221000220000
RAILROAD
2753
20221000230000
RAILROAD
2754
20221000240000
187,122
2755
20221000250000
207,112
2756
20221000260000
255,764
2757
20221010010000
EXEMPT
2758
20221010020000
EXEMPT
2759
20221010030000
EXEMPT
2760
20221010040000
EXEMPT
2761
20221010050000
EXEMPT
2762
20221010060000
10,072
2763
20221010070000
EXEMPT
2764
20221010080000
EXEMPT
2765
20221010090000
EXEMPT
2766
20221020010000
EXEMPT
2767
20221020020000
EXEMPT
2768
20221020030000
EXEMPT
2769
20221020040000
EXEMPT
2770
20221020050000
EXEMPT
2771
20221020060000
EXEMPT
2772
20221030010000
3,067
2773
20221030020000
3,067
2774
20221030030000
3,067
2775
20221030040000
EXEMPT
2776
20221030050000
EXEMPT
2777
20221030060000
EXEMPT
2778
20221030070000
EXEMPT
2779
20221030080000
EXEMPT
2780
20221030090000
EXEMPT
2781
20221080010000
443,332
2782
20221080020000
RAILROAD
2783
20221080050000
RAILROAD
2784
20221080080000
RAILROAD
2785
20164050020000
5,073
2786
TOTALS
76.534.773
2787
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Page 46 of 46
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT FIVE -PHOTO APPENDIX OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Step cracking in the bricks of 5551 La Salle Street.
5529 La Salle Street is a vacant boarded up Multi-Family Home. Note lack of setback between the homes, which constitutes "excessive land coverage".
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Deteriorated shingles on 5530 La Salle Street.
5841 Wabash Avenue is a vacant boarded up home. Note: deteriorated fence.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The vacant boarded up home at 5614 La Salle has' been deemed by the City to be a in danger of collapse (indicated by the red X).
This former residential property has been converted into a church, creating an obsolete building.
 
A5-1
PGAVPLANNERS
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013
 
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
Street right-of-way adjacent to 6076 S. LaSalle is used for      Another example of excessive land coverage on a commer-
parking and loading commercial trucks, an indication of ex-      cial or industrial property (140 W. 62nd).
cessive land coverage.
 
The Wa King Noodle Company is located in a predominantly
An example of a deleterious land use that adversely affects      residential area, an example of an incompatible land use.—
adjacent residential areas (6053 S. State).      photo from 2009.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      Qri /tw*r. .k~*~ .-i*,***
CD ia«»'AAhM&*'m'aau>«no
A5-2
PGAVPLANNERS
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
 
5702 La Salle is a boarded up vacant home.
 
 
The siding on 5750 La Salle has become dislodged.
The gutter is falling off of 5957 La Salle. Note the roof is inadequately covered in roofing felt without the protection of shingles.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5948 La Salle is in need of tuck-pointing.
The roof on 5932 La Salle is severely deteriorated.
 
;PQ, iun**i4*u,M.e*»iii>.ouir.««auu.:
A5-3
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5707 La Salle is another vacant boarded up home in danger      5607 Perry Avenue is a vacant home in danger of collapse,
of collapse.
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013
 
 
;QD UHM^*M.Mi|l)-Qig)ilr«MCI
A54 PGAVPLANNERS
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5764 Lafayette Avenue is a vacant boarded up multi-family home.
5624 Lafayette Avenue is one of several newer homes that was improperly siding and the siding has become dislodged
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5538 Lafayette Avenue is a vacant board up that has been tagged by the city as unsafe.
5512 Lafayette Avenue is a vacant church. Note deteriorated stone veneer
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The roof is severely deteriorated and the gutter is falling off of 5821 Lafayette.
The roof on 5703 Lafayette Avenue is only covered in roofing felt. Note sagging rear porch roof.
 
A5-5
PGAVPLANNERS
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013
 
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
5635 Lafayette Avenue has a dilapidated roof structure with      5611 Lafayette Avenue has a missing chimney cap allowing
roof with holes in it.      ,      birds and other animals access.
 
The vacant and boarded up home at 5612 La Salle Street has      Step cracking in the brick on 5927/5929 Lafayette Avenue,
a severely deteriorated porch
 
Step cracking in the brick of 5931/5933 Lafayette Avenue.      The close proximity of these buildings does not meet set back
requirements and is a demonstration of Excessive Coverage.
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      'CD J«^J^M~^.^.
A56 PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area      Chicago, Illinois
 
5924 Lafayette Avenue has dislodged siding, missing gutters      5821 Wabash Avenue is a vacant boarded up single-family
sections and no shingles covering the roofing felt. home
 
6032 Lafayette Avenue is a multi-family home that is vacant      The siding on 6038 Lafayette Avenue has become dislodged,
and boarded up.
 
The walls on 5928 State Street are no longer straight.      Graffiti on the dumpster screening wall of 6 59th Street
 
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      -do ^.jawafefr**-,
A57 PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area      Chicago, Illinois
 
A boarded up vacant Industrial building located at 5822 State      The bricks on 5632 Indiana Avenue are in need of tuck-
Street. Note ■ property backs to residential.      pointing. Note: concrete band is cracked and crumbling.
 
5847 Indiana Avenue is a boarded up residential.      The doors on 6238 Wabash are deteriorated and the building
is vacant.
 
6232 Wabash Avenue is a vacant residential property sand-      Overgrown deteriorated curb in the 5900 block of S. Michi-
wiched between industrial properties, creating an incompati- gan. ble land use relationship.
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      f'O ■'—"'"■ •
|QQ' iflMUlAllMUlia.OMIkwnV
A 8 PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
 
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      rgj-.wwn«jt^ngghajfe.
45-9
PGAVPLANNERS
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
 
 
 
 
6221 Michigan Avenue is a boarded up and vacant residential      This hole in Indiana Avenue is filled with trash,
building.
 
 
 
 
 
 
The parapet wall on 215 East 61st Street is leaning in and      Deteriorated brick wall at 201 East 61st Street,
deteriorated.
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      'CD ^xt.^.'^
»>MUUbI>MLSjl*:lll-CU|k.M«i«ra
A fx. ]0
PGAVPLANNERS
 
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project
Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area      Chicago, Illinois
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rusted cornice on 5925 Indiana Avenue.      Roofing felt is being used to cover up a severely deteriorated
roof on 5855 Indiana Avenue.
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      fab      —"~
A5-11
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
 
 
The church at 5500 Indiana Avenue is in need of tuck-      Trash and debris on this abandoned lot.
pointing.
 
A vacant and boarded up mixed use building at 30-1 61st      Wood support members supporting the exterior wall at 301
Street.      61st Street.
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013 :Dti
jUUJ lCBMUUfclkMLfMr1!li*a«JCt»<«Kl|Cl
A512 PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
Deteriorated fencing along 6115 Prairie Avenue.      A boarded up vacant multi-family building located at 6123
Prairie Avenue
 
A vacant industrial building located at 6155 Prairie Avenue.      6155 Prairie Avenue has deteriorated bricks, windows and
cornicing.
 
Missing shingles on 6215 Prairie Avenue.      Step cracking in the side of 228 61st Street.
 
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013
A513 PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
The walls of 6036 Prairie Avenue are in need of tuck-'pointing.      The yard of 6014 Prairie Avenue and the vacant lot next door
are covered in trash.
 
5822 Wabash Avenue is a vacant boarded up building that      The parapet wall on 5919 Prairie Avenue is deteriorated and
has been tagged by the city as unsafe.      leaning in.
 
A vacant and boarded up multi-family home located at 309      The rear brick wall of 221 East 58th Street is dilapidated.
East 59th Street.
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      "      ing. .-o-w mr.,^.-u<^v.„ .■ j-
A5-14
PGAVPLANNERS
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
 
 
 
 
The siding on 219 East 59th Street has become dislodged.      A vacant restaurant located at 304 East 58th Street.
 
 
 
 
 
 
A vacant commercial strip development located along East      The rear wall of the previous commercial building is sagging
58th Street that has been deemed unsafe to enter by the city.      and bricks have fallen out of the wall.
 
 
 
 
 
 
The steel beams used at this newer commercial development      The concrete reinforcing inside of the steps is rusted due to
are rusted and deteriorated.      moisture penetrating the concrete
 
:LjGj in m lit* bM.M nit • On« *m na
A5-15
PGAVPLANNERS
 
Photos taken from 0-1/01-04/11/2013
 
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
229 East 55th Street is boarded up and vacant.      Step cracking in 5528/5530 Prairie Avenue.
 
