Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.21.20 AGENDA City Council Tuesday, January 21, 2020 Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, James C. Lytle City Council Chambers, Room 2800 7:00 PM Page (I) ROLL CALL - BEGIN WITH ALDERMAN WYNNE (II) MAYOR PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS (III) CITY MANAGER PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS (IV) COMMUNICATIONS: CITY CLERK Page 1 of 137 (V) PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public are welcome to speak at City Council meetings. As part of the Council agenda, a period for public comments shall be offered at the commencement of each regular Council meeting. Public comments will be noted in the City Council Minutes and become part of the official record. Those wishing to speak should sign their name and the agenda item or non-agenda topic to be addressed on a designated participation sheet. If there are five or fewer speakers, fifteen minutes shall be provided for Public Comment. If there are more than five speakers, a period of forty-five minutes shall be provided for all comment, and no individual shall speak longer than three minutes. The Mayor will allocate time among the speakers to ensure that Public Comment does not exceed forty-five minutes. The business of the City Council shall commence forty-five minutes after the beginning of Public Comment. Aldermen do not respond during Public Comment. Public Comment is intended to foster dialogue in a respectful and civil manner. Public comments are requested to be made with these guidelines in mind. (VI) SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS SP1. Affordable Housing Work Plan Progress to Date This memorandum and the summary chart attached provide the City Council an update on the projects and activities to address the City Council goal of expanding affordable housing options in Evanston that have been undertaken since the Affordable Housing Update on September 16, 2019. Staff requests that it be accepted and placed on file. For Action: Accept and Place on File Affordable Housing Work Plan Progress to Date 6 - 13 SP2. Age-Friendly Evanston Market Assessment for Independent and Assisted Living Needs in Evanston The Housing and Homelessness Commission and staff recommend that City Council accept and place on file the Sawgrass Market Assessment of independent and assisted living needs for seniors in Evanston prepared for the Age-Friendly Evanston Task Force, and refer it to the Affordable Housing Plan Steering Committee to inform the development of the City’s Affordable Housing Plan. For Action: Accept and Place on File Age-Friendly Evanston Market Assessment for Independent and Assisted Living Needs in Evanston 14 - 67 Page 2 of 137 SP3. Consideration of a Waiver of Building Permit Fees for Coach Houses/ADUs with Affordable Rental Restrictions This memo provides information to City Council pertinent to a referral by Alderman Fleming to waive the building permit fees for construction of a new coach house/accessory dwelling unit (ADU) if the owner agrees to rent the ADU at an affordable rate to income eligible households. Staff does not recommend waiver of building permit fees at this time; rationale is provided below. For Discussion Consideration of a Waiver of Building Permit Fees for Coach Houses/ADUs with Affordable Rental Restrictions 68 - 69 SP4. Consideration of Funding for ArtSpace in Support of a Preliminary Feasibility Study Staff recommends City Council authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with ArtSpace (50 Third Avenue North, Suite 400, Minneapolis, MN 55401) for affordable housing consulting services/preliminary feasibility study for an amount not to exceed $25,000. The Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) 250.21.5465.62490 is the proposed funding source. The AHF currently has a cash bal ance of approximately $3,500,000; $2,000,000 is requested for the Evergreen Senior Housing Project. For Action Consideration of Funding for ArtSpace in support of a Preliminary Feasibility Study 70 - 78 SP5. Ordinance 8-O-20 Planned Development, 999-1015 Howard Street The Plan Commission and staff recommend adoption of Ordinance 8-O- 20 for approval of a Special Use for a Planned Development in the B2 Business District to construct a 4-story, 73,017 square foot addition to the existing CJE Senior Life building. The addition includes 60 affordable dwelling units for residents (older adults, 62 years and older) and 55 parking spaces. For Action Ordinance 8-O-20 Planned Development, 999-1015 Howard Street 79 - 123 Page 3 of 137 SP6. Allocation of $2 Million in HOME Investment Partnership and Affordable Housing Fund Dollars for Evergreen Real Estate Group/CJE Senior Housing Project The Housing and Homelessness Commission and staff recommend approval of $2,000,000 from the City’s HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) grant and its Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) for the Evergreen/CJE Senior Housing Project at 1015 Howard Street. This 60- unit senior housing project will provide much-needed affordable rental and meets City underwriting standards. Up to $500,000 in HOME funding, account 240.21.5430.65535. The City has $184,500 of its 2019 HOME grant available in its line of credit with HUD, and anticipates receiving approximately $300,000 per year in 2020 and 2021 that can be allocated to the project. $1,500,000 or the balance to total $2,000,000 from the City’s Affordable Housing Fund, account 250.21.5465.65530. The AHF currently h as a cash balance of approximately $3,500,000. For Action Allocation of $2 Million in HOME Investment Partnership and Affordable Housing Fund Dollars for Evergreen Real Estate Group/CJE Senior Housing Project 124 - 137 (VII) CALL OF THE WARDS (Aldermen shall be called upon by the Mayor to announce or provide information about any Ward or City matter which an Alderman desires to bring before the Council.) {Council Rule 2.1(10)} (VIII) EXECUTIVE SESSION (IX) ADJOURNMENT Page 4 of 137 (X) UPCOMING ALDERMANIC COMMITTEE MEETINGS DATE TIME BOARD/COMMITTEE/COMMISSION 1/21/2020 7:00PM Housing & Community Development Act Committee - CANCELLED 1/23/2020 7:00PM Emergency Telephone System Board 1/27/2020 6:00PM Administration & Public Works/Planning and Development/City Council 2/3/2020 6:00PM Human Services Committee 2/6/2020 7:00PM Housing &Homelessness Commission 2/10/2020 6:00PM Administration & Public Works/Planning and Development/City Council Page 5 of 137 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Sarah Flax, Housing & Grants Administrator CC: Johanna Leonard, Community Development Director; Marion Johnson, Housing Intern; Quentin Crane, VISTA Housing Associate Subject: Affordable Housing Work Plan Progress to Date Date: January 21, 2020 Recommended Action: This memorandum and the summary chart attached provide the City Council an update on the projects and activities to address the City Council goal of expanding affo rdable housing options in Evanston that have been undertaken since the Affordable Housing Update on September 16, 2019. Staff requests that it be accepted and placed on file. Council Action: For Action: Accept and Place on File Summary: Create New Housing Opportunities Approval of Ordinance 171-O-19, Amending Title 6, Accessory Dwelling Unit Requirements and Qualifications City Council approved zoning changes that facilitate construction of coach houses/ADUs, including houses/ADUs as coach allow: to acces principal any to units dwelling sory residential structure, no longer limited to single-family detached homes; increased height with additional setbacks from property lines in non-historic districts; and remove the parking requirement when located within a designated TOD area or within 1,500 feet of a Metra, PACE or CTA public transit bus stop or train station at its meeting on January 13, 2020. Age-Friendly Evanston Market Assessment for Independent and Assisted Living Needs in Evanston A presentation of the Sawgrass Market Assessment of independent and assisted living needs of seniors in Evanston by the Age Friendly Evanston Task Force Housing Committee is on tonight’s agenda for acceptance by City Council and referral to the Affordable Housing Plan Steering Committee for consideration in the development of the City’s Affordable Housing Plan. ArtSpace Preliminary Feasibility Study for a Live/Work Project SP1.Page 6 of 137 Staff recommends approval of proposal from ArtSpace Consulting for a Preliminary Feasibility Study of affordable artist live/work housing in Evanston in a not to exceed amount of $25,000 from the Affordable Housing Fund. The Housing and Homeless Commission voted against approval of up to $25,000 from the Affordable Housing Fund for this project at its meeting on December 5, 2019; the Commission recognized the potential value of the study to Evanston but viewed this as a primarily Economic Development project that could be funded by some other source. This item is on tonight’s agenda for action by City Council. Increase Affordable Units in Market Rate Developments Waiver of Building Permit Fees for Coach houses/ADUs for Affordable Housing Rental Restrictions A staff memo in response to a referral by Alderman Fleming to waivethe building permit fees for any property owner constructing a coach house/accessory dwelling unit (ADU) who will agree to rent the ADU at an affordable rate to income eligible households is on tonight’s agenda for discussion. Expand Revenues for Affordable Housing Fees-In-Lieu of Onsite Units received in 2019 The City received a fee-in-lieu of onsite units totaling $2.4 million for the 811 Emerson Street development. Increased Fee-in-lieu of Onsite Units and Demolition Tax The City’s IHO fees-in-lieu of onsite units and demolition tax rates are adjusted annually on January 1 based on the Consumer Price Index per their ordinances. In the 12 -month period ending November 30, 2019, the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI -U) in the Chicago-Naperville-Elgin area increased 2.2%. The chart below shows the fees-in –lieu of onsite affordable units and the demolition tax rates in effect for 2020. 2019 2020 Downtown and Research Park districts fee-in-lieu $ 175,000 $ 178,850 All other zoning districts fee-in-lieu $ 150,000 $ 153,300 Demolition tax for single and two-unit properties $ 15,000 $ 15,330 Demolition tax per unit for three or more unit properties $ 5,000 $ 5,110 For condominium developments that elect to pay the fee-in-lieu of all onsite units, the fee-in-lieu is 1.5 times the fee-in-lieu shown above for their Downtown or non-Downtown zoning districts. Page 2 of 8 SP1.Page 7 of 137 Create Pathways to Homeownership Geometry In Construction Construction is underway at ETHS for the home that will be moved to 1824 Emerson Street in summer of 2020. 2005 Grey Avenue home was sold to an income eligible household in 2019. 2018-2019 GIC home was moved to 1729 Dodge Avenue in June 2019 for completion prior to its sale to an income eligible household. Financial Wellness Program for Evanston Residents A Financial Wellness agreement with First Northern Credit Union for a personal finance education program to assist Evanston residents with building wealth to enable participation in capital and credit markets was approved by Council at its meeting on Janua ry 13, 2020. This program should lead to increased levels of business startup activity and home ownership, decreased debt, and overall improved community health resulting from financial stress reduction. Expand Development of Income Restricted Rental Units Evergreen/CJE 60-unit Senior housing project at 1015 Howard Street Evergreen Real Estate Group received an award of Low Income Housing Tax Credits from the Illinois Housing Development Authority in May for its 60-unit senior housing development at 1015 Howard Street. Its planned development ordinance was introduced at Planning & Development Committee on January 13 and is on tonight’s City Council agenda for action. A recommendation from the Housing and Homeless Commission and staff for City fundin g in the amount of $2 million for this project is on tonight’s City Council agenda for action. Redevelopment of City-Owned Property at 1805 Church Street The City acquired 1805 Church Street through a deed in lieu of foreclosure following Council approval of that action on 4/29/2019. Council voted to approve the issuance of a request for proposals for the sale of the property at its meeting on January 13, 2020. Alderman Rue Simmons held a meeting at which Mt. Pisgah Church presented its proposal fo r a combined affordable housing project combined with a new church on this site. Expand Programs to Overcome Barriers to Rental for Low Income Residents Assessment of Fair Housing Staff is working with Enterprise Community Partners, the Chicago Metropoli tan Agency for Planning, Chicago Area Fair Housing Alliance, Cook County, and others on the Cook County wide Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH). The Existing Conditions and Contributing Factors portions of the AFH are being finalized. Community meetings are being held for input from residents to further inform the development of the AFH. Comprehensive Housing Plan Affordable Housing Plan Steering Committee The Affordable Housing Plan Steering Committee (AHPSC) concluded a series of meetings to frame the need for affordable housing and identified key stakeholders for outreach at its meeting in June. The City contracted with Millennia Consulting to facilitate the community outreach phase of the plan in early August. AHPSC and Millennia Consulting will finali ze the community outreach process which consists of one-on-one interviews with community Page 3 of 8 SP1.Page 8 of 137 stakeholders, and small group discussions that will be undertaken in October-November 2019, and one or more community meetings that will take place in early 2020. Mill ennia Consulting will provide a report summarizing community priorities following the outreach activities in 2020. National League of Cities: Cities of Opportunity The City of Evanston was selected as one of six municipalities in the National League of Cities (NLC) second cohort of Cities of Opportunity Initiative (CoO). This 12 -month technical assistance initiative, supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, helps cities make transformative changes to policies and systems to achieve improved health outcomes for residents and thriving communities. Evanston’s CoO initiative will identify and advance cross - cutting approaches to address underlying factors of health and well-being so all residents — regardless of geography, background, age, race/ethnicity, gender or wealth — have equitable access to: educational opportunities; affordable, safe and health housing; economic opportunities; transportation; safe neighborhoods; and affordable, healthy foods. Evanston's CoO is focused on decent, affordable housing as a determinant of peoples’ health and wellbeing, and has identified accessory dwelling units as one tool to help address multiple, interconnected factors that affect residents’ lifespans and quality of life. The team is exploring how to effectively link housing and social services to address historic inequities including redlining, particularly for Evanston’s African-American residents, and how to use the CoO’s health equity framework to create the most livable city in America for all its residents. Te am members include Alderman Robin Rue Simmons, staff from the City's Health & Human Services and Community Development departments, and external partner, the Evanston Development Cooperative. 