Office of the City Clerk - Record #: O2014-7884

• Record #: O2014-7884
• Type: Ordinance
• Status: Passed
• Intro date: 9/10/2014
• Current Controlling Legislative Body: Committee on Finance
• Final action: 10/8/2014
• Title: Approval of Amendment No. 3 to redevelopment plan for Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area
• Sponsors: Emanuel, Rahm
• Topic: TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS - Bronzeville T.I.F. - Amendment

Date	Journal Page Number	Action By	Action	Result
10/8/2014	91588	City Council	Passed	Pass
10/6/2014		Committee on Finance	Recommended to Pass	Pass
9/10/2014	86800	City Council	Referred

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR

CITY OF CHICAGO

RAHM EMANUEL

MAYOR

September 10,2014

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

Ladies and Gentlemen:

At the request of the Commissioner of Planning and Development, I transmit herewith ordinance authorizing an amendment to the Bronzeville TIF District.

Your favorable consideration of this ordinance will be appreciated.

 

Mayor

Very truly yours,

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

APPROVING AMENDMENT #3 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE BRONZEVILLE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA

WHEREAS, the City of Chicago (the "City"), by an ordinance adopted by the City Council ofthe City (the "City Council") on November 4, 1998, approved an initial redevelopment plan which was subsequently amended pursuant to an ordinance adopted on July 29, 2003 and further amended on December 7, 2005 (the "Original Plan") for a portion of the City known as the Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area (the "Original Redevelopment Project Area") for the purpose of implementing tax increment allocation financing ("Tax Increment Allocation Financing") pursuant to the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et. seg, as amended (the "Act"); and

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an ordinance on November 4, 1998 designating the Original Redevelopment Project Area as a redevelopment project area pursuant to the Act which ordinance was amended on July 29, 2003 and December 7, 2005; and

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an ordinance on November 4, 1998 adopting Tax Increment Allocation Financing for the Original Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to the Act which ordinance was amended on July 29, 2003 and December 7, 2005; and

WHEREAS, it is desirable and in the best interests of the citizens of the City for the City to encourage development of areas located adjacent to the Original Redevelopment Project Area by expanding the boundaries of the Original Redevelopment Project Area and designating such expanded project area as a redevelopment project area under the Act to be known as the Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area Amendment #3 (the "Expanded Area"); and

WHEREAS, the City desires further to supplement and amend the Original Plan for the Original Redevelopment Project Area to provide for the redevelopment of the Expanded Area; and

WHEREAS, the City has caused to be prepared an eligibility study entitled "Bronzeville Tax Increment Financing Program - Redevelopment Plan and Project Amendment No. 3 -Added Area Eligibility Report" (the "Eligibility Study") of the proposed additional portions ("Added Area") of the Expanded Area, which Eligibility Study confirms the existence within the Added Area of various eligibility factors as set forth in the Act and supports a finding of eligibility of the Added Area for designation as a redevelopment area under the Act; and

WHEREAS, it is desirable and in the best interest of the citizens of the City for the City to implement Tax Increment Allocation Financing pursuant to the Act for the Expanded Area described in Section 2 of this ordinance, to be redeveloped pursuant to a proposed redevelopment plan and project attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Amended Plan"); and

WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission (the "Commission") of the City has heretofore been appointed by the Mayor of the City with the approval of its City Council (the City Council, referred to herein collectively with the Mayor as the "Corporate Authorities") (as

1

codified in Section 2-124 of the City's Municipal Code) pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-4(k) of the Act; and

WHEREAS, the Commission is empowered by the Corporate Authorities to exercise certain powers enumerated in Section 5/11-74.4-4(k) ofthe Act, including the holding of certain public hearings required by the Act; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 5/11-74.4-4 and 5/11-74.4-5 of the Act, the Commission, by authority of the Corporate Authorities, called a public hearing (the "Hearing") on July 8, 2014, concerning approval of the Amended Plan, designation of the Expanded Area as a redevelopment project area pursuant to the Act and adoption of Tax Increment Allocation Financing within the Expanded Area pursuant to the Act; and

WHEREAS, the Amended Plan (including the Eligibility Study attached thereto as an exhibit) was made available for public inspection and review pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-5(a) of the Act beginning May 2, 2014, being a date not less than 10 days prior to the adoption by the Commission of Resolution 14-CDC-18 on May 13, 2014, fixing the time and place for the Hearing, at the offices of the City Clerk and the City's Department of Planning and Development; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-5(a) of the Act, notice of the availability of the Amended Plan (including the Eligibility Study attached thereto as an exhibit) and of how to obtain the same was sent by mail on May 19, 2014, which is within a reasonable time after the adoption by the Commission of Resolution 14-CDC-18, to: (a) all residential addresses that, after a good faith effort, were determined to be (i) located within the Expanded Area, and (ii) located within 750 feet of the boundaries of the Expanded Area (or, if applicable, were determined to be the 750 residential addresses that were closest to the boundaries of the Expanded Area); and (b) organizations and residents that were registered interested parties for such Expanded Area; and

WHEREAS, due notice of the Hearing was given pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-6 of the Act, said notice being given to all taxing districts having taxable property within the Expanded Area and to the Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity of the State of Illinois by certified mail on May 16, 2014, by publication in the Chicago Sun-Times or Chicago Tribune on June 10, 2014, and June 17, 2014, and by certified mail to taxpayers within the Expanded Area on June 10, 2014; and

WHEREAS, a meeting of the joint review board established pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-5(b) of the Act (the "Board") was convened upon the provision of due notice on June 6, 2014, at 10:00 a.m., to review the matters properly coming before the Board and to allow it to provide its advisory recommendation regarding the approval of the Amended Plan, designation of the Expanded Area as a redevelopment project area pursuant to the Act and adoption of Tax Increment Allocation Financing within the Expanded Area, and other matters, if any, properly before it; and

WHEREAS, the Commission has forwarded to the City Council a copy of its Resolution 14-CDC-26, attached hereto as Exhibit B, adopted on July 8, 2014, recommending to the City Council approval of the Amended Plan, among other related matters; and

2

WHEREAS, the Corporate Authorities have reviewed the Amended Plan (including the Eligibility Study attached thereto as an exhibit), testimony from the Hearing, if any, the recommendation of the Board, if any, the recommendation of the Commission and such other matters or studies as the Corporate Authorities have deemed necessary or appropriate to make the findings set forth herein, and are generally informed of the conditions existing in the Expanded Area; now therefore,

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO:

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

hereof.

Section 2. The Expanded Area. The Expanded Area is legally described in Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein. The street location (as near as practicable) for the Expanded Area is described in Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated herein. The map of the Expanded Area is depicted on Exhibit E attached hereto and incorporated herein.

Section 3. Findings. The Corporate Authorities hereby make the following findings as required pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-3(n) of the Act:

1. The Expanded Area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development through investment by private enterprise and would not reasonably be expected to be developed without the adoption of the Amended Plan;
2. The Amended Plan:

1. conforms to the comprehensive plan for the development of the City as a whole; or
2. either (A) conforms to the strategic economic development or redevelopment plan issued by the Chicago Plan Commission, or (B) includes land uses that have been approved by the Chicago Plan Commission;

            c      _ The      Amended Plan      meets all of the requirements of a redevelopment plan as

defined in the Act and, as set forth in the Amended Plan, the estimated date of completion of the projects described therein and retirement of all obligations issued to finance redevelopment project costs is not later than December 31 of the year in which the payment, to the municipal treasurer as provided in subsection (b) of Section 11-74.4-8 of the Act is to be made with respect to ad valorem taxes levied in the twenty-third calendar year after the year in which the ordinance approving the redevelopment project area is adopted, and, as required pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-7 of the Act, no such obligation shall have a maturity date greater than 20 years;

d.  Within the Amended Plan:

(i) as provided in Section 5/11-74.4-3(n)(5) of the Act, the housing impact study: a) includes data on residential unit type, room type, unit occupancy, and racial and ethnic composition of the residents; and b) identifies the number and

3

location of inhabited residential units in the Area that are to be or may be removed, if any, the City's plans for relocation assistance for those residents in the Area whose residences are to be removed, the availability of replacement housing for such residents and the type, location, and cost of the replacement housing, and the type and extent of relocation assistance to be provided;

(ii) as provided in Section 5/11-74.4-3(n)(7) of the Act, there is a statement that households of low-income and very low-income persons living in residential units that are to be removed from the Area 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 under that Act, including the eligibility criteria.

Section 4. Approval of the Amended Plan. The City hereby approves the Amended Plan pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-4 of the Act.

Section 5. Powers of Eminent Domain. In compliance with Section 5/11-74.4-4(c) of the Act and with the Amended Plan, the Corporation Counsel is authorized to negotiate for the acquisition by the City of parcels contained within the Expanded Area. In the event the Corporation Counsel is unable to acquire any of said parcels through negotiation, the Corporation Counsel is authorized to institute eminent domain proceedings to acquire such parcels.  Nothing herein shall be in derogation of any proper authority.

Section 6. Invalidity of Any Section. If any provision of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this ordinance.

Section 7. Supersedes All ordinances, resolutions, motions or orders in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict.

Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage.

4

List of Attachments

Exhibit A: Exhibit B:

Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E:

The Amended Plan

CDC Resolution recommending to City Council approval of the Amended Plan, designation of the Expanded Area and adoption of tax increment allocation financing

Legal description of the Expanded Area Street location of the Expanded Area Map of the Expanded Area

5

EXHIBIT A The Amended Plan SEE ATTACHED

Bronzeville Tax Increment Finance Program Redevelopment Project Area Redevelopment Plan and Project

November 4, 1998 Amendment No. 1 - July 29, 2003 Amendment No. 2 - December 7, 2005

Amendment No. 3 - May 2, 2014

City of Chicago, Illinois

City of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, Mayor

Eligibility Report Prepared by: ERS Enterprises, Inc. 100 North LaSalle Street Suite 1515

Chicago, Illinois 60602

Amendments to the Plan Prepared by: Laube Consulting Group, LLC 200 S. Wacker Dr. Suite 3100

Chicago, Illinois 60606

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project- Amendment No. 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary

Introduction

II.

Redevelopment Project Area and Legal Description

III

Redevelopment Project Area Goals and Objectives

IV.

Blighting Conditions in the Redevelopment Project Area

V.

Bronzeville Redevelopment Plan and Project

Appendix:

• Table 1
• Table 2
• Exhibit 1
• Exhibit 2
• Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report
• Housing Impact Study
• Bronzeville Redevelopment Plan and Project
• Bronzeville Redevelopment Plan and Project Amendment No. 1
• Bronzeville Redevelopment Plan and Project Amendment No. 2

2

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Chicago (the "City") is dedicated to the continued growth and economic development of the City. The City's ability to stimulate growth and development relies on the creation and implementation of government policies that will allow the City to work with the private sector to eliminate blighted areas and ensure sound growth and development of property. Based upon the City's establishment of a redevelopment project area as described herein, it is understood that the City recognizes the necessity of the relationship between continued community growth and public participation. The blighting of communities-Impairs the value of private investment and threatens the growth ofthe community's tax base. Additionally, the City understands the dangers associated with blighting factors and problems arising from blighted conditions Both of these statements are supported by the City's establishment of a redevelopment project area.

The Illinois General Assembly passed the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et. seq.) (the "Act") to address the growing number of blighted areas in many Illinois municipalities. The blighting of communities impairs the value of iprivate investment and threatens the growth of the community's tax base. The Act declares that iri order to 'promote the public health, safety, morals, and welfare, blighting conditions must be eliminated.

therefore, to induce redevelopment pursuant to the Act, the City Qouncil adopted three ordinances on November 4, 1998 approving the Bronzeville Tax, Increment Finance Program Redevelopment Project and Plan (the "Original Plan"), designating the. Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area (the "Redevelopment Project Area") as a 'redevelopment project area", and adopting Tax Increment Allocation Financing for the Redevelopment Project Area. Subsequently, the City amended the Original Plan on July 29, 2003 ("Amendmerit>ip. 1") and on December 7, 2005 ("Amendment No. 2", and together with the Original P)ah and: Amendment No. 1, "the Plan").

The Plan is being amended to extend the boundaries of the Redevelopment Project Area, amend the eligible cost budget, and bring the Plan up to current City ordinance and policy standards. - Additionally-due-to—a-scrivener's -e^^

Numbers ("PINs") 17-27-204-0lO-OO'OO, 17-27-203-018-0000, 17-34-400-005-0000, 17-27-501-006-0000 were inadvertently excluded from the Redevelopment Project Area. These PINS were in the original TIF and inadvertently excluded per a scrivener's error from the legal description used in Amendment No. 2; no other change is needed, as these PINs were in the Original TIF plan Redevelopment Project Area legal description and are part of the original base EAV. The amendments to the Plan are outlined below and follow the format of the Original;Plan.

The Redevelopment Project Area as amended is generally bounded by 25'^h Street to the north, Cottage Grove and Lake Shore Drive on the east, the Dan Ryan Expressway and State Street to the West, and 40^th Street to the South. This area is represented by the following PINs:

3

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

PIN

1. 17-34-123-051-0000
2. 17-34-123-055-0000
3. 17-34-216-043-0000
4. 17-34-216-044-0000
5. 17-34-216-045-0000
6. 17-34-319-019-0000
7. 17-34-402-003-0000
8. 17-34-402-004-0000
9. 17-34-402-032-0000
10. 17-34-402-033-0000
11. 17-34-402-034-0000
12. 17-34-402-035-0000
13. 17-34-402-036-0000
14. 17-34-402-041-0000
15. 17-34-402-061-0000
16. 17-34-402-067-0000
17. 17-34-402r068-0000
18. 17-34-402-069-0000

1.9      17-34-402-070-0000

1. 17-34-402-071-0000
2. 17-34-402-072-0000
3. 17-34^402-073-0000
4. 17-34-402-074-0000
5. 17-34-402-075-0000
6. 17-34-402-076-0000
7. 17-34-402-077-0000
8. 17-34-405-032-0000
9. 17-34-411*011-0000
10. 17-34-412-013-0000
11. 17-34-412-014-0000
12. 17-34-319-003-0000
13. 17-34-319-004-0000
14. 17-34-319-005-0000
15. 17-34-319r006-0000 35-^7=34=319-0-1-2-6000

1. 17-34-319-013-0000
2. 17-34-319-014-0000
3. 17-34-319-015-0000
4. 17-34-319-016-0000
5. 17-34-319-017-0000
6. 17-34-319-018-0000
7. 17-34-319-021-1001
8. 17-34-319-021-1002
9. 17-34-319-021-1003
10. 17-34-319-021-1004

The boundaries ofthe Redevelopment Project Area are shown on Amended Map 1, Boundary Map. The area to be added is hereinafter referred to as the "Added Area."

4

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

I. INTRODUCTION

1^st Paragraph- Delete the second and third sentence and replace it with the following:

The Added Area comprises 45 new PIN numbers. The Redevelopment Project Area is generally bounded by 25^th St. to the north, Cottage Grove and Lake Shore Drive on the east, the Dan Ryan Expressway and State St. to the West, and 40^,h St. to the South, the boundaries of the Redevelopment Project Area are shown on Amended Map 1, Boundary Map.

8^th Paragraph- Add the following sentence at the end:

The Added Area is generally characterized by the fact that it qualifies as a conservation area due to the presence of 23 of 23 buildings (i.e., 100% of the buildings In the Added Area) being 35-years or older, the presence df extensive deterioration, inadequate utilities arid declining equalized assessed value. Please see the accompanying Eligibility Report iri the Appendix; for a full description of the blighting factors present.

1. Area History - No changes
2. Historically Significant Features - No changes
3. Existing Land Uses and Current Conditions

Insert this paragraph after the first full paragraph.

The Added: Area generally consists of retail, institutional, parks, recreation residential and vacant land. The retail sections are generally bounded by 33^rd Place to the n6rth,35* Street to the south, Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive to the west, and Rhodes Avenue to the east The institutional sections are generally bounded by 35^th Street to the south, Rhodes Avenue "to the west, Cottage Grove Avenue to the east, and Browning Avenue and 36^th Street to the south. The residential sections are generally bounded by 37 Street to the north, 2QP Street to the south Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive td the east and Calumet Avenue to the west The vacant land secWhs "are geheTally^

Avenue to the east, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive to the west.

1. Urban Renewal - Slum and Blighted Area - No changes
2. Zoning Characteristics

Insed the following paragraph at the end ofthe section:

The Added Area includes PD 1169, PD 236, and includes land that is zoned RM-5, RT4, and POS-1. Any change to the underlying zoning does not necessitate or warrant a change to the Plan.

5

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

1. REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION

This entire section is deleted and replaced with the following:

The Redevelopment Project Area is located on the south side of the City approximately two miles south of Chicago's Loop. The Redevelopment Project Area, as amended, is comprised of approximately 581.2 acres.

The boundaries of the Redevelopment Project Area are shown on Amended Map 1₍ the boundary map.

The legal description of the Redevelopment Project Area is attached to this Plan as Amended Exhibit 1 - Legal Description.

1. REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

1. General Goals

Insert this bullet point after the 3? bullet point:

• Provide for recreational amenities for neighborhood residents.
• Redevelopment Objectives

Add the following bullet point after the 8^th bullet point:

• Provide for a community centerfor neighborhood residents.
• Design Objectives— No changes
  1. BLIGHTED   AREA   CONDITIONS   EXISTING   IN   THE REDEVLEOPMENT

PROJECT AREA      

This section is being added at the end of the last paragraph.

The Added Area qualifies as a conservation area as characterized by the following:

• Twenty Three (23) of twenty three (23), or 100% of the buildings in the Added Area, are age Thirty Five (35) or greater.
• It exhibits deterioration throughout the Added Area. Deteriorating conditions were recorded on all (100%) ofthe 23 buildings in the Added Area. Buildings with some major or minor defects (e.g., damaged door frames, broken window frames and munnions, dented or damaged metal siding, gutters and downspouts damaged, weathered fascia materials, cracks in masonry walls, spalling masonry surfaces, etc.) were observed in the Added Area. In addition, site improvements like roadways and off-street parking

6

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

areas also evidenced deterioration such as cracking on paved surfaces, potholes, depressions, loose paving materials and weeds protruding through the surface.