The concrete cornice is crumbling on 5841 Calumet Avenue.      A boarded up and vacant multi-family located at 5727 Calu-
met Avenue.
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013 'OB"
A51G PGAVPLANNERS
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This 37 unit multi-family building at 6242-6236 Martin Luther King Junior Drive is boarded up and vacant.
This 36 unit multi-family building at 6224-6232 Martin Luther King Junior Drive is boarded up and vacant.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This 16 unit multi-family building at 6142-6144 Martin Luther King Junior Drive is boarded up and vacant.
Standing water at the intersection of Martin Luther King Junior Drive and 59th Street due to a lack of storm drainage.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Flooding along Martin Luther King Junior Drive due to a lack of storm drainage.
Standing water along 58th Street due to inadequate storm drainage. Note: excessive amount of trash.
 
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013
 
A5-17
PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
Chicago, Illinois
TIF Redevelopment Plan & Project Washington Park Redevelopment Project Area
 
 
Several of the holes in the storage building located inside of      A deteriorated sidewalk along LaSalle Street.
Washington Park.
 
A sidewalk that has become overgrown and the concrete has      A deteriorated sidewalk that has become overgrown,
crumbled.
 
Photos taken from 04/01-04/11/2013      CO ;^/*^=raiaaj!=i=!^
:UU ;U*i»>.Jb«fNL9«k1lll'ao|a.MMK<ei
A'18 PGAVPLANNERS
 
 
 
 
 
 
City of Chicago
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLAN APPENDIX, ATTACHMENT SIX -HOUSING IMPACT STUDY
 
WASHINGTON PARK REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PROGRAM HOUSING IMPACT STUDY
 
 
 
 
 
 
Prepared for: ' The City of Chicago
 
 
By:
 
Goodman Williams Group
 
 
Goodman Williams
' GROUP —
R II A L  1?. S T A T li R II 5 E A R C I I
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
April 2014
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
Table of Contents
  2. Introduction      A6-2
II.      Housing Impact Study - Part I      A6-4
Number and Type of Residential Units      A6-4
Number and Types of Rooms Within Units      A6-5
Number of Inhabited Units      A6-6
Race and Ethnicity of Residents      A6-7
  1. Housing Impact Study - Part II      A6-9
Number and Location of Units that Could Potentially be Removed      A6-9
Relocation Plan      A6-9
Replacement Housing      A6-9
Housing Eligibility Assessment      A6-10
Rental Housing      A6-11
For-Sale Housing      A6-18
Foreclosures      A6-20
Relocation Assistance      A6-21
Tables
Table 1        Housing Units By Year Structure Built      A6-4
Table 2        Housing Unit Occupancy By Housing Type      A6-5
Table 3        Number And Type Of Rooms      A6-6
Table 4        Housing Units By Occupancy      A6-7
Table 5        Select Population Characteristics      A6-8
Table 6        Number Of Households By Income      A6-10
Table 7        Maximum Annual Income Limits, 2010      A6-11
Table 8        Project Based Section 8 Housing      A6-12
Table 9        Legends South Unit Mix      A6-14
Table 10       Savoy Square - Legends South Rent Mix      A6-15
Table 11       Legends South C-3 Unit Mix      A6-15
Table 12       Summary of Rental Listings      A6-17
Table 13       Summary of Washington Park For Sale Listings      A6-18
Table 14       Median Sales Price of Detached Single-Family Units      A6-19
Table 15       Median Sales Price of Attached Single-Family Units      A6-20
Table 16       Foreclosures Filings by Property Type by Community Area      A6-21
Appendix       A6-23
 
2014
A6-1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
I. INTRODUCTION
 
 
Goodman Williams Group was retained by Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises, Inc. to be part of a team working for the City of Chicago Department of Planning and Development to develop a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district for an area designated as the Washington Park Project Area. PGAV Urban Consulting is also part of the team for this assignment.
The Washington Park Project Area (referred to in this report as the "Project Area") is generally bounded by:
  • Cottage Grove Avenue and Washington Park on the east
  • 51st Street on the north
  • The Dan Ryan Expressway (I-90/94) on the west
  • 63rd Street on the south
A map of the Project Area is included in the Redevelopment Plan, which is contained in a separate document.
Housing Impact Study
The Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area does not presently envision acquiring or demolishing occupied housing units. It is possible, however, that at some point during the 23-year life of the TIF some relocation may occur as a consequence of the renovation and redevelopment activity that is envisioned.
It is for that reason that this report fulfills the legislative requirements for a Housing Impact Study, as set forth in the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et seq.). The specific requirements of the Housing Impact Study are as follows:
Part I of the Housing Impact Study shall include the following for all residential units within the Project Area:
  1. data as to whether the residential units are single family or multi-family units; and
  2. the number and type of rooms within the units, if that information is available; and
  3. whether the units are inhabited or uninhabited, as determined not less than 45 days before the date that the ordinance or resolution required by subsection (a) of Section 11-74.4-5 is passed; and
  4. data as to the racial and ethnic composition of the residents in the inhabited residential units. The data requirement as to the racial and ethnic composition of the residents in the inhabited residential units shall be deemed to be fully satisfied by data from the most recent federal census.
Part II of the Housing Impact Study shall identify the inhabited residential units in the Project Area that are to be or may be removed. If inhabited residential units are to be removed, then the housing impact study shall identify:
 
2014
A6-2
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
 
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
  1. the number and location of those units that will or may be removed; and
    1. the municipality's plans for relocation assistance for those residents in the Project Area whose residences are to be removed; and
    2. the availability of replacement housing for those residents whose residences are to be removed, and the type, location, and cost of the housing; and
  2. the type and extent of relocation assistance to be provided.
 
2014
A6-3
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
II.      HOUSING IMPACT STUDY - Part I
 
The information presented in this report is compiled from a variety of sources. In winter 2014, Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises and PGAV conducted field research that identified the parcels and buildings located in the Project Area, the number of units in each building, and whether the units were occupied or vacant.
The field work was supplemented with information from the U.S. Census American Community Survey Selected Housing Characteristics Profile. Ratios from the four Census tracts that align most closely with the Project Area were applied to the actual unit counts to provide estimates of the age of the housing stock, the number of rooms and bedrooms, and whether the occupied units were leased or owned.
Demographic information on current residents of the Project Area was provided by Esri Business Analyst, a respected vendor of demographic and economic data. Other information in Part II of the Housing Impact Study was provided by Goodman Williams Group and reliable secondary sources as noted in the tables.
Number and Type of Residential Units
The recent field work identified a total of 4,375 housing units in 887 buildings located within the Project Area. Table 1 provides estimates of the age of the structures based on percentages derived from the Census. As the table indicates, nearly half of the housing units in the Project Area were built before 1939.
 
 
Table 1 Housing Units in Project Area by Year Structure Built
 
100.0%
4,375
 
Total Housing Units
 
2000 to Present
1990 to 1999 1980 to 1989 1970 to 1979 1960 to 1969 1950 to 1959 1940 to 1949 1939 or Earlier
206 105 201 385 411 459 508 2,109
4.7% 2.4% 4.6% 8.8% 9.4% 10.5% 11.6% 48.2%
 
 
Source: ERS Enterprises and PGAV Consulting, based on field work, 2014 and U.S. Census American Community Survey Housing Profile
 
A6-4
2014
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
This older housing stock consists mostly of multifamily buildings. As Table 2 below shows, 39.8% of units in the Project Area are located in buildings containing two to four units. Another third (37.1%) are in buildings with 5 or more units, and only 3.7% of the housing stock is comprised of single-family homes.
 