2020 Census The City of Evanston was awarded $25,000 for 2020 Census outreach and education by the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, a Regional Intermediary for the State of Illinois. Illinois is at risk of losing one or more representatives in Congress and reductions in federal funding due to its declining population. Evanston’s ability to secure resources to address housing and other needs for its residents are at risk if its population is undercounted in the 2020 Census. There are multiple factors that contribute to the likelihood of an undercount, including: new online or telephone response rather than a paper form, high levels of distrust/fear among recent immigrants/non-citizens, apathy/feeling that the census isn’t relevant, and concerns that personal information will be shared with other federal, state and local gove rnment agencies and used against them. The Complete Count Committee is organizing outreach and education about the importance of counting all Evanston residents, in particular targeting demographic segments that are projected to be undercounted, including; seniors, people of color, renters, college students/young adults, children 0-5, and low income residents. City libraries and community centers with computer facilities will have trained staff to assist residents who do not have access to broadband service to enter their census response online. Pop-up computer sites where people may enter their data will be coordinated with community events for people without access to broadband internet service or who are uncomfortable with online response. Partners includ e: Evanston schools, Northwestern University, non-profits, faith organizations, the League of Women Voters, and State and Federal elected officials. Attachments: Page 4 of 8 SP1.Page 9 of 137 City Council Affordable Housing Update - 1.21.2020 Page 5 of 8 SP1.Page 10 of 137 Goal Activity 10/30/17 Meeting 01/29/18 Meeting 4/30/18 Meeting 07/30/18 Meeting 10/29/18 Meeting 2/04/19 Meeting 4/29/19 Meeting 9/16/19 Meeting 1/21/20 Meeting Status Allow rental of existing coach houses to non-family members X X X X X X X Amnesty period for rental registration of existing ADUs was March 1 - May 31, 2019. Text amendments to zoning, including allowing ADUs/coach houses with any residential property to facilitate construction of coach houses/ADUs Ordinance 171-O-19 was approved by City Council at its meeting on 1/13/2020. Review of zoning code to allow for the creation and rental of new accessory dwelling units X X X X Additional strategies such as internal and attached ADUs to address housing needs and integrate affordable units into more neighborhoods. Text amendment to Zoning Bonuses in IHO to allow addition of an affordable unit to existing residential properties X Council referred a text amendment to the Zoning Bonuses in the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to allow the addition of affordable units within the footprint of an existing residential building at its 4/29 meeting. Text amendment to Unique Use in Zoning Code to allow test of small lot housing at 2122 Darrow Avenue X Using the Unique Use in zoning code to test small lot housing at 2122 Darrow Avenue, property owned by the City, determined not allowable by the Law Dept. Alternatives will be explored. Amend occupancy standards (3-Unrelated)X X Discussed at P&D on 5/14/18. Staff seeks direction from Council on next steps Explore new initiatives in housing development and funding X X Age Friendly Evanston Housing Committee presentation of Market Assessment of affordable senior independent and assisted living units is on the 1/21/2020 agenda. Explore the potential to create a successful, affordable, self-sustaining live/work development for artists in Evanston. X A proposal from ArtSapce Consulting for a Preliminary Feasibility Study of affordable artist live/work housing in Evanston is on the agenda for City Council approval. Explore expansion of alternate housing forms including rooming houses and co- housing X X X Memo on different types of shared housing included in 10/29/18 City Council packet. Staff seeks direction from Council on next steps Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to incentivize onsite units more effectively X X X Subcommittee proposed ordinance revisions introduced on 10/8/18 and adopted on 10/29/18, effective 1/1/19. Waiver of Building Permit Fees for Coach houses/ADUs for Affordable Housing Rental Restrictions X Consideration of waiving the building permit fees for any property owner constructing a coach house/accessory dwelling unit (ADU) who will agree to rent the ADU at an affordable rate to income eligible households is on tonight’s agenda for discussion. Increase the IHO fee-in-lieu X X X X IHO fee-in-lieu is adjusted annually on January 1 based on the CPI - 2020 fees are $178,850 in Downtown districts and $153,330 in non-Downtown districts. Increase the demolition tax X X X Demolition tax is adjusted annually on January 1 based on the CPI - 2020 tax is $15,330 and $5,110 Fee in lieu of affordable units onsite for 811 Emerson St development X Developer fee-in-lieu payment of $2,400,000 to the Affordable Housing Fund received in 2019. New revenue sources: fee based on building permit value on non-IHO covered development, portion of RETT for affordable housing X Staff seeks direction from Council on next steps Create new housing opportunities Expand revenues for affordable housing Increase affordable units in market rate developments Updates on City Council Goal: Expand Affordable Housing Options in EvanstonPage 6 of 8SP1.Page 11 of 137 Goal Activity 10/30/17 Meeting 01/29/18 Meeting 4/30/18 Meeting 07/30/18 Meeting 10/29/18 Meeting 2/04/19 Meeting 4/29/19 Meeting 9/16/19 Meeting 1/21/20 Meeting Status Create new housing opportunities ETHS Geometry in Construction X X X Construction is underway at ETHS for the home that will be moved to 1824 Emerson Street in summer of 2020. 2005 Grey Avenue home was sold to an income eligible household in 2019. 2018-2019 GIC home was moved to 1729 Dodge Ave in June 2019 for completion prior to its sale to an income eligible household. Plannign for the 2020-2021 school year project is underway. Leverage external resources to provide financial education and homebuyer assistance for Evanston residents. X X X A Financial Wellness agreement with First Northern Credit Union for a personal finance education program to assist Evanston residents and lead to increased levels of business startup activity and home ownership, decreased debt, and overall improved community health resulting from financial stress reduction was approved by Council at its meeting on 1/13/2020. Leverage external resources to develop housing for low income and special needs residents X X X Housing Authority of Cook County is seeking financing for a 120-unit, 15-story mixed income development on the Perlman site at 1900 Sherman Avenue. Meeting with staff to discuss progress is scheduled for 1/14/2020. Leverage external resources to develop housing for low income seniors X X X Approval of the planned development and City financing in the amount of $2M for Evergreen/CJE 60-unit senior housing project on Howard Street is on the 1/21/2020 agenda for approval. Leverage City-owned land for affordable housing development X X X X Two neighbhorhood meetings were held to discuss the redevelopment of 506 South Blvd and adjacent HACC-owned parcel to the west. Leverage City-owned land for affordable or mixed income housing development X City Council approved the release of a RFP for the redevelopment of 1805 Church Street and two City-owned lots at 1708-1710 Darrow Avenue at its meeting on 1/13/2020.. Alderman Rue Simmons held a meeting on 1/8/2020 at which Mt Pisgah Church presented a mixed use development comprising affordable housing and a new church for its congregation for this site. Mt. Pisgah owns two properties immediately west of 1805 Church Street that would be included in their proposed project. Landlord Rehabilitation Assistance Program X X X X Additional research into rental rehab needs that are not addressed by CDBG rehab program is needed to refine and implement an effective program. Handyman Program X Renewed funding from AHF in the amount of $35,000 approved on 6/25/18 Evanston Rental Assistance Program X X Next steps pending based on generating ongoing source of revenues for Affordable Housing Fund HOME Tenant-Based Rental Assistance X X X Renewal funding of $300,000 to Connections for the Homeless was approved by Council on 9/9/2019. Review changes to General and Emergency Assistance Programs Landlord-Tenant education and assistance X X X Renewal funding of up to $70,000 for MTO/LCBH to continue landlord-tenant services was approved by City Council on 9/23/2019. Create pathways to homeownership Maintain and expand rent subsidies for low- income households Preserve affordable housing Expand development of income-restricted rental unitsPage 7 of 8SP1.Page 12 of 137 Goal Activity 10/30/17 Meeting 01/29/18 Meeting 4/30/18 Meeting 07/30/18 Meeting 10/29/18 Meeting 2/04/19 Meeting 4/29/19 Meeting 9/16/19 Meeting 1/21/20 Meeting Status Create new housing opportunities Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Waitlist X See Work Plan memo for a summary of CPAH's activities to expand and update the waitlist Pilot Landlord Mitigation Fund X Assessment of Fair Housing X X Data collection to assesss existing conditions is underway; community outreach efforts will be undertaken in fall 2019. Tenant Relocation Assistance Policy X Tenant Relocation Assistance Policy is being considered as part of the Affordable Housing Plan. Steering Committee to oversee development of the plan X X AHFSC concluded a series of meetings to frame the need for affordable housing and identified key stakeholders for outreach. The City contracted with Millennia Consulting to facilitate the community outreach phase of the plan. Community Outreach and Education AHPSC and Millennia Consulting are conducting community outreach consisting of one-on-one interviews with residents and stakeholders, and small group discussions that will be completed in February. One or more community workshops will be held in March. Millennia Consulting will provide a report summarizing community priorities following the conclusion of outreach activities. National League of Cities: Cities of Opportunity This 12-month technical assistance initiative by NLC, funded by the Rbert Wood Johnson Foundation, will focus on decent, affordable housing as a determinant of peoples' health and wellbeing, and a tool to address historic inequities, particularly for Evanston's African-American residents. Affordable Housing Plan Expand programs to overcome barriers to rental for low income householdsPage 8 of 8SP1.Page 13 of 137 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Sarah Flax, Housing & Grants Administrator CC: Johanna Leonard, Community Development Director Subject: Age-Friendly Evanston Market Assessment for Independent and Assisted Living Needs in Evanston Date: January 21, 2020 Recommended Action: The Housing and Homelessness Commission and staff recommend that City Council accept and place on file the Sawgrass Market Assessment of independent and assisted living needs for seniors in Evanston prepared for the Age-Friendly Evanston Task Force, and refer it to the Affordable City’s the of development the to Committee Steering Plan Housing inform Affordable Housing Plan. Council Action: For Action: Accept and Place on File Summary: In December 2013, the Mayor of Evanston appointed an Age -Friendly Evanston Task Force that was charged with a mandate to develop an Age -Friendly Action Plan for the City based on the World Health Organization (WHO) model. On June 20, 2016 the City Counci l accepted the Age-Friendly Action Plan which included recommendations to address unmet housing needs for older adults in Evanston. The Age-Friendly Action Plan identified barriers to developing additional affordable senior housing in Evanston that include securing land and financing, particularly for affordable assisted living units. Development of affordable assisted living units is limited based on issuance of Supportive Living Facilities (SLF) licenses by the State of Illinois that use Medicaid to fund the supportive services. The Age-Friendly Action Plan recommended four actions to address needs: • Expand Affordable Housing through Community Land Trust Ventures • Expand Shared Housing Opportunities • Expand Opportunities for Subsidized Assisted Living • Explore Innovative Approaches to expand Affordable Housing Options SP2.Page 14 of 137 The Age Friendly Evanston Housing Committee secured funding from the Evanston Community Foundation and the City for a market assessment to move forward with the third action item. The Committee contracted with Sawgrass Partners for a market assessment of senior housing needs in Evanston, including market penetration rates for independent and assisted living, and the estimated demand for independent and assisted living (affordable and market rate). The Sawgrass study confirmed the unmet need for more affordable independent living units at multiple income levels, including for seniors at 80%-120% of the area median. In addition, there is a critical need for affordable assisted living for s eniors 75 and older with incomes ≤ 80% AMI, a demographic that is projected to make up approximately 49% of all households age 75+ by 2024. *The Market Assessment for Age Friendly Evanston may not be used for purposes other than those stated on page 3 of the study without the express consent of Sawgrass Partners. Legislative History: The Housing and Homelessness Commission voted unanimously to accept and place on file the Sawgrass Partners market assessment of senior housing needs in Evanston, and to ref er it to the Affordable Housing Plan Steering Committee to inform the development of the City's Affordable Housing Plan. Attachments: AgeFriendlyEvanston_FinalReport to ECF Sawgrass Market Assessment Page 2 of 54 SP2.Page 15 of 137 Rolling Grant Final Report Due One Year from Grant Decision Date (March 1, June 1, Sept 1, Dec1) Name of Organization: Age-Friendly Evanston Task Force Housing Committee Project Title: Affordable Senior Housing Feasibility Study Contact Information: Margaret Gergen, margergen@gmail.com, 773-617-8976 Amount of Grant: $ 5,000 Amount Spent to Date: $ 7,500 Impact: What is the long-term societal change to which this effort will contribute? Evanston seniors will have affordable housing options, offering both independent and assisted living, creating a safety net to allow older adults to remain in Evanston and providing a continuum of care when residents need to transition from independent living situations to assisted living.  Low and moderate income independent seniors will be able to maintain ties with family, friends and organizations in the community and thereby maintain a high level of social interaction so important for healthy aging.  Low and moderate income seniors will be able to continue to live in a community they know, with resources that are familiar to them at a time in life when change is difficult.  Seniors’ physical, mental and cognitive health will be improved by the availability of an affordable assisted living facility able to meet their changing needs in a supportive congregate setting. Outcomes: How will the program participants benefit or change as a result of our program? 1. Substantiate the need for units of senior housing at the proposed mix of affordable, market rate and levels of care through feasibility study to be conducted by Sawgrass Partners beginning in early 2019, to be completed on or before May 31. 2019.  