• The Added Area exhibits 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 Added Area. Many of the water mains serving the Added Area are deficient in terms of age_; The projected service life of water mains is 100 years. Some sections of water line in the Added Area are mdre^;than 100 years old, while others are only 47 years old. Sanitary sewer data was also reviewed by the Consultant. Many sections of sewer line also exceed 100 years of age. On the whole, the majority of the Added Area is served by sewer lines that exceed their expected service life.
• The'Added Area exhibits declining EAV. The EAV ofthe Added Area has declined in three (3) of the past five (5) years:

V.       BRONZEVILLE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PROJECT

1. General Land Use Plan

Delete first two paragraphs and replace with the following:

The existing land uses for the Redevelopment Project Area are outlined on Amended Map-2. the Amended Land Use Plan, Amended Map 3, identifies the proposed land uses that will be> in effect upon adoption of this Amendment No: 3 to the Plan.

The major categories of land uses include residential, commercial, institutional, industrial, mixed-use, rail, expressways, recreational, and park and open space. These types of land uses reflect the uses allowed under the current zoning regulations as adopted by City Council.

1. Redevelopment Plan and Project - No Changes

C^stimatecTReTIe^

replace with the following:

Redevelopment project costs include the sum total of all reasonable or necessary costs incurred, estimated to be incurred, or incidental to this Plan pursuant to the Act. Such costs may include, without limitation, the following:

1. Costs of studies, 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 costs of marketing sites within the Redevelopment Project Area to prospective businesses, developers and investors;

7

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project- Amendment No. 3

1. 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;
2. Costs of rehabilitation, reconstruction or repair or remodeling of existing public or private buildings, fixtures, and leasehold improvements; and the costs 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 tp a different use requiring private investment; including any direct or indirect costs relating to Green Globes or LEED certified construction elements or construction elements with an equivalent certification;
3. 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)oftheAct; '

0 Costs of job training and retraining projects including the cost of welfare to work programs implemented by businesses located within the Redevelopment Project Area;

Financing costs including, but.not limited to, all necessary and incidental expenses of the City related to the Issuance of obligations and which may include, payment of interest on any obligations issued thereunder including Interest accruing during the estimated'fjeriod of construction of any redevelopment project for which such City obligations are issued and for a period not exceeding 36 months following completion and including reasonable reserves related thereto;

1. 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 ofthe Redevelopment Plan.
2. An elementary, secondary, or unit school district's increased costs attributable to assisted housing units will be reimbursed as provided in the Act;

i)      Relocation costs to the extent that the City determines that relocation costs shall he 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);

j)  Payment in lieu of taxes, as defined in the Act;

k) 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 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

8

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

employed or to be employed by employers located in the Redevelopment 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 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 10-22.20a and 10-23.3a of the School Code, 105 ILCS 5/10-22.20a and 5/10-23.3a;

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

1. such: costs are to be paid directly from the special tax allocation fund established pursuant to the Act;
2. such payments in any one year may not exceed 30 percent of the annual interest costs incurred by the redeveloper with regard to the development project during that year;
3. 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;
4. the total of such interest payments paid pursuant to the Act may not exceed 30 percent ofthe 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

5. up to 75 percent 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.

m) Instead of the eligible costs provided for in (m) 2, 4 and 5 above, the City may pay up to 50 percent of the cost of construction, renovation and/or rehabilitation of all low- 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- and very low-income households, only the low- and very low-income units shall be eligible for benefits under the Act;

n) The costs of daycare services for children of employees from low-income families working for businesses located within the Redevelopment Project Area and all or a

9

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

portion of the cost of operation of day care centers established by Redevelopment Project Area businesses to serve employees from low-income families working in businesses located in the Redevelopment Project Area. For the purposes of this paragraph, 'low-income families' means families whose annual income does not exceed 80 percent of the City, county, or regional median income as determined from time to time by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

o) Unless explicitly provided in the Act, the cost of construction of new privately-owned buildings shall not be an eligible redevelopment project cost;

p) The City required that developers receiving TIF assistance for market rate, housing meet the affordability criteria established by the City's Department of Planning and Development.

To undertake these activities, redevelopment project costs need to be incurred. Redevelopment project costs" (herein after referred tp as the "Redevelopment Project Costs") mean the sum total of all reasonable or necessary costs so incurred or estimated to be incurred, and any such costs incidental to this Plan' pursuant to the Act.

If a special service area has been established pursuant to the Special Service Area Tax Act, 35 ILCS 235/0.01 et seq,, then any tax Increment revenues derived from the tax imposed pursuant to the Special Service Area Tax Act may be used within the Redevelopment Project Area for the purposes permitted by the Special Service Area Tax Act as well as the purposes permitted by the Act.

Amended Table 1 represents the eligible project costs as defined in the Act. This total jn budget represents the upper limit on the potential costs that may be reimbursed or expended ;over the 23-year life of the Redevelopment Project Area. These funds are subject to the number of projects, the amount of TIF revenues generated, and the City's willingness to fund proposed projects on a project by project basis.

10

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

Amended Table 1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs

Eligible Activities: Cost

1. Property Assembly including Acquisition, Site Prep and $15,000,000 Demolition, Environmental Remediation

1. Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, Fixtures and $45,000,000 Leasehold Improvements, Affordable Housing

Construction and Rehabilitation Costs

1. Public Works & Improvements, including streets and $27,000,000 utilities, parks and open space, public facilities (schools &

other public facilities) (Note 1 below)

1. Job Training, Retraining, Welfare-to-Work $5,000,000

1. Financing costs      $5,000,000
2. Day Care Services      $1,000,000
3. Relocation costs      ' "      $1,000,000
4. Interest subsidy      $3,000,000

Total Eligible Redevelopment Project Costs (Notes 2-5 below) $104,000,000 Notes for Exhibit I - Redevelopment Project Costs

1. This category may also include paying for or reimbursing: (i) an elementary, secpndary or unit school district's increased costs attributed to assisted housing units, and (if) capital costs of taxing districts impacted by the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project Area. As permitted by the Act, to the extent the City by written agreement accepts;anT approve

taxing district's capital costs resulting from a redevelopment project necessarily incurred or to be incurred within a taxing district in furtherance of the objectives of the Plan.

1. 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 additional financing costs are subject to prevailing market conditions and are in addition to Total Redevelopment Project Costs. Adjustments to the estimated line item costs in Exhibit I are anticipated, and may be made by the City without further amendment to this Plan to the extent permitted by the Act. Each individual project cost will be re-evaluated in light of the projected private development and resulting incremental tax revenues as it is considered for public financing under the provisions of the Act. The totals of the line items set forth above are not intended to place a limit on the described expenditures. Adjustments may be made in line items

11

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project- Amendment No. 3

within the total, either increasing or decreasing line item costs as a result of changed redevelopment costs and needs.

1. The amount of the Total Redevelopment Costs that can be incurred in the Redevelopment Project Area will be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated from the Redevelopment Project Area only by a public right-of-way, that are permitted under the Act to be paid, and are paid, from incremental property taxes generated in the Redevelopment Project Area, but will not be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in the Redevelopment Project Area which are paid from incremental property taxes generated in contiguous redevelopment project areas dr those separated from the Redevelopment Project Area only by a public right-bfrway.
2. All costs are shown in 2014 dollars and may be increased by five percent (5.%) after adjusting for inflation reflected in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI") for All Urban Consumers for All Items fdr-the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI CMSA, published by the U;S. Department of Labor or a similar index acceptable to the City.
3. Additional funding from other sources such as federal, state, county, or locai grant funds may be utilized to supplemeritthe City's ability to finance Redevelopment Project Costs identified above.

C. Sources of Funds to' Pay Redevelopment Costs -This section is deleted and replaced

with the following:      , ■

Funds necessary to pay fpr 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 state and federal grants, Investment income, private financing and other legally permissible funds the City may deem appropriate. The City may incur Redevelopment Project Costs which are paid from funds of the City other than incremental taxes, and the City.may then be reimbursed for such costs from incremental taxes. Also, the CTfy~may~peT^

available by private sector developers. Additionally, the City may utilize revenues, other tfjan 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 Redevelopment 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 Redevelopment 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 Redevelopment 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

12

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

Redevelopment Project Area, shall riot at any time exceed the total Redevelopment Project Costs described in this Redevelopment Plan.

The Redevelopment 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 Redevelopment Project Area, the City may determine that it is in the best interests ofthe City and the furtherance ofthe purposes of the Plan that net revenues from the Redevelopment Project Area be made available to support arty such redevelopment project areas, and vice versa. The City therefore proposes to utilize net incremental revenues received from, the Redevelopment 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 Redevelopment Project Area and such areas. The amount of revenue from the Redevelopment Project Area so made available, when added to all amounts used to pay eligible Redevelopment Project Costs within the Redevelopment Project Area or other areas as described in Amended Exhibit 1, shall not at any time exceed the total Redevelopment Project Costs described In this Plan. _:

D. Issuance of Obligations - No changes

F.      Most Recent Equalized Assessed Value of Properties in the Redevelopment Project

Area -This section is being deleted and replaced with the following:

The certified Base EAV for the existing Redevelopment Project Area is $46,166,304 based on the 1997 EAVs. The most current (2012) EAV ofthe parcels being added to the TIF district is. $14,781,921. Therefore, subject to the verification ofthe Cook County Clerk, the initial EAV of the overal Redevelopment Project Area, as expanded, is estimated to be $60,948,225.

G.      Anticipated Equalized Assessed; Valuation - This section is being deleted and replaced

with the following:      ' "

Based upon the expansion dfTfie Boundaries ot this KedeVe1opmenrProJe^Are^rnumeroti& blighting factors will be eliminated and growth and development of the Redevelopment Project Area will occur in accordance with the Redevelopment Agreement(s) between the City and businesses in the Redevelopment Project Area and other interested parties. It is estimated that the total EAV of the real property following completion of all phases of the redevelopment project in the Redevelopment Project Area will be approximately $120 - $125 million.

H.      Lack of Growth and Development Through Investment by Private Enterprise - No

Changes

I.      Financial Impact of the Redevelopment Project -The following paragraph is added to the

end ofthe section:

The Act requires an assessment of any financial impact of the Redevelopment Project Area on, or any increased demand for services from, any taxing district affected by the Redevelopment

13

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

Plan and a description of any program to address such financial impacts or increased demand. The City intends to monitor development in the Redevelopment 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.

J. Demand on Taxing District Services - No changes

K. Program to Address Financial and: Service Impacts - No Changes

L. Provisions for Amending the Plan - No Changes

M. Fair Employment Practices, Affirmative Action Plan and Prevailing Wage Agreement

This section is to be deleted and replaced with ihe following:

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 Plan, including, but not limited to hiring, training, transfer, promotion, discipline, fringe benefits, salary, employment working conditions, termination, etc., without regard to race, color, sex, age, religion, disability, national origin; ancestryf sexual orientation, marital status, parental status, military discharge status, source of income, or housing status.
2. Redevelopers must meet the City'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.

D) Redevelopers will meet City standards for any applicable prevailing wage rate as ascertained by the Illinois Department of Labor to all project employees.

N. Phasing and Scheduling of Redevelopment - No Changes

14

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

APPENDIX

15

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project- Amendment No. 3

Table 1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs This Table is to be deleted and replaced with the following:

Amended Table 1 - Estimated Redevelopment Project Costs Eligible Activities Cost

1. Analysis, Administration, Studies, Surveys, Legal,      $2,000,000
2. Marketing, etc.
3. Property Assembly including Acquisition, Site Prep      $15,000,000

and Demolition, Environmental Remediation

1. Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings,: Fixtures and      $45,000,000

Leasehold Improvements, Affordable Housing

Construction and Rehabilitation Costs

1. Public Works ^Improvements, including streets      $27,000,000

and utilities, parks and open space, public facilities

(schools & other public facilities) (Note 1 below)

1. Job Training, Retraining, Welfare-td-Work      $5,000,000
2. Financing costs                    ' "      $5,000,000
3. Day Care Services      $1,000,000
4. Relocation costs      $1,000,000
5. Interest subsidy      . •       $3,000,000

... Total Eligible Redevelopment Proiect Costs (Notes 2-       $104,000,000

"• "■ "'5 below)       

Notes for Exhibit I - Redevelopment Project Costs

1. 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 of 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 of the objectives of the Plan.
2. 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 additional financing costs are subject to prevailing market conditions and are in

16

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

Amendment No. 3

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project -

addition to Total Redevelopment Project Costs. Adjustments to the estimated line item costs in Exhibit I are anticipated, and may be made by the City without further amendment to this Plan to the extent permitted by the Act. Each individual project cost will be reevaluated in light of the projected private development and resulting incremental tax revenues as it is considered for public financing under the provisions of the Act. The totals of the line items set forth above are notintended to place a limit on the described expenditures. Adjustments may be made in line items within the total, either increasing dr decreasing line item costs as a result of changed redevelopment costs and needs.

1. The amount of the Total Redevelopment Costs that can be incurred in the Redevelopment Project Area will be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in: contiguous redevelopment-project areas, or those separated from the Redevelopment Project Area only by a public right-of-way, that are permitted under the Act to be paid, and are paid, from incremental property taxes generated in the Redevelopment Project Area, but will not be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in the Redevelopment Project Area which are paid from incremental property taxes generated In contiguous redevelopment project areas or those separated from the Redevelopment Project Area only by a public right-of-way.
2. All costs are shovyn in 2014 dollars and may be increased by five percent (5%) after adjusting for Inflation reflected in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI") for All Urban Consumers for All Items for the Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI CMSA, published by the U.S. Department of Labor or a similar Index acceptable to the City.
3. 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.

17

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project- Amendment No. 3

Table 2

The following PINs and 2012 Equalized Assessed Values are to be added to the list.

1. 17-34-123-051-0000 $0
2. 17-34-123-055-0000.      . $0
3. 17-34-216-043-0000 $308,330
4. 17-34-216-044-0000 $140,939
5. 17-34-216-045-0000 $11,625,225
6. 17-34-319-019-0000 $0
7. 17-34-402-003-0000 $0
8. 17-34-462-604-0060 $0
9. 17-34-402-032-0000 $0

1. 17-34-40'2r033-0000 $0
2. 17-34-402-034-0000 $0
3. 17-34-402-035-000.0 $0
4. 17-34-402-036-0006' $0
5. 17-34-402-041-0000 $0
6. 17-34-402-061-0000 $0
7. 17-34-402-067-0000 $0
8. 17-34^402-068-0000 $0
9. 17^34-402-069-0000 $0
10. 17-34^462-070-OOdO $0
11. 17-34-462-671-6000 $0
12. 17-34-402-072-0600 $6
13. 17-34-462-673^6666 $0
14. 17-34-402-674-6066' $0
15. 17-34-462-075-0006 $0
16. 17-34-402r076-60Q0 $0
17. 17-34-402-077-0606 $6
18. 17-34-465-032-0066 $6
19. 17-34-411-011-0000 $0
20. 17-34-412-013-0000 $0
21. 17-34-412-014-0000 $0
22. 17-34-319-003-0000 $65,850

      32^I-14_-119^0j4-_00P0 $75,476       

1. 17-34-319-005-0000.      < $81,721      " ^—
2. 17-34-319-006-0000 $869
3. 17-34-319-012-0000 $51,563
4. 17-34-319-013-0000 $14,926
5. 17-34-319-014-0000 $14,926
6. 17-34-319-015-0000 $66,737
7. 17-34-319-016-0000 $123,673
8. 17-34-319-017-0000 $2,069,071
9. 17-34-319-018-0000 $0
10. 17-34-319-021-1001 $35,151
11. 17-34-319-021-1002      . $30,019
12. 17-34-319-021-1003' $40,128
13. 17-34-319-021-1004      $37,317

Total 14,781,921

Certified Base EAV of Existing Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area - $46,166,304.