 
Table 2
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Project Area Housing Unit Occupancy by Building Type
 
Occupied Units       Vacant Units Total
Numb   Perce       Numb   Perce       Numb Perce
Building Type      er        nt      er        nt      er nt
 
Single Unit Dwellings                104         4.1%      19      10.6%      123 3.7%
Units in Two-Unit Buildings        230         7.8%      84      18.4%      314 7.0%
Units in 3 and 4-Unit Buildings 479 38.0%      199      49.6%      678 32.8%
Units in Multi-Family (>5 units)
Buildings                              2,777     44.3%      483      21.3%      3,260 37.1%
100.0      100.0      100.0
TOTAL                                 3,590           %      785      %      4,375 %
 
Source: ERS Enterprises and PGA V Consulting, based on field work, 2014
 
 
 
Number and Type of Rooms Within Units
Estimates of the number and types of rooms in the units in the Project Area are shown in Table 3. Key findings include:
  • Of the 4,375 total units counted in the Project Area, more than 27% contain five rooms. Another 21% of units contain four rooms, and 17% contain six rooms.
  • Most of the units in the Project Area (60.9%) contain two or three bedrooms. Smaller studio and one-bedroom units make up 30% of the units. Larger units with four or five bedrooms make up the remainder of the mix.
These findings suggest that the housing stock in the Project Area includes a high percentage of larger units with two or more bedrooms. These apartments meet the needs of larger families with children.
 
2014
A6-5
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Table 3
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Project Area
      Number and Type of Rooms      
Number      Percent
Total Number of Housing Units           4,375      100.0%
Number of Rooms
  1. room                                    186      4.3%
  2. rooms                                    454      10.4%
  3. rooms                                    492      11.2%
  4. rooms                                    928      21.2%
  5. rooms                                  1,193      27.3%
  6. rooms                                    741      16.9%
  7. rooms                                    250      5.7%
  8. rooms                                     83      1.9%
  9. or more room's                         48      1.1 %
 
Number of Bedrooms
No bedroom                             401      9.2%
  1. bedroom                               927      21.2%
  2. bedrooms                            1,499      34.3%
  3. bedrooms                             1,165      26.6%
  4. bedrooms                               347      7.9%
  5. or more bedrooms                      35      0.8%
 
Sources: ERS Enterprises with percentages derived from U.S. Census
 
 
Number of Inhabited Units
 
Of the 4,375 total residential units identified in the Project Area, 3,590, or 82.1% are occupied. As shown in Table 4, most of these occupied units are rental apartments. Owner-occupied units constitute only 14.0% of the total.
 
2014
A6-6
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Table 4
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Project Area
      Housing Units Occupancy and Tenure      
 
Percent
Number
 
Total Housing Units
Occupied
Vacant
4,375 3,590 785
100.0% 82.1% 17.9%
 
Occupied Housing Units
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
3,590 503 3,087
100.0% 14.0% 86.0%
 
 
Sources: ERS Enterprises and PGAV Consulting with tenure estimates from Esri Business Analyst
 
 
Race and Ethnicity of Residents
Table 5 provides demographic information on residents of the Project Area.
  • The 2013 total population of the Project Area is estimated to be 8,730, a slight decrease from the 2010 Census count. Of the total, 97.1% of the residents identify as Black or African American, 0.5% White, 0.1% Asian, and less than 1% Hispanic or Latino.
  • The majority of the Project Area's 3,240 estimated households in 2013 were Family Households, defined as two or more related persons living together. The number of non-family households grew between 2010 and 2013.
  • The number of family households living in the Project Area with incomes below the poverty level was slightly higher than the number of family households at or above the poverty level. The estimated median household income within the Project Area in 2013 was $16,880, well below the'estimated 2013 median for the City of Chicago of $43,854.
 
2014
A6-7
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Table 5
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Project Area
      Select Population Characteristics      
2010      2013 Estimate
 
Number      Percent      Number      Percent
Population      8,787      100.0%      8,730      100.0%
Race
White Alone      44      0.5%      43      0.5%
Black or African American Alone      8,602      97.9%      8,536      97.1%
American Indian and Alaska Native Alone      12      0.1%      12      0.1%
0.0%      0 0.0%
Asian Alone      6      0.1%      6      0.1%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander      n
Alone
Some Other Race Alone      18      0.2%      20 0.2%
Two or More Races      104      1.2%      113 1.3%
 
Hispanic or Latino      68      0.8%      72 0.8%
 
Households      3,241      100.0%      3,240 100.0%
Family Households      2,035      62.8%      2,009 62.0%
Nonfamily Households      1,206      37.2%      1,231 38.0%
 
Median Household Income (Esri Estimate)      $17,414      $16,880
 
Source: U. S. Census Bureau, Esri Business Analyst and Goodman Williams Group
 
2014
A6-8
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
III.     HOUSING IMPACT STUDY - Part II
 
 
Number and Location of Units that Could Potentially be Removed
One of the defining features of this proposed TIF district is the abundance of vacant land, which presents many opportunities for development without the need to disturb existing structures. The primary objectives of the Plan are to rehabilitate existing single and multi-family dwellings, redevelop vacant land, and correct obsolete land use patterns through redevelopment.
Methodology
Presented below are the three steps used to fulfill the statutory requirements of defining the number and location of inhabited residential units that may be removed or impacted.
  1. Properties identified for acquisition. An acquisition plan has not been prepared as part of the Plan. There are no occupied housing units that are planned for acquisition.
  2. Dilapidation. As stated above and presented in more detail in the Eligibility Study, there are no occupied residential buildings classified as "dilapidated" in the Project Area. As a result of this analysis, there are no occupied housing units that are likely to be displaced because they are located within a dilapidated structure.
  3. Changes in land use. The Land Use Plan, presented in Section V of the Plan identifies the future land uses to be in effect upon adoption of the Plan. If public or private redevelopment occurs in accordance with land use changes proposed by the Plan, displacement of inhabited units will not result. As a result of this analysis, no occupied housing units are likely to be displaced because of land use changes.
Relocation Plan
With no residential displacement anticipated, a relocation plan for displaced residents within the proposed TIF District has not been established.
Replacement Housing
In accordance with Section 11-74.4-3 (n)(7) of the Act, the City shall make a good faith effort to ensure that affordable replacement housing for any qualified displaced resident whose residence is removed is located in or near the Project Area.
 
 
At this juncture there are no plans to remove any occupied residences within the Project Area. However, if replacement housing were needed, available housing options within the boundaries of, or in close proximity to, the Project Area are discussed below.
 
2014
A6-9
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Housing Eligibility Assessment
Table 6 presents a breakdown of Project Area households by income. These 2013 estimates suggest that 44.5% of the households in the Project Area have annual incomes of less than $15,000. Nearly a third (31.9%) have incomes between $15,000 and $35,000 annually, and the remaining 23.7% have incomes in excess of $35,000.
Table 6
$75,000 $99,999
$35,000 $49,999
$15,000 $24,999
$25,000 $34,999
$100,000 or more
Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Project Area
      Number of Households by Income, 2013 Estimates      
<$15,000
$50,000 $74,999
Number of
Households     1,429      652      373      350      185      93 132
Percent of
Households    44.5%      20.3%      11.6%      10.9%      5.8%      2.9% 4.1%
 
Source: Esri Business Analyst
 
Most of the subsidized and public housing options available to low-income residents in Chicago are determined by Maximum Annual Income Limits published by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Limits are based on household size and are calculated from the Area Median Income (AMI). The 2013 schedule, the most recent available, is shown in Table 7 below. The highlighting corresponds to the household size and income that applies to most of the residents in the Project Area.
 
2014
A6-10
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Table 7
Schedule of Maximum Annual Income Limits for Greater Chicago*
      Effective December 18, 2013      
i            2             3            4      5      6      7      8
AMI     Person    Person     Person    Person      Person      Person      Person      Person
 
120%    $60,840    $69,600    $78,240    $86,880      $93,840      $100,800      $107,760      $114,720
80%    $40,550    $46,350    $52,150    $57,900      $62,550      $67,200      $71,800      $76,450
60%    $30,420    $34,800    $39,120    $43,440      $46,920      $50,400      $53,880      $57,360
50%    $25,350    $29,000    $32,600    $36,200      $39,100      $42,000      $44,900      $47,800
40%    $20,280    $23,200    $26,080    $28,960      $31,280      $33,600      $35,920      $38,240
30%    $15,210    $17,400    $19,560    $21,720      $23,460      $25,200      $26,940      $28,680
20%    $10,140    $11,600    $13,040    $14,480      $15,640      $16,800      $17,960      $19,120
10%      $5,070      $5,800      $6,520     $7,240      $7,820      $8,400      $8,980      $9,560
 
* Includes Cook, DuPage, Lake, Kane, McHenry, & Will Counties
Source: Illinois Housing Development Authority
 
The Project Area has an estimated 2,454 households, or 74% of total households, who earn 60% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI). 1,429 households earn less than $15,000 and are categorized as earning less than 30% AMI. 652 households earn between $15,000 and $24,999 earn less than 50% AMI but more than 30% AMI.
Rental Housing
This section discusses rental housing options, including CHA, affordable, and market-rate.
Housing Choice Vouchers. Approximately 86% of the Project Area's residents are renters and 74% of all households have an income at or below 60% AMI, making them qualified for Housing Choice Vouchers, also known as Section 8. Under the Housing Choice Voucher Program, renters pay 30-40% of their income for rent and utilities. Landlords whose tenants have Housing Choice Vouchers are entitled to Fair Market Rents (FMR), established annually by HUD, and which are roughly equivalent to Maximum Monthly Gross Rents for households at 60% AMI. Landlords collect the difference between tenants' rent and the FMR directly from the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA). According to the CHA's FY2012 Annual Report, the City of Chicago had 38,525 tenant-based vouchers at the end of 2012.
Project-Based Voucher Program. This program is designed for developments where landlords enter into a contract with HUD to provide subsidized housing such that the Section 8 status is tied to the development and cannot be transferred if a qualified low-income tenant moves away. A major concern in gentrifying neighborhoods is the loss of these project-based Section 8 units when rental properties convert to condominiums or when landlords choose not to renew their Section 8 contracts, thereby decreasing the availability of low-income housing.
 