Study confirmed an urgent unmet need for more affordable independent living (IL) units – and although affordable units for those with 50-80% of AMI (very low to low) are needed, there is also an urgent need for those with 80-120 % of AMI (missing middle). In addition, there is a significantly unmet need for “lo wer-end” market rate IL housing. (pg 21-23)  As relates to affordable assisted living (AL) units, there are no affordable AL communities within Evanston or surrounding zip code areas. (pg 32 -35). Yet households of seniors age 75+ projected to be income qualified (in 2024) for very low to affordable AL communities total 52%. Clearly, affordable assisted living is a critical unmet need in Evanston. (pg 37)  Concerning market rate assisted living (AL), current and proposed units (including those proposed by our Project) will approach “concerning” penetration rates by 2024. This would indicate the need to scale back the proposed number (50) of market rate assisted living units to a number more in line with “feasible” penetration rates. (pg 38-41) Page 3 of 54 SP2.Page 16 of 137 2. Identify gaps in affordable housing for Evanston’s older adults in terms of income levels and numbers and types of units, based on feasibility study information to be completed on or before May 31, 2019.  It is projected that in 2024 approximately 41% of households age 75 and older (1554 households) will have annual incomes of $40,000 or less, financially qualifying them for affordable independent living services. Currently proposed (and in construction) affordable housing units for seniors in Evanston total only 163 units: a. Avidor Evanston, 1727 Oak 17 b. CJE/Evergreen Project, Howard St 60 c. Evanston Sr. Living, 1815 Ridge 2 d. 1900 Sherman (HACC) addition 84 (includes low-mod & missing middle) Adding these proposed 163 units to the existing 300 affordable units leaves an obvious deficit in available affordable units. This is particularly so for thos e with incomes of 50-80% AMI (low income) and those with incomes of 80-120% AMI (missing middle) as the existing 300 affordable units are only available for extremely low to very low income limit categories – i.e. less than 50% AMI. The numbers themselves demonstrate the immense gap between the need for affordable independent living units and the availability. (pg 7-8)  As stated above, no affordable assisted living facilities are located in Evanston or the surrounding zip codes. Yet by 2024 it is projected there will be 1873 households of seniors age 75 and over (49%) who would be qualified (based on an income of 80% AMI) for affordable assisted living. (pg 37) 3. Identify potential financing, developers and operating managers based on outcome of feasibility study, after completion of the study on or before May 31, 2019.  Currently, the Committee is developing a Resource List of experts in the field with whom to discuss the results of the feasibility study, next steps, and possible relationships to be pursued regarding operating partners, financing, & development. Please report on progress relative to the strategies and indicators outlined in your grant agreement. Strategies achieved to date Strategy 1. Secure balance of funds required for study from City of Evanston. City of Evanston proposal/presentation dates: December 6 – Housing and Homeless Commission (consensus approval received); January 14 – Planning & Development Committee; Jan-Feb (exact date TBD) – City Council. Funding balance ($2500) recommended by Commission on Housing and Homelessness in Dec, 2018 and approved by the Evanston City Council in Jan, 2019 for this study. Strategy 2. Solicit support of the mayor and city council members – ongoing through November, December 2018 and January 2019. Discussions with key alderpersons and Mayor Hagerty were conducted one on one by committee members during this period. Strategy 3. Lacking approval of funding by City of Evanston, contact private/individual donors to advise their pledges will be needed to underwrite the feasibility study and request contributions to be received by February 29, 2019. This strategy was not necessary, as City of Evanston approved funding. Page 4 of 54 SP2.Page 17 of 137 Progress on Indicators Indicator 1. Completed feasibility study will confirm proposed project size and configuration of levels of care, or will indicate corrected demand regarding number of units, levels of care, and price point. The feasibility study indicates a need to reconsider the unit configuration and levels of care, i.e. more independent living units, fewer market rate assisted living units. With fewer market rate assisted living units, and considering the lack of available affordable housing for low to middle income seniors, it may make sense to expand the AMI parameters for independent living to include more units priced for the missing middle (80-120% AMI) and even some market rate units (120%+AMI). Indicator 2. Once these figures are available, the Committee will commence in spring 2019 to re - initiate discussions with experts in this field to seek advice regarding possible sources of financing, developers, etc to move the project forward. Since completion of the study, the Committee has reviewed the study with city staff and has talked with affordable housing advocates and representatives of current affordable housing projects to gather insights and Information. Currently, as stated above, the Committee is developing a Resource List of experts in the field with whom to discuss the results of the study, next steps, and possible relationships to be pursued regarding operating partners, financing, & development. The direction of these discussions will be determined by the presentation of our final report and subsequent feedback received from the Housing and Homelessness Commission, city staff and City Council regarding city support for such a project. The level and scope of such support will obviously affect the way this project is presented to potential interested parties. Please also answer the following questions, relative to this grant: Tell us about any new opportunities: Since the inception of the Age-Friendly Task Force Housing Committee’s commitment to find a way to fund this feasibility study, the City Council has adopted as one of its annual goals to “expand affordable housing options.” Toward this end a citizen task force on affordable housing has been established and a new level of awareness is developing regarding the urgent need for more affordable housing. These organizations and conversations are important in creating a consensus and a will in the community at large to support and endorse such efforts. Tell us about any challenges and/or obstacles: Having the completed feasibility study presents the next series of challenges: determining exactly what IS “feasible” and how to make it happen. Current new and proposed developments offer encouraging examples of affordable senior independent living units, but clearly many more are needed. One of the greatest challenges for this project will be to come up with a plan for developing the affordable assisted living component. A State of Illinois waiver program to develop such facilities is currently suspended for budgetary reasons. One of the directions for the Housin g Committee will be to have conversations with elected and appointed State officials to determine if other resources and/or programs are available. If applicable, please tell us about your active partnerships with other nonprofits or community groups, relative to this grant: With the dissolution of the Age-Friendly Evanston Task Force at the end of 2019, the Committee is anticipating continuing its work as an ad hoc committee of the Joining Forces for Affordable Housing Task Force. Page 5 of 54 SP2.Page 18 of 137 Tell us about/or attach any publicity, if any: n/a Other information, stories, anecdotes, etc: n/a Please attach a photograph of the program in action, or if not possible, a photograph that captures your organization’s mission. The renderings below capture our vision, our mission is bringing that vision to reality. Please return to Rebecca Cacayuran, Program Officer grants@evanstonforever.org Northtown Branch Library & Senior Living Apartments Pratt Ave & Western Ave, Chicago Opened Spring 2019 Evergreen Real Estate Group / CJE Senior Life / Urban Works 25 Architects Proposed Affordable Senior Housing 999-1015 Howard, Evanston Projected Occupancy Early 2021 Page 6 of 54 SP2.Page 19 of 137 May 2019 Market Assessment for Age Friendly EvanstonPage 7 of 54SP2.Page 20 of 137 Table of Contents 2 ➢Market Assessment Overview and Limitations ➢Background ➢Executive Summary Market Analysis: ➢Primary Market Area ➢Population and Growth ➢Real Estate ➢Affordable Housing for Seniors ➢Qualified Households -Affordable Independent Living ➢Assisted Living Communities ➢Assisted Living Qualified Households and Penetration Rates ➢Appendix –Information for Additional ZIP CodesPage 8 of 54SP2.Page 21 of 137 Market Assessment Overview and Limitations 3 This Market Assessment was prepared for the internal use of the City of Evanston’s Age Friendly Evanston Task Force (Task Force)in order to assess the potential market demand for affordable independent living,market rate assisted living and affordable assisted living services in the City of Evanston as part of the Task Force’s efforts to create a plan to develop affordable senior housing and services in Evanston,Illinois. It is our understanding that the Market Assessment is an important first step in the planning and development of this initiative.As such,our report may be shared with the City of Evanston and the Age Friendly Evanston Task Force,as well as other members of the planning and development team.Our report must be shared in its entirety,with the understanding that the market assessment is only one component necessary in determining the success of any project. This assessment should not be utilized for any other purpose or distributed to any other parties without our express consent.The ultimate success of any project will not rely solely on market dynamics,but will also depend on other factors,including,but not limited to: ➢Economic factors and influences; ➢A project’s development,marketing and operational plans; ➢Availability of capital and related restrictions; ➢Projected financial results;and ➢The ability to effectively implement the plans.Page 9 of 54SP2.Page 22 of 137 Market Assessment Overview and Limitations 4 Prepared by: Sawgrass Partners, LLC 1721 Del Ogier Drive Glenview, IL 60025 (847) 724-1759 The main components of the Market Assessment are outlined below: 1)Analysis of key demographic and economic information related to the primary market area (“PMA”) 2)Summary of affordable independent living (“IL”)units located in the PMA 3)Summary of assisted living (“AL”)communities located within the PMA 4)Estimated AL market penetration and a calculation of project penetration assuming the project size proposed by the Age Friendly Evanston Task ForcePage 10 of 54SP2.Page 23 of 137 Background 5 In order to better meet the needs of the city’s current and future residents,the Mayor of Evanston established a nine-member task force (the “Task Force”)with a mandate to develop an Age Friendly Initiative,including formulating a 3-year city-wide action plan for implementation.The Task Force is comprised of members appointed by the Commission on Aging,the Mental Health Board,the Human Relations Commission and the Evanston community at-large. The “Age Friendly Evanston”Task Force will make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council of Evanston on the creation and implementation of an action plan based on the objectives of the World Health Organization’s Age Friendly Communities Program.This program is an international effort to help prepare for the rapid aging of populations,which is a demographic trend impacting the U.S.as well as many other countries. As part of this initiative,the Task Force has requested Sawgrass Partners provide a Market Assessment for a proposed project for older adults that may include up to 50 affordable independent living units (“ILUs”),50 affordable assisted living units (“ALUs”)and 50 market rate assisted living units (referred to herein as the Project).Page 11 of 54SP2.Page 24 of 137 Executive Summary 6Page 12 of 54SP2.Page 25 of 137 PMA, Demographics & Economics 7 Primary Market Area (PMA) ➢The PMA for this study is defined as the 2-ZIP-code area that defines Evanston,spanning approximately four miles north-to-south and three miles east-to-west at its widest points. Demographics &Economics ➢The percentage of older adults to the total population is projected to be similar to or lower in the PMA than in the state of Illinois and the United States for the 65 to 74 and 75 to 84 age cohorts.The percentage of the populations age 75 and older and age 85 and older is projected to be higher as compared to the state and nation. ➢The fastest growing segment of the senior population from 2019 to 2024 in the PMA is the 75 to 84 age cohort.Comparatively,the fast growing segment in Illinois and the U.S.is the 65 to 74 age cohort. ➢The projected growth rates for older adults in the PMA are lower than the rates projected for Illinois and the United States,for all age groups shown except the 75 to 84 and the 75 and older age cohorts. ➢In 2024,it is projected that approximately: o 41%of households age 75 and older (1,554 households)will have annual incomes of $40,000 or less,financially qualifying them for affordable independent living services within the PMA;and o 70%of households age 75 and older (2,661 households)will have annual incomes of $35,000 or more,or own a home and earn between $25,000 and $35,000 annually,financially qualifying them for market-rate assisted living services within the PMA (compared to 26%for very low income or affordable assisted living),in 2024. ➢For the twelve months ending March 31, 2019, the weighted average median residential home sale price in the PMA was approximately $422,600, which represents a decrease of approximately 2.5% from the prior 12-month period.Page 13 of 54SP2.Page 26 of 137 Affordable IL and Assisted Living Providers Summary 8 The following table summarizes the total number of existing and planned affordable IL housing and assisted living units in the PMA. Level of Living/Care Number of Units Percent Occupied Planned Number of Units by 2024 Total Number of Units Affordable Independent Living 300(a)99%77 377 Affordable Assisted Living(b)−−−− Market Rate Assisted Living 157 92%131(c)288 Notes:(a)Of the available 384 affordable ILUs marketed to seniors within the PMA, management of these buildings estimated the percentage of residents age 62 or older to be 78%(300 affordable ILUs). (b)No existing or planned affordable assisted living communities were identified within the PMA or the surrounding ZIP code areas. (c)The development of these 131 units has experienced multiple delays.In addition,a former assisted living building (King Home)has been purchased. It is currently unoccupied and no plans have been submitted as of yet for its future use.Page 14 of 54SP2.Page 27 of 137 Assisted Living Penetration Rates 9 The market penetration rate for assisted living services provides an indication of the market by determining the percentage of qualified senior households in the PMA who already reside,or would need to reside,in the inventory of assisted living beds within the PMA in order for those beds to achieve and maintain acceptable levels of stabilized occupancy. A Project penetration rate is the proportion of eligible households (after excluding those already residing in available units)that must move into a Project in order for it to achieve stabilized occupancy. Adult children may opt to subsidize parental income so that a parent can financially qualify for residency in assisted living,or may influence a parent’s decision to choose an assisted living unit in the PMA.The Adult Children penetration rate compares the number of Adult Child households in the PMA to the number of AL units in the PMA.Page 15 of 54SP2.Page 28 of 137 Assisted Living Penetration Rates continued 10 While the Market and Project penetration rates for the PMA are within the thresholds typically experienced in other markets,the projected Market penetration rate is nearly double that of the rate in 2019,indicating a significant amount of product entering the market in the next five years. Penetration Rates in the PMA Experienced in Other Markets 2019 2024 Level of Care Market Market