18

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

Amended Exhibit 1 - Amended Legal Description Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area

That part of the North Half of Section 3 and 4, Township 38 North, Range 14, East ofthe Third Principal Meridian, Section 27, 28, 33 and 34, Township 39 North, Range 14, East of the third Principal Meridian, described as follows:

Beginning at the intersection of the €ast line of Wentworth Avenue and the North line of Pershing Road; Thence East along the North line of Pershing Road to the West line' of State Street; Thence North along this West line of State Street to the South line of 27^,h Street; Thence West along the South line of 27^th Street to the West line of Lot 75 in W.H. Adams Subdivision of part ofthe East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 28, Township 39 North, Range 14, as extended South;, Thence North along said extended line, being the West line of said Lot 75, Lot 40 and 9 in said W.H. Adams'Subdivision and its extension North to the North line of 26^th Street; Thence West along said North line of 26^th Street to the West line of a vacated 10 foot Wide alley adjoining Lot 24 in Block 3 of G.W. Gerrish's Subdivision of part of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 28, Township 39 North, Range 14; Thence North along the West line of said vacated TO foot Wide alley* fd the Westerly extension ofthe North Line of Lot 19 in said Block 3 of G.W. Gerrish's Subdivision;-Thence East along said Westerly extension of the North Line of Lot 19 to the centerline of said vacated 10 foot wide alley; Thence North along said centerline to the North line of 25* Street; Thence Easterly along the North line of 25^th Street to the East line of Lot 1 extended North in.Gardner's Subdivision ofthe West Half of Block 60, in Canal Trustee's Subdivision of the West Half ofthe Northwest Quarter of Section 27, Township 39 North, Range 14;, Thence South along said exterided line to the North line of 26^th Street; Thence Southerly io the Northwest corner of Lot 28 in Assessor's Division recorded as document 20877; Thence South along the East line of an alley to a point on the North line of Lot 2 in County Clerks Division recorded as document 176695; Thence West along the North line of Lots 2 through 5 in said Assessors Division to the West line of said Lot 5; Thence southwest and south along the West' line of said Lot 5 and its extension South to the North line of 28^th Street; Thence West along the North line of 28^th Street to the East line of Wabash Avenue; Thence South along East'lirie of Wabash Avenue to the South line of 29"¹ Street; Thence West WrigThTWu^

Assessor's Division of the West ^yA of Block 93 in Canal Trustees' Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of the West 22 feet of Lot 6 to the centerline of a 16 foot vacated: alley lying. first south of 29^th Street; Thence East along said centerline to the West line of the East 35 feet of Lot 42 In Block 1 of Assessor's Division aforesaid extended north; Thence South along the West line of the East 35 feet of Lot 42 and of Lots 36 through 41 to the South line of Lot 36; Thence West to the West line of the East 36 feet of Lot 35; Thence South along the West line of the East 36 feet of Lot 35 and of Lots 30 through 34 to the South line of Lot 30, said south line also being the North line of Lot 32 in Aaron Gibbs' Subdivision; Thence continuing South along the West line of the East 36 feet of said Lot 32 to the North line of Lot 31; Thence East to the West line of the East 35 feet of said Lot 31; Thence South along the West line of the East 35 feet of said Lot 31 to the North line of Lot 30; Thence East to the West line of the East 34 feet of said Lot 30; Thence South along the West line of the East 34 feet of said Lot 30 to the North line of Lot 29; Thence East to the West line of the East 33 feet of said Lot 29; Thence South along the West line of the East 33 feet of'said Lot 29 to the North line of Lot 28; Thence East to the

19

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

Amendment No. 3

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project -

West line of the East 32 feet of said Lot 28; Thence South along the West line of the East 32 feet of said Lot 28 to the North line of Lot 27; Thence East to the West line of the East 31 feet of said Lot 27; Thence South along the West line of the East 31 feet of said Lot 27 to the North line of Lot 26; Thence East to the West line of the East 30 feet of said Lot 26; Thence South along the West line of the East 30 feet of said Lot 26 to the North line of Lot 25; Thence East to the West line of the East 29 feet of said Lot 25; Thence South along the West line of the East 29 feet of said Lot 25 to the South line of said Lot 25 also being the North line of Lot 12 in Weston's Subdivision; Thence East to the West line of the East 28 feet of said Lot 12; Thence South along the West line of the East 28 feet of said Lot 12 to the North line of Lot 11; Thence East to the West line ofthe East 27 feet of said Loll 1; Thence South along the West line ofthe East 27 feet of said Lot 11 to the North line of Lot 10; Thence East to the West line of the East 26 feet of said Lot 10; Thence South along the West line of the East 26 feet of said Lot 10 to the North line of Lot 9; Thence East to the West line'of the East 25 feet of said Lot 9; Thence South along the West line of the East 25 feet of said Lot 9 to the South line of Lot 9 also being the North Una of Lot 4 in Assessor's Division of Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 in Weston and Gibbs' Subdivision; Thence East to the East line of the. West 4 'feet of said Lot 4; Thence South along the East line ofthe West 4 feet of said Lot 4 to the North line of SO⁰¹ Street;. Thence South to the Northeast corner of Lot 65 ih R.S. Thomas' Subdivision of'Block'99 in Canal trustees Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of said Lqt'65, its extension to the Northeast corner of Lot 70 and the East line of Lot 70 to a point '70.6 feet North of 31^rt Street; Thence West 4.0 feet; Thence South parallel with the East line of Lot 70 to the North line of 31* Street; Thence East along the North line of 31^st Street: to the centerline of vacated. Indiana Avenue; Thence North along the centerline of vacated Indiana Avenue to the North line The South 50 Feet of 29* Street; Thence East along the North line of The South-50 Feet of 29*' Street to the West line of Prairie Avenue; Thence North along the West Jine of Prairie Aventie to the South line of 26* Street; Thence East alohg the South line of 26* Street to the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive; Thence North along the West line of Dr, Martin Luther King Drive to the North line of 25* Street as extended West; Thence East along said extended line and the North line of 25* Street to the Easterly line of Lake Park Avenue; thence continuing Easterly along the Easterly extension of the North line of 25* Street to the Westerly line of Lake Shore Drive; thence Southerly along the Easterlyfine of Lake Shore Drive to the North line of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 39 North, Range 14; Thence continuing Southerly along the West line of Lake Shore Drive to the -South Ma of Section 27_r said line also being the Easterly extension of the centerline of 31^sl Street; Thence West along the centerline of 31*' Street to the West nhe 6TTorT31n Chfcago Land Clearance Commission No. 2 recorded as document 17511645 as extended South; Thence North along said line to the South line of 30* Street; Thence West to the West line of Vernon Avenue; thence North along the West iirie of Vernon Avenue to the North line of 29* Place; Thence East to the center line of Cottage Grove Avenue; Thence North along the center line of Cottage Grove Avenue to the South line of 29* Street; Thence West along the South line of 29* Street to the West line of Vernon Avenue; Thence North and Northeast along the West line of Vernon Avenue to the West line of Ellis Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Ellis Avenue to the South line of 26* Street; Thence West along the South line of 26* Street to the East line of Dr. Martin Luther Ling Drive; Thence South along the East line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive to the intersection with the South line of 31^s1 Street as extended East; Thence West along the South line of 31^s1 Street to the Northeast corner of Lot 2 in Block 2 in Loomis and Laflin's Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of Lots 2, 3, 6 and 7 to a point 17.0 feet North of the Southeast corner of Lot 7 in Block 2 in Loomis and Laflin's Subdivision; Thence West parallel with the South line of Lot 7 in Loomis and Laflin's Subdivision and its extension to

20

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

a point on the West line Giles Avenue; Thence South along the West line of Giles Avenue to the Southeast corner of Lot 4 in C. Cleaver's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of said Lot 4 to the Southwest corner of Lot 4 in C. Cleaver's Subdivision; Thence North along the West line of said Lot 4 to a point of intersection with the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot 1 in Haywood's Subdivision as extended East; Thence West along said extended line and the South line of Lots 1 through 5 in Haywood's Subdivision to the East line of Prairie Avenue; Thence West to the Southeast corner of Lot' 6 in Haywood's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of Lots 6 through 10 and its extension to the Southeast corner of Lot 11 in Haywood's Subdivision; Thence South along the Southerly extension of the East line of said Lot 11 to the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot 16 in Haywood's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of said Lot 16 and its extension West to the East line of Indiana Avenue; Thence South along the East line of Indiana Avenue to the South line of 32^nd Street; Thence West along the South line of 32^nd Street to the West line of Michigan Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Michigan Avenue to the Southeast corner of Lot 8 in Block 2 In C.H Walker's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of said Lot 8 in Block 2 in C.H. Walker Subdivision and its extension West to the Southwest corner of Lot 7 in Block 2 in C.H Walker's Subdivision being the East line of vacated Wabash; Avenue; Thence South along the East line of vacated Wabash Avenue being the West line of Block 2 in C.H. Walker's Subdivision to the South line of vacated 32^nd Street; Thence East along the South line of vacated 32"^d Street to the Northwest corner of Lot 46 lh Block 2 in J. Wentworth's Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of Wabash Avenue to the Southwest corner of Lot 1 in J. S. Barnes' Subdivision; Thence East along the South line of said. Lot 1 and its extension East to the West line of a vacated 20.0 foot wide alley; Thence North along said centerline. of said vacated 20.0 foot alley to the centerline of 34* Street; Thence East tb the East line of Michigan Avenue; Thence South along the East line of Michigan Avenue to the Northwest .corner of Lot 36 in Block 7 in J. Wentworth's Subdivision; Thence East along the North line of said Lot 30 and Its extension East to the East line of a 20.0 foot wide alley, being the Northwest corner of Lot 19 in Block 7 in J. Wentworth's Subdivision; Thence South along the East line Of said alley to the Southwest corner of Lot 20 in Block 7 in J. Wentworth's Subdivision; Therjce East aldrig the South line of said Lot 20 and its extension East to the East line of Indiana Avenue; Thence North along the East line of Indiana Avenue to the Northwest corner of Lot 39 in Block: 1 of Harriet Farlin's Subdivision; Thence East along the North line of said Lot 39 and its extension East to the East line of an 18.0 foot wide alley in said Block 1; Thence South along the East line of said alley to the Southwest comer of Lot 15 in

Block 1 in Harriet Farlin's Subdivision; .Thence fast aJonglhe" S6Ifth^_lineT)T^5rd^ri51rrBlock      

1 to the West line of Prairie AVenue; Thence North along the West line of Prairie Avenue to the North line of the South half of Lot 7 in Block 1 in Dyer and Davisson's Subdivision as extended West; Thence East along said extended line to the West line of an 18.0 foot alley; Thence South along the West line of said alley to the South line of said Lot 7; Thence East along the South line of said Lot 7 and its extension West to the West line of Giles Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Giles Avenue to the South line of a vacated 16.0 foot alley in Block 2 in Dyer and Davisson's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of said alley, to the East line of an 18.0 fool alley in said Block 2; Thence South along the East line of said alley to the Westerly extension of the North line of the South 3 feet of Lot 1 in Nellie C. Dodson's Subdivision extended East; Thence West along said extended line to the West line of Prairie Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Prairie Avenue to a point 85.0 feet South of the south line of 33^rd Street; Thence West parallel with 33^rd Street 124.62 feet to the East line of 16.0 foot alley; Thence North along the East line of said alley to the South line of 33^rd Street; Thence East along the South line of 33^rd Street to the West line of 14.0 foot alley, being the Northeast corner

21

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

of Lot 1 in Fuller, Frost and Cobb's Subdivision; Thence South along the West line of said alley to the North line of Lot 15 in Francis J. Young's Subdivision extended West; Thence East along the North line of said Lot 15 to the West line of Calumet Avenue; Thence South along the West line of Calumet Avenue to the North line of Lot 23 in Fowler's Subdivision extended West; Thence East along said extended line and North line of Lots 23 to 19 in said Fowler's Subdivision and it's extension East to.the East line of a 16.0 foot alley; Thence North along said East line of the public alley to the South line of the 66 foot wide right of way of 33^rd Street; Thence East along said South right of way line of 33^rd Street to the West right of way line of Martin Luther King Drive; Thence South along the West right of way line of Martin Luther King Drive to a point of intersection with the Westerly extension of the North right of way line of 33^R-Place; Thence East along the North right of way fine of 33^Rb Place to a point of Intersection with the Northerly extension of the East right of way line of Rhodes Avenue; Thence South along the East right of way line of Rhodes Avenue to the North right of way line of 35™ Street; Thence East along the North right of way line of .35™ Street to the East right of way line of Cottage Grove Avenue; Thence Southeasterly along the East, right of way line of Cottage Grove Avenue to a point of intersection with the Northeasterly, extension of a line being 300 feet Northwesterly of the center line of vacated 36^th Street; thence Southwesterly along said extension line tb a point being 150 feet Westerly of the West line of Cottage Grove Avenue; Thence Southeasterly on a line being parallel with the West-right of way line of Cottage Grove Avenue to the center line of vacated 36™ Street; Thence Southwesterly along the center line of vacated 36™ Street to an angle point; Thence Westerly along the center line of vacated 36™ Street to the Westerly right of way line of Vincennes Avenue; Thence Northerly aidng the Westerly right of way line of Vincennes Avenue to the South, right of way line of.Browning Avenue; Thence West along the South right of way line of Browning Avenue to the West right of way line of Rhodes Avenue; Thence North along the West right of wijy line of Rhodes Avenue to the South right of way line of 35™ Street; Thence West.along trie South right of way line of 35™ Street to the center line of a 16.0 foot alley extended North said .center line being 132.0 feet East of the East line of .Dr. Martin Luther King Drive; Thence south along the center line of the 16.0 foot alley to the Easterly extension ofthe South line'of Lot 1 in Loomis' Resubdivision of Lots 1 and 4 in Block 1 of Eliis' West Addition to Chicago in the SE Vi of Section 34 aforesaid; Thence West along the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot t in Loomis' Resubdivision to the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive; Thence North along the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive to a point 120.0 feet South of the South line of 35^th Street; Thence West parallel with 35^th Street to 4he-E«st-line-Qf^^6T&-f0Ot-^lleyT^

Thence South along the East line of said alley to the North line of Lot 2 in D. Harry Hammer's Subdivision; Thence West along the North line of said Lot 2 to the East line of Lot 24 in W. D. Bishopp's Subdivision; Thence South along the east line of said Lot 24 to the North line of 37* Street; Thence East along the North line of 37^th Street to The East right of way line of Rhodes Avenue; Thence South along the East right of way line of Rhodes Avenue to the North right of way line of Pershjng Road; Thence West along the North line of Pershing Avenue to the East line of an alley extended North, said line being the West line of Lot 17 in Block 1 in Bowen and Smith's Subdivision; Thence South along the east line of said alley to the North line of Oakwood Boulevard; Thence East along the North line of Oakwood Boulevard to the Southeast corner of Lot 1 in Subdivision of Lot 32 in Block 1 in Bowen and Smith's Subdivision of the Northeast % of said Section 3; Thence South along the Southerly extension of said Lot 1 a distance of 25 feet; Thence West along a line being 25 feet South of and parallel with the North line of Oakwood Boulevard to the Northerly extension ofthe West line of Lot 16 in Bowen & Smith's Subdivision; Thence South to the Northeast corner of Lot 16 in Bowen & Smith's Subdivision; Thence South

22

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

along the East line of Lots 16, 17, and 18 in Bowen & Smith's Subdivision to the South line of Lot 18 in Block 2 in Bowen and Smith's Subdivision aforesaid; Thence West along said South line to the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive; Thence North along the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive to the Southeast corner of Lot 1 in Wallace R. Martin's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of Lots 1 through 3 in Wallace R. Martin's Subdivision to the East line of a 16.0 foot alley; Thence North along the East line of said 16.0 foot alley to the South line of Lot 66 in Circuit Court Partition per document 1225139 extended East; Thence West along the South line of Lots 66 through 70 in Circuit Court Partition and its extension West to the West line of Calumet Avenue;. Thence West along the North line of a 16.0 foot alley to.tbe East line of Prairie Avenue; Thence South alorig the East line of Prairie Avenue to the South line of Lot 3 in Springer's Subdivision extended East; Thence West a|ong said extended line and South line of said Lot 3 to the Southwest corner of Lot 3; Thence North along the West line of Lot 3 to the Southeast corner of Lot 4 In Springers Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of Lots 4 through 7 in Springer's Subdivision to the East line of Indiana Avenue; Thence South along the East line of Indiana Avenue to the North line of 40* Street; Thence West along the North line of 40* Street and its extension West/to the centerline line of State Street; Thence South along the centerline of State Street to_; the South line of 40^th Street; Thence West along the South line of 40* Street to the East line of Block 4 in Pryor's Subdivision; Thence North along said East line to the .North line of the LLS. Yards Railroad Right of Way running through said Block 4 in Pryor's Subdivision;. Thehce West along said North line to the East line of Wentworth Avenue; Thence North along East line of Wentworth Avenue to the place of beginning, all in Cook County, Illinois.

23

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

Exhibit 2 - Map Legend

These maps are to be deleted and replaced with the following: I

I

• Amended Map 1-Amended-Redevelopment Project Boundary j
• Amended Map 2 - Amended Land Uses

i

• Amended Map 3 - Amended Proposed Land Uses J
• Amended Map 4 - Amended Map with Schools, Parks and Other Public Facilities j

i

24

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

 

 

Map 1

Redevelopment Project Area Boundary Amendment No. 3

Amendment to Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois

Er33RD-BLVD

 

tO K-Ci      llW, Sst% IJIJ • 0*«(e Doit K*rt

Map 2

Land Uses Amendment No. 3

Amendment to Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois

 

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project- Amendment No. 3 Exhibit 3 - Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report

Laube Consulting Group, LLC 25

Bronzeville Tax Increment Finance Program

Redevelopment Plan and Project Amendment No. 3

Added Area Eligibility Report

City of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, Mayor

May 2, 2014

Page 1

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction      3
2. Background Information      4

1. 1. The Location and Size of the Added Area      4
   2. Basis for Redevelopment      5
2. Qualification of the Added Area      6

1. Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act      6
2. Survey, Analysis and Distribution of Eligibility Factors      9
3. Evaluation Procedure      10
4. Investigation and Analysis of Factors      10
5. Eligibility Factors - Improved Added Area      13
6. Conclusion of Investigation of Eligibility Factors for the Improved      20
7. Portion of the Added Area
8. Analysis of Undeveloped or Vacant Property      20

H.      Conclusion of Investigation of Eligibility Factors for the Vacant

Portion of the Added Area      24

1. Summary and Conclusions      25

EXHIBITS

Eligibility Report Exhibit A, Added Area Boundaries. Eligibility Report Exhibit B, Existing Land Uses, Eligibility Report Exhibit C, Existing Conditions Map C

Page 2

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

I. Introduction

On November 4, 1998 the City Council of the City of Chicago (the "City") adopted ordinances approving the Bronzeville Tax Increment Finance Redevelopment Plan and Project. That Plan was Amended July 29, 2003 and amended most recently by an ordinance adopted on December 7, 2005 (the "Original Plan") and designating the Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area (the "Redevelopment Project Area"). In an effort to reenergize economic development activity within the larger community,, the City of Chicago proposed an amendment to the Bronzeville TIF to expand the boundaries.

Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises ("the Consultant") has been engaged to determine whether approximately 68.7 acres of land located on the south side of the City and adjacent to the Bronzeville TIF qualifies for designation as redevelopment project area based on findings for a "conservation area," and/or a "blighted area" within the requirements set forth in the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (the "Act"). The Act is found in Illinois Compiled Statutes* Chapter 65, Act 5, Section 11-74.4-1 et. seq. as amended. The area examined in this Eligibility Report is divided into two sections along the eastern boundary of the Redevelopment Project Area. It is generally bounded by 33^rd Place on the north; Cottage Grove on the east; Pershing Road on the southland the existing Redevelopment Project Area boundary on the west (hereafter referred to as the "Added Area"). The eligibility findings for the Added Area are documented and summarized in this report entitled, the Bronzeville Tax Increment Finance Program Redevelopment Plan and Project Amendment No. 3 Added Eligibility Report. The boundaries of the Added Area are shown on the following map: Eligibility Report Exhibit A. Added:Area Boundaries.