2014
A6-11
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Within the Project Area and surrounding community areas, Table 8 shows that there are a total of 6,607 Section 8 units in 70 developments.
Table 8
      Project-Based Section 8 Housing      
 
Assisted
Community Area      Units Projects
Washington Park (the Project
Area)      583      8
Grand Boulevard      1,252      19
Englewood      642      6
Woodlawn      2,024      19
Kenwood      908      9
Greater Grand Crossing      1,198      9
 
Total      6,607 70
 
Source: Chicago Rehab Network
 
2014
A6-12
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
CHA and the Plan for Transformation. Chicago's public housing stock is in the midst of an ongoing redevelopment program known as CHA Plan for Transformation. Now in its 13th year, the plan calls for the redevelopment of 25,000 units of public housing into mixed-income communities. The CHA's FY2012 Annual Report projected a total of 21,376 units, or 85.5% of 25,000 units, to be completed by the end of FY2012.
Many of the properties in the CHA's portfolio are reserved specifically for families. The CHA Community Wide (Family Housing) Wait List remained closed to new applicants in Fiscal Year 2012; 32,647 applicants remain on the list prior to completion of its wait list survey update which began in December 2012. There are several CHA properties in and around the Project Area, discussed below.
  • Washington Park Low-Rises. This family housing development consists of 60 two-story row houses in 27 scattered locations roughly bounded by 39th Street (N), 63rd Street (S), Stewart Avenue (W), and Lake Michigan (E). Some of the units are in the Project Area. Renovation of the units, which were built in 1963, was began in and was completed in 2010.
  • Washington Park Homes. This family housing development is being redeveloped and rehabilitated as a mixed-income community. The completed project as currently envisioned will include 192 public housing units (37%), 183 affordable units (35%), and 146 market-rate units (28%) for a total of 521 units. At the end of 2008, two developments were completed: Keystone Place and St. Edmund's Meadows.
St. Edmund's Meadows, located near the intersection of 61st and South Michigan Avenue, was completed in 2007. The new rental development consists of three- and four-bedroom row houses and three-flat buildings. 14 of the 56 units are rehabilitated public housing units. Keystone Place has a mix of 38 public, 24 affordable and 7 market-rate units in the Woodlawn community area bounded by 63rd Street (N), Woodlawn Avenue (E), Marquette Road (S), and Drexel Avenue (W).
  • Legends South. This major redevelopment replaces Robert Taylor Homes. Once the country's largest public housing development with 4,321 units, Robert Taylor was demolished between 2002 and 2007, clearing 92 acres bounded by 39th Street on the north, State Street on the east, 54th Street on the south, and Federal Street on the west. Redevelopment of the property calls for 2,400 mixed-income rental and for-sale units, with one-third of the units reserved each for public, affordable, and market-rate housing tenants. The redevelopment team is being led by Brinshore Development.
 
Table 9 shows the unit mix for the phases in Legends South that are completed, and Table 10 presents the unit mix, size, and rent are shown for Savoy Square, located at 4448 South State Street.
 
Brinshore continues their redevelopment efforts with Legends South C-3, a 71-unit mixed-income rental development bounded by 43rd Street (N), Calumet Ave (E), 48th Street (S) and Michigan Ave (W). Table 11 shows the unit mix for Legends South C-3, which is expected to open in December 2014.
 
A6-13
2014
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Table 9 Legends South Unit Mix
 
Total Units
Public
Unit Type
 
Affordable    Market Rate
 
Hansberry Square, completed 2007
Family, 1BR      ,12
Family, 2BR      35
Family, 3BR      29
Family, 4BR      7
Subtotal      83
Mahalia Place, completed 2005
Family, 1BR      8
Family, 2BR      23
Family, 3BR      19
Family, 4BR      4
Subtotal      54
Coleman Place, completed 2008
Family, 1BR      7
Family, 2BR      25
Family, 3BR      16
Family, 4BR      4
Subtotal      52
Savoy Square, completed 2011
Family, 1 BR      11
Family, 2BR      ■ 20
Family, 3BR      24
Family, 4BR      5
Subtotal      60
Total Units      249
 
3
33 33 0
68
4
28 12 0
44 3
28 12 0
43 9
19 22 0
50 205
 
1
18 14
0
30
 
0 11 1 0 12
2
14
7 0
23
 
6 12 10
0
28 93
 
16 86 76 7
181
12 62 32 4
110
12 67 35 4
118
26 51 56 5
138 547
 
Source: Chicago Housing Authority, February 2014
 
2014
A6-14
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Table 10
Savoy Square - Legends South Rent Mix
 
Sq. Ft.            Rent      $ / Sq. Ft.
    1. BR/1 BA                        758-775      $1,000      $1.29-$1.32
  2. BR/1 BA                       945- 1,021      $1,200      $1.17 - $1.27
Market                                           1,256-      $1,350-
Rate           3BR/1.5BAor2BA             1,573      $1,450*      $0.92-$1.07
  1. BR/1 BA                        758 - 775           $754      $0.97 - $0.99
  2. BR/1 BA                      945- 1,021          $901      $0.88 - $0.95
1,256-
  1. BR/1.5 BA                        1,573      $1,037      $0.66 - $0.82
4 BR (Public Housing Affordable Only)
Source: Savoy Square rental office, February 2014 and Goodman Williams Group *Higher rent is for 3BR/2BA unit
 
Table 11 Legends South C-3 Unit Mix
Market Total
Unit Type      Public       Affordable     Rate Units
 
Family, 1 BR      8
Family, 2BR      10
Family, 3BR      ,9
Family, 4BR      3
Subtotal      30
7      6      21
9      8      27
7      4      20
0      0      3
23      18      71
 
 
Source: Chicago Housing Authority, February 2014
 
2014
A6-15
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Planned and Completed Rental Developments
 
Several new development projects that are completed, are under construction, or are planned could provide additional affordable rental opportunities to residents of the Project Area. These include:
  • POAH's redevelopment of Grove Park Plaza on South Cottage Grove Avenue between 61st and 63rd Streets. The renamed Woodlawn Park will include 420 residential units and 65,000 square feet of commercial space.
  • The Shops and Lofts at 47, a mixed-use development that is currently under construction at the southwest corner of 47th and South Cottage Grove Avenue that will include 96 rental apartments;
  • Parkway Gardens, located on South King Drive between 63rd and 66th Street reopened in 2013 after a two-year renovation of its 694 units.
  • The Rosenwald, a long vacant landmarked building at 4600 South Michigan Avenue, is scheduled to undergo extensive redevelopment. The project as currently envisioned will include 239 apartments, 51,000 square feet of commercial space and 27,000 square feet of community space.
 
2014
A6-16
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
Market Rate Rentals. The Project Area has relatively few market-rate rental apartments. Listings in Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) in January 2014 revealed apartment rates that roughly corresponded to IHDA's Maximum Monthly Gross Rents for 50% to 60% Area Median Income (AMI).
The outliers shown in Table 12 below are three-bedroom apartments in Washington Park that were recently rehabbed and finished with high-end features.
 