Project Market Rate Assisted Living (assuming a 50-unit Project)25.0%22.7% -48.8%(a)9.3%Market: <50% Project: <10% Assisted Living -Adult Children 2.8%2.5% -5.4%−<7% Note:(a)There are two potential properties that could significantly impact the Market Penetration rate in 2024.The first is the proposed Evanston Senior Living development which has experienced multiple delays.Assuming this development does not move forward,the market penetration rate would decrease from 48.8%to 29.9%. The second property is the former King Home,which is currently vacant and no plans have been submitted for its re-use as assisted living.However,if we assume that the King Home is re-developed to include 90 AL beds,AND assuming the Evanston Senior Living project is developed with 131 AL beds, the market penetration rate is projected to be 61.7%.Page 16 of 54SP2.Page 29 of 137 Market Analysis 11Page 17 of 54SP2.Page 30 of 137 Primary Market Area 12 Based on discussions with the Task Force and an understanding of their goals,the PMA for senior living services has been defined as the 2-ZIP-code area of Evanston -60201 and 60202. Demographic data for the ZIP code 60203 is included in the Appendix. The PMA spans approximately four miles north-to-south and three miles east-to-west at its widest points and lies in the northeast portion of Cook County,just north of Chicago city limits. It is bordered by Wilmette to the north,Skokie to the west,and Lake Michigan to the east. The main routes intersecting the PMA are: ➢Green Bay Road,which provides access north to Wilmette and Chicago’s North Shore; ➢Ridge Avenue,which provides access south to Chicago;and ➢Dempster Street,which provides access west to Interstate 94 (the Edens Expressway). I-94 connects to Interstate 90 (the Kennedy Expressway)and provides access to O’Hare International Airport and south to downtown Chicago.Page 18 of 54SP2.Page 31 of 137 Affordable IL Apartment Building Affordable IL Housing within the PMA Existing Affordable IL in the PMA 1 Jacob Blake Manor 2 Ebenezer Primm Tower 3 Victor Walchirk Apartments 4 Jane Perlman Apartments Proposed Affordable IL in the PMA 5 Avidor Evanston Apartments 6 CJE/Evergreen Project 4 1900 Sherman Addition 13 The map below includes the highlighted 2-ZIP-code PMA,and the locations of existing and proposed affordable independent living housing within the PMA.Page 19 of 54SP2.Page 32 of 137 Assisted Living within and near the PMA Existing Market Rate AL in the PMA 1 The Mather 2 Three Crowns Park 3 Westminster Place Proposed Market Rate AL in the PMA 4 Evanston Senior Living Existing Market Rate AL near the PMA 5 Lincolnwood Place 6 The Carrington at Lincolnwood Proposed Market Rate AL near the PMA 7 Grandbrier Senior Living (Skokie) 8 Artis Senior Living (Wilmette) 14 The map below includes the highlighted 2-ZIP-code PMA,the locations of existing and proposed market rate assisted living communities within and near the PMA.No affordable assisted living communities were identified within the PMA. AL CommunityPage 20 of 54SP2.Page 33 of 137 Population and Growth 15 As the following table indicates,the percentage of the population age 75 and older and 85 and older age groups is projected to be higher compared to the state and nation.The percentage of the remaining older adult cohorts to the total population is projected to be generally similar to or lower in the PMA than in Illinois and the U.S. PMA State of Illinois United States 2019 (Estimated) 2024 (Projected) 2019 (Estimated) 2024 (Projected) 2019 (Estimated) 2024 (Projected) Total Population 72,164 72,562 12,771,681 12,754,807 329,236,175 340,950,101 Population Aged 55-64 8,645 8,460 1,661,318 1,627,696 42,525,246 43,333,758 Population Aged 65-74 6,408 7,217 1,178,821 1,376,553 31,812,272 38,103,508 Population Aged 75-84 3,058 3,676 564,342 642,535 15,155,602 17,449,003 Population Aged 85+ 1,923 1,891 256,824 257,018 6,522,563 6,902,222 Total Age 55+20,034 21,244 3,661,305 3,903,802 96,015,683 105,788,491 Total Age 65+11,389 12,784 1,999,987 2,276,106 53,490,437 62,454,733 Total Age 75+4,981 5,567 821,166 899,553 21,678,165 24,351,225 Percent 55-64 12.0%11.7%13.0%12.8%12.9%12.7% Percent 65-74 8.9%9.9%9.2%10.8%9.7%11.2% Percent 75-84 4.2%5.1%4.4%5.0%4.6%5.1% Percent 85+ 2.7%2.6%2.0%2.0%2.0%2.0% Percent 55+27.8%29.3%28.7%30.6%29.2%31.0% Percent 65+ 15.8%17.6%15.7%17.8%16.2%18.3% Percent 75+ 6.9%7.7%6.4%7.1%6.6%7.1%Page 21 of 54SP2.Page 34 of 137 Population and Growth (continued) 16 As indicated in the following table,the fastest growing segment of the senior population in the PMA over the five-year period from 2019 to 2024 is projected to be the 75 to 84 age cohort. Comparatively,the fast growing segment in Illinois and the U.S.is the 65 to 74 age cohort. The projected growth rates for older adults in the PMA are lower than or similar to the rates projected for Illinois and the United States,for all age groups shown except the 75 to 84 and the 75 and older age cohorts.(Population and growth information for adjacent ZIP code areas is shown in the Appendix). Compounded Annual Growth Rates Between 2019 and 2024 PMA State of Illinois United States Total Population 0.1%0.0%0.7% Population Aged 55-64 (0.4%)(0.4%)0.4% Population Aged 65-74 2.4%3.1%3.7% Population Aged 75-84 3.7%2.6%2.9% Population Aged 85+(0.3%)0.0%1.1% Population Aged 55+ 1.2%1.3%2.0% Population Aged 65+ 2.3%2.6%3.1% Population Aged 75+ 2.2%1.8%2.4% Source: ClaritasPage 22 of 54SP2.Page 35 of 137 Real Estate 17 Residential real estate trends are indicators of home values and appreciation,and the timing and predictability of home sales.Many residents moving into a senior living community are homeowners who will sell their home prior to residency and may use those proceeds to pay any required entrance fees or re-invest the proceeds and use the interest earnings to supplement their annual incomes. Approximately 63%of the total households age 75 and older in the PMA own their home,as compared to 74%of the households age 75 and older in the state of Illinois. The following table summarizes the number of homes sold and residential home sale prices in the PMA,as reported by the Melissa Data Corporation.This data is based on County Recorder’s Office data,which includes “For sale by owner”sales and foreclosures. For the twelve months ending March 31,2019,the weighted average median residential home sale price in the PMA was approximately $422,600,which represents a decrease of 2.5%from the weighted average of the prior 12 months. Source:Melissa Data Corporation -based on County Recorders Office data, which includes “For sale by owner” sales and foreclosures, April 2019 Note (1):Data reported for the 12-month period ending March 31. Number of Homes Sold and Median Selling Price 2017-2018(1)2018-2019(1) Location Zip Code # of Homes Sold Median Selling Price # of Homes Sold Median Selling Price Evanston 60201 510 $491,500 390 $492,500 Evanston 60202 459 $369,000 347 $344,000 Total / Weighted Average Median Sales Price in the PMA 969 $433,474 737 $422,582 Page 23 of 54SP2.Page 36 of 137 Affordable Housing for Seniors 18Page 24 of 54SP2.Page 37 of 137 Qualified Households -Affordable Independent Living 19 While the income qualifications have not yet been determined for the proposed Project,HUD generally uses the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)area definitions in the calculation of income limit program parameters.The table below reflects income limits within the “Chicago-Joliet-Naperville,IL HUD Metro Fair Market Rents (FMRs)Area”,which includes Cook County. Median Family Income FY2019 Income Limit Category 1-Person Family 2-Person Family $89,100(a)Extremely Low(b)$18,750 $21,400 Very Low (50%)(c)$31,200 $35,650 Low (80%)(c)$49,950 $57,050 Source:HUD's Office of Policy Development and Research,May 2019 Notes:(a)Median Family Income for family of four persons. (b)Definition of extremely low-income is the greater of 60%of Section 8 Very Low- Income limit or the poverty guideline established by the Department of Health and Human Services for the applicable area,provided that this amount is not greater than the Section 8 50%Very Low-Income limit. (c)Definition of Very Low (50%)and Low (80%)is less than 50%/80 %of the Area Median Income (AMI).AMI is a statistic generated by the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)for purposes of determining the eligibility of applicants for certain federal housing programs.Page 25 of 54SP2.Page 38 of 137 Qualified Households -Affordable Independent Living 20 In metropolitan areas,HUD defines Small Areas using ZIP Codes within the metropolitan area. Using ZIP codes as the basis for FMRs provides tenants with greater ability to move into “Opportunity Neighborhoods”with jobs,public transportation,and good schools.They also provide for multiple payment standards within a metropolitan area,and they are likely to reduce the need for extensive market area rent reasonableness studies.HUD hopes that setting FMRs for each ZIP code will reduce overpayment in lower-rent areas. The following table summarizes residence types and their FMRs within the PMA’s two ZIP codes. The following page presents demographic data for the PMA.All demographic data was obtained from Claritas and reflects Claritas’estimates for 2019 and projections for 2024 based on the 2010 Census,and demographic and economic trends. Zip Code Efficiency One-Bedroom Two-Bedroom 60201 $1,270 $1,450 $1,680 60202 $1,110 $1,270 $1,470 Source: HUD's Office of Policy Development and Research, April 2019 Note: Indicated FMRs are effective beginning October 1, 2019.Page 26 of 54SP2.Page 39 of 137 Age 75+ Qualified Households –Affordable IL 21 The following table presents household data by income category for the PMA as estimated for 2019 and projected for 2024.Approximately 41%of seniors age 75 and older are projected to be income qualified for affordable independent living in 2024,assuming annual incomes of $40,000 or less. Source: Claritas Notes:(1)Because Claritas does not provide household data specifically for income levels between $35,000 and $50,000,these numbers were interpolated from the Census data provided by Claritas. (2)The total number of Affordable IL Qualified households includes all householders age 75 and older earning an annual income of $35,000 or less in 2019 and $40,000 or less in 2024. Age 75+ Households in the PMA 2019 %2024 % Total Number of Households 3,375 3,805 Annual Household Income: Under $25,000 962 28%999 26% $25,000 -34,999 368 11%390 10% $35,000 and over: $35,000 -39,999(1)150 4%165 4% $40,000 -49,999(1)291 9%319 9% $50,000 and over 1,604 48%1,932 51% Total and percentage of Affordable IL Qualified -$35,000 or less and $40,000 or less(2)1,330 39%1,554 41%Page 27 of 54SP2.Page 40 of 137 Age 65 to 74 Qualified Households –Affordable IL 22 The following table presents household data by income category for the PMA as estimated for 2019 and projected for 2024.Approximately 21%of seniors age 65 to 74 are projected to be income qualified for affordable independent living in 2024,assuming annual incomes of $40,000 or less. Source: Claritas Notes:(1)Because Claritas does not provide household data specifically for income levels between $35,000 and $50,000,these numbers were interpolated from the Census data provided by Claritas. (2)The total number of Affordable IL Qualified households includes all householders age 65 to 74 earning an annual income of $35,000 or less in 2019 and $40,000 or less in 2024. Age 65 to 74 Households in the PMA 2019 %2024 % Total Number of Households 4,283 4,836 Annual Household Income: Under $25,000 595 14%604 12% $25,000 -34,999 259 6%278 6% $35,000 and over: $35,000 -39,999(1)135 3%140 3% $40,000 -49,999(1)271 6%266 6% $50,000 and over 3,023 71%3,548 73% Total and percentage of Affordable IL Qualified -$35,000 or less and $40,000 or less(2)854 20%1,022 21%Page 28 of 54SP2.Page 41 of 137 Age 55 to 64 Qualified Households –Affordable IL 23 The following table presents household data by income category for the PMA as estimated for 2019 and projected for 2024.Approximately 19%of seniors age 55 to 64 are projected to be income qualified for affordable independent living in 2024,assuming annual incomes of $40,000 or less. Source: Claritas Notes:(1)Because Claritas does not provide household data specifically for income levels between $35,000 and $50,000,these numbers were interpolated from the Census data provided by Claritas. (2)The total number of Affordable IL Qualified households includes all householders age 55 to 64 earning an annual income of $35,000 or less in 2019 and $40,000 or less in 2024. Age 55 to 64 Households in the PMA 2019 %2024 % Total Number of Households 5,447 5,360 Annual Household Income: Under $25,000 769 14%658 12% $25,000 -34,999 354 6%290 5% $35,000 and over: $35,000 -39,999(1)105 2%95 2% $40,000 -49,999(1)209 4%187 4% $50,000 and over 4,010 74%4,130 77% Total and percentage of Affordable IL Qualified -$35,000 or less and $40,000 or less(2)1,123 21%1,043 19%Page 29 of 54SP2.Page 42 of 137 Affordable Housing for Seniors 24 The Illinois Housing Development Authority (IHDA)oversees the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC)Program.LIHTC accounts for approximately 90%of all affordable rental housing created in the U.S.today.Generally,affordable housing is provided to households earning 60% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI)with rents restricted to 30%of the income limit.The maximum rent that can be charged is capped at 80%of AMI.Rents must be kept affordable for a 15-year initial “compliance period”and a subsequent 15-year “extended use period”. Annually,Illinois has $23,700,000 in tax credits available (9%).To offset tax reforms,states were issued 12.5%more credits for the next three years. Source: The IHDA and BakerTillyPage 30 of 54SP2.Page 43 of 137 Affordable Housing for Seniors 25 The following table summarizes the four existing affordable housing providers within the PMA (with a total of 384 apartments)that are available to seniors.As previously summarized, approximately 40%of households age 75 and older in the PMA (1,654 households)are projected to have annual household incomes of $40,000 or less in 2024. Community Name Address Year Opened Number of Units Total Occupancy Percentage % of Residents Age 62 or Older Number of Residents Age 62 or Older Type of Subsidy Monthly Rent (RD or Tax Credit Only) Wait List Details(a)(b) Jacob Blake Manor 1615 Emerson 1984 76 100%100%76 HUD 30% of AGI 1.5 years Ebenezer Primm Tower 1001 Emerson 1970s 109 100%100%109 HUD 30% of AGI 2.5 years Victor Walchirk Apts 2300 Noyes 1984 99 98%61%59 Project- based Section 8 Income based (30% of AMI)162 people Jane Perlman Apts(c)(d) 1900 Sherman 1978 100 100%55%55 HACC subsidies Rent is 30% of AGI / HACC subsidies 1 -3 years Total / Weighted Average Occupancy 384 99%78%299 Sources:Housing Authority of Cook County (HACC),telephone surveys and on-line research conducted through April 2019. Notes:(a)Wait list is maintained by the Occupancy Department of the HACC.Number of applicants on waitlists were estimated by building managers. (b)The wait lists for other affordable ILUs near Evanston are also long.Per management of CJE SeniorLife (CJE),there are currently 800 people on the wait list for the 400 affordable ILUs in the four buildings served by CJE.These buildings are located in Skokie and Chicago. (c)Jane Perlman Apartments are designated for seniors and disabled residents.Building management estimated the indicated percentage of residents age 62 or older. (d)Under HACC subsidies,tenants pay 30%of their income toward rent,and federal subsidies cover the balance.Page 31 of 54SP2.Page 44 of 137 Affordable Housing for Seniors 26 The Merion,an existing independent living community owned by Horizon Realty Group (Horizon),plans to develop The Legacy,a 19-story building with 240 apartments.The Legacy will be built next door to The Merion (1621-1631 Chicago Avenue,ZIP code 60201)with a walkway connecting the two buildings. Horizon will focus its marketing efforts to attract older adults aged 55 to 75.Instead of offering affordable living units,Horizon will pay approximately $2.1 million to the City’s Affordable Housing fund.If the project moves forward,it would potentially provide money for affordable projects through the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Fund.As this project will not include affordable units,it is excluded from the following demand analyses.Page 32 of 54SP2.Page 45 of 137 Proposed Affordable Housing for Seniors 27 The following table summarizes the three proposed affordable senior housing developments within the PMA. Community Name Number of Affordable ILUs Developer Status Avidor Evanston Apartments 1727 Oak Avenue 17 Trammell Crow Company Project approved in 2018, construction timing has not yet been determined. Developer will build 17 affordable ILUs for residents meeting the 50%, 60% and 80% AMI limit in this 169-ILU building for “active seniors”. 