The findings and conclusions presented In this, report are based on surveys, documentation, and analyses of properties and conditions related to the Added Area as conducted by the Consultant The Eligibility Report summarizes the analyses and findings of the Consultant's work. The City is entitled to re|y on the findings'and conclusions of this Eligibility Report in designating the improved portions of the Added Area as a conservation area and the vacant tax parcels as a blighted area under the Act The Consultants have prepared this Eligibility Report and the related Amendment No. 3 to the Redevelopment Plan and Project with the understanding that the City would rely on (i) the findings and conclusions of this Eligibility Report and the related Amended Redevelopment Plan, and (ii) the fact that the Consultants have obtained the.necessary information so that the Eligibility Report and related Amended Redevelopment Plan will comply with the Act. The determination of whether the Added Area qualifies for designation as a redevelopment project ~area based on^flndhigs^the-impTOved-portions-of-the area -as-a-conservation-area-and-thevacant-portions of the area as a blighted area,' pursuant to the Act is made by the City of Chicago after careful review and consideration of the conclusions contained in this Eligibility Report.

Following this introduction, Section Ii presents background information of the Added Area including the geographic location, description of current conditions and area data; Section 111 documents the building condition assessment and qualifications of the Added Area as a combination conservation area and vacant blighted area under the Act; and Section IV, Summary and Conclusions, documents the findings ofthe Eligibility Report.

Page 3

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

II.      Background Information A. The Location and Size of the Added Area

The Added Area is located on the south side of the City. The Added Area can be separated into two sections: a commercial, institutional section and a residential section. The Added Area contains a total of 23 buildings on 45 tax parcels located in the Douglas community area. There are 38 improved tax parcels and 7 vacant tax parcels. Three of the improved tax parcels make up Right of Way along Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive. The total land area including all Right of Ways is approximately 68.7 acres.

The Added Area is a mix of Commercial/Institutional and Residential, with the commercial hub concentrated in the Lake Meadows' Shopping Center located between Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive and Rhodes Avenue and between 33^rd Place and 35^th Street. The Added Area contains approximately 17.04 acres of vacant land. Existing land uses are illustrated in Eligibility Report Exhibit B. Existing Land Uses.

Residential

The residential section of the Added Area predominately consists of modest single family homes situated along Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive south of 37^th Street and North of 38^th Street Road and one high rise apartment building on two parcels. Although many ofthe structures located in the residential area appear on the exterior to be in fair condition, we noted deterioration and signs of deferred maintenance which are apparent throughput the area. This can be viewed as an emerging lack of maintenance and investment in the area. The area also suffers from widespread street, curb, and gutter disrepair. Most ofthe streets in the Added Area have large pptholes, crumbling sidewalks and. pavement; and broken curbs. The level of disrepair of the infrastructure goes beyond what would be considered normal wear and was consistent throughout the entire area.

Commercial

The commercial areas of the Added Area are characterized by deteriorating commercial and institutional property. The commercial areas contain deteriorated buildings, site, and infrastructure. Commercial activity in the Added Area is fairly high with the commercial hub concentrated in the Lake Meadows Shopping Center located between Martin Luther King, Jr. i?rive~and--Rhodes-VWenue-^nd-betweer>-3^

although predominately located on one tax parcel, makes up 16 acres of the Added Area. The shopping center has excessive vacancies with approximately 30% of the commercial units in the Added Area unoccupied.

Institutional

The area to the south and east of this commercial hub includes two Chicago Public School buildings: the Chicago High School for the Arts at 521 East 35^th Street and the James R. Doolittle Elementary School at 535 East 35^th Street and a portion of Ellis Park.

Page 4

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

Transportation

Street System

Local - For residents and visitors who choose to drive into, out of, and around the Added Area, there are many major thoroughfares linking the Added Area to other parts of the City. Within the Added Area, the major thoroughfares include north-south routes: Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, Rhodes Avenue, and Cottage Grove Avenue; and east-west routes: 35^m Street and 37^th Street.

Public Transportation

the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) Buses services a few stops in close proximity to the Added Area. There are three (3) bus lines with stops within the Added Area.

Pedestrian Transportation

Pedestrian traffic in the Added Area is concentrated; along the major arterial streets. Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive and 35^th StreetJiave the largest, concentrations of pedestrian traffic. The higher concentration of pedestrian traffic along these streets is associated with commuters utilizing the CTA bus lines along this route. Concentration of pedestrian traffic is also associated with schools located within the Added Area as well as its close proximity to downtown Chicago Most pedestrian traffic around schools is present during the peak periods before and after school hours.'

There are sidewalks on all of the streets within the Added Area that connect pedestrians from north to south and east to west. The major thoroughfares provide crosswalks at intersections for pedestrian safety.

B. Basis for Redevelopment

The Illinois General Assembly"made these key findings in adopting the Act:

1. That there exists in many municipalities within the state blighted and conservation areas;
2. That as a result of the existence of blighted areas and areas requiring conservation, there is an excessive and disproportionate expenditure of public funds, inadequate public and private investment,. Unmarketability of property, growth in delinquencies and crime, and housing and zoning law violations in such areas together with an abnormal

      exodus of families and businesses so that the decline of these areas impairs the value of

private investments and threatens the sound grdwth'ariffTITe^axTJase 6T taxing districts in such areas, and threatens the health, safety, morals, and welfare ofthe public; and

1. That the eradication of blighted areas and the treatment and improvement of conservation areas by redevelopment projects are essential to the public interest.

To ensure that the exercise of these powers is proper and in the public interest, the Act also specifies certain requirements that must be met before a municipality can proceed with implementing a redevelopment project. One of these requirements is that the municipality must demonstrate that a prospective redevelopment project area qualifies either as a blighted area or as a conservation area within the definitions for each set forth in the Act (Section 11-74.4-3).

Page 5

Bromeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

III.      Qualification of the Added 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 Added Area was determined to qualify as a conservation area, and the vacant portion of the Added 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- ot 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 advanded state of disrepair or neglect of necessary repairs io 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,
4. major defects in the secondary building components such as doors, windows,
5. porches, gutters and downspouts, and fascia. With respect to surface
6. 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

piSvlng material, andweeds^mtrndihg-threu^pa^d^suri^iGe^      

1. 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 codes.
2. 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.
3. 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.

Page 6

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

1. 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.
2. 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
3. lacking within the redevelopment project area.
4. 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 exqessive land coverage are: the presence of buildings either improperly situated on parcels or Ideated 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 brie (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.
   1. pfjiftfrtrinus land usb • gr 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.
   2. 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.

Page 7

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois  May 2, 2014

1. 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.
2. The total equalized assessed value ofthe proposed redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) ofthe 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 tor 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 a vailabief

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 tnaf 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 plaiting 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 nght-of-way

      widths-far streets^.alleys., or. other public riqhts-of-wav or that      omitted

easement for public utilities.

1. Diversity of ownership of parcels of vacant land sufficient in number to retard or impede the ability to assemble the land for development.
2. 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.
3. Deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas adjacent to the vacant land.
4. 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

Page 8

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

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) ofthe last five (5) calendar years for which information is available oris 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 agendy 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 ofthe redevelopment project area is impaired by one ofthe 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 dearly present within the. intent of the Act and (ii) 7s reasonably distributed throughout the vacant part ofthe 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Prior to the effective: date of this amendatory Act of the 91" 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 dfthe redevelopment project area), and the area meets at least one (1) ofthe 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 notbeen developed for that designated purpose.

      (F) 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."

It is also important to note that the test of eligibility Is based on the conditions of the Added Area as a whole; it Is not required that eligibility be established for each and every property in the Added Area.

B.      Survey, Analysis and Distribution of Eligibility Factors

A parcel-by-parcel analysis of the Added Area was conducted to identify the presence of TIF eligibility factors. The condition of each parcel and structure in the Added Area was documented. Field survey data was compiled and analyzed to investigate the presence and distribution of each of the TIF eligibility factors. That data is presented in two tables: Table 1 -Conservation Factors Matrix for Improved Land, and Table 3 - Blighting Factors Matrix

Page 9

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

for Vacant Land. The conditions recorded in Tables 1 and 3 are depicted graphically in the Eligibility Report, Exhibit C~ Existing Conditions Map.

The improved portion of the Added Area contains 23 structures located on 38 tax parcels. This portion ofthe Added Area is characterized by the following conditions:

• the predominance of buildings that are 35 years of age or older (100% of buildings)¹;
• deteriorated buildings (100% of buildings);
• excessive vacancies (1% of improved parcels);
• inadequate utilities (100% of improved parcels);
• lack of community planning (1 % of improved parcels); and
• declining EAV

The vacant portion of the Added Area, which constitutes approximately 24% of net land area, is characterized by the following conditions:

■   obsolete platting (100% of vacant parcels).

• deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas (100% of vacant parcels).

C. Evaluation Procedure      _t '

The Consultant conducted exterior surveys of observable conditions on all properties, buildings, and public and private improvements located in the Added Area. These inspectors have been trained in TIF survey techniques and have extensive experience In similar undertakings.

The surveys examined-not only the condition arid use of buildings, but also included surveys of streets, sidewalks, curbs,, gutters, lighting, vacant land, underutilized land, parking facilities, landscaping, fences and walls, and general maintenance, in addition, an analysis was conducted on existing site coverage, parking and land uses, and their relationship to the surrounding Area. Investigators 'also researched historic photos and were assisted by information obtained from the City of Chicago. This boundary artd qualification ofthe Added Area was determined by the field investigations, eligibility requirements described in the Act, and the needs and deficiencies of the Added Area.

P.    Investigation and Analysis of Factors

In determining whether or not the proposed Added 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 Added 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 Added 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.

' This is 100% 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.

Page 10

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

1. On-site field inspection of. the proposed Added 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 designated areas for tax increment financing.
2. Use of accepted definitions as provided for in the Act.
3. 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 ofthe TIF statute.
2. The eradication of blighted areas and the treatment of conservation areas by redevelopment.projects are essential to the public interest.
3. These findings are made on the basis that the presence of blight, or conditions which lead to blight, is detrimental to the safety, health, welfare and morals of the public. .

table 1 - Conservation Factors Matrix for Improved Land, provided on the following page documents the conditions in the Added Area,

Page 11

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2. 2014

TABLE 1. CONSERVATION FACTORS MATRIC FOR IMPROVED LAND

	PIN NO.	Building 35 Years Age or more ;	Dilapidation \	Obsolescence ■	Deterioration	Structures below mln code standards	Illegal use of structures	Excessive vacancies	Lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities	Inadequate utilities	Excessive land coverage	Deleterious land use or layout	Lack of community planning	EPA remediation costs
1	17-34-123-051	0			X					X
2	17-34-123-055	0			X					X
3	17-34-216-043	1			X					X
4	17-34-216-044	0		r	"X					X
5	17-34-216-045	3			X			X		X			X
6	17-34-319-003	1			X					X
7	17-34-319-004	1			X-					X
8	17-34-319-005	1			X					X
9	17-34-319-008	i			X					X
16	17-34-319-012	.1			'X'					X
.11	17-34-319-013	. 1			-X					X
12	17-34-319-014	t			.X					X
13	17-34-319-015	1			'x					X
14.	: 17-34-319418	1			X					X
IS	17-34-319-017	i			: x					X
16	17-34-319-018	2			X					X
17	17-34-319-019	0			X '					X
18	17r34r319-021-1001	1			X.					X
19	17-34-319-021-1002	0			x;					X
20	17-34-319^621-1003	0			~x					X
21	17-34-319-021-1004	0	-•	♦	X					. X
22	17-34-402-069	1			X
23	17-34-402-003	1	•		X					X
24	17-34-402-004	1			X					X
25	17-34-402-032	0			X
26	17-34-402-033	0			X
27 28	17-34-402-034 17-34-402-035	0 ' 0			x * X
29	17-34-402-036	0			X
30	17-34^»02-061	2			X
31	17-34-402-067	0			X					X
32	17-34-402-068	0			X					X
33	17-34-402-070	0			X
34	17-34-402-071	0			X
35	17-34-402-072	0			. X
36	17-34-402-076	0			X					X
37	17-34-402-077	1			X					X
38	17-34-405-032	0	-		X					X
		23			38			1		28			1

Page 12

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

E.      Eligibility Factors - Improved Added Area

In making the determination of eligibility, each and every property or building in the Added Area is not required to be blighted or otherwise qualify. It is the Added Area as a whole that must be determined to be eligible.

The report stated below details conditions that cause the Added Area to qualify under the Act as a conservation area, per surveys and research undertaken by the Consultant in March 2014:

Age of Structures

Age, although not one of the 13 factors used to establish a conservation area under the Actj Is used as a threshold thai an area must meet in order to qualify.

Age presumes the existence of problems or limiting conditions resulting from normal and cdhtinuous Use of structures and exposure to the elements over a period of many years. As d tC|f#_t'^6|ciejr-.bMljdin^3 typicallyexhibit more problems than buildings constructed in later years because-of longer periods of active usage ("wear and tear") and the impact of tijri6,^m'peiiitui$. and moisture. Additionally, older buildings tend not to be ideally suited for meeting modern-day space.and development standards. These typical problematic condrtioftaMh older buildings can be the initial indicators that the factors used to qualify may be present.      • '■:

Summary of Findings. Regarding Age:

There are 23; buildings in- the Added Area (Including accessory structures such as

garages arid sett      Of these buildings, 23 (100%) 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 Added Area meets the threshold requirement for a conservation area In that more than 50% of ihe structures In the Added Area exceed 35 years of age.

1,.   Dilapidation ,

Dilapidation as a factoMsH>ased^pon-the-deewTiented--presenGe-and-reasonable-distribution. of buildjngs 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 Added Area have such 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.

Page 13

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

Summary of Findings Regarding Dilapidation:

This factor was not documented in the Added Area.

1. Obsolescence

An obsolete building or improvement is one which no longer serves its intended use. The Act defines obsolescence as °fhe 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:

a. Functional Obsolescence: Structures are typically built for specific uses or purposes, and their design, location, height and space arrangement are each Intended for a specific occupancy at a given time. Buildings are obsolete when they contain characteristics or deficiencies that limit the use and marketability of Such' buildings. The characteristics may include loss in value to a property resulting from an inherent deficiency existing from poor design or layout, Improper orientation, of the building oh site, etc., which detracts from the overall useftlWessvof desirability of a property. Obsolescence in such buildings is typically .difficult and expensive to correct.

b; 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 rnay nqt be economically curable, resulting in net rental losses and/or depreciation in 'market value.

t

c. Obsolete site improvements: Site improvements, including sewer and water lines j 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.

Summary oTFIhdings Kegarain^Obsoleffcerrcer       

This factor was not documented in the Added Area.

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.        ₍ .

Summary of Findings Regarding Deterioration:

Throughout the Added Area, deteriorating conditions were recorded on all (100%) ofthe

Page 14

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

23 buildings in the Added Area. Buildings with some major or minor defects (e.g., damaged door frames, broken window frames and muntins, dented or damaged metal siding, gutters and downspouts damaged, weathered fascia materials, cracks in masonry walls, spalling masonry surfaces, etc.) were observed in the Added Area. In addition, site improvements like roadways and off-street parking areas also evidenced deterioration such as cracking, on paved suriaces, potholes, depressions, loose paving materials and weeds protruding through the surface. Therefore, this factor is a supporting factor for Added Area conservation area eligibility.

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 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 Added Area, it is certain that many of the buildings are below the minimum code standards currently in force by the City of Chidagp. However, in order to substantiate these conditions both interior and exterior inspections of the properties by qualified professionals would be required. Therefore, this factor cannot be verified as;prasentfor this Eligibility Study

1. 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:

a.      illegal home occupations;

b.      _t conduct of any illegal vice activities such as gambling or drug

manufacture;

      Ct      lisesj^otJn sonfnrmance 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 Added Area. 6. Excessive Vacancies

Establishing the presence of this factor requires the documenting of the presence of unoccupied or underutilized buildings that represent an adverse influence on the Area because ofthe frequency, extent, or duration of such vacancies. It

Page 15

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

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 of the commercial areas within the Added Area, it was observed that the property suffers from excessive vacancies with approximately 30% of the commercial units unoccupied. The shopping center, although predominately located on one tax parcel, makes up approximately 16 acres of the improved land within the Added Area. Once all rights of way are excluded, the amount ot improved land within the Added Area is approximately 33.9 acres. Therefore, this one tax parcel makes up 47% of the improved land within the Added Area. Without intervention, vacancies are likely to persist and begin to negatively impact surrounding properties. Therefore, this factor is a supporting factor for Added Area conservation area eligibility.

1. 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 buildings in the Added Area did not result in documentation of structures without adequate mechanical ventilation, natural light and proper window area ratios in the Added Area. This factor was not documented in the Added Area.

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 Cit/s Department of Water Management provided the consultant with data on the condition of sanitary sewer mains and water lines In the Added Area. Mahy of the water mains serving the Added Area are deficient in terms of age. The projected service life of water mains is 100 years. Some sections of water line in the Added Area are more than 100 years old, while others are only 47 years old.

Sanitary sewer data was also reviewed by the Consultant. Many sections of sewer line also exceed 100 years of age On a whole, the majority ofthe Added Area is served by sewer lines that exceed their expected service life.

These deficient utilities are distributed throughout the Improved portions of the Added Area and present on 38 (100%) of the improved parcels. Therefore, this factor is a supporting factor for Added Area conservation area eligibility.

Page 16

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2,2014

1. 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:

This factorwas not documented in the Added Area.

1. 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 rittxio'us, offensive or environmentally unsuitable.

Summary of Findings Regarding Deleterious Land Use or Layout:

This factor was hot documented in the Added Area.

11. Lack of Community Planning

This-roay-be^ounted as-a factor-if4he-AddedJu'Ba_was-0^eJflp-ed 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.

Page 17

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

1. Industrial land use and zoning adjacent to or within heavily developed residential areas without ample buffer areas.
2. 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:

Lack Of community planning was observed on one improved tax parcel within the Added Area. However, that one tax parcel makes up approximately 36% of the improved land within the Added Area. Therefore, this factor is a supporting factor for Added Area conservation area eligibility.