 
Table 12 Summary of Rental Listings
 
Washington Park Neighborhood
Avg
Bedrooms     Available Apts. Rent
  1. 2 $730
  2. 5 $910
  3. 7 $1,292
 
Englewood Neighborhood Bedrooms
 
 
Avg
Available Apts. Rent
  1. 1 $650
  2. 13 $812
  3. 17 $1,026
  4. 3 $1,292
 
Source: Midwest Real Estate Data, January 2014
 
Senior Housing. Two affordable senior housing projects are located in the Project Area, one with 35 units and one with 60 units. Rent is tied to residents' incomes, and all units are reserved for low-income residents.
The CHA owns 10 dedicated senior buildings in the vicinity of the Project Area, although none is located in Washington Park. Seniors must be 60 years old to apply and 62 years old to move in to CHA senior housing. Nearby community areas with CHA senior buildings include Grand Boulevard, Kenwood, Fuller Park, Greater Grand Crossing, Woodlawn, and Englewood. A list of senior properties can be found in the master table in the Appendix.
 
 
Planned and Completed Rental Developments
St. Edmund's Redevelopment Corporation (SERC) is a prominent developer in the Washington Park community area. Since its inception in 1990, it has developed 598 housing units in 26 buildings. Its most recent development is St. Edmund's Court, a vacant apartment building
 
2014
A6-17
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
rehabbed into 36 units of affordable housing in conjunction with the City of Chicago's Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Located near St. Edmund's Common, the project was completed in December 2011.
SERC has two additional projects in the development stages:
  • St. Edmund's Oasis will be a 54 unit rental townhome development on scattered sites on 61st St, Indiana and Prairie Avenues. SERC is partnering with Tria Adelfi, LLC in a joint venture through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
  • St. Edmund's Tower Annex (Tower Annex) will be a 34 unit affordable senior rental building at 6151 South Michigan Avenue.
For-Sale Housing
As discussed previously, only 14.0% of Project Area residents were estimated to be homeowners and the remaining 86.0% were renters. The market of for-sale housing is therefore relatively smaller than other community areas. Table 13 below summarizes 28 listings from registered Realtors as reported by Midwest Real Estate Data. The real estate listings revealed a wide range in prices, from inexpensive to high-end units. The predominant unit type was three-bedroom condominiums.
Table 13
      Summary of Washington Park For-Sale Listings      
Type      # Bedrooms      Median Price       Price Range      # Listings
 
Condominium            1      ■ $54,500      $28,000 - $125,000      4
Condominium           2      $33,600      $20,000 - $89,000      5
Condominium          3      $40,000      $29,000 - $83,500      13
Condominium          4+      $98,450      $92,000 - $104,900      2
House                    NA      $129,450      $4,900 - $299,900      4
 
Source: Midwest Real Estate Data January 2014
 
Tables 14 and 15 on the following pages show median sale prices of detached and attached housing units sold by Realtors in the Washington Park, Englewood, Woodlawn, and Grand Boulevard community areas over the previous 10 years. Prices are highest in Grand Boulevard, remaining stable from 2005 to 2007. Prices have dropped precipitously with the market downturn beginning at the end of 2007.
 
A6-18
2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Table 14
Median Sales Price of Detached Single-Family Units
 
Community
Name      2005        2006        2007        2008        2009      2010      2011        2012 2013
Grand
Boulevard $380,000 $375,000 $379,500 $242,000 $139,900 $200,000 $80,000 $220,000 $249,000 Woodlawn $146,450 $237,500 $258,050 $70,700 $71,500 $24,000 $44,000 $40,000 $45,583 Washington
Park      $82,000    $97,750    $74,750    $69,250    $27,000      $40,500  $13,625    $60,250 $144,075
Englewood      $79,500    $90,000    $67,000 . $20,000    $10,000      $12,000  $11,950      $9,900 $9,000
 
Source: This representation is based in whole or in part on data supplied by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC for the period January 2011 through December 2013. Midwest Real Estate Data LLC does not guarantee nor is it in any way responsible for its accuracy. Data maintained by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC may not reflect all real estate activity in the market. © 2014 MRED
 
      Number of Detached Single-Family Units Sold      
 
2005        2006        2007 .      2008      2009      2010      2011        2012 2013
Grand
Boulevard         51           45           24           30      45      36      27      34 55
Woodlawn         32           26           18           20      6      4      36      25 30
Washington
Park                 9646      27      21      586
Englewood       184         139         123         100      117      125      64      53 59
 
Source: This representation is based in whole or in part on data supplied by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC for the period January 2011 through December 2013. Midwest Real Estate Data LLC does not guarantee nor is it in any way responsible for its accuracy. Data maintained by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC may not reflect all real estate activity in the market. © 2014 MRED
 
2014
A6-19
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
 
Table 15
Median Sales Price of Attached Single-Family Units
 
Community
Name      2005        2006        2007        2008      2009      2010      2011       2012 2013
Grand
Boulevard      $229,000  $244,000  $239,250  $205,000  $57,000  $36,315  $40,850  $50,600 $60,300
Washington
Park      $184,900  $194,950  $199,950  $148,300  $44,000  $25,000  $25,000  $28,000 $32,150
Woodlawn      $199,000  $213,000  $205,000  $179,900  $46,000  $45,000  $40,000  $37,000 $45,550
Englewood      $61,500    $69,995    $60,000    $10,000   $10,500    $6,000  $11,500      $1 $18,850
 
Source: This representation is based in whole or in part on data supplied by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC for the period January 2011 through December 2013. Midwest Real Estate Data LLC does not guarantee nor is it in any way responsible for its accuracy. Data maintained by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC may not reflect all real estate activity in the market. © 2014 MRED
 
Number of Attached Single-Family Units Sold
 
2005      2006      2007      2008      2009      2010      2011      2012      2013
Grand
Boulevard      309      423      272      159      153      178      140      158      176
Washington
Park      186      192      96      63      67      65      76      58      62
Woodlawn      187      171      199      105      147      115      83      87      78
Englewood      11      9            3      13           8      5      3      1      2
 
Source: This representation is based in whole or in part on data supplied by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC for the period January 2011 through December 2013. Midwest Real Estate Data LLC does not guarantee nor is it in any way responsible for its accuracy. Data maintained by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC may not reflect all real estate activity in the market. © 2014 MRED
 
Foreclosures
 
Table 16 below summarizes the foreclosure filings in the Washington Park, Englewood, Woodlawn, Grand Boulevard, and Kenwood community areas over the last five years. Foreclosures are highest in Greater Grand Crossing and Grand Boulevard. Washington Park and Kenwood have recorded the fewest foreclosures since 2008; foreclosures in Washington Park have dropped steadily over the last five years.
 
2014
A6-20
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
 
Table 16
Foreclosure Filings by Property Type by Community Area
 
2008-2012
 
Total
667 1,524 1,723
547 1,364
Washington Park Grand Boulevard Greater Grand Crossing Kenwood Woodlawn
2008      2009      2010      2011      2012
163      150      121      123      110
351      347      315      252      259
415      349      334      291      334
111      .90      125      103      118
397      294      277      201      195
Source: Woodstock Institute Proposed For-Sale Developments in Project Area
A number of new residential developments are planned or have been announced in the Project Area, taking advantage of the vacant lots or existing buildings in need of rehabilitation. Most of these developments, described below, are located in the eastern half of the Project Area. The status of a number of these developments is uncertain, and will depend on the ongoing recovery of the housing market.
    • 10 single-family homes were proposed by Appiah Development on South Wabash Avenue between 56th and 57th Streets.
  • A 12-unit condominium development was planned at 57th Street and South Prairie
Avenue.
  • Ascendance Partners proposed rehabbing an existing building at 59 Street and South Wabash Avenue to create approximately 32 units.
  • Good Shepherd Community Service Organization proposed developing 19 units between 56th and 57th Streets on South Prairie Avenue.
 
 
Relocation Assistance
In the event that the implementation of the Plan results in the removal of residential housing units in the Project Area occupied by low-income households or very low-income households, or the displacement of low-income households or very low-income households from such residential housing units, such households shall be provided affordable housing and relocation assistance not less than that which would be provided under the federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 and the regulations thereunder, including the eligibility criteria. Affordable housing may be either existing or newly constructed housing. The City shall make a good faith effort to ensure that this affordable housing is located in or near the Project Area.
 