1015 Howard Street(a)60 CJE & Evergreen Real Estate Group Appeared at Jan. 2019 city zoning meeting. Construction is projected to begin in Dec. 2019/Jan. 2020. 1900 Sherman Addition (on the Jane Perlman building lot) 84(b)Housing Authority of Cook County (HACC) Revised project plans were presented at the April 29, 2019 City Council meeting. Height variance will be needed for revised plans. The Council was very receptive in general. Zoning modifications will be needed for the project to move forward. The project will likely be a PUD. HACC is still pursing financing (private) for the project. (Building will be for residents ages 55+.) Notes:(a)An application was submitted to the IHDA for low-income housing tax credits in February 2019.Announcement of the tax credit recipients is expected by May 2019.Receipt of the tax credits are necessary for the planned project to move forward.If the tax credit is received,the developer will need to rezone the site.The public hearings held to-date have been favorable and the Evanston City Council approved the project unanimously. The proposed project includes six two-bedroom units and 54 one-bedroom units.No services will be provided in the building,but the building will be on the same property as CJE’s adult day care center.CJE provides many older adult services at the site,including transportation (day trips and local trips),counseling and care management services. (b)HACC proposed 60 units for the “missing middle”(people with incomes between 80%-120%of AMI)and 24 units for the “low-mod” group (people with incomes at 80%AMI or less).An additional 36 units for market rate units are included in the proposed building.Page 33 of 54SP2.Page 46 of 137 Proposed Affordable Housing for Seniors 28 In addition to the three projects shown in the table,two smaller affordable IL developments were identified in the PMA: o Plans for an eight-unit low-income housing building to be located at 506 South Blvd.in Evanston,were presented at the February 5,2019 City Council meeting.This building is not planned to be restricted to seniors.The plans for this project have been tabled due to neighbor opposition. o Evanston Senior Living is being developed by Centrum Partners LLC and will be located at 1815 Ridge Avenue.It will include 30 market rate ILUs and 2 affordable ILUs (at 80%AMI)in addition to AL and AL memory care.Construction timing has not yet been determined.Page 34 of 54SP2.Page 47 of 137 Assisted Living Communities 29Page 35 of 54SP2.Page 48 of 137 Assisted Living Facilities Assisted Living The Assisted Living Act,as applicable to an assisted living facility,addresses community-based residential care for persons who need assistance with the activities of daily living,including personal,supportive,and intermittent health related services available 24 hours per day,if needed,to meet the scheduled and unscheduled needs of the resident.No person may establish,operate or maintain an assisted living establishment without a license.Prior to admission,the assisted living provider must conduct a comprehensive assessment of the resident’s physical,cognitive and psychological condition,develop a plan of services for the resident,and enter into a written service delivery contract with the resident or resident’s representative.Licensure requirements,policy and staffing requirements,resident rights, physical plant and environmental requirements and regulations pertaining to resident services are set forth in the Assisted Living Rules. Sheltered Care In addition,the IDPH also provides licensure for sheltered care.Sheltered care facilities may provide services similar to those found in an assisted living environment;however,there are more requirements for licensure for sheltered care facilities compared to ALFs and sheltered care services are generally delivered in a more institutional-type setting.Many facilities licensed under the sheltered care regulations are older facilities providing assisted living services under a “medical model”and are often attached to or included as part of a licensed nursing facility. 30Page 36 of 54SP2.Page 49 of 137 Supportive Living Facilities In addition to assisted living and sheltered care communities,supportive living facilities (SLFs) are also available in Illinois.SLFs,which are licensed and regulated by the Department of Healthcare and Family Services,were developed as an alternative to nursing home care for low- income seniors age 65 and older or persons with disabilities (age 22 and older)covered under Medicaid.The aim of the program is to preserve privacy and autonomy while emphasizing health and wellness for persons who would otherwise be qualified for admission to a nursing facility. SLFs provide housing,meals,housekeeping and personal care and are subsidized by Medicaid. Income and asset requirements apply. Per Department of Health Care and Family Services Bureau of Long Term Care,applications were previously accepted for Supportive Living for dementia sites,but the awards were not announced.The announcement of awards is not expected any time soon due to pending litigation.Additional applications for the SLF program are not currently be accepted. For purposes of this report,the general industry term “assisted living”has been used to describe licensed ALFs,sheltered care facilities,market rate units at SLFs,and residential- based or social model memory support units in the market place. 31Page 37 of 54SP2.Page 50 of 137 Assisted Living 32 Based on our research,there are three senior living communities within the PMA that offer market rate assisted living services.No assisted living communities offer affordable AL within the PMA or the surrounding ZIP code areas. The three existing communities located within the PMA comprise 157 assisted living beds,of which 29 are designated for memory care.These communities report a weighted average occupancy rate of 92%in traditional assisted living and 90%in memory care (92%overall). Based on discussions with representatives of the local planning and permitting agencies in Evanston,there is one planned start-up project within the PMA with market rate assisted living units.The planned community,Evanston Senior Living,is being developed by Centrum Partners LLC and will be located at 1815 Ridge.It will include 30 market rate ILUs,2 affordable ILUs,69 ALUs,and 62 AL memory care (MC)units.Zoning for this project was approved in 2016 and the City Council approved an extension in January 2018.Construction timing has not yet been determined. The two affordable ILUs will be designated for applicants that meet the 80%or less AMI limit. The developer will also contribute $400,000 to Evanston’s Affordable Housing Fund in lieu of building all the required affordable units. The tables on the following pages provide summary information on the existing market rate assisted living within the PMA,as well as information on two communities near the PMA.Due to their location outside the PMA,the 202 ALUs at the two communities are excluded from the following demand analyses.Page 38 of 54SP2.Page 51 of 137 Assisted Living -within the PMA 33 Community Name (ZIP Code) Year Opened Number of Assisted Living Beds Number of Designated Memory Care Beds AL Occupancy Rate Memory Care Occupancy Rate Square Footage Basic Assisted Living Monthly Fees Basic Memory Care Monthly Fees Additional Monthly Fees for Higher Levels of Care Community Fee/ Second Person Fee The Mather(a)(b) (60201) 2009/ 2012 10 12 90%92%n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Three Crowns Park (60201) AL: 1909; MC: 2008 25 17 90%89% AL: 260 - 861 MC: 320 - 480 Studio: $3,365 - $4,745; 1BR: $5,865 $7,605 - $9,910 All-inclusive ─ / $2,085 Westminster Place (60201) 1922- 1960s 93 ─92%─350 -850 Rates include Level 1 of care: Studio -$5,720 - $6,200; 1BR -$6,515 - $8,390; 2BR -$9,410 ─ $500 to $1,500 based on level plus medication management fee of $450 to $550 based on need ─ / $1,500 Total Number of Beds/ Wtd. Avg. Occupancy 128 29 92%90% Source:Information based on telephone surveys and on-line research conducted through April 2019. n/a -information not available or provided Notes:(a)The Mather was established in 1941 and was rebuilt from the ground up.The North building opened in 2009 and the South building opened in 2012. (b)Assisted living and memory care at The Mather are open only to The Mather life care residents.Occupancy changes based on residents’ needs,but beds not utilized by existing life care residents are not open for direct admissions.Page 39 of 54SP2.Page 52 of 137 Assisted Living -near the PMA 34 Community Name (ZIP Code) Year Opened Number of Assisted Living Beds Number of Designated Memory Care Beds AL Occupancy Rate Memory Care Occupancy Rate Square Footage Basic Assisted Living Monthly Fees Basic Memory Care Monthly Fees Additional Monthly Fees for Higher Levels of Care Community Fee/ Second Person Fee Lincolnwood Place(a) (60712) 1991 44 26 89%92% AL: 550- 1,015 MC: 350 $4,200 -6,000 $7,500 - 7,800 AL only: $450 -2,800 $5,000 / $1,000 The Carrington at Lincolnwood(b) (60712) 2018 88 44 Less than 50% Less than 50% AL: 385 - 865 MC: 360 - 427 Start at $4,975 Start at $6,950 AL: $400 - 1,250 MC: $400 and $800 Waived at this time / $600 Source: Information based on telephone surveys and on-line research conducted through April 2019. Notes:(a) Lincolnwood Place converted one floor of IL to AL to create a total of 44 AL units. The converted units opened in D ecember 2018. (b) The Carrington opened in April 2018 and is still in its fill-up phase. Based on discussions with a representative of The Carrington at Lincolnwood,their AL and memory care units are still “less than 50%”occupied after being open for one year.Page 40 of 54SP2.Page 53 of 137 Proposed Assisted Living –in and near the PMA 35 Community Name Number of Units Developer Status Within the PMA: Evanston Senior Living 1815 Ridge, Evanston 69 AL, 62 AL MC Michael McClean Approved, but developer is revising unit configuration. Extension approved by City Council on 1/8/18. This project has been delayed multiple times and may not go through. Near the PMA: Grandbrier Senior Living 5300 block of Lincoln, Skokie 78 AL / 14 MC market rate units Chris Rintz/ Grandbrier Senior Living Village Board approved. Artis Senior Living 333-357 Ridge Road, Wilmette 64 AL MC market rate units Artis Senior Living Village Board approved. Expect permitting soon and construction to begin late summer 2019. Source: Information based on discussions with representatives of local planning and permitting agencies and on-line research conducted through April 2019. In addition,the King Home (1555 Oak Ave,60201)has been purchased,but plans have not been finalized.This project may potentially add AL units and /or may potentially contribute to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance fund.Page 41 of 54SP2.Page 54 of 137 Assisted Living Penetration Rates 36 For purposes of analyzing assisted living market demand,we have assumed that a prospective assisted living resident would have the following characteristics: ➢75 years of age or older; ➢Currently living alone; ➢Requires some assistance with activities of daily living;and ➢Has an annual income of at least $35,000 per year;or,is a homeowner with annual income between $25,000 and $35,000 (allows homeowners with a lower income threshold to be included based on an assumed willingness to “spend-down”assets to pay for the cost of assisted living). Based on the experience in other markets,assisted living market and Project penetration rates are generally less than 50%and less than 10%,respectively.Market penetration rates are only one of the indicators of the strength of a market for assisted living services. The following tables present assisted living market and Project penetration rates based on age and income qualified households in 2019 and 2024.The analysis assumes the weighted average actual occupancy rate of 92%for comparable assisted living beds. Another market consideration is the subsidization that occurs between Adult Children (defined as householders between ages 45 and 64 earning at least $100,000 annually)and their parents, and the potential for seniors to move to be near their adult children.Accordingly,Adult Child penetration rates are also presented.Page 42 of 54SP2.Page 55 of 137 Qualified Households –Assisted Living 37 The following table presents qualified household data by income category for the PMA as estimated for 2019 and projected for 2024.Approximately 70%of seniors age 75 and older are projected to be income qualified for market-rate assisted living (compared to 26%for very low income or affordable assisted living),in 2024. Source: Claritas Notes:(1)The total number of AL Qualified households includes all householders age 75 and older earning an annual income of $35,000 and over and homeowners earning between $25,000 and $35,000 annually. (2)Because Claritas does not provide household data specifically for income levels between $35,000 and $50,000 and $50,000 and $75,000, these numbers were interpolated from the Census data provided by Claritas. (3)“Very Low” Includes all householders age 75 and older earning an annual income of less than $25,000. (4) “Affordable” includes all householders age 75 and older earning an annual income between $25,000 and $65,000 (the maximum annual income cut-off for Evanston). Age 75+ Households in the PMA 2019 %2024 % Total Number of Households 3,375 3,805 Annual Household Income: Under $25,000 962 29%999 26% Renters $25,000 -34,999 137 4%145 4% Homeowners $25,000 -34,999(1)231 7%245 6% $35,000 and over: $35,000 -39,999(2)150 4%165 4% $40,000 -49,999(2)291 9%319 8% $50,000 -64,999(2)105 3%120 3% $65,000 -74,999(2)405 12%469 12% $75,000 and over 1,094 32%1,343 35% Total and percentage of AL Qualified -Market Rate(1)2,276 67%2,661 70% Total and percentage of AL Qualified -Very Low(3)962 29%999 26% Total and percentage of AL Qualified -Affordable(4)914 27%994 26%Page 43 of 54SP2.Page 56 of 137 Assisted Living Penetration Rates 38 Households Qualified for Assisted Living Services The assisted living demand analysis considers the following factors in the determination of the size of the qualified market. Source:U.S. Bureau of the Census, The Need for Personal Assistance with Everyday Activities by Age and the Current Population Survey, 2018 Annual Social and Economic Supplements. Notes:(1)Qualified households include those 75 and older with household incomes in excess of $35,000 and homeowners with an annual income between $25,000 and $35,000. (2)Percentage requiring assistance is a weighted average of the qualified households within each senior age cohort and the percentage of the population requiring assistance with activities of daily living within each age cohort. (3)Percentage living alone of those aged 75 and older. PMA 2019 2024 Age and Income Qualified: Estimated age and income qualified households(1)2,276 2,661 Percentage requiring assistance(2)26.4%25.7% Estimated number of age and income qualified households requiring assistance 601 684 Percentage living alone(3)57.9%57.9% Estimated number of age and income qualified single-person households 348 396Page 44 of 54SP2.Page 57 of 137 Assisted Living Penetration Rates 39 The following table presents market and Project penetration rates for qualified households headed by individuals 75 years of age or older within the PMA.This analysis assumes Evanston Senior Living will be developed(4). Assisted Living Penetration Rates 2019 2024 Market Penetration Rates: Number of qualified individuals 348 396 Number of individuals in existing comparable beds (A)116(1)116(1) Total qualified individuals (B)464 512 Proposed comparable beds to be filled in the PMA (C)−(2)97(2) Number of beds at the Project (D)−37(3) Based on existing beds (A/B)25.0%22.7% Based on existing and planned beds ((A+C+D)/B)25.0%48.8%(4) Experienced in other markets < 50% Project Penetration Rate: Number of qualified individuals 396 Planned beds at the Project 37(3) Project penetration rate 9.3% Experienced in other markets < 10% See following page for notes.Page 45 of 54SP2.Page 58 of 137 Assisted Living Penetration Rates 40 Notes for the table Assisted Living Penetration Rates Table 1.Absent the analysis of specific resident origin data from these communities,the calculation assumes a total of 157 assisted living beds at the existing comparable assisted living communities in the PMA,assuming an 80%(126 beds)draw for residents from the PMA and a 92%occupancy rate (116 beds). 