12,      Environmental Remediation Costs

If an area has incurred Illinois or United States Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs fori or a study conducted by an independent consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation has determined a need for, the cfeah-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 Added Area.

13.      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 ihrfift (3) nf the, last fivft (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) ofthe last five (5) calendar years for which information is available then this factor may be counted.

Summary of Findings Regarding Declining or Lagging Rate of Growth of Total Equalized Assessed Valuation:

Analysis of historic EAV for.the Added Area indicated that the presence of this factor does exist. Over a five years period between 2007 AND 2012, the growth rate of the total equalized assessed valuation (EAV) of the Added Area has increased at an annual rate that is less than the balance of the municipality for three of the last five years. These figures are shown below in Eligibility Report Table 2. Growth of Added Area vs. City of Chicago.

Page 18

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

					&Xtu£i***Z2i;--fi? ,t.;,... ■- >■*£■
1	17-34-123-051	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
2	17-34-123-055	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
3	17-34-216-043	$451,316	$472,692	$362,963	$355,413	$319,937	$308,330
'   4 '	17-34-216-044	$146,990	$153,952	$171,080	$165,776	$149,228	$140,939
5	17-34-216445	$10,583,781 .	$11,085,077	$18,231,961	$13,645,404	$12,283,345	$11,625,225
6	1744-319403	$92,323	$103,928	$127,856 '	$124,781	$62,215	$65,850
7 '	17-34-319404	$69,692	, $80,224	$97,360'	$98,919	$91,448	$75,476
8	17-34-319-005	$86,482	$97,810	$107,916	. $1'0'9,255	$100,752	$81,721
9	17-34-319-006	$4,369	$3,369	$2,869	$2,869	$2,869	$869
10	1744419412	$80,658 .	$91,709	$97,435	. $95,405	$52,863	$51,563
ill	17-34419413	$21,634	$22,658	$26^93	$26,334	$23,705	$14,926
12	17-34-319-014	$21,834.	$22,658:	$26,893	$26,334	$23,705	$14,926
13	17-34-319-015	, $24,941	$26.'687	$89,950 .	$30;554	$74,183	$66,737
14	17-34-319.-016	$163,228	$181,857	$169,909	$169,958	$155,396	$123,673
15	17-34-319-017	$3,069,866	$2,543,975	$4,045,610	$2,475,908	$2,228,767	$2,069,071
16	1.744419418 •	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
17	17-34-319-019	$0	:'$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
18	" 17-34-319421-1001	$46,159	$48,346	$58,235	$57,024	$51,332	$35,151
19	17-34-319-021-1002	$50,180	$52,294'	$62,108	. $60,168	$43,861	$30,019
20	17-34*319-021-1003	$52,697	$55,193	$68,482	$65,099	$58,601	$40,128
.21	17-34-^19-021-1004	$53,195	$55,451	$65,890	$65,887	$58,712	$37,317
22.	17-34-402-003	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0
23	17-34-402-004'	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
.24	17-34-402-032	$0	$6	$0	$0	$0	$0
25	17-34-402-033	.$0	• $0 .	$0	$0	$0	$0
26	17-34-402-034 .	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
27	17-34-402-035	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
28	17-34-402-036	$0 .	■ $0	$0	$0	$0	$0
29	17-34-402-061	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
30	17-34-402-067	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
31	17-34-402-068	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
	17-34-40246.9-	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
33	17-34-402470	$0	$0	$0	" To	$0" ""	- —$rr
34	1744-402471	$0	' $o	$0	$0	$0	$0
35	17-34-402472	$0	. $0	$0	$0	$0	$0
36	17-34-402-076	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
37	17-34-402-077 '	$0	'$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
38	17-34-405432	$0	, $o	$0	$0	$0	$0
		•
	$15,019,147	$15,097,880	$523,611,410	$17,575,088	$15,780,919	$14,781,921
		1%	58%	-26%	-10%	-6%
	$73,645,316, 037	$80,977,543, 020	$84,586,807, 689	$82,087,170, 063	$75,122,913, 910	$65,250,387, 267
		9.96%	4.46%	-2.96%	-8.48%	-13.14%

Page 19

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

Declining or Lagging Equalized Assessed Valuation as a factor is present in the improved parcels of the Added Area. Therefore, this factor is a supporting factor for Added Area conservation area eligibility.

F.      Conclusion of Investigation of Eligibility Factors for the Improved Portion of the

Added Area

The Improved tax parcels within the Added Area meet the requirements of the TIF Act for designation as a conservation area within the requirements ofthe Act.

Conclusion of Investigation of Eligibility Factors for the Improved Portion of tbe Added Area:

The presence of excessive building vacancies in the commercial buildings; deteriorated structures; deteriorated site improvements and public rights-of-way; inadequate utilities; and a lack of community planning are all indications of detrimental conditions in the Added Area. Furthermore, these conditions are present to a meaningful extent arid reasonably distributed throughout the improved portions of the Added Area. The presence of these TIF eligibility factors underscores the lack of private investment in the Added Area.

The tax increment program and redevelopment plan include measures designed to reduce or eliminate the deficiencies, which cause the improved portion of the Added 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 Added Area. The presence of these factors qualifies the improved portion of the Added 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 1 /.U4 acres"oniTe~6crracre Added Area aie considered^acant by^hls-defrhitiQn-Vacant land is Identified in the Eligibility Report, Exhibit B - Existing Land Use Map. the blighting factors present on vacant parcels are summarized on Eligibility Report, Table 3 -Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land on the following page.

Page 20

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

	Table 3. Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land
	PIN NO.	Obsolete Platting	Diversity of Ownership	Tax Delinquencies	In Neighboring areas	EPA remediation costs	Declining or Sub-par EAV Growth
1	17-34-402-041	.-. X			X
2	17-34-402-073.	X			X
3	17-34-402-074	X			X
4	17-34-402-075	* X			X
5	17-34-411-011	X			X
.6	17-34-412-013	X			X
7	17-34-412-014	X			X
		7			■ ■ 7

Using GIS software the Consultant evaluated the Added Area's vacant land in terms of the conditions listed in'Table 3 during field surveys and subsequent analyses. The data was processed by Parcel Identification Number for each ofthe factors, relevant to making a finding of eligibility.

Vacant Blighted Area Category 1 Factors:

Vacant land within the Added Area may qualify for designation as part of a redevelopment project area, if the sound growth of the redevelopment:project 0rea. is Impaired by a combination of two (2) of six (6) factors listed in'section 11-74.4-3(a)(2) of the Act, each of which Is (i) present, with that presence documented, to a meaningfulextent 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. The Category 1 factors include:

a. Obsolete Platting

This factor is present when the platting of yelcafjt land lesutls in paicels-xnHimitecr-of-narrow size or configuration of parcels in irregular size- or shape that would be difficult to develop on a planned basis, in a manner compatible, with contemporary standards and requirements. Obsolete platting is also evident where there is a failure to create rights-of-way for streets or alleys 'or where public rights-of-way are of inadequate widths, or easements for public utilities have not been provided.

Summary of Findings Regarding Obsolete Platting

Obsolete Platting as a factor affects seven (100%) ofthe vacant parcels in the Added Area and is therefore is meaningfully present and reasonably distributed throughout the Added Area

Page 21

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

1. Diversity of Ownership

This factor is present when the number of owners of the vacant land is sufficient in number to retard or impede the assembly of land for development. This factor is not present within the Added Area.

1. Tax and special assessment delinquencies

This factor is not present within the Added Area.

1. Deterioration of structures or improvements in neighboring areas adjacent to the vacant land

As indicated in the above analysis of blighting factors present oh improved portions of the Added Area, 100% of buildings exhibited deteriorated-righUof-way conditions. It was found that seven (100%) of the vacant parcels are >locat6d adjacent to deteriorated buildings or site improvements.

All ofthe vacant land in the Added Area is adjacent to or hear deteriorated buildings and site improvements. These deteriorated buildings and site improvements 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. Therefore, this factor 1$ a supporting factor for Added Area blighted area eligibility,

1. Declining or Lagging Equalized Assessed Valuation

As defined in the Act, a 'declining or lagging equalized assessed valuation'' means that the total equalized assessed value of Vie proposed redevelopment project area has declined for3 ofthe last 5calendar, yearspriortothe year in which, the redevelopment project is designated or is increasing at ah annual rate that is less than the balance of the municipality for 3 of the last 5 calendar years for which, in formation 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 3 of the last 5 calendar years prior to the year in which the redevelopment project area is designated.

Summary of Findings Regarding Declining or Lagging Equalized Assessed Value

Shown below in Eligibility Report Table 4 Comparative Increase In EAV - Study Area vs. the Balance of the City of Chicago. Table 4 presents the percent change in EA V by year for the Study Area and the rate of growth in EA V for the balance of the City of Chicago. ,

As all of the vacant land within the Added Area consists solely of tax exempt property, the EAV for each tax parcel has remained at zero for the past 5 years. While this cannot be used as a classification factor, it does Indicate that any for profit development that takes place on those tax parcels will greatly contribute to the tax base within the Added Area. Therefore, it can be considered a contributing factor to the blighted conditions in the Added Area.

Page 22

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

		2007              2008             2009             2010             2011 2012
1	17-34-402-041	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
2	17-34-402-073	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
3	17-34-402-074	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
4	17-34-402-075	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
5	17-34-411-011	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
6	17-34-412-013	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
7	17-34-412-014	$0	$0 .	$0	$0	$0	$0
			'•
	Total	.    $0                  $0                 $0                 $0                 $0 $0
		0%               0%              0%              0% 0%
	Percentage Change
		J73.64S.316.037       $80,877,543,020      $84,586,807,689      $82,087,170,063     $76,122,913,910 $65,250,387,267
	City EAV
		9;96%           4.46%          -2.96%         -8.48% -13.14%
	Percentage Change

f. Environmental Remediation

The area has incurred Illinois Environmental Protection Agency or United States

EhvimnmehtaJ Ri^e'&bm'^(g^ffc]( remediation costs for, or a study conducted by an

independent cpfljsWte/ii¹fecdghM$d as having expertise In environmental remediation

has determined a n&eti fo^^^      of hazardous waste, hazardous substances, or

underground storage tanks required by State or federal law, provided that the remediatidn costs ■constitute: a material impediment to the development or redevelopment of the redevelopment project area.

Summary of Findings Regarding Environmental Remediation:

As is natedJiLlhe discussion of environmental remediation, this factor was not identified. It is not known whether past land uses on parcels that are now vacahl^re^lea^sbTdf groundwater contamination. No documentation of past contamination of vacant land is presently available.

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 Added 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 Added Area. Those familiar with the Added Area indicate that many of these buildings

Page 23

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

were deteriorated and vacant. However, documentation ofthe conditions of many of these vacant 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 Added Area in Eligibility Report Table 3 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land.

H.    Conclusion of Investigation of Eligibility Factors for the Vacant Portion of the Added Area

The discussion above, and the evidence summarized in Eligibility Report Table 3 - Blighting Factors Matrix for Vacant Land, indicate that the factors required to qualify the vacant portion , of the Added 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 withih the Intent of the Act, and that the factors were reasonably distributed throughout the vacant portion of the Added Area.

The tax increment program and redevelopment plan include measures designed to reduce or eliminate the deficiencies which cause the Added Area to qualify consistent with the strategy of the City of Chicago for revitalizing other designated redevelopment areas and industrial cprridbrs. As documented In this investigation and analysis, it is clear that the vacant portion of the-Added.Area is impacted by a number of eligibility factors. The presence of these factors qualifies the vacant portion ofthe Added Area as a blighted area.

Page 24

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois- May 2, 2014

IV.      SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions of the Consultant are that the number, degree, and distribution of eligibility factors in the Added Area as documented in this Eligibility Study warrant: i) the designation of the improved portion of the Added Area as a conservation area, and ii) the designation of the vacant portion of the Added Area as a blighted area as set forth in the Act.

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 Added Area.

Despite small incremental improvements scattered throughout the Added Area, there exist conditions in the Added Area that continue to threaten the public safety, health and welfare. The presence of deteriorated structures; the high level of commercial building vacancies; inadequate utilities; deteriorated streets and sidewalks; and the predominance of underutilized, vacant and tax exempt properties in the Added, Area may result in further disinvestments that will not be overcome without action by the City. These conditions have been previously documented in this report. All properties within the Added 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 area and finding of a blighted area for vacant portion of the Added Area and making this Eligibility Study a part of the public record.

The analysis contained herein was 'based upon data assembled by the Consultant. The study and survey of the Added Area indicate the requirements necessary for designation as a combination conservation and blighted area, are present. Therefore, the Added 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.

Page 25

Bronzeville Added Area Eligibility Report City of Chicago, Illinois - May 2, 2014

 

 

Eligibility Report Exhibit A Added Area Boundaries .

Amendment to Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois

e-i:ni>-DLVD.

 

Eligibility Report Exhibit B Existing Land Uses

rea

Amendment to Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Ai City of Chicago, Illinois

 

 

Eligibility Report Exhibit C Existing Conditions Map

Amendment to Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

Exhibit 4 - Housing Impact Study

Laube Consulting Group, LLC 26

Bronzeville Tax Increment Finance Program

Redevelopment Plan and Project Amendment No. 3

Housing Impact Study

City of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, Mayor

May 2, 2014

Prepared By: Goodman Williams Group

Goodman Williams

"' GROUP —      

R l: AI.   lis TA TR  K HS I: AR C II

Table of Contents

1. Introduction      '.      1
2. Housing Impact Study - Part 1      3

Number and Type of Residential Units      4

Number and Type of Rooms Within Units      5

Number of Inhabited Units      ,       6

Race and Ethnicity of Residents      7

i

1. Housing Impact Study- Part II      8

Current Land Use.in Redevelopment Project Area      8

Number and Location of Units that Could Potentially be Removed      .      8

Relocation Plan      9

Replacement Housing      9

Housing Eligibility Assessment....:      ,      10

Rental Housing      *      11

For-Sale Housing      ;      14

Relocation Assistance      ; 17

Appendix: Affordable Housing on South Side

City of Chicago

Housing Impact Study Bronzeville TIF

Redevelopment Plan and Project

I. INTRODUCTION

Goodman Williams Group is on a team headed by Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises, Inc. that is amending the Bronzeville Tax Increment Financing (TIF). This TIF district was originally designated in 1998 and amended in 2003 and 2005. It is being expanded to include two areas adjacent to the Original Redevelopment Project Area. The amended boundaries will be designated as the Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area.

The irregularly shaped Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area (referred to in this report as the "Redevelopment Project Area") is generally located south of the Stevenson Expressway (I-55),. east of State Street, Wentworth and LaSalle, north of 40^th Street, and west of Lake Shore Drive, Cottage Grove, and Rhodes. A map of the Redevelopment Project Area showing the original boundaries and the two adjacent areas is included in the Redevelopment Plan;

The original Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan did not include a Housing Impact Study (HIS). As part of the proposed Amendment, Goodman Williams Group has completed this HIS for the entire amended Redevelopment Project Area.

Housing Impact Study

The Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area, contained in a separate report, dde,s not presently envision acquiring or demolishing occupied housing units. Nonetheless, the City of Chicago has': requested a Housing Impact Study to highlight the affordable housing ChoicesTn and around the Redevelopment Project Area. 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 ofthe Housing Impact Study are as follows:

Part I of the Housing Impact Study shall include the following for all residential units within the Redevelopment Project Area:

      (i)~-^ata^Uo-whether-thft msiriptntial units are single family or multi-familv units:

and

1. the.number and type of rooms within the units, if that information is available; and
2. 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
3. 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.

1

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

Part II of the Housing Impact Study shall identify the inhabited residential units in the Redevelopment 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:

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 Redevelopment 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 ofthe housing; and
2. the type and extent of relocation assistance to be provided.

2

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

II.

HOUSING IMPACT STUDY - Part I

The information presented in this report is compiled from a variety of sources. In March 2014, Ernest R. Sawyer Enterprises conducted field research that identified the parcels and buildings located in the Redevelopment Project Area 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. Percentage characteristics from the three Census tracts that align most closely with the Redevelopment Project Area (8392, 8396, and 3514) were applied to the actual unit counts to provide estimates of the age ofthe housing stock, the number of units in each building, the number of rooms and bedrooms, and whether the occupied units were leased or owned.

Demographic information ort current residents of the Redevelopment Project Area was provided by Esri Business Analyst, a respected vendor of demographic and economic data. Other information In Part if of the Housing Impact Study was obtained.by Goodman Williams Group and reliable secondary sources as noted in the tables. Some of the information is available by Community Area. The Redevelopment Project Area falls within the Douglas Community Area.

Number and Type of Residential Units

The recent field work Identified a total of 1,569 housing units located within the Redevelopment Project Area. Table 9.1 provides estimates of the age of the structures. As the table Indicates, nearly 40 percent of the housing units in the Redevelopment Project Area were built between 1960 arid 1979. A total of 218 units have been constructed since.2000.

Table 9.1 Housing Units In Redevelopment Project Area by Year Structure Built

Number Percent Total Housing Units        1,569 100.0%

2000 to Present

1990 to 1999 1980 to 1989 1970 to 1979 1960 to 1969. 1950 to 1959 1940 to 1949 1939 or Earlier

218 133 143 265 358 93 69

292

13.9% 8.5% 9.1%

16.9%

22.8% 5.9% 4.4%

18.6%

Source: ERS Enterprises, based on field work, 2014 and percentages derived from U.S. Census

3

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

The housing stock in the Redevelopment Project Area consists mostly of multifamily buildings. As Table 9.2 below shows, an estimated 74.2% of the units in the Redevelopment Project Area are located in buildings containing 5 or more units. Roughly 10 percent of the units are in buildings with 2 to 4 units, and the remaining 15.5% of the housing stock is comprised of single-family homes.

Table 9.2

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Project Area Housing Unit Occupancy by Building Type

Total.