2014
A6-21
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
City of Chicago
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project
 
 
 
As used in the above paragraph "low-income households", "very low-income households" and "affordable housing" shall have the meanings set forth in Section 3 of the Illinois Affordable Housing Act, 310 ILCS 65/3. As of the date of this Plan, these statutory terms are defined as follows: (i) "low-income household" means a single person, family or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is more than 50 percent but less than 80 percent of the median income of the area of residence, adjusted for family size, as such adjusted income and median income are determined from time to time by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") for purposes of Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937; (ii) "very low-income household" means a single person, family or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is not more than 50 percent of the median income of the area of residence, adjusted for family size, as so determined by HUD; and (iii) "affordable housing" means residential housing that, so long as the same is occupied by low-income households or very low-income households, requires payment of monthly housing costs, including utilities other than telephone, of no more than 30 percent of the maximum allowable income for such households, as applicable.
 
2014
A6-22
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
 
Housing Impact Study Washington Park TIF
Redevelopment Plan and Project      City of Chicago
 
 
 
Appendix
 
2014
A6-23
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises Goodman Williams Group
 
o
< 0
< a q
nz Q_ Q_
o Q Q
Q Q_
a
OO
o
£?
co Q
<
o
Ql      co
<      < < < S
Q      Q Q Q "
Q Q Q ^ ^ ^ ^
 
 
Q Q Q Q_ Q_ Q_
o o a
 
co co oo co co oo c  c  c:  c  c c
OOOOOO--.
U= "^5 *J3        <C <C <C OOOOOOQQQ
oaiaiaiaiiUxxT
 
 
Q <      <      <      <      <      <
o_ m      m      m      :c      :c      m
Q o      o      o      o      o      o
lo o      lo      r~      lo      1      1
cm o      cm      co      1—
CO      ^—      CM
 
IS
o
a> E o
 
t: o
><>.>«>>«>»
E  E E
E E E to  ro ro
E E ca ca
e -e
ca o ~ a.
let
2 CO
CO
-nT
co co co"
CO   CO   CNJ   CNJ cnj
cm" cm" -<— t—~
co      co co co
eg *<3- 00 eg" eg eg t—" co eg t—" t—" x—"
ca c ca
CO .O CO
CO
CO      el)
<u !c      >
>   o      <
< 2      ca
i s      I
^   CD      CO
5 -a      a>
w co      V
„      o>
-      o
CO
<
s,ii
£      0-
2      Lo
co      «
LO      CO
^-      t
LO      LO
r—      cm
LO      CO
3: <
<C ro
ca .!5
Ol "O
^co
CO LO t— pi. O "nT
00 cr>
LO LO
CO
CO CD
f<
o c -5 ca
CO IE co ^ lo S
S CO
CO LO
LU
J2      cjd
W £ t      c
o      co
"J LLI      ^
C=>  1—  o      o
cn co cnj      cnj
CO
£ LO T-O LO CO CO   LO CO
■Nt
CO   CO CO
CO     O     1—     T— T—
II
■"= --
E ■c ca
CO
cn
CO
J2 "S. C < S    C =
E n  « «
" IE -*= ,°
~      .O I—
to
O
E E o O
CD
o   cn      co O-
—  5=  c  ca      N <£
co -5£ ■—  ca =      jo
S  ™  S? 2 >      a.
CD
< =g —
to   co   to   £   « 0
<
5 c?z E
CO
E E E E
ca D.
.S =5 ^ «
Signs to to
E      E      *i
"D   "O   T3      T3      CD
c LU LU      LU      'P
2  *J      *J      TO
m co co      co      x
o
O CO
<u to
o
CO (/] "o
O)
CO
o
JZ
o c o
 
a. O
O)
_e "«/)
3
o X
0} £1
ca
"2 <
 
CD
o >
E o
S
0)
> <
"5 E _3 co O CO
|N-
m
■o •a <
0)
E
A
 
a> CO
■Nf -Nf
CO   CO CO
cm" CM CM
EEEEEEEEEEEE
 
 
 
co co csj" eg" co ^—~ "
§2
<
 
U5 CO _Q
ca
CD
> CD
< 5      "S
co  ca      oq
05 (—
r  Ii      2
^      ^ ca
CO tO      (J
o      111
CM CD
t—   O      LO
CO   CO      LO
 
 
CD > <
£      5      co.
CO   .hr      -°      i-
o
oi Q      "o Q
—      —      CO —
CO
2 ^
CO CO CO LO o o
CO O t— CO   CO ■>—
Tj"   LO   LO   LO   CO   CM CO
CD
E t:
CO
 
 
 
 
-H2
CD
i 1—
-g CD
O-CD
sz CO
■a o o O
I «
to CO to f= "a "a =b ~
Sg
  1. to
  2. E ■er w
S CO —I LO
J2 E -p E S.E
CO
< I ^ E
CO
CO CO CO
I 3 2 1
CO
lo Q. CO CO D_
 
.11
-e E
 
 
^ ^
CD CO
"1  E  E E ro ro
ol — — — — — co
>
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
s
<
CO
s
Sri
co co
CO |n-
<
Dl ^      Ij D_
£ cd      co      S ^ a>
0      -X      r      ? " 1 =
1      J      O)      C ■■■
3
m   rr\      CO
CM      ^
t—   CO      CO
CO   t—      CD
CO   ■Nt      -c—
 
 
 
CD
E -e ca
 
_CD C
S <
^ "2 "  io — S  > c
CD CD 3 O
to      m      82      =§ o
o
CD
■a
O-      §      CD      "      ° CO
o      a)      j:      ^      co
TO      Q      c      TO      « O
°-      co      o      °-      = i
<D      „      N      CD      CD ft
            TO      M      CO -i
CO  ±r   TO      ^5      CO      TO      CD iP
«   3  _l      <      -3_l_lO
 
o
oo oo O—
Q
oo D- oo
 
<<<<<<<<<<Oq        oqQDqqqqooq   o q q o   oq SgggggOOO
cm t— co(Ooo(OCM^inmoo)o)
00)CD(O^OOCMO)^-Ot-i-(D
t—   LO      CO   CD      -Nt CM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
o
CD CO
 
E E E
.CO    CO CO
E E co co
E E <5 <?
E E <5 <?
E
| S 2 co
 
CD >,
> = _ E
-e -e t: -t:
CD CD
oooooooo
1 -e "= ~
3 CO
CD CO
CO CO CO CO
.2       o_ ~  a a a a ~
CDCDcDcDcDCDCDCDcD C/3COCOC/3COCOC/3COCO
■Nt co co" cm" cm"
1—" i—" CM o~ <=>" t-~
CO
cm"
£ E E
TO    CD 03
 
 
LO
^J" CO CO CO CO" CM   CM CM
e      -e e
.CO      Q .CO
~      ca. ~
3      §-3
2      co 2
LO
"Nt      "Nt
CO   CO      CO
CM   CM      CM"
■<—" t—"      CZ> t-"
m— ^— n— n— ^ o
CD
-Nt
n^- co"
co" cm" cm" ~
T-" O"
^ ^ CO
■nT
co"
cm" CO t-" CM" t—
o"
CM    T— O
 
 
 
cd
CD
cn
CO
o o
CO
a> > <
<
3
<
CZ
3 ca
CD
> <
CD
co ca
CD t TO
3 CL ™ CD
TO 7T-
co
> E
< ° co §5 «   « Z  „ o
™  ™ CO  ™ —
CO
O O
S
CD CO E£
q co
LU CO
j 5 £
■£      CM
Ti    CO      'Nt      ro
w D-      o<j      £
£  CD      -a      cd
ca      co      =
co _i      -Nt      S
CO CO      LU      CO
CO o      ■»—      o
O   OO      CZ>      CO
LO   O      ■Nt      CO
co ■Nt      rN-      co
o      x      a.      to
o      £      CO      CO
5      Q      =      S
CO      CO      CO      CO
o      o      o      6
T-      -tt      "Nt      CO
r~—      t—      o      co
(D      tO      CD
CO      CO
CO      o
"Nt      O
oo      oo
•Nt      "Nt
CO CO      >      CO
t-  LO      CO      *      tO
O   (O      O      Tf      lO
SLO      ■Nt      CM      CT>
CD      CO      CD      CD
O O CO t-LO   CD   LO LO
CD
to
"cz
CD
CD
E ■t:
TO
O- o_
CD to
CC c
2^
CO S ^ E co t:
CL TO
£3 o • Cl o Q- < O
CL
<
CD
o
CO
t
CD I—
"55 x
CD
■- to
Q CD
ro J2 E
J£     Q_ O
3 < -C
& -g 2 S 2 -g
S    TO TO
c o_ CD ^  c >•
™    O TO
■a to S o
o  o |=
Z* TO TO S   -5 O-
cd ca
— o_
<
CD
CL' o_
<
<-      ^ >
C?   TO    CO Q CO
■E      I
TO      ^
<C      TO
co      <r
CD      ^" ,
CD      "O -1-
.»-      o t
< a.
CO   JQ CD
°- "S. -a £ < <
5J    CZ i_
.22 cd o CD c75
CO CD CD J£   O) O)
E
CO
O
CD
cr cr c tj
co to —
o
£ o
" £ =
CD 01 C "2
CD -ct o
TO I      
^ _gj  co ,pj cj
s "
> LU
CD   cz JO CL
O    TO   — —
■      w
c      5
o ^ 5      ^>
co 5      co
"    ^    O      CZ
DC      LU
CD oo CD    CL ^ TO   =    CO ^ -C LO
_ g <5 co CD >
CO
CD
 