2.The calculation includes the 131 planned assisted living beds within the PMA,assuming an 80%(105 beds)draw for residents from the PMA and a 92%target occupancy rate (97 beds). 3.The calculation includes the 50 assisted living beds at the Project,assuming an 80%(40 beds)draw for residents from the PMA and a 92%target occupancy rate (37 beds). 4.Estimated market penetration rate in 2024 is 29.9%assuming Evanston Senior Living is not developed.Assuming the King Home is re-developed to include 90 AL beds,AND assuming the Evanston Senior Living project is developed with 131 AL beds,the market penetration rate is projected to be 61.7%.Page 46 of 54SP2.Page 59 of 137 Profile of Adult Children 41 The following table provides a profile of adult children within the PMA who may opt to subsidize parental income so that a parent can financially qualify for residency in assisted living, or who may influence a parental decision to choose an assisted living unit in the PMA. Source: Claritas Notes:(1)116 total existing assisted living beds, as calculated previously, divided by A. (2)250 total existing and planned assisted living beds, as calculated previously, divided by A. (3)Assuming a larger assisted living Project of 100 beds,the projected adult child penetration rate increases to 6.2%. Profile of Adult Children 2019 2024 Householders earning > $100,000 Age Cohort 45 -54 2,254 2,588 55 -64 1,854 2,057 Total (A)4,108 4,645 Adult Child Penetration Rate: Based on existing assisted living beds(1)2.8%2.5% Based on existing and planned assisted living beds 2.8%(1)5.4%(2) Experienced in other markets < 7%Page 47 of 54SP2.Page 60 of 137 Appendix –Additional ZIP Codes 42Page 48 of 54SP2.Page 61 of 137 Primary Market Area with Surrounding ZIP Codes 43 The map below highlights the 2-ZIP-code PMA in Evanston.The five surrounding ZIP codes are included for informational purposes. 60091 -Wilmette 60076 -Skokie 60203 -Evanston 60645 -Chicago (West Ridge) 60626 -Chicago (Rogers Park)Page 49 of 54SP2.Page 62 of 137 Population and Growth -2019 44 As the following table indicates,the percentage of older adults to the total population in 2019 is lower in the PMA as compared to Skokie,Wilmette and Evanston -60203,and higher in the PMA as compared to the Chicago ZIP codes of 60626 and 60645. 2019 PMA Skokie 60076 Wilmette 60091 Evanston 60203 Chicago 60626 Chicago 60645 Total Population 72,164 32,672 26,481 4,512 51,174 45,314 Population Aged 55-64 8,645 4,908 4,473 686 5,718 5,254 Population Aged 65-74 6,408 3,767 3,121 572 3,622 3,770 Population Aged 75-84 3,058 1,742 1,612 279 1,464 1,696 Population Aged 85+ 1,923 1,021 746 123 627 1,012 Total Age 55+20,034 11,438 9,952 1,660 11,431 11,732 Total Age 65+11,389 6,530 5,479 974 5,713 6,478 Total Age 75+4,981 2,763 2,358 402 2,091 2,708 Percent 55-64 12.0%15.0%16.9%15.2%11.2%11.6% Percent 65-74 8.9%11.5%11.8%12.7%7.1%8.3% Percent 75-84 4.2%5.3%6.1%6.2%2.9%3.7% Percent 85+ 2.7%3.1%2.8%2.7%1.2%2.2% Percent 55+ 27.8%35.0%37.6%36.8%22.3%25.9% Percent 65+ 15.8%20.0%20.7%21.6%11.2%14.3% Percent 75+ 6.9%8.5%8.9%8.9%4.1%6.0%Page 50 of 54SP2.Page 63 of 137 Population and Growth (continued) -2024 45 As the following table indicates,the projected percentage of older adults to the total population in 2024 is lower in the PMA as compared to Skokie,Wilmette and Evanston -60203, and higher in the PMA as compared to the Chicago ZIP codes of 60626 and 60645. 2024 PMA Skokie 60076 Wilmette 60091 Evanston 60203 Chicago 60626 Chicago 60645 Total Population 72,562 32,271 26,198 4,454 51,374 45,370 Population Aged 55-64 8,460 4,410 4,257 589 6,011 5,047 Population Aged 65-74 7,217 4,287 3,615 633 4,295 4,180 Population Aged 75-84 3,676 1,971 1,769 301 1,931 2,082 Population Aged 85+ 1,891 967 732 119 654 946 Total Age 55+21,244 11,635 10,373 1,642 12,891 12,255 Total Age 65+12,784 7,225 6,116 1,053 6,880 7,208 Total Age 75+5,567 2,938 2,501 420 2,585 3,028 Percent 55-64 11.7%13.7%16.2%13.2%11.7%11.1% Percent 65-74 9.9%13.3%13.8%14.2%8.4%9.2% Percent 75-84 5.1%6.1%6.8%6.8%3.8%4.6% Percent 85+ 2.6%3.0%2.8%2.7%1.3%2.1% Percent 55+ 29.3%36.1%39.6%36.9%25.1%27.0% Percent 65+ 17.6%22.4%23.3%23.6%13.4%15.9% Percent 75+ 7.7%9.1%9.5%9.4%5.0%6.7%Page 51 of 54SP2.Page 64 of 137 Population and Growth (continued) 46 As indicated in the following table,the fastest growing segments of the senior population in the PMA and adjacent ZIP codes over the five-year period from 2019 to 2024 are projected to be the 65 to 74 and 75 to 84 age cohorts. Compounded Annual Growth Rates Between 2019 and 2024 PMA Skokie 60076 Wilmette 60091 Evanston 60203 Chicago 60626 Chicago 60645 Total Population 0.1%(0.2%)(0.2%)(0.3%)0.1%0.0% Population Aged 55-64 (0.4%)(2.1%)(1.0%)(3.0%)1.0%(0.8%) Population Aged 65-74 2.4%2.6%3.0%2.0%3.5%2.1% Population Aged 75-84 3.7%2.5%1.9%1.5%5.7%4.2% Population Aged 85+(0.3%)(1.1%)(0.4%)(0.7%)0.8%(1.3%) Population Aged 55+ 1.2%0.3%0.8%(0.2%)2.4%0.9% Population Aged 65+ 2.3%2.0%2.2%1.6%3.8%2.2% Population Aged 75+ 2.2%1.2%1.2%0.9%4.3%2.3% Source: ClaritasPage 52 of 54SP2.Page 65 of 137 Household Income -Additional ZIP Codes 47 The following table presents household data by income category for the Additional Zip Codes as estimated for 2019 and projected for 2024. Source: Claritas Age 75+ Households -2019 Skokie 60076 %Wilmette 60091 %Evanston 60203 %Chicago 60626 %Chicago 60645 % Total Number of Households 1,606 1,694 278 1,202 1,775 Annual Household Income: Under $25,000 483 30%280 17%43 15%807 67%743 42% $25,000 -34,999 223 14%165 10%38 14%96 8%266 15% $35,000 -49,999 241 15%246 14%32 12%88 7%205 11% $50,000 and over 659 41%1,003 59%165 59%211 18%561 32% Age 75+ Households -2024 Skokie 60076 %Wilmette 60091 %Evanston 60203 %Chicago 60626 %Chicago 60645 % Total Number of Households 1,703 1,810 291 1,497 1,975 Annual Household Income: Under $25,000 473 28%265 15%39 13%947 63%765 39% $25,000 -34,999 219 13%138 8%34 12%138 9%286 14% $35,000 -49,999 246 14%242 13%37 13%117 8%236 12% $50,000 and over 765 45%1,165 64%181 62%295 20%688 35%Page 53 of 54SP2.Page 66 of 137 Real Estate -Additional Zip Codes 48 The following table presents the median residential home sale prices in the five additional zip codes surrounding the PMA. Source:Melissa Data Corporation -based on County Recorders Office data, which includes “For sale by owner” sales and foreclosures, April 2019 Note (1):Data reported for the 12-month period ending March 31. Number of Homes Sold and Median Selling Price 2017-2018(1)2018-2019(1) Location Zip Code # of Homes Sold Median Selling Price # of Homes Sold Median Selling Price Skokie 60076 445 $340,000 349 $319,000 Wilmette 60091 456 $702,000 366 $751,500 Evanston 60203 73 $427,500 63 $419,000 Chicago 60626 475 $213,000 404 $231,000 Chicago 60645 467 $235,500 356 $230,000 Page 54 of 54SP2.Page 67 of 137 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Sarah Flax, Housing & Grants Administrator CC: Johanna Leonard, Community Development Director; Gary Gerdes, Building Services Manager Subject: Consideration of a Waiver of Building Permit Fees for Coach Houses/ADUs with Affordable Rental Restrictions Date: January 21, 2020 Recommended Action: This memo provides information to City Council pertinent to a referral by Alderman Fleming to waive the building permit fees for construction of a new coach house/accessory dwelling unit (ADU) if the owner agrees to rent the ADU at an affordable rate to income eligible households. Staff does not recommend waiver of building permit fees at this time; rationale is provided below. Council Action: For Discussion Summary: Building permit fees are based on construction value and typically amount to about 2% of the construction value of a coach house/ADU. A recent example of a coach house constructed in 2019 was valued at $143,394 with building permit fee of $2,519. It is unlikely that waiving the building permit fee is enough of an incentive for a property owner to agree to a 10 -year rental restriction for households (HHs) at 80% of the area median income (AMI). The current monthly gross rent for a one bedroom unit at 80% AMI is $1,337, which is $334 less than a unit at 100% AMI. This amounts to an annual rent reduction of $4,008, which over the course of 10 years totals $40,080 in current dollars. Even if all fees associated with the coach house construction totaling $5,636 were waived, it does not seem likely that this would incentivize income restricted units. See chart below for the different fees referenced. SP3.Page 68 of 137 The City of Evanston generally does not waive building permit or related fees for construction projects because they are designed to recoup the direct costs incurred to review and inspect the construction project. The ETHS Geometry in Construction program, a partnership between two governmental agencies, the City and ETHS, that constructs one house per year, is one exception. The second is new residential construction projects covered by the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance that provide at least 5% of units affordable onsite at 60% AMI for 30 years, where only the portion of building permit fees attributable to the affordable units is waived. If permit fees were waived on only the residential portion of construction of a coach house/ADU, consistent with the IHO process, the waiver would be less of an incentive. Based on the example above and a typical garage permit fee of $500, the waiver of building permit fees less the garage portion would be $2,019. A waiver of total fees less the garage portion would be $5,136. The City of Evanston has identified coach houses/ADUs as an important opportunity to expand the number of housing units in the City to meet housing needs, particularly for small units, and also to integrate smaller, more affordable rental units in high cost neighborhoods with primarily owner-occupied single family homes. City Council approved Ordinance 171-O- 19, Amending Title 6, Accessory Dwelling Unit Requirements and Qualifications at its meeting on January 13, 2020, which allows ADUs on residential properties other than single- family homes, which dramatically increases the number of properties on which a coach house/ADU can be constructed. It also allows a waiver of the off street parking requirement for rental units restricted for HHs at 80% of the area median income for 10 years. If permit fees were waived for ADUs restricted for HHs at 80% AMI for 10 years, these properties would also qualify for that waiver. Additional changes to zoning that would be more effective at generating more ADU s and incentivizing income restricted units could include allowing internal or attached ADUs without an additional parking space. Internal or attached ADUs are currently not an option, and would allow additional units on properties at maximum lot or impermeable surface coverage. Another strategy to support the development of detached ADUs including coach houses is to offer pre-approved plans that simplify and streamline permitting. Seattle, WA is employing this strategy to facilitate ADU development. Seattle also allows two ADUs per single-family property with height and size limits that allow family-size units, and waive off-street parking and occupancy requirements for ADUs. These and other strategies will continue to be evaluated by staff for Evanston. Page 2 of 2 SP3.Page 69 of 137 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Johanna Leonard, Director of Community Development Subject: Consideration of Funding for ArtSpace in support of a Preliminary Feasibility Study Date: January 21, 2020 Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with ArtSpace (50 Third Avenue North, Suite 400, Minneapolis, MN 55401) for affordable housing consulting services/preliminary feasibility study for an amount not to exceed $25,000. Funding Source: The Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) 250.21.5465.62490 is the proposed funding source. The AHF currently has a cash balance of approximately $3,500,000; $2,000,000 is requested for the Evergreen Senior Housing Project. Council Action: For Action Summary: ArtSpace is a nonprofit arts organization that develops, owns and manages properties which seek to “create affordable spaces for artists, arts & cultural organizations, and creative businesses.” ArtSpace has developed a variety of unique properties throughout the US that include both new construction and rehabilitation of existing structures. Their website reports that they operate approximately 53 projects and that this comprises over 1,000 residential units. In May 2019, Alderman Fiske made a reference for staff to investigate whether ArtSpace would be interested in working with Evanston in consideration of the creation of affordable artist spaces. Following this reference, staff was able to obtain a proposal from ArtSpace for its services. They are uniquely positioned to support Evanston’s mission to create the most livable city through assisting in planning efforts to identify opportunities to create and preserve affordable housing spaces that also serve as spaces to support Evanston’s crea tive and cultural arts community. SP4.Page 70 of 137 The attached scope of work summarizes the work ArtSpace would provide the City for a preliminary feasibility study: • help the City understand and explore key elements that determine feasibility of a project (project concept, site selection, market need, funding and financing, local leadership, sustained community impact); • engage key stakeholders to build support for the Project; and • outline the next steps necessary to move the Project forward. Legislative History: The Housing and Homeless Commission voted against approval of up to $25,000 from the Affordable the 2019; 5, December on its meeting project this for Fund Housing at Commission recognized the potential value of the study to Evanston but viewed this as a primarily Economic Development project that could be funded by some other source. Attachments: Introduction to ArtSpace Preliminary Feasibility Study Draft Scope/Proposal for City of Evanston's Preliminary Feasibility Study Page 2 of 9 SP4.Page 71 of 137 Introduction to Preliminary Feasibility Study The Preliminary Feasibility Study provides preliminary feedback about the feasibility of creating a live/work, multi-use, or other arts facility development. There are six areas of consideration: 1. Project Concept 2. Arts Market 3. Local Leadership 4. Funding and Finance 5. Potential Sites 6. Alignment with