Number Percent

Building Type

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

243 72 89 1,164

Single Unit Buildings      234      9

Units in Two-Unit Buildings      70      3

Units in 3 and 4-Unit Buildings      86      3

Units in Multi-Family (>5 units) Buildings      1,121      43

TOTAL      1,511      58

15.5% 4.6% 5.7%

74.2%

1,569 100.0%

Sources: ERS Enterprises with percentages derived from U.S. Census

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

4

Number and Type of Rooms Within Units

Estimates of the number and types of rooms in the units in the Redevelopment Project Area are shown in Table 9.3. Key findings include:

• Of the 1,569 total units counted in the Redevelopment Project Area, more than 28% contain three rooms. Another 20% of units contain four rooms, and 13% contain five rooms.
• Most of the units in the Redevelopment Project Area (49.2%) contain smaller studios or one-bedrooms. Two and threerbedroom units make up 40.3% 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 Redevelopment Project Area includes a high percentage of studios and smaller units with one bedroom,

Table 9.3

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Project Area

      Number and Type of Rooms      

Number Percent 1,569 100.0%

Total Number of Housing Units

Number of Rooms

1. room
2. rooms

3 rooms -

1. rooms
2. rooms
3. rooms'
4. rooms
5. rooms

9 or more rooms

194 120 448 319 206 92 81 53 56

12,3% 7.7% 28.6% 20.3% 13.1% 5.8% 5.2% 3.4% 3.6%

Number of Bedrooms

No bedroom 1 bedroom^-2-bedrooms-

1. bedrooms
2. bedrooms

5 or more bedrooms

225 548 2SL 244 127 38

14.3% 34.9% 24,7% 15.6% 8.1% 2.4%

Sources: ERS Enterprises with percentages derived from U.S. Census

5

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

Number of Inhabited Units

Ofthe 1,569 total residential units identified in the Redevelopment Project Area, 1,511, or 96.3% are occupied. As shown in Table 9.4, most of these occupied units are rental apartments. Owner-occupied units make up 26.1% ofthe total.

Table 9.4

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Redevelopment

Project Area

      Housing Units Occupancy and Tenure

•      '      Number Percent

Total Housing Units      1,569 100.0%

Occupied      1.511 96.3%

Vacant      58 3.7%

Occupied Housing Units      1,511 100.0%

. Owner Occupied      395 26.1%

Renter Occupied,      1,116 73.9%

Sources: ERS Enterprises and with tenure estimates frdm Esri Business Analyst

6

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

Race and Ethnicity of Residents

Table 9.5 provides basic demographic information on residents of the Redevelopment Project Area.

• The 2013 total population of the Redevelopment Project Area is estimated to be 5,045, a slight increase from the 2010 Census count. Of the population living in the Redevelopment Project Area in 2013, 82.8% of the residents identify as Black or African American, 11.2% White, 5.1% Asian, and 3.1% Hispanic or Latino.
• The Redevelopment Project Area's 1,984 estimated households in 2013 were roughly split between Non-iFamily and Family Households. Family Households are defined as two or more related persons living together.
• The number of family households living in the Redevelopment Project Area with incomes below the poverty level was slightly higher than the number of households at or above the poverty level. The estimated median household income within the Redevelopment Project Area in 2013 was $22,366, well below the estimated 2013 median for the City of Chicago of $43,854.

* :      Table 9.5

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Project Area

       Select Population Characteristics      ■

2010      2013 Estimate

Number      Percent      Number      Percent

Population . 4,924      100.0%      5,045      100,0%

Race

White Alone               •'      * "                          547      11.1%      552      11.2%

Black or African American Alone                         3,985      80.9%      4,075      82.8%

American Indian and Alaska Native Alone                   18      0.4%      18      0.4%

Asian Alone                                                    242      4.9%      252      5.1%

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Alone            1      0.0%      1      0.0%

Some Other Race Alone                                       29      0.6%      32      0.6%

— Twoorraore-Races      —'      102"      1tA%      115      -2r3%-

Hispanic or Latino                    , .                          142      2.9%      154      3.1%

Households                                                       1,919      100.0%      1,984      100.0%

Family Households                                            957      49.9%      979      49.3%

Nonfamily Households                                        962      50.1%      1,005      50.7%

Median Household Income (Esri Estimate)                     n/a      $22,366

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Esri Business Analyst and Goodman      Williams Group

7

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

III.      HOUSING IMPACT STUDY-Part II

Current Land Uses in the Redevelopment Project Area

Existing land uses within the Redevelopment Project Area are primarily residential and

institutional. Among the prominent institutions Ideated in or adjacent to the TIF are Illinois

Institute of Technology (partially included), Dunbar Vocational Career Academy, and De

La Salle Institute. The former Michael Reese Hospital property, now vacant, is also

included in the Redevelopment Project Area. The Illinois College of Optometry and Mercy

Hospital are proximate to, but not Included. Commercial buildings fronting East 35^,h Street

and along other'commerciai arteries are included in the Redevelopment Project Area's

original boundaries.      • :

The northern-most of the two properties to be annexed includes Lake Meadows Shopping Center, a 193,000-square foot retail property located at the northeast comer of East 35 Street and Martin Luther King Drive. South of East 35^,h Street, the property to be annexed includes two Chicago Public School buildings: the Chicago High School for the Arts at 521 East 35⁰¹ Street and the James R Doolittle elementary school at 535 East 35^,h Street.

The second property to be added to the Bronzeville TIF is a vacant site located between East 37^th Street and Pershing Road east of Martin Luther King Drive.

Number and Location of Units that Could Potentially be Removed

The primary objectives of the Redevelopment Plan are to rehabilitate existing residential development and redevelop vacant land and buildings, The Plan does not presently envision acquiring or demolishing occupied housing units.

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 in the acquisition plan: Therefore, 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~clas"slfled as^-"dilapidated" in the Redevelopment 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 dr 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.

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

8

Relocation Plan

With no residential displacement anticipated, a relocation plan for displaced residents within the proposed TIF District has not been established. The following section discusses housing alternatives in the adjacent, neighborhoods that could be choices for residents in the Redevelopment Project Area.

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, hbusirig for any qualified displaced resident whose residence is removed is located in or hear the Redevelopment Project Area.

At this juncture, there are no plans to remove any occupied residences within the Redevelopment Project Area. However, if replacement hdusihg were needed, available housing options within the boundaries of, or in close proximity to, the Redevelopment Project Area are discussed in the following section.

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

9

City of Chicago

Housing Impact Study Bronzeville TIF

Redevelopment Plan and Project

Housing Eligibility Assessment

Table 9.6 presents a breakdown of Redevelopment Project Area households by income. The estimates for percentage of households within, the Area in each income category are applied to housing data from the field survey. Data indicated that nearly 35.4% of the households in the Redevelopment Project Area have annual incomes of less than $15,000. Another 25.7% have incomes between $15,000 and $35,000, and the remaining 38.8% have incomes greater than $35,000.

Table 9.6

Bronzeville f IF Redevelopment Project Area

      Number of Households, by Income, 2013 Estimates      

<$15,000

$15,000-$24,999

$25,000 -$34,999

$35,000 -$49,999:

$50,000 -$74,999

$75,000-$99,999

$100,000 or more

Number of

Households      703      356      .155      126      251      110 281

Percent of

Households    35.4%      17.9%      7.8%      6.4%      12.7%      5.5% 14.2%

Source: Esri Business Analyst

Most of the subsidized and public housing options available: to lowMncome 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 9i7 beldyv. the highlighting corresponds to the household size and income that, applies to most of the residents in the Redevelopment Project Area.

Table 9.7

Schedule of Maximum Annual Income Limits for Greater Chicago*

      Effective December 18,2013      

AMI   1 Person   2 Person   3 Person   4 Person   5 Person   6 Person   7 Person   8 Person

120% 80% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%

$60,840 $40,550 $30,420 $25,350 $20/280 $.15,210 $10/140 $5,070

$69,600 $46,350. $34,800 $29,000 $23,200 $17,400 $11,6*00 $5,800

$78,240 $52,150 $39,120 $32,600 $26;080 $19;5§Qw $^3,046 $'6'520

$86,880 $57,900 $43,440 $36,200 . '$28 960:'

'■ .-'i.^v-saV's^

: )$21f720J -:}$l¥v480l:; " $7,240'

$93,840 $62,550 $46,920 $39,100 $31,280 $23,460 $15,640 $7,820

$100,800 $67,200 $50,400 $42,000 $33,600 $25,200 $16,800 $8,400

$107,760 $71,800 $53,880 $44,900 $35,920 $26,940 $17,960 $8,980

$114,720 $76,450 $57,360 $47,800 $38,240 $28,680 $19,120 $9,560

* Includes Cook, DuPage, Lake, Kane, McHenry, & Will Counties

Source: Illinois Housing Development Authority

10

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

The Redevelopment Project Area has an estimated 1,214 households, or 61% of total households, with incomes 60% or fess of the Area Median Income; 703 households have incomes less than $15,000 and are below 30% AMI; 356 households have incomes between $15,000 and $24,999—greater than 30% AMI but (ess than 50% AMI.

Rental Housing

This section discusses multiple rental housing options, including CHA, affordable, and market-rate.

Housing Choice- Vouchers. Approximately 74% of the Redevelopment Project. Area's residents are renters and 61% of alii households have an income at or below 60% AMI, potentially qualifying them for Housing Choice Vouchers, also known as Section 8. Under the Housing Choice Voucher Program, renters pay 30^40% of^heir 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 w'rtH HUD to provide¹ subsidized .housing such that the Section 8 status is tied to ihe development and cannot be transferred if a qualified low-income tenant moves away. A major concern in gentrifyihg. 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.

Within the Redevelopment Project- Area and surrounding community areas, Table 9.8 shows that there are a totai of 2,841 Section 8 units in 29 developments.

Table 9.8 Project-Based Section 8 Housing

Community Area Douglas

Grand Boulevard

Oakland

Total

Assisted

Units      Protects _:

1,378      9

1,209      17

254      3

2,841      29

Source: Chicago Rehab Network

11

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

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 13^th 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 Holising) Wait List remained closed to new applicants in Fiscal Year 2012. Prior to a wait-list update in December 2012, there were 32,647 applicants remaining oh the list. Several CHA properties, discussed below, are located in and around the Redevelopment Project Area,

• Oakwood Shores. Started in; 2004, this redevelopment spreads oyer a 94-acres site, replacing four former public housing complexes: Ida B. Wells Homes, Ida B Wells Extension,, Clarence barrbw Home, and Madden Park Homes. Phase 1 was completed in 2007, and included 325 mixed-income rentalapartments and 129 for-sale units. Approaching completion. Phase 2 will add 199 mixed-income rental units. This phase includes' dakwodd Shores Senior Apartments at 3750 South Cottage Grove (76 units) arid Mercy Family Health Center and Oakwood Residences (48 units) at 375.3/South Cottage Grove, which opened in 2011 and 2013 respectively. Phase 2frbe'gan construction in 2013 and features 66 mixed-income rental units in row houses, six fiats, and a twelve-unit walk-up. Future phases of Oakwood Shores remain in planning stages. The redevelopment team is led by The Community Builders and Granite Development.
• Park Boulevard. The redevelopment of the former Stateway Gardens spans 33 acres bounded by 35* Street 6'n the north, 39* Street on the south, State Street on the east, and Federal Street on ihe west. Redevelopment of the property calls for 1,316 mixed-income rental¹ and: for-sale units. Phases 1A and 1B added 239 rental and for-sale units and 11,000 square feet of retail between 2005 and 2007. Phase 2A was completed In 2012 arid, included 128 rental units in four buildings. Phase 2B is under construction and will add 108 mixed-income rental units and 4,000

      square feet of ground floor retail in four buildings.      

• Lake Park Crescent, by Draper Kramer, replaces the former Lakefront Homes on the 4000 block of South -Lake Park Avenue. Phase 1 was finished in 2008 and featured 65 for-sale townhomes. and condos. Phase 2 was completed in 2013, adding 132 mixed-income rental units in an eight-story midrise and twelve three-and six-flat structures located at 1061 East 41^st Place.
• 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 39^m Street on the north, State Street on the east, 54^th Street on the south, and Federal Street on the west. Redevelopment ofthe property calls for 2,400 mixed-income

12

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

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.

Plans have called for 600 units to be built off-site in the surrounding neighborhood. Brinshore continues their redevelopment efforts with Legends South C-3, a 71-unit mixed-Income rental development that is expected to open in December 2014.

• Dearborn Homes. The renovation of this 16-acre development on State Street between 2-7"' and 30* Street is one of the (atest Plan for Transformation projects. Originally built in ,1950, Dearborn Homes were the. first CHA buildings to have elevators. Grouped in -16 six-- and nine-story buildings, the 800 unit development and its open space underwent extensive exterior, interior, and infrastructure improvements between 200? and 2012. The addition of four-bedroom apartments and compliance with the> Americans with Disabilities Act reduced the total units to 660 from the original 800.

Market Rate Rentals. The- Redevelopment Project Area has relatively few market-rate rental apartments. Listings were identified in Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) and Craigslist, a website where users can^ist their units for rent, in March 2014. Shown below in Table 9, rents In,the: pouglas- Community Area are higher than IHDA's Maximum Monthly Gross Rents for 50% to 60% Area Median Income (AMI).

■•- *     Table 9:9

      Summary of Rental Listings       

Avg Rent $1,079 $1,323 $1,648

Douglas Neighborhood

Bedrooms      Available Apts.

1. 12
2. 17

3      ' 7

      Source: Midwesf.Real Estate Data and Craigslist, March

2014

Senior Housing. Three age-restricted senior housing developments are located in the Redevelopment Project Area. Rent is tied to residents' incomes, and all units are reserved for low-Income residents. Seniors must be 60 years old to apply and 62 years old to move into CHA senior housing. Three other senior living housing facilities abut the Redevelopment Project Area boundaries, including G&A Senior Residences, CHA's Lincoln Perry Apartments and Annex, and Oakwood Shores Senior Apartments.

The CHA owns six other senior buildings in the vicinity of the Redevelopment Project Area. Nearby community areas with CHA senior buildings include Grand Boulevard, Kenwood, Fuller Park and Greater Grand Crossing. A list of senior properties can be found in the master table in the Appendix.

13

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

New and Planned Rental Developments. Several rental projects are recently completed, under construction, or planned in or around the Redevelopment Project Area. These provide additional affordable rental opportunities to residents of the Redevelopment Project Area. They include:

• The Shops and Lofts at 47, a mixed-use development that is currently under construction at the southwest corner of 47th and Cottage Grove. It will include a total of 96 rental apartments.
• The Rosenwald, a long vacant landmarked building at 4600 S 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.
• South Park Plaza, 2616 S Martin Luther King Drive, was built in 2005 at the sduthwestiCQmerdf'fyllik Drive and 26^lh Street. It replaced the former CHA Prairie. Courts Apactmerijs: with 134 affordable apartment and townhome rental units. The project was developed by the Woodlawn Community Development Corporation ■.

Future phases of Oakwood Shores remain fn planning stages. For-Sale Housing

AS discussed previouslyj 26%.6 of Redevelopment Project Area residents are estimated to be homeowners. The market of for-sale housing Is therefore relatively smaller than other community areas., Table 9,fi bestow summarizes/current listings from Midwest Real Estate Data for the Douglas Community'Area, where the Bronzeville TIF is Ideated.

•"•      ' Table 9;10

      Summary of Douglas For-Sale Listings      .      

#

Type      # Bedrooms   Median Price      Price Range Listings

"Condominium      1      $6fj$00      $59,900-$75^)00      3      

Condominium      2      $1,34,975       $68,900 - $225,000 4

Condominium    '     3      $209,500       $159,999 -$540,000 4

House      NA      $575,000      $224,9000 - $890,000 7

Source: Midwest Real Estate Data March 2014

Tables 9.11 and 9.12 on the following page show median sale prices of detached and attached housing units sold by Realtors in the Douglas, Grand Boulevard, and Oakland Community Areas over the previous 7 years. Prices of detached housing units are highest in Douglas. Prices dropped precipitously with the market downturn beginning at the end of 2007.

14

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

City of Chicago

Housing Impact Study Bronzeville TIF

Redevelopment Plan and Project

Table 9.11

Median Sales Price of Detached Single-Family Units

Community Name      2007        2008        2009        2010        2011        2012 2013

Douglas      $500,000  $415,811   $309,999   $212,000   $178,000   $152,500 $314,450

Grand Boulevard       $379,500  $242,000  $139,900  $200,000    $80,000  $220,000 $249,000

Oakland      $399,000   $319,750   $392,500   $159,950   $147,100   $279,950 $300,000

Source: This representation is based in whole or in part on data supplied by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC for the period January 2007. 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

2007        2008        2009        2010        2011        2012 2013

Douglas      9,      14      13      15      17      24 20

Grand Boulevard      24      30      45      36      27      34 55

Oakland      .7      4      6      10      16      8      11

Source: This representation is based in whole or in part on data supplied by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC for the period January 2007 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

Table 9.12

      Median Sales Price of Attached Single-Family Units      .

Community Name           2007       2008       2009       2010       2011        2012 2013

Douglas                  $208,231   $212,000    $97,700    $84,000    $57,000    $55,500 $77,500

Grand Boulevard        $239;250  $205;000    $57,000    $36,315    $40,850    $50,600 $60,300

Oakland       _:      •   $274,900  $323.950  $225.000  $239.500  $199,500  $142.000 $120.000

Source: This representation is. based in whole or in part on data supplied by Midwest Real Estate Data

LLC for the period January 2007 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 me market. © 2U14~MRED      

Number of Attached Single-Family Units Sold

Community Name 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Douglas      -      144      90      48      55      47      80 82

Grand Boulevard      272      )59      153      178      140      158 176

Oakland      43  ■       24      15      12      14      38      37

Source: This representation is based in whole or In part on data supplied by Midwest Real Estate Data LLC for the period January 2007 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

15

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

City of Chicago

Housing Impact Study Bronzeville TIF

Redevelopment Plan and Project

New and Planned For-Sale Developments. A number of new residential developments are planned or have been announced in and around the Redevelopment Project Area. Most of these developments, described below, are located in the northern half of the Redevelopment Project Area and take advantage of vacant lots or existing buildings in need of rehabilitation.

• Occupying the northwest corner of 26^th Street and Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, East Gate Village was developed in 2007 by New West Realty and Mercy Developers. It is part of a 10-acre site previously belonging to the Mercy Hospital Campus, which downsized in 2005. Originally planned in four phases with as many as 500 units of condos and townhomes, only Phases I and II were completed, amounting to 108 units. East Gate Village is situated just north of the Redevelopment Project Area.
• Signature Residences is a 36 unit cbndo building built in 2008.by Mark Properties, Inc. The five-story building, .at 207 East 31^st Street is located on the southeast corner of 31^st Street and Indiana Avenue, within the Bronzeville TIF.
• Michigan Place at 3120 South Indiana Avenue and 3115 South Michigan Avenue was built by Optima Inc. and completed in 2002. The development includes 44 townnouses and 76 condominiums. It falls within the Bronzeville TIF, just north of the College of Optometry.

16

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

Relocation Assistance

In the event that the implementation of the Plan results in the removal of residential housing units in the Redevelopment 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 Redevelopment Project Area.

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

ofthe United States Housing Act of 1937;: (ii) "very low-Income household" means a single

person, family⁷ or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is not more

than 50 percent ofthe median income of the area of residence, adjusted for family size, as

so determined by HUD; and (Hi) "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.      ■ '

17

Goodman Williams Group May 2, 2014

Appendix

Goodman Williams Group

May 2, 2014 18

.a

3 CO

o

CO

<

Q      co

5      c

.      o

Q Q D a      -g

Ol Dl cl O-      cp

Cl Q O Q      CO

< o

o

CL Q

o r— co

< <

<<<< OOOO

I I I I

ooooooooooaooaoooooooo

CLQ.O_0_0L-Q.O-Q.Q.O_CLa.a.D.Q.0uQ.Q.rxa.D-Q-

oooaooooooaoooooooooao

3 a

E o

IS

<u •a 'to 5

3 O

to w "o

CD

a>

Q

> .

E o

E      "§

rn      ftj      in>      k>

1. i      -S      ° .2

3      3      0)      <J> <D

1. 2      w      co co

E

fl

=3 cu 2 CO

'■=      6 E "6 E '§ E E E E E '§ E E E '§

III 1 iii i, # I i I gi I § I | I |

I i I i if1 i 1.11i I i $

E 3:

m i_

■5"

'E E

II

3

O CO g CO CO CO CO

co co ^m_m cd co" co oi

2      ^      . _

.      CO CO

CO CO      CO      ~

o m      o       

o --j-      o      o

<o      eo      <*

CM  CO      CO      CO

co 45 £ -6 5 to-^ =* o ;-

1— CO CO CO CO CO CO co' •«—

c

CO

6 I

ra a

CD J2

ra

5-

J2

•a

a 1

>

■e

o

CO jS" CO <6

£: 1= £ <

to CO CO nt   m *=

^ < <

$ $ $ $ $

-H 12 V-

CM      CO

to      in

e      s»

o      o

< £

CD 0>

cn c co R

o >=

"5

to

3      5

ra      £

>      ra

g      o,

<U      ro

■E      T2

3      S

3      3

o      o

CO      CO

-e      -ti

ra      ra

o_      o.

2      5

■3      3

o      o

CO      CO

ra      co

O.      O-

>      >      S      S

co      co      ra      ~

•§      3      5      § ^

O      ⁰      CO

CO      CO      w w

-£      -t:      ^      ra ra

_      c CO

era      Q) io

M      E c

< -2      cL .£

W      '55 CO

•I « S <2

-I? I

c □ D S S co uj o.

CO CO CO CO -0-0*0*0

8 8 8 8 J 1 M M

ra  w to

oooo

8 2

Q. Q. _ I I fl. 0.

i 5 -B

o

o

c

o

tn c o

V3

o. O

D) _C

CO 3

o X _££ XI

ra ■5

£

T3 <

o      ^

oi w      Si      uj

CM f-      O      O

m in      cm      o

r-. cm      «■      to

CU

-o c

CP

CD CC

•o e

e

S .0

ra

3

cr -p

si

>

■«> 3

to o <0 CO cn

n XI

■* >*■      ■*      >*

I

CO ^ a> CO

co cj uJ

O CO CD

ai o i-

ra

-s      -s

3      3

o      o

CO      CO

c c <u d>

xxxSxxilxxx x'| HI

2      £

o      o

o      o

D_      CL

co tzz o

<D X CO O

£ 3

< <

a o x x

o

a> CO

3

o

'■S a>

O Ol Q

<<<<"<<<< QQQQOQC1Q XXXXXXXX^

CM r- to JO O CT) CO "t -— U3

±:-±=COCO-d=-i=-i:i

CO O CO CD CM "r-O  N  U)  O)  O "f

cm      -or      ->- -—

•3      <

O      Q

a-      y

CO      i

CO      CO

c      c

o      o

«-s

a>      ai

CO      CO

s 1

 

§      I

—      —      t—

3      =      a>

5      5      co

§ CO CD CD CD . 37* 'CD. CO CO CO CO W CO' CO-

-5" E E

•2 ■£

2 2 2

-2r* .&> E E

3 -3

2 2

-5"

'E E ii

CO CM

CO CM

CO

cm**    co co co

----- CM CM CM CM

CO CM-

CO

CM CO

CO

CM CM

CO CO CM CM"

ID

"-a-* co

CO CM

-t n n

CO" CM CM

-jS-JCj. .g.g      to c

c§      5 cm^

O      o

CO W CO J CO co      »

O  O*  O -r—' LO

O   T*   T-   O   W   I/)      O

~   O  r-  O  IO  IO      -r-

CO   *-I   *>»•   -Of   C--)      Tj-

CM      i-      CO      t—

CD      CO      --      CO

-r-      O      O      CO

-or      i-      -or      CO

_> W CO .2 CO

r-      co n      2

5      £ S      s      s

CO      -t   •*      CO      o

cm      -cr io      oo      cn

CN      -T <D      '      —

CD

-S

3

s

<

"5

?_E I      S ^ cp

_. CO o o LO  CO  CM -—

' -or -or

cy5Lu5co^'f₁cocococo

OCO-fN-*010      "

O O CM in  -}   O "

-t  l- >*      ■} <t

 

2 % CD Ct

-S -8

a> q> co co

CO   CO   CO   CO   CO OO

■8 € "f «

<D    CD    35 CD

co to » w

cooocococococooococo cccccczccccz -   - oooooooo

o --8    -8 •-&    "f "8

QJ   Q)   QJ   Q)   CD   OJ    CD CO

CO

wwwwwcoww

CO LO

A-E

E I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 i I

cr CD C/O

.-£•

E

.£< ^- i< .2? .& E E E E 1 g

d)   3   m    q5    13    J3  _5   m   S   m   - —.    —    —    - - _.

co2wco5co2wcootSS2 2S2

5

ro

CO

cd, LU      ^

CO  O      CO

to lo      cn

■r ui      n

CO

_      c

«=>      r-      ct>      -^JL-

CN      -or      IO      w-

•«—      c-      t—      o

-or      -or      -or      -or

s

e

CD

c-m O r- Q

o o CO CM

eg oo co -or ■or -or c» ■*

a m is

Ii;¹

Q,  0) < "3J.

>. o LU q _3 ~~ co co co co

^UJ      in      * in      o

o      m      cm rg      o

t-      op      co co      r--.

co      "?      -or -or      -*

o c

CO

CO

O Dl

cd cz      o

5 S      -=

"Si      co

"5 cf      5

co  o      5

03   >   <f      CO    r     ^           i_ ;t

g" € f      -s -? € 3 | $

.2  o  c      ~ .E  o  co S

S -Z t=      <J      "->- " -~-<-n

ss

CO

■g 3 S3 I Q. i2  S |

§ < f 2 £ f. g> | §. -5 _B f £

m      to      ^      o      cr

c      co      o      O      CO

&   §5      £      CO      CD      CD

^ -?  5      9      r      x      x

< £ i < co fc^co Ct

ig g

it

CO ^

< to

J3 £

CO

UJ UJ CO

* jf

co jS

°- r*

CO CO

If

CD CD

■5 £

       CO

CD —1

CD .2

Q Si J J

EXHIBIT B

CDC Resolution recommending That City Council Approve the Amended Plan; Designate The Expanded Area and Adopt Tax Increment Allocation Financing

SEE ATTACHED

STATE OF ILLINOIS)

)SS

COUNTY OF COOK )

CERTIFICATE

I, Robert Wolf, the duly authorized and qualified Assistant Secretary of the Community Development Commission of the City of Chicago, and the custodian of the records thereof, do hereby certify that I have compared the attached copy of a Resolution adopted by the Community Development Commission of the City of Chicago at a Regular Meeting held on the 8^th Day of July 2014 with the original resolution adopted at said meeting and noted in the minutes of the Commission, and do hereby certify that said copy is a true, correct and complete transcript of said Resolution.

 

ASSISTANT SECRETARY Robert Wolf

Dated this 8^th Day of July 2014

14-CDC-26

J. T[F Area Designation. CDC I^:orrn2b-rccoinmi 11904

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO

RESOLUTION #1cdc-2^

RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO FOR THE PROPOSED BRONZEVILLE AMENDMENT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA:

APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PROJECT

WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission (the "Commission") of the City of Chicago (the "City") has heretofore been appointed by the Mayor of the City with the approval of its City Council ("City Council," referred to herein collectively with the Mayor as the "Corporate Authorities") (as codified in Section 2-124 ofthe City's Municipal Code) pursuant to Section 5/1 l-74.4-4(k) of the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, as amended (65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-1 et seg.) (the "Act"); and

WHEREAS, the Commission is empowered by the Corporate Authorities to exercise certain powers set forth in Section 5/1 l-74.4-4(k) of the Act, including the holding of certain public hearings required by the Act; and

WHEREAS, staff of the City's Department of Planning and Development has conducted or caused to be conducted certain investigations, studies and surveys of the Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area Amendment No. 3, the street boundaries of which are described on ^xhibit^±ereJto_(jUieJlAjea^).-tQ_detero the eligibility of the Area as a redevelopment project area as defined in the Act (a "Redevelopment Project Area") and for tax increment allocation financing pursuant to the Act ("Tax Increment Allocation Financing"), and previously has presented the following documents to the Commission for its review:

Bronzeville Redevelopment Plan.and Project Amendment No3 (the "Plan"); and

WHEREAS, prior to the adoption by the Corporate Authorities of ordinances approving a redevelopment plan, designating an area as a Redevelopment Project Area or adopting Tax Increment Allocation Financing for an area, it is necessary that the Commission hold a public hearing (the "Hearing") pursuant to Section 5/1 l-74.4-5(a) of the Act, convene a meeting of a joint review board (the "Board") pursuant to Section 5/ll-74.4-5(b) of the Act, set the dates of such Hearing and Board meeting and give notice thereof pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-6 of the Act; and

J Tl!^: Area Designation CDC I-'crin2b-recomin I M90I

WHEREAS, a public meeting (the "Public Meeting") was held in accordance and in compliance with the requirements of Section 5/1 l-74.4-6(e) of the Act, on May 1, 2014 at 6:00 pm at the James Doolittle Jr Elementary School - 535 E. 35th Street, Chicago, Illinois, (this date being more than 14 business days before the scheduled mailing ofthe notice of the Hearing [hereinafter defined], as specified in the Act), pursuant to notice from the City's Commissioner of the Department of Planning and Development, given on April 14,2014, (this date being more than 15 days before the date of the Public Meeting, as specified in the Act), by certified mail to all taxing districts having real property in the proposed Area and to all entities requesting that information that have taken the steps necessary to register to be included on the interested parties registry for the proposed Area in accordance with Section 5/11-74.4-4.2 of the Act and, with a good faith effort, by regular mail, to all residents and to the last known persons who paid property taxes on real estate in the proposed Area (which good faith effort was satisfied by such notice being mailed to each residential address and to the person or persons in whose name property taxes were paid on real property for the last preceding year located in the proposed Area); and

WHEREAS, the Report and Plan were made available for public inspection and review since May 2, 2014, being a date not less than 10 days before the Commission meeting at which the Commission adopted Resolution 14-CDC-18 on May 13, 2014 fixing the time and place for the Hearing, at City Hall, 121 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois, in the following offices: City Clerk, Room 107 and Department of Planning and Development, Room 1000; and

WHEREAS, notice of the availability of the Report and Plan, including how to obtain this information, were sent by mail on May 19, 2014 which is within a reasonable time after the adoption by the Commission of Resolution 14-CDC-18 to: (a) all residential addresses that, after a good faith effort, were determined to be (i) located within the Area and (ii) located outside the proposed Area and within 750 feet of the boundaries of the Area (or, if applicable, were determined to be the 750 residential addresses that were outside the proposed Area and closest to the boundaries of the Area); and (b) organizations and residents that were registered interested parties for such Area; and

WHEREAS, notice of the Hearing by publication was given at least twice, the first publication being on June 10, 2014 a date which is not more than 30 nor less than 10 days prior to the Hearing, and the second publication being on June 17, 2014, both in the Chicago Sun-Times or the Chicago Tribune, being newspapers of general circulation within the taxing districts having property in the Area; and

WHEREAS, notice of the Hearing was given by mail to taxpayers by depositing such notice in the United States mail by certified mail addressed to the persons in whose names the general taxes for the last preceding year were paid on each lot, block, tract or parcel of land lying within the Area, on June 10, 2014, being a date not less than 10 days prior to the date set for the Hearing; and where taxes for the last preceding year were not paid, notice was also mailed to the

2

I. TIF Area Dcsignadon CDC Form2b-rccomrnl 11904

persons last listed on the tax rolls as the owners of such property within the preceding three years; and

WHEREAS, notice of the Hearing was given by mail to the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity ("DECO") and members of the Board (including notice of the convening of the Board), by depositing such notice in the United States mail by certified mail addressed to DECO and all Board members, on May 16,2014, being a date not less than 45 days prior to the date set for the Hearing; and

WHEREAS, notice of the Hearing and copies of the Report and Plan were sent by mail to taxing districts having taxable property in the Area, by depositing such notice and documents in the United States mail by certified mail addressed to all taxing districts having taxable property within the Area, on May 16, 2014, being a date not less than 45 days prior to the date set for the Hearing; and

WHEREAS, the Hearing was held on July 8, 2014 at 1:00 p.m. at City Hall, 2^nd Floor, 121 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois, as the official public hearing, and testimony was heard from all interested persons or representatives of any affected taxing district present at the Hearing and wishing to testify, concerning the Commission's recommendation to City Council regarding approval of the Plan, designation of the Area as a Redevelopment Project Area and adoption of Tax Increment Allocation Financing within the Area; and

WHEREAS, the Board meeting was convened on June 6, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. (being a date at least 14 days but not more than 28 days after the date of the mailing of the notice to me taxing districts on May 16, 2014) in Room 1003A, City Hall, 121 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois, to review the matters properly coming before the Board to allow it to provide its advisory recommendation regarding the approval of the Plan, designation of the Area as a Redevelopment Project Area, adoption of Tax Increment Allocation Financing within the Area and other matters, if any, properly before it, all in accordance with Section 5/ll-74.4-5(b) ofthe Act; and

WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Report and Plan, considered testimony from the Hearing, if any, the recommendation of the Board, if any, and such other matters or studies as the Commission deemed necessary or appropriate in making the findings set forth herein and formulating its decision whether to recommend to City Council approval of the Plan, designation of the Area as a Redevelopment Project Area and adoption of Tax Increment Allocation Financing within the Area; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO:

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

3

J. TIF Aria Designation CDC Form2b-reconim111904

Section 2. The Commission hereby makes the following findings pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-3(n) of the Act or such other section as is referenced herein:

a.      The Area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development through

investment by private enterprise and would not reasonably be expected to be developed

without the adoption of the Plan;

1. The Plan:

1. 1. conforms to the comprehensive plan for the development of the City as a whole; or
   2. the Plan either (A) conforms to the strategic economic development or redevelopment plan issued by the Chicago Plan Commission or (B) includes land uses that have been approved by the Chicago Plan Commission;
2. The Plan meets all of the requirements of a redevelopment plan as defined in the Act and, as set forth in the Plan, the estimated date of completion of the projects described therein and retirement of all obligations issued to finance redevelopment project costs is not later than December 31 of the year in which the payment to the municipal treasurer as provided in subsection (b) of Section 5/11-74.4-8 of the Act is to be made with respect to ad valorem taxes levied in the twenty-third calendar year following the year of the adoption of the ordinance approving the designation of the Area as a redevelopment project area and, as required pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-7 of the Act, no such obligation shall have a maturity date greater than 20 years;
3. To the extent required by Section 5/1 lD74.4-3(n) (6) of the Act, the Plan incorporates the housing impact study, if such study is required by Section 5/ll-74.4-3(n)(5) ofthe Act;

e.      The Plan will not result in displacement of residents from inhabited units.

1. The Area includes only those contiguous parcels of real property and improvements thereon that are to be substantially benefited by proposed Plan improvements, as required pursuant to Section 5/1 l-74.4-4(a) of the Act;
2. As required pursuant to Section 5/1 l-74.4-3(p) ofthe Act:

1. The Area is not less, in the aggregate, than one and one-half acres in size; and
2. Conditions exist in the Area that cause the Area to qualify for designation as a redevelopment project area and a blighted area as defined in the Act;

4

J Til- Area Designation CDC Konn2b-'cconnn I1 i90't

h.      If the Area is qualified as a "blighted area", whether improved or vacant, each of the

factors necessary to qualify the Area as a Redevelopment Project Area on that basis is (i)

present, with that presence documented to a meaningful extent so that it may be

reasonably found that the factor is clearly present within the intent of the Act and (ii)

reasonably distributed throughout the improved part or vacant part, as applicable, of the

Area as required pursuant to Section 5/1 l-74.4-3(a) of the Act;

i.      If the Area is qualified as a "conservation area" the combination of the factors

necessary to qualify the Area as a redevelopment project area on that basis is detrimental

to the public health, safety, morals or welfare, and the Area may become a blighted area;

[and]

Section 3. The Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Plan pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-4 ofthe Act.

Section 4. The Commission recommends that the City Council designate the Area as a Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to Section 5/11-74.4-4 of the Act.

Section 5. The Commission recommends that the City Council adopt Tax Increment Allocation Financing within the Area.

Section 6. If any provision of this resolution shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this resolution.

Section 7. All resolutions, motions or orders in conflict with this resolution are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict.

Section 8. This resolution shall be effective as of the date of its adoption.

List of Attachments:

Exhibit A: Street Boundary Description of the Area

5

Section 9. A certified copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the City Council.      

 

J. TfF Area Dejit-naiion CDC Form2b-recom:nl 11904

EXHIBIT A

Street Boundary Description of the Area

The Redevelopment Project Area is generally bounded by 25th Street to the north, Cottage Grove and Lake Shore Drive to the east, the Dan Ryan Expressway and State Street to the west, and 40^th Street to the south.

EXHIBIT C

Legal Description of the Expanded Area SEE ATTACHED

Legal Description of Expanded Area

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

Amended Exhibit 1 - Amended Legal Description Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area

That part of the North Half of Section 3 and 4, Township 38 North, Range 14, East of the Third Principal Meridian, Section 27, 28, 33. and 34, Township 39 North, Range 14, East ofthe third Principal Meridian, described as follows:

Beginning at the intersection of the East line of Wentworth Avenue and the North line of Pershing Road; Thence East along the North line of Pershing Road to the West line of State Street; Thence North along the West line of State Street to the South line of 27^th Street; Thence West along the South line of 27^th Street to the West line of Lot 75 in W.H. Adams Subdivision of part of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 28, Township 39 North, Range 14, as extended South; Thence North along said extended line, being the West line of said Lot 75, Lot 40 and 9 in said W.H. Adams Subdivision and its extension North to the North line of 26^lh Street; Thence West along said North line of 26^th Street to the West line of a vacated 10 foot wide alley adjoining Lot 24 in Block 3 of G.W. Gerrish's Subdivision of part of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 28, Township 39 North, Range 14; Thence North along the West line of said vacated 10 foot wide alley to the Westerly extension of the North Line of Lot 19 in said Block 3 of G.W. Gerrish's Subdivision; Thence East along said Westerly extension ofthe North Line of Lot 19 to the centerline of said vacated 10 foot wide alley; Thence North along said centerline to the North line of 25^th Street; Thence Easterly along the North line of 25^th Street to the East line of Lot 1 extended North in Gardner's Subdivision of the West Half of Block 60, in Canal Trustee's Subdivision of the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 27, Township 39 North, Range 14; Thence South along said extended line to the North line of 26^th Street; Thence Southerly to the Northwest corner of Lot 28 in Assessor's Division recorded as document 20877; Thence South along the East line of an alley to a point on the North line of Lot 2 in County Clerks Division recorded as document 176695; Thence West along the North line of Lots 2 through 5 in said Assessors Division to the West line of said Lot 5; Thence southwest and south along the West line of said Lot 5 and its extension South to the North line of 28^th Street; Thence West along the North line of 28^th Street to the East line of Wabash Avenue; Thence South along East line of Wabash Avenue to the South line of 29^th Street; Thence West along-the-SouthHine-of--29^aLStreet -to-the- East-line-oMhe-West-22^eet^fJj3t-6Jn_BiackJl_La. Assessor's Division of the West Vi of. Block 93 in Canal Trustees' Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of the West 22 feet of Lot 6 to the centerline of a 16 foot vacated alley lying first south of 29^th Street; Thence East along said centerline to the West line of the East 35 feet of Lot 42 in Block 1 of Assessor's Division aforesaid extended north; Thence South along the West line of the East 35 feet of Lot 42 and of Lots 36 through 41 to the South line of Lot 36; Thence West to the West line ofthe East 36 feet of Lot 35; Thence South along the West line of the East 36 feet of Lot 35 and of Lots 30 through 34 to the South line of Lot 30, said south line also being the North line of Lot 32 in Aaron Gibbs' Subdivision; Thence continuing South along the West line of the East 36 feet of said Lot 32 to the North line of Lot 31; Thence East to the West line of the East 35 feet of said Lot 31; Thence South along the West line of the East 35 feet of said Lot 31 to the North line of Lot 30; Thence East to the West line of the East 34 feet of said Lot 30; Thence South along the West line of the East 34 feet of said Lot 30 to the North line of Lot 29; Thence East to the West line of the East 33 feet of said Lot 29; Thence South along the West line of the East 33 feet of'said Lot 29 to the North line of Lot 28; Thence East to the

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

West line of the East 32 feet of said Lot 28; Thence South along the West line of the East 32 feet of said Lot 28 to the North line of Lot 27; Thence East to the West line of the East 31 feet of said Lot 27; Thence South along the West line of the East 31 feet of said Lot 27 to the North line of Lot 26; Thence East to the West line of the East 30 feet of said Lot 26; Thence South along the West line of the East 30 feet of said Lot 26 to the North line of Lot 25; Thence East to the West line of the East 29 feet .of said Lot 25; Thence South along the West line of the East 29 feet of said Lot 25 to the South line of said Lot 25 also being the North line of Lot 12 in Weston's Subdivision; Thence East to the West line of the East 28 feet of said Lot 12; Thence South along the West line ofthe East 28 feet of said Lot 12 to the North line of Lot 11; Thence East to the West line of the East 27 feet of said Lot 11; Thence South along the West line of the East 27 feet of said Lot 11 to the North line of Lot 10; Thence East to the West line of the East 26 feet of said Lot 10; Thence South along the West line of the East 26 feet of said Lot 10 to the North line of Lot 9; Thence East to the West line of the East 25 feet of said Lot 9; Thence South along the West line of the East 25 feet of said Lot 9 to the South line of Lot 9 also being the North line of Lot 4 in Assessor's Division of Lots 5., 6, 7 and 8 in Weston and Gibbs' Subdivision; Thence East to the East line of the West 4 feet of said Lot 4; Thence South along the East line of the West 4 feet of said Lot 4 to the North line of 30^m Street; Thence South to the Northeast corner of Lot 65 in R.S. Thomas' Subdivision of Block 99 in Canal Trustees Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of said Lot 65, its extension to the Northeast corner of Lot 70 and the East line of Lot 70 to a point 70.0 feet North of 31^s1 Street; Thence West 4.0 feet; Thence South parallel with the East line of Lot 70 to the North line of 31^st Street; Thence East along the North line of 31^st Street to the centerline of vacated Indiana Avenue; Thence North along the centerline of vacated Indiana Avenue to the North line The South 50 Feet of 29^th Street; Thence East along the North line of The South 50 Feet of 29^th Street to the West line of Prairie Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Prairie Avenue to the South line of 26^th Street; Thence East along the South line of 26^th Street to the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive; Thence North along the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive to the North line of 25^th Street as extended West; Thence East along said extended line and the North line of 25^th Street to the Easterly line of Lake Park Avenue; Thence continuing Easterly along the Easterly extension of the North line of 25^th Street to the Westerly line of Lake Shore Drive; Thence Southerly along the Easterly line of Lake Shore Drive to the North line of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 39 North, Range 14; Thence continuing Southerly along the West line of Lake Shore Drive to the South line of Section 27, said line also being the Easterly extension of the centerline of 31^st Street; Thence West along the ceTTteTllne

Land Clearance Commission No. 2 recorded as document 17511645 as extended South; Thence North along said line to the South line of 30^th Street; Thence West to the West line of Vernon Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Vernon Avenue to the North line of 29^lh Place; Thence East to the center line of Cottage Grove Avenue; Thence North along the center line of Cottage Grove Avenue to the South line of 29^th Street; Thence West along the South line of 29^th Street to the West line of Vernon Avenue; Thence North and Northeast along the West line of Vernon Avenue to the West line of Ellis Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Ellis Avenue to the South line of 26^th Street; Thence West along the South line of 26^th Street to the East line of Dr. Martin Luther Ling Drive; Thence South along the East line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive to the intersection with the South line of 31^s1 Street as extended East; Thence West along the South line of 31^s' Street to the Northeast corner of Lot 2 in Block 2 in Loomis and Laflin's Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of Lots 2, 3, 6 and 7 to a point 17.0 feet North of the Southeast corner of Lot 7 in Block 2 in Loomis and Laflin's Subdivision; Thence West parallel with the South line of Lot 7 in Loomis and Laflin's Subdivision and its extension to

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

a point on the West line Giles Avenue; Thence South along the West line of Giles Avenue to the Southeast corner of Lot 4 in C. Cleaver's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of said Lot 4 to the Southwest corner of Lot 4 in C. Cleaver's Subdivision; Thence North along the West line of said Lot 4 to a point of intersection with the Easterly extension ofthe South line of Lot 1 in Haywood's Subdivision as extended East; Thence West along said extended line and the South line of Lots 1 through 5 in Haywood's Subdivision to the East line of Prairie Avenue; Thence West to the Southeast corner of Lot 6 in Haywood's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of Lots 6 through 10 and its extension to the Southeast corner of Lot 11 in Haywood's Subdivision; Thence South along the Southerly extension of the East line of said Lot 11 to the Easterly extension ofthe South line of Lot 16 in Haywood's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of said Lot 16 and its extension West to the East line of Indiana Avenue; Thence South along the East line of Indiana Avenue to the South line of 32^nd Street; Thence West along the South line of 32^nd Street to the West line of Michigan Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Michigan Avenue to the Southeast comer of Lot 8 in Block 2 in C.H Walker's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of said Lot 8 in Block 2 in C.H. Walker Subdivision and its extension West to the Southwest corner of Lot 7 in Block 2 in C.H Walker's Subdivision being the East line of vacated Wabash Avenue; Thence South along the East line of vacated Wabash Avenue being the West line of Block 2 in C.H. Walker's Subdivision to the South line of vacated 32^nd Street; Thence East along the South line of vacated 32^nd Street to the Northwest corner of Lot 46 in Block 2 in J. Wentworth's Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of Wabash Avenue to the Southwest corner of Lot 1 in J. S. Barnes' Subdivision; Thence East along the South line of said Lot 1 and its extension East to the West line of a vacated 20.0 foot wide alley; Thence North along said centerline of said vacated 20.0 foot alley to the centerline of 34^th Street; Thence East to the East line of Michigan Avenue; Thence South along the East line of Michigan Avenue to the Northwest-corner of Lot 30 in Block 7 in J. Wentworth's Subdivision; Thence East along the North line of said Lot 30 and its extension East to the East line of a 20.0 foot wide alley, being the Northwest corner of Lot 19 in Block 7 in J. Wentworth's Subdivision; Thence South along the East line of said alley to the Southwest corner of Lot 20 in Block 7 in J. Wentworth's Subdivision; Thence East along the South line of said Lot 20 and its extension East to the East line of Indiana Avenue; Thence North along the East line of Indiana Avenue to the Northwest corner of Lot 39 in Block 1 of Harriet Farlin's Subdivision; Thence East along the North line of said Lot 39 and its extension East to the East line of an 18.0 foot wide alley in said Block 1; Thence South along the East line of said alley to the Southwest corner of Lot 15 in Block i in Harriet harlirTs~SubTf!vf5lc^;~Trre^

1 to the West line of Prairie Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Prairie Avenue to the North line of the South half of Lot 7 in Block 1 in Dyer and Davisson's Subdivision as extended West; Thence East along said extended line to the West line of an 18,0 foot alley; Thence South along the West line of said alley to the South line of said Lot 7; Thence East along the South line of said Lot 7 and its extension West to the West line of Giles Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Giles Avenue to the South line of a vacated 16.0 foot alley in Block 2 in Dyer and Davisson's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of said alley to the East line of an 18.0 foot alley in said Block 2; Thence South along the East line of said alley to the Westerly extension of the North line of the South 3 feet of Lot 1 in Nellie C. Dodson's Subdivision extended East; Thence West along said extended line to the West line of Prairie Avenue; Thence North along the West line of Prairie Avenue to a point 85.0 feet South of the south line of 33^rd Street; Thence West parallel with 33^rd Street 124.62 feet to the East line of 16.0 foot alley; Thence North along the East line of said alley to the South line of 33^rd Street; Thence East along the South line of 33^rd Street to the West line of 14.0 foot alley, being the Northeast corner

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

of Lot 1 in Fuller, Frost and Cobb's Subdivision; Thence South along the West line of said alley to the North line of Lot 15 in Francis J. Young's Subdivision extended West; Thence East along the North line of said Lot 15 to the West line of Calumet Avenue; Thence South along the West line of Calumet Avenue to the North line of Lot 23 in Fowler's Subdivision extended West; Thence East along said extended line and North line of Lots 23 to 19 in said Fowler's Subdivision and its extension East to the East line of a 16.0 foot alley; Thence North along said East line of the public alley to the South line of the 66 foot wide right of way of 33^rd Street; Thence East along said South right of way line of 33^rd Street to the West right of way line of Martin Luther King Drive; Thence South along the West right of way line of Martin Luther King Drive to a point of intersection with the Westerly extension of the North right of way line of 33 Place; Thence East along the North right of way line of 33^rd Place to a point of intersection with the Northerly extension of the East right of way line of Rhodes Avenue; Thence South along the East right of way line of Rhodes Avenue to the North right of way line of 35™ Street; Thence East along the North right of way line of 35^th Street to the East right of way line of Cottage Grove Avenue; Thence Southeasterly along the East right of way line of Cottage Grove Avenue to a point of intersection with the Northeasterly extension of a line being 300 feet Northwesterly of the center line of vacated 36™ Street; Thence Southwesterly along said extension line to a point being 150 feet Westerly of the West line of Cottage Grove Avenue; Thence Southeasterly on a line being parallel with the West right of way line of Cottage Grove Avenue to the center line of vacated 36™ Street; Thence Southwesterly along the center line of vacated 36™ Street to an angle point; Thence Westerly along the center line of vacated 36™ Street to the Westerly right of way line of Vincennes Avenue; Thence Northerly along the Westerly right of way line of Vincennes Avenue to the South right of way line of Browning Avenue; Thence West along the South right of way line of Browning Avenue to the West right of way line of Rhodes Avenue; Thence North along the West right of way line of Rhodes Avenue to the South right of way line of 35™ Street; Thence West along the South right of way line of 35™ Street to the center line of a 16.0 foot alley extended North said center line being 132.0 feet East of the East line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive; Thence south along the center line of the 16.0 foot alley to the Easterly extension ofthe South line'of Lot 1 in Loomis' Resubdivision of Lots 1 and 4 in Block 1 of Ellis' West Addition to Chicago in the SE % of Section 34 aforesaid; Thence West along the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot 1 in Loomis' Resubdivision to the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive; Thence North along the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive to a point 120.0 feet South of the South line of 35^th Street; Thence West parallel with 35^th Street to *e-^sHtrre^f-^6:0^rot^lleyHjein§^

Thence South along the East line of said alley to the North line of Lot 2 in D. Harry Hammer's Subdivision; Thence West along the North line of said Lot 2 to the East line of Lot 24 in W. D. Bishopp's Subdivision; Thence South along the east line of said Lot 24 to the North line of 37^th Street; Thence East along the North line of 37^th Street to The East right of way line of Rhodes Avenue; Thence South along the East right of way line of Rhodes Avenue to the North right of way line of Pershing Road; Thence West along the North line of Pershing Avenue to the East line of an alley extended North, said line being the West line of Lot 17 in Block 1 in Bowen and Smith's Subdivision; Thence South along the east line of said alley to the North line of Oakwood Boulevard; Thence East along the North line of Oakwood Boulevard to the Southeast corner of Lot 1 in Subdivision of Lot 32 in Block 1 in Bowen and Smith's Subdivision ofthe Northeast Vi of said Section 3; Thence South along the Southerly extension of said Lot 1 a distance of 25 feet; Thence West along a line being 25 feet South of and parallel with the North line of Oakwood Boulevard to the Northerly extension ofthe West line of Lot 16 in Bowen & Smith's Subdivision; Thence South to the Northeast corner of Lot 16 in Bowen & Smith's Subdivision; Thence South

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

City of Chicago

Bronzeville TIF Redevelopment Plan and Project - Amendment No. 3

along the East line of Lots 16, 17, and 18 in Bowen & Smith's Subdivision to the South line of Lot 18 in Block 2 in Bowen and Smith's Subdivision aforesaid; Thence West along said South line to the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive; Thence North along the West line of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive to the Southeast corner of Lot 1 in Wallace R. Martin's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of Lots 1 through 3 in Wallace R. Martin's Subdivision to the East line of a 16.0 foot alley; Thence North along the East line of said 16.0 foot alley to the South line of Lot 66 in Circuit Court Partition per document 1225139 extended East; Thence West along the South line of Lots 66 through 70 in Circuit Court Partition and its extension West to the West line of Calumet Avenue;, Thence West along the North line of a 16.0 foot alley to the East line of Prairie Avenue; Thence South along the East line of Prairie Avenue to the South line of Lot 3 in Springer's Subdivision extended East; Thence West along said extended line and South line of said Lot 3 to the Southwest corner of Lot 3; Thence North along the West line of Lot 3 to the Southeast corner of Lot 4 in Springer's Subdivision; Thence West along the South line of Lots 4 through 7 in Springer's Subdivision to the East line of Indiana Avenue; Thence South along the East line of Indiana Avenue to the North line of 40^,h Street; Thence West along the North line of 40^th Street and its extension West to the centerline line of State Street; Thence South along the centerline of State Street to the South line of 40^th Street; Thence West along the South line of 40^th Street to the East line of Block 4 in Pryor's Subdivision; Thence North along said East line to the North line of the U.S. Yards Railroad Right of Way running through said Block 4 in Pryor's Subdivision; Thence West along said North line to the East line of Wentworth Avenue; Thence North along East line of Wentworth Avenue to the place of beginning, all in Cook County, Illinois.

Laube Consulting Group, LLC

EXHIBIT D

Street Location of the Expanded Area

The Redevelopment Project Area is generally bounded by 25^th Street to the north, Cottage Grove and Lake shore Drive to the east, the Dan Ryan Expressway and State Street to the west, and 40^th Street to the south.

EXHIBIT E

Map of the Expanded Area SEE ATTACHED

 

 

Map 1

Redevelopment Project Area Boundary Amendment No. 3

Amendment to Bronzeville Redevelopment Project Area City of Chicago, Illinois