ca
 
 
 
s
CD      TO      CZ
>- >-
CD      3      >.      o
o      o      s      di
CO      CO      >      CO      CO
O)      IN      ^      o      o
■Nt      CM      LO      CO      LO
O)      CM      LO      O)      CN
"Nt      "Nt      CO      "Nt      "Nt
 
 
 
 
<
o
m
Li= <f
<o      Q>      to
Q.      «      "S.
<      S      <      -2      =
2 o
!5 "> >
 
J3      to      CC      cj      3 ^
.o      '=      to      CD .2
TO      TO      J      >      to "E
2      2      2      >      >- <
< E
CZ CD CO o
cn cz € >
5*0
CO      <=>
CO
LO      O
CO      CO
LO      "nT
 
 
 
 
CD      3
> 3
" LU LO CD
■_    CD      —"
cn ±-      -fc:
c=  o      co
O      2
co co      co
co co      co
CO   CNJ      TT
t—   OO      CM
CL
<
2
CD
co
LO   "Nt      LO
Li o
»      L C
"Sn   .CD TO
CD O ?> CO .tJ
to
TO    ^ O
-t:      °
3      c „
C    |    CD   2   O      O S
■S ^  o  is  to      la t
=   >   -1=   ,9    CD      c ^>
O   CD  CO  ^   C      t L.
O   c? £        §      £ =
»  o  o  ffl £      i°
2 O CO O >      I—
cd
s
<
to
 
 
 
CD > <
co
3 s .i
LU Lo ^
"t£    CD TO
CO CJ)
CO
O 2 CO       to CO CO
CO cS
CD   CD CD
>
CD O
 
 
o o
 
 
■      a)      —1
CO      c      TO i-
d.      f      .2
<      ra      -if 5
!2      5"      to co
co
CO
> CD >• LU   CD TO
CO
t—   LO      *- CD
co to CD CD ^
 
< < -.3 -.2
d> S=! S=!   co cu
co £ £ w w
o
Q- oo
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<B
000000000000000
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
< < < o a o X x x
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooaooooo czcczczczczccczczczczczczczcz o o o o o o o o o o o g o o g o utjt5oc5oouot)uuuooo (DcoiuQiaiaiiDaivajvisviDaia)
COOTCOCOWCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOWCOW
 
co cd co r—
CM      CM   ^   CM   CM      Tl-Or— L0030
cm      "a- •«—
 
co
E E
 
CO
E ~ J?
CO
E
J?
cu g>.>>_>'.>-.>'.>-.>'.>^-><->» E --E -E E E E E E E E E E
,      ,      K0    O    O   JO   JO   JO   JO   JO   JO   JO   JO   JO £j
333 §"§"333333333 £ 222wco222222222co
LO
Tt      ■>!)■
CO      CO      CO      CO      CO      CO      CO CO
CN   CO  CM  t-" CO   CM  CM  CM      Csl" CO  CM  CM   CN   CM* CM
T-"   CM"   1-"   O"   CM"      T-"   T-" CM
>. >, >^ >, >,
E E
.CO CO
 
 
 
CO CO
cm" cm"
cu CO
 
LO
->a-"
CO" CM CM" t-"
s
e -e
^ CL d = 3 CU 2 CO CO
CD CD CD CO  CO CO
 
 
 
CU CU CO CO
  1. §
  2. co
 
E
£ .0
cu
CO
 
 
 
cu
 
cz o cu c
II
CO CO CO CO CO
LLI
cz> o
CO   t—   CO -xt
 
E
CO
cu
-o >
= s <
CO —— "c 10 o Q- —  o „
I CO
 
 
 
 
 
-o CO.
o 5 r O CO ^ co
CO
.cu
LO
<?      CN £
_      CO CO
CO      UJ
m   O      U)
LO   CM      CM
O      t—   LO      O CO
CO   CO CD
 
 
s
2 CD cu
CO
o o
cu >
cz <
o o
j> .CO O UJ CO CO p0, CO
LO CM LO LO LO
-a- CO
O
CO
cz
CD
 
-t:
CO
~ CO
CO   c- r
£ co ~
o
cz>
CO
 
i      s
CO      =
Q_      CU
-o      £
i-      CO
CO      Q_
f      li-
 
 
0
m co
»W      $      co W      ,3
CO
£ t5      2      <= "E      co
co t-      Q      co      _.
■* "*      CO      CO 10      co
^J-CZ>LOCOCDCMOCZ>CZ> IfOLOCO'CfCMCMOO TtTfTtTfCOCOTj-CDN
 
 
 
CU
>      J=
<C      co
4_i      CO
CD      -O
E      5
 
CO      CO      W      y
LO      t-      t-      O
■vT      o      o      o
CO      CM      t—      LO
CO      T
 
 
 
 
CD
5: i
£ ro S O
CO O CO LO CO LO CO
 
 
s
<
.!5      co
£      iZ
CO      CO
o      r~-
CM      -vT
t—      r—
 
 
 
 
O      CO
-—      CZ      c
>      c5      .2
£0      m      W
CO      o
LO      t—      -nI-
|n-      O      T}-
^      m
 
 
 
 
=3
o "o"
CO
CO
.      < &£
O    CZ   <£      CO   CZ 00
co  a>      co cu
E 11      e 11
jj <   ™      ™ ~ co
2 > O      O 00 CD
 
CL
<
CZ CO
E
< cu
 
 
 
 
 
S J2
JU I— _>£ CO   C CO
£ c o.
 
<
o_
cu
CO CO
-cz D.
 
 
 
>
CU CO
ca
o> &
CO D_
> |
CU CU
5 CO (5 fj
<
E
ca      ^
cu >E n
CO CL <
^      5.
jo      O
<      ~
 
 
O 03
% cu
 
t; co O Q_ ca cz
fc cu
°5 _„
 
 
CO CL cz
CO      a>
cu      =
' cz      cz
J=      a>
a.      £
CO
CO      >
cu      ^
i      I
cu      3
o      cu
£      co
— is g
CO o o ca  o X
1 o
< to =
^      ™      2;
o      „      n      - „
C      CZ      X      £ CL
cu      ca      _      I—
a> = —      ■§  Si ^ a>
O Z]
CD c§
OQlCL^Olgc
X 2
2 5 <
03
Bi11 if 51 1
E. S?
co CD
CO co
■<3- D.
CZ   ocS   08   CD    CO T3
S ^ £ £ 3 ■'B
I— I— < CO r— Q-l— Q02z
 
 
 
 
 
 
cl      cz
<      j=
<u      <2
>      5
jzo tz-
 
 
 
 
—      cz
CO      cu
-H.      W
<      -if
■tz-      jo
CO      D_
Jl>      o
CD      £
1|
Q.      S
 
CO   CO   CO   CO   CO   CO   CO   CO   OO   CO   CO   OO   CO   CO   CO   CO   CO   GO   CO   CO   OO   CO   GO   OO   CO   CO   CO GO
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o g o o g g g g g g g g g g ouooucjuuuooIjuuuouoooc^
OO O CO o O.   CD   TJ- CO
Wt7)WCOC7)tV)cy)W(/)C/)WCfllOWWCOW
CD co co o
CN      CD CM
CO
 
< < < <
Q Q Q Q
_c _c _c
<
 
Q Q Ol D-
< < <
O O O
Odd Q_ Q_ Q_ O O O
 
 
 
E E
E E .g ^
cu CO
CD CO
 
■t:
8. .2
 
E
=  a c
=3 CD CO CO
 
>s _>s J>s E E E
-tz o
>, >n. >,>,>,>, >,
CU CD CO CO
EEEEEEEOT_'E
cocccoi-i^cccococacocccaL-ca
itr lt=      O   O ;tr        ;tr it it Ifc it   O ^
ZJ    ZJ    ZJ   .ZJ    §5 ZJ
2 2 2 2 w 2
cu CO
, .Df. E
£ 2 cz
CD CO
CU CO
cu co
 
E
£ o
 
i
S      o-      :
—  cz      cl
CO      ZJ      ,
CO      CO      ,
 
 
 
cu CO
cu CO
E
 
E E
E
CO .CO
 
._ ._ ._ ._
CO    CO CO
 
 
 
CM  O  CN O
 
CU
s
< 2?
S <
to  J —
CD > <
i_ CO CD C CL CO T3
CO
LO   S *=
J3J _ ro c >-
.     CM CO -   <° I-CO CO CO LU O
LO
CO £
""" CO CO
CO CO CO
S g ■ ii T
CD CZ — CD
co S
II
_C   _C   _C .C
CD CO
CO
LO
5-
"1-   LO   N   l- CO
t-      o      o      o
.    CD      -5f      -nT      •>-
CO   LO   CD      CD      CD      'tf
r^.   t—   CD      CO      LO      i—
S
 
cu      t:
cz      o
EL" a5      -S
"a  c      c5
cn >      S
CO      CO
m o      -
o in      ^
CD   CD      t—
CO      s
 
CD CO < "S
cu
s
2 cd
CD
CO ^ CO CO
O £
o
2 =
 
1^1
m l m
            CO       
CD      Q-      CD
Q-CO
X      m      X
CD
CO ^ CN CO
CO
CD ™ LO CM CD CM OO
■ct co ^
2      -o      2
Q   >• Q 31 CO
-—   O   CO   CD   CO   CO   "Nf *—
i— Ln co t-       —    ■ —
 
 
<      CD
.VI      CD
LU      Q
CO      CO
S
<
CO
°-      CD "53
CD      CL X
(0      CO ^
_l      _E Q
CO      CO CO
CD      CD LO
 
o       
CO
1
8 cd
cu
 
o
O -       
3 .£ <2 °-
§ CD
co cu  5 ^ o
LU ^ Z H S I > CO CO LU CO Qj q
N  O      LO  ~ ~"
CO   TJ-   CD   CD LO CM   CM   •»— OOCDr~l^-r— NTfNCOT-COCOCO
 
 
 
to
to g
^1
o
,g      I
S      c5 2
2      I I
to
"J      £- -e
2      CD ij
O      Lt i
cd      <-      o
§3      =      2
03      CD      CD      _^
c                    03
CO      CD      03      Q-
o      o a:
"to      .=
^      s
co      -a
Q_      LU
 
 
 
i      »
CO      (5      CD
"cz      o_      E
CD      <      O
E      CD      X
■c:      o      c
CO      CO      5
CL      LZ      >
<      CD      CO
»      c-      I
£      a>      cu
8      S"      2
J=      To      CO
>      _l      Q-
 
 
o o o
CO
CO
■E "to
 
i_      co
•I      a
53      Q-
co      cu
O      fU
-2      io
<      —I
 
 
 
 
°      i
TZJ      CD
CO
T3      O
.Sis I—      to
£• cu      cu
LZ    >      CD
CD    CD      ^
Q.   CO      CD
 
 
 
to
to S2 "S ■ecu
S g E
—    CO Q.
s> <
CO
Q-      <      —
<      is      ^      ;      jj
"C      CO      <D      CD      LU
O      cr      o      cu      "lz
O      CO      I—      co
—      —      —      co      n
CU      CD      CD       I
X      X      X      cu
CD      CU      CD      ~      ^
Q      Q      Q      UJ      ™
 
 
 
cu E t;
CO      CD
CL      u
<      co
"co      cu
CO      r-
"J      ^
=      c
>      o
 
 
 
 
11
-e      cz
CO      CD
CL      "Cj
,ft   <      U)
J5   l-      CD
CD
aj      CC
o «
CO
•§ o E 1— Q Mi
 
CD
E
 
g 'cz
CD CO
CL
<
CD
CO
CD      CO
2      is
CD "O
55      o-
-      3 r^"
a! -!2      ! _E
u. J2      2 i—
CD
o
CO
cz
CM "to - ZJ O o
 
E      CD D-CO
CD   CD      =
cz   >      to
CU    CD      S
o td      ^
CO   CD      ^
CZ ^      H!
O    CZ      CO
"5) 3      2
■i €      o
 
 
 
 
U)
c:      .
cu      t3
E      g>
■tz-      o
CL      CL
<      CZ
i_      cu
"S      "2
!fl      co
»      CD
O      _CD
O      CO
Q      >-
 
 
 
 
 
„   CD  < CO
< CO CM CM
to  to  to  to to
^Z   _LZ   ^Z   _CZ _CZ
""   " to CO CO
CD    CD    CD    CD CD
o   o "~
-IZ _LZ
o o o o
11
CO CO
TZI   TZ!   T3 T3
CO
■o o o
co  ca  co  co co
ZzJjOOOOO
 
< < < < -E -E x x o o o c_>
oooooooooooo
0_CLO-0-0_CLCLCLa-0-CLCLLLO-LLD-0-0-aLO-0-D-0_0-
oooooooooooooooooooooooo
 
E  E  E  E  E  E  E E
 
E E E E E
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§
I I       E E E E E q *J5 vJ5 45 45 45 o *2 o o 45
£ s = il -H 5 2 § = £ § = = = = =
coco22222co2coco22222
 
to > w £ * S
s
<
 
 
 
O      CO
CO      CO
CD      LO
LO      1*-
r—      00
CO      CO
 
1  r-n CO
CO        Js js
CO
3 3 to
CO o
CO
CO      CO      CO
3      3      iB      _      _
CO      CO      JO      CZ      L      JI
w      w      S5      k      k      So
co      co      co      co      co      ■
CM      O      CO      O      O      m
T—      CD      CD      CD      CD
CO      CO      LO      CO      CO      ^
CO      CO      CO      CNJ      CO      CO
 
5 5
 
§2 <
 
> <
S2 <
cz g
CO cu.
.S U 02 co co
CO <
CO
CO 2
cz
CO
CO
aj      co
■nT LU
— ~ a ti S3      ~E
CO CO
r— ^nI-
CO   CO   CO   -r-   CO      CO
CO
CO CO -Nt CM ■* T— CM
CO      tO      CO      CM      CO
>      cm      r—      o      cd
LU      LO      LO      CM      CD
;      |n»      CM      ■N+      LO
LU      -nT      -nT      -nT
 
 
 
cu
CU CD
o ca to =-
E
-t;
CO
CO
"O    CO   CU   .CO CO
o
CL
—      l_      —   CO   CO 50
CO
— JD CO o
5 O
cu
CO
■o ui 5 5 5
CZ    CO   _CD    cz    CU CD
=J 3
o o
CO CO
CD o CO
CO    to CO
CD CD CO CO
cu cu
CD      CZ
LZ      CD
l-      CO
O      CD
O      -J
<-<<<<
u/   2^   —   —   — —
CO
>
       .cu
ZJ ZJ
o o CO CD
CO      CO
>      >
J-V.      .2>
Z)      ZJ
o      o
CD      CD
2 -p      -p "a "o
CO      J
"o      ZJ
9      0
CO CO CL CL
co ca D_ D.
o      CD
-5
CO      CO
O      0_
£9      co
-r,      IM
^      jo
CO      Q_
jU
CO
 
CO o D. CO
J2 >■
CO "
co .£
CZ ZJ
5". CD
to a
CD £
CO
CO      CU
"E      E
CD      o
1 °
E      in
To -      i
Ol cz      g
CD
< o      o
-S3  -S   CU   >   m 0 >   J  ,5 LL
.2
o
—'    CO    O CO CO   cu CD -CO J£
=      cu      ca
>      S      2
a>      Q      co
<D      r-      £
S      cB      ^
5      o
CD "55
CO CO CD CU
> CO
CO    CD TO
b.ui£llQ.LiOS
 
CD CO
S 3
§ i
co tr
CO CO
^<
11
to E to
CD ^
o ss
CD CD