Community Goals The study kick-starts the process of creating affordable space for artists. It is the first step Artspace takes on its own development projects. As part of this fact-finding process, the Artspace team meets with artists, city officials, funders, and other stakeholders. They look at potential properties and hold a public meeting to welcome community participation, answer questions, and generate buzz. Who Might Benefit: • City Governments/Civic Organizations • Arts and Cultural Organizations • Downtown Organizations What is Included: • Consulting phone/email time in preparation for the visit, including review of invitation lists, agenda, and potential building/sites, and past studies • Original Artspace materials to assist in preparing and sharing information regarding the visit • Two-day visit to facilitate focus groups, tour potential sites, hear from the local community, and present at a public meeting • Written report summarizing Artspace’s findings and recommended next steps Page 3 of 9 SP4.Page 72 of 137 What to Expect from a Typical Preliminary Feasibility Visit: Each visit is customized to meet the needs of the community and project. Unique meetings/events suitable to the community’s needs may be substituted. Day 1 • Site Tour o Tour potential sites/buildings o Visit existing creative spaces and arts communities (e.g. studios, creative businesses, and key arts organizations) • Dinner with Core Group Day 2 • Continuation of Site Tour o Explore additional potential sites and creative spaces • Working Lunch: Meeting with Cultural Leaders o Discuss the community and understand the needs of various cultural organizations and groups. • Artists, Creatives, and Arts Organizations Focus Group o Learn about the creative community’s space needs, market for renting creative space, and economic considerations • Funding and Financing Leadership Focus Group o Learn more about potential funding sources for a project; gauge the interest of local finance and business leaders • Public Meeting o Present to the community about Artspace and the economic and community impact of the arts; build support, and facilitate Q&A Day 3 • Civic Leadership Focus Group o Learn more about broader community goals, current initiatives and local priorities • Working Lunch: Debrief with Core Group Page 4 of 9 SP4.Page 73 of 137 1 Preliminary Feasibility Study Exhibit A The City of Evanston has invited Artspace to submit a proposal for a Preliminary Feasibility Study of affordable artist live/work housing. The purpose of this scope of work (“Purpose”) is to help the City of Evanston understand the potential to create a successful, affordable, self-sustaining arts development project (the "Project") Evanston, IL. The visit and ensuing report are also intended to: help the City of Evanston understand and explore key elements that determine feasibility of a project (project concept, site selection, market need, funding and financing, local leadership, sustained community impact); engage key stakeholders to build support for the Project; and outline the next steps necessary to move the Project forward. Preliminary Feasibility Study Scope of Work 1. Visit Preparation. a. Assign two Artspace staff as project leads; b. Work with the City of Evanston or (assignee) to set dates, customize the Visit agenda and identify 3-6 key individuals to help carry out the study (the “Core Group”); c. Conduct two conference calls with the Core Group: i. Kick-off call to meet the Core Group, review Visit preparation materials, and articulate goals for the Visit; ii. Pre-visit check in call, approximately one week before the Visit, to review Visit details and answer any questions; d. Provide Core Group with preparation materials, including a sample agenda, suggested participants, and meeting planning tips; e. Review relevant materials about the community prior to the visit, including site map(s), concept write-ups, or floor plans; f. Review existing market, redevelopment, cultural planning, city planning or other appropriate available studies; g. Prepare a slideshow presentation that provides background on Artspace and prompts discussion during the Focus Groups and Public Meeting; Page 5 of 9 SP4.Page 74 of 137 2 h. Confirm travel dates and provide arrival/departure times; i. Communicate via email or phone to assist Core Group with Visit preparation, as needed; j. Provide phone or email interviews with local press, as requested. 2. Preliminary Feasibility Visit. a. Travel to Evanston, IL for one, two-day (sixteen-hour) visit, by two Artspace staff (the “Visit”). The Visit includes up to 20 hours of on-the-ground consulting time. The total fee is inclusive of all travel expenses including hotel accommodations, meals, car rental, and staff travel time; b. Tour of 3-5 potential project sites for new construction or building reuse. This includes a tour of existing arts districts and facilities as well as a general tour of the priority area(s) under consideration for this Project; c. Facilitate up to three Focus Group Meetings to understand the priorities, interests, community goals, and space needs of each stakeholder group. Each meeting includes a short presentation to introduce the Artspace model and a facilitated discussion. Focus Group Meetings educate about arts facility development, elicit feedback on the Project, and provide a platform for questions, concerns and support. Focus Group Meetings typically include the following stakeholder groups: i. Civic Leadership. e.g. Key City, County and/or State staff and elected officials, as well as leaders from other community groups such as a chamber of commerce, tourism board, main street organization, and Rotary Club, etc. This meeting focuses on civic involvement, a shared vision for development, current initiatives, and complementary community goals; ii. Funding and Financing Leadership e.g. Local public and private funders, economic development officials, nonprofit developers, and representatives from local banks and businesses. This meeting focuses on how affordable mixed-use arts facilities are developed and sustained as well as available funding sources and tools for predevelopment and development; and potential partners/tenants/programs that will bolster the project’s sustainable community impact; Page 6 of 9 SP4.Page 75 of 137 3 iii. Artists, Creatives, and Arts Organizations. e.g. A diverse cross section of people working in the arts, creative and cultural industries, and arts-compatible community organizations. Participants should represent a diversity of perspectives, in terms of arts discipline, career stage, age, ethnic and cultural background, as well as a balance between individual artists and organizations. This meeting focuses on the articulating the project concept, understanding the market for a new arts facility, and collecting feedback about the creative sector's current assets, challenges and opportunities; d. Present at a Public Meeting, which includes a slideshow about the Artspace model and the proposed Project as well as a facilitated Q&A session to receive community input and answer questions; e. Meet with the Core Group to discuss the project concept, answer questions and discuss initial impressions from the Visit; 3. Post-Visit a. Compile notes and perform any necessary additional research; b. Write a Preliminary Feasibility Report and deliver first draft 6-8 weeks after the Visit; c. Facilitate a conference call with Core Group to discuss draft report, next steps, and suggested revisions. If Core Group is unavailable by phone, it may choose to compile edits from the group into one document and share via email; d. Finalize and deliver final report 2-3 weeks after receiving one round of Core Group edits. If edits are not received within 4 weeks of delivery of draft report, Artspace will independently finalize and deliver the final report. Up to five (5) physical copies of the report can be delivered, upon request. Deliverables: • Preliminary Feasibility Report Page 7 of 9 SP4.Page 76 of 137 4 Exhibit B Timeline and Fee Disbursement Budget The fee for the proposed Preliminary Feasibility Study is $25,000. This flat fee includes staff time, deliverables, and travel expenses and time. This contract is set up not to exceed the total fee of $25,000 as noted above unless another agreement is put into place with a specific work scope. For additional services, Artspace charges $250 per hour for its consulting work Timeline and Fee Disbursement Scope of Work will commence upon receipt of deposit. This timeline assumes that a contract is signed and an initial payment of $12,500 (1/2 of the work fee) is received in [MONTH PRIOR TO START, YEAR]. The remaining $12,500 would be due within 30 days of the delivery of the draft report. Page 8 of 9 SP4.Page 77 of 137 5 Exhibit C Additional notes on roles and responsibilities The City of Evanston agrees to: • Assign a main point of contact/proxy the City of Evanston’s communication with Artspace; • Provide any relevant documents for Artspace’s review; • Create an agenda for the Visit, based upon the sample provided, and share with Artspace no less than two (2) weeks before the Visit; • Coordinate logistics for the execution of the agenda. Which includes: a. Identifying and inviting the appropriate individuals or groups. b. Promoting the Public Meeting, encouraging artists, community members, stakeholders and all to attend. c. Securing space and setting up for all focus groups and meetings; d. Providing technology for presentations, which includes projector, screen/blank wall, power source, microphone (for Public Meeting), and extension cord (if needed). Artspace will bring a mac laptop and adaptor to plug into provided projector. e. Arranging for site and area tour. • Pay additionally to Artspace any reasonable and/or necessary costs incurred by Artspace to rearrange or cancel travel itineraries as requested by the City of Evanston or necessitated by changes initiated by same. Page 9 of 9 SP4.Page 78 of 137 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council CC: Members of the Planning and Development Committee From: Michael Griffith, Development Planner CC: Johanna Leonard, Director of Community Development; Scott Mangum, Planning and Zoning Manager Subject: Ordinance 8-O-20 Planned Development, 999-1015 Howard Street Date: January 21, 2020 Recommended Action: The Plan Commission and staff recommend adoption of Ordinance 8 -O-20 for approval of a Special Use for a Planned Development in the B2 Business District to construct a 4-story, 73,017 square foot addition to the existing CJE Senior Life building. The addition includes 60 affordable dwelling units for residents (older adults, 62 years and older) and 55 parking spaces. Council Action: For Action Summary: The applicant is proposing to rehab the existing CJE SeniorLife Adult Day service center and to construct a 4-story (51 feet high), 73,017 square foot addition. The addition will provide 60 dwelling units, 54 will be 1-bedroom dwellings (665 SF) and 6 will be 2-bedroom dwellings (1,021 SF). All dwelling units will be reserved for seniors ages 62 and older that have incomes at or below 60% of Area Median Income (AMI). The addition includes a parking structure providing 55 parking spaces for residents, visito rs, vans and buses for the CJE SeniorLife Adult Day service center. The development includes site development allowances for the following: 1. A building height of 51’ where 45’ is allowed; 2. To reduce the required interior side yard setback for parking to 0’ where 5’ is required from the east property line; 3. To reduce the required rear yard setback for parking to 0’ where 15’ is required from the north property line when adjacent to a residential district; 4. To reduce the required number of off -street parking spaces from 69 to 55; and SP5.Page 79 of 137 5. To allow a loading area with a vertical clearance of 11’-10” where a minimum clearance height of 14’ is required. The existing CJE facility is considered an office use. Offices and dwellings above the ground floor are permitted uses in the B2 district. The surrounding zoning and land uses to the site include: • North: R2 Single-Family Residential - Single-family detached and multi-family dwellings • South: C1-2 and C1-3 (City of Chicago) - Commercial • East: B2 Business - Retail • West: B2 Business - Office 999- 1015 Howard Street - south elevation rendering Site Layout: The site is located on the north side of Howard Street, mid-block between Barton Avenue and Ridge Avenue, and is bounded by a 16-foot wide alley to the north. Current improvements on the property include the existing CJE building at the far west end of the site, its parking lot to the east and the now vacant former Dairy Queen at the far east end of the site. There are currently three curb cuts onto Howard Street. The existing CJE building will remain, the 4-story addition will be constructed on the remaining site. The proposed site plan provides two curb cuts onto Howard Street to access a drop-off and pick-up area, a loading zone within the parking structure, and the parking structure. The site plan does not provide vehicular access from the alley. The eastern curb cut provides access to the below-grade ramped parking level for residents and CJE staff, while the western curb cut provides access to the visitor and CJE bus/van parking located on an upper-level ramp. Page 2 of 45 SP5.Page 80 of 137 The refuse containers will be located on the alley side of the CJE building, where they are currently located, screened by a cedar wood fence stained to match the exterior building materials on the new construction. As configured, the only access to the dumpsters is at the east end of the space next to stairs leading up to the deck, creating operational issues. Dumpsters would have to be manually pulled from that area since a truck would not have access. The problem could be worse if bulk items are left in this area and with snow accumulation. A rolling or swing gate could be provided to allow refuse collectors direct access to the dumpsters. The gates should screen the dumpsters too. A building section diagram shows a 6-foot tall wall at the parking structure to block headlight exposure to neighbors to the north. While the diagram shows the wall tapering down at the west end of the parking structure, the building elevation drawing shows a consistent wall height. The applicant should clarify this detail. All lighting is required to be screened and directed away from adjacent properties. The landscape plan notes proposed streetscape elements will conform to the City’s standards for Howard Street and will be coordinated with the City’s Howard Street Corridor Improvement Project currently being developed. The plan provides additional parkway trees along Howard Street and green walls planted with vines. An irrigation system will be implemented to maintain the vines. Autumn Blaze Maple is one of the trees listed on the proposed tree list, this tree should be removed from the list. The applicant needs to work with the Public Works Agency to prepare a list of approved trees. 999-1015 Howard Street - north elevation rendering Page 3 of 45 SP5.Page 81 of 137 999-1015 Howard Street - site plan/landscape plan Planned Development: The applicant is requesting Special Use approval for a Planned Development to construct the 73,017 square foot addition. The following table identifies how the project meets or does not meet the bulk requirements of the B2 District: 999-1015 Howard Zoning Requirements Standard Min. / Max. Permitted Proposed Building: Front setback (south) 0 feet 0 feet Side setback (west) 0 feet 0 feet Side setback (east) 0 feet 0 feet Rear setback (north) 0 feet 0 feet Parking: Front setback (north) Open parking prohibited Enclosed parking Side setback (west) 5 feet 5+ feet Side setback (east) 5 feet 0 feet Rear setback (north) 15 feet (abutting residential district) 0 feet Height 45 feet 51 feet FAR 2.0 77,920 square feet 1.88 73,017 square feet Off-street parking 69 55 Page 4 of 45 SP5.Page 82 of 137 Loading dock(s) 1 short 1 short Loading dock vertical clearance 14 feet 11 feet-10 inches In the planned development application, the applicant requested approval of the following site development allowances: 999-1015 Howard Street Site Development Allowances Required / Max. Permitted Proposed Building height 45 feet per base zoning, 57 feet with site development allowance 51 feet Side yard setback for parking 5 feet 0 feet Rear yard setback for parking 15 feet 0 feet # of required parking spaces 69 55 Since the planned development application submittal, the applicant has requested an additional site development allowance concerning the minimum required vertical clearance for loading docks. The minimum required vertical clearance is 14 feet, the applicant is asking for 11 feet-10 inches. Building Height While the surrounding area is predominantly made up of buildings between 1-2 stories tall, there are buildings between 3-6 stories tall within close proximity to the site: A 3-story building abuts the site to the west, a 4-story building is located to the northeast on the west side of Ridge Avenue, a 4-story building to the southeast on the south side of Howard Street east of Ridge Avenue, a 6-story building to the southeast on the west side of Ridge Avenue, and a 4-story building is located on the south side of Howard Street across from the site. The proposed building height at 4-stories, 51 feet tall, is compatible with the varied building heights found in the surrounding area. Parking Setbacks Currently, the existing parking lots for both the CJE and the former Dairy Queen do not provide setbacks from either the east or north property lines. The proposed development maintains the existing conditions while screening parking from view from the street, east and north where screening does not currently exist. Parking The proposed development requires 69 off-street parking spaces, 55 parking spaces are proposed. The off-street parking requirement is based on the following standard: Day Care Center - Adult:1 space per employee + 1 space per each company vehicle The applicant stated there are 22 employees and 11 company vehicles parked on the property. 22 employees + 11 vehicles = 33 Page 5 of 45 SP5.Page 83 of 137 Residential: 0.75 parking spaces per 1-bedroom unit Since the residential portion of the development is a primarily affordable non-covered development and is located outside of a Transit Oriented Area (TOD), the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) and Section 6-9- 1-10 of the Zoning Ordinance exempts 20% of the dwelling units from the off-street parking requirement. Therefore, twelve dwelling units are exempted, 6 2-bedroom units and 6 1-bedroom units. 0.75 * 48 = 36 33 + 36 = 69 The applicant provided a table noting parking data for affordable housing developments within 5 miles of the proposed development, located in Evanston and Chicago. The table is an attachment to this memo. The table notes these developments include both senior and family housing and two of the developments include a library. The average residential par king ratio provided for these developments is 0.54 spaces per dwelling unit, the ratio ranging between 0.22 to 1.5. The proposed development provides 0.55 spaces per residential unit (33 parking spaces are designated for residents on the site plan). Loading Dock Clearance Fourteen feet is the minimum required vertical clearance for loading docks/areas, the applicant is requesting 11 feet-10 inches. The applicant states the 14-feet height cannot be achieved with the proposed construction method without rai sing the 1st floor, increasing the building height. The applicant prefers to maintain the proposed building height. The applicant states large trucks are not typically used for deliveries and by senior-aged residents when they move-in/out, that the requested vertical clearance will accommodate the typical vehicles used for loading/unloading for this type of development. Exterior Building Materials The existing CJE building facade will be renovated to include glazing and wood slats mating materials on the proposed addition. The proposed building exterior materials include: ● Existing brick masonry on CJE building ● Architectural precast concrete panels with scoring pattern ● Textured architectural structural concrete wall ● Storefront glazing ● Aluminum frame windows ● Wood slats, including railing and fence ● Living green wall in front of precast concrete Page 6 of 45 SP5.Page 84 of 137 999-1015 Howard Street - building elevations Traffic The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Study prepared by Eriksson Engineering, Associates, dated June 19, 2019. Howard Street is an east-west major arterial road with one travel lane in each direction. On-street parking is provided on the south side of the street. There are sidewalks provided on both sides of the street; painted crosswalks with pedest rian signals are provided to the east at Ridge Avenue and at an unsignalized crosswalk crossing Howard Street at Oakley Avenue to the west. There are three bus routes on Howard Street (Pace Bus route 215 and CTA Bus routes 97 and 206), two bus routes on Ridge Avenue to the east (CTA Bus routes 201 and 206). There is a CTA Rail station (Howard Red, Purple, and Yellow Lines) located approximately ¾ of a mile to the east and served by the above bus routes. The study indicates the street network can accommodate the additional traffic from the proposed project; the redevelopment of the site with senior housing will generate less traffic than the prior use of the property with a restaurant; the location of the site and availability of public transportation, walking, and biking will minimize the volume of vehicular traffic generated by the site; all intersections within the study area work at acceptable levels of service and delay, however, a small increase in delays from the projected traffic growth is anticipated; the proposed loading area can serve deliveries. Public Benefits The applicant provides the following to address how the proposed development provides public benefits per Section 6-3-6-3: Page 7 of 45 SP5.Page 85 of 137 • The development allows for the rehabilitation of the CJE SeniorLife Adult Day Services (ADS) building. The development improves the aesthetics of this section of Howard Street through pleasing storefront glass and activating 175 feet of frontage at the pedestrian scale of a major east-west artery. • The development is designed to simultaneously create vertical physical improvements to the site by creative facade and glasswork. A key improvement is the programmed outdoor terrace on the 2nd floor for use by ADS clients and residents of the new residential building. • The development addresses the City’s housing goals to provide affordable housing and to target the senior population. • The development replaces a vacant structure previously occupied by fast -food establishments which will improve the site, block, and surroundings. The addition of dwellings on this section of Howard Street will provide enhanced de-facto security with additional “eyes on the street”. • CJE Adult Day Services center is a non-profit organization whose existing building will be incorporated into the new development. CJE currently holds tax-exempt status as a non-profit entity. Under a new ownership structure, CJE Senior Life will be leasing from General Partnership and its tax-exempt status will not carry through, allowing a current commercial property to join into the property tax roll. • The development efficiently uses the site while improving circulation on the property. Reducing curb cuts from three to two allows for a more straightforward circulation plan. The plan also accommodates the buses used by ADS on a daily basis. • The development will meet LEED Silver Certification (or higher). The development will also meet the Illinois Housing Development Authority’s sustainable design requirements, as well as having received an Eligibility Letter for the Com Ed Energy Efficiency Program which will help reduce energy use. Compliance with the Zoning Ordinance The intent of the B2 Business District is: 1. … to accommodate and encourage the continued viable use of older, pedestrian oriented shopping areas found throughout the City primarily at arterial roadway intersections and, in some cases, near mass transit facilities. This zoning district encompasses the City's oldest shopping areas whose pedestrian orientation and character it wishes to preserve. 2. These shopping and business areas are primarily neighborhood oriented, however, they can also accommodate specialty stores and service facilities that service a larger market area. The established physical pattern of the district is typically buildings built to the front lot line and continuous bands of storefronts. The provisions of this district are intended to maintain pedestrian character. 3. Uses in the B2 district may include businesses catering to the daily shopping needs of neighborhood residents, specialty stores that provide retail opportunities that have broader market appeal, retail service uses and professional service uses, offices and financial institutions without drive-up facilities. No individual use in this district should exceed twenty thousand (20,000) square feet in size. The proposed development provides new housing along an established commercial corridor to encourage and strengthen pedestrian and shopping activity. Page 8 of 45 SP5.Page 86 of 137 Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan The proposed Planned Development is consistent with the 2000 Comprehensive General Plan. The guiding principle of the Plan is to encourage new development that improves the economy, convenience, and attractiveness of Evanston while simultaneously working to maintain a high quality of life within the community where new developments should be integrated within existing neighborhoods to promote walking and the use of mass transit. The site is located within a corridor the Comprehensive Plan identifies where commercial and mixed-use redevelopment and revitalization are probable, and where sensitive transit- oriented development is encouraged. The proposed development is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan objectives: • Complements and strengthens existing street and sidewalk patterns. • Provides new housing construction that will increase the supply of affordable rental housing. • Continues to promote the revitalization of the Howard Street corridor, new housing on Howard Street helps to increase pedestrian activity and “eyes on the street” which in turn benefits the surrounding neighborhood. Compliance with the Design Guidelines for Planned Developments The proposed building is consistent with the Design Guidelines for Planned Developments. The proposal was reviewed by the Design and Project Review Committee on November 6, 2019, and on December 4, 2019, and received a recommendation for approval. The massing and scale of the proposed addition creates a street edge/building wall along a section of Howard Street where such street edge/building wall does not exist currently. The building elevation facing Howard Street is broken up by different building materials and textures. Off-street parking and loading area are not prominently visible from a pu blic street, located behind and/or screened by the new building. The refuse area is located to the rear of the building, not visible from a public street and screened by a fence. However, the DAPR Committee felt the east and west building elevations create blank walls. Staff will continue to work with the applicant on possible additional design elements for the east and west building elevations. DAPR Committee Review The Design and Project Review Committee reviewed the proposed Planned Development on November 6, 2019, and on December 4, 2019. The Committee recommended approval of the proposed development at the December 4, 2019, meeting subject to addressing garbage enclosure and waste management. Standards for Special Use (Section 6-3-5-10) The proposed development must satisfy the standards for Special Use in Section 6-3-5-10, the Standard for Planned Development in Section 6-3-6-9 and standards and guidelines established for Planned Developments in the B2 Business District. (Section 6-9-1-9). Staff finds that the proposed development meets all standards for approval. Standards for Special Use (Section 6-3-5-10) Page 9 of 45 SP5.Page 87 of 137 • A Planned Development is listed as an allowed special use in the B2 District. • As noted above, the proposal is in keeping with the purposes and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. • when effect cumulative a cause negative will development proposed The not considered in conjunction with other special uses in the area. Surrounding uses are single-family detached residential to the north across the alle y, with commercial, retail, and office uses to the east and west along a commercial corridor. • The proposed development will not interfere with or diminish the value of property in the neighborhood. • The proposed development will be adequately served by public infrastructure already available. The street and sidewalk network, as well as water, sewer, electricity and gas infrastructure already exist. • The proposed development will not cause undue traffic congestion. The applicant has submitted a traffic study indicating there will be minimal effect on the level of service on existing surrounding roadways. • There are no historical and architectural resources or environmental features present on the site. Standards and Guidelines for Planned Developments in t he B2 District (Sections 6-3-6-9 and 6-9-1-9) • The proposed Planned Development is compatible with surrounding development with respect to building height, bulk, and scale. • The proposed Planned Development will strengthen the pedestrian character of the business district by providing new dwelling units along the Howard Street commercial corridor. • The proposed Planned Development will enhance the streetscape and architectural character of the business district by creating a strong street edge/building wall wh ere open parking lots currently exist. Legislative History: December 4, 2019 - The Design and Project Review Committee (DAPR) recommended unanimous approval of the proposed development subject to addressing garbage enclosure and waste management issues. DAPR noted that while many of the applicant's stated public benefits were either fulfilling city requirements or inherent to the development, the provision of affordable housing in excess of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements is a significant public benefit. December 11, 2019 - The Plan Commission opened the public hearing and heard testimony by the applicant and the general public. The Plan Commission recommended, 4 -0, to approve the proposed Planned Development subject to the conditions of approval. Link to December 11, 2019 Plan Commission Packet (item materials begin on page 45). Ordinance 8-O-20 incorporates the following conditions of approval: (A) Compliance with Applicable Requirements: The Applicant shall develop and operate the Planned Development authorized by the terms of this ordinance in substantial compliance with: the terms of this ordinance; the Site and Landscape Plans in Exhibits D and E, attached Page 10 of 45 SP5.Page 88 of 137 hereto and incorporated herein by reference; all applicable legislation; the Applicant’s testimony and representations to the Design and Project Review Committee, the Plan Commission, the P&D Committee, and the City Council; and the approved documents on file in this case. (B) Continued Design Development: The applicant shall continue to work with staff on design details on the east and west building elevations. (C) Construction Management Plan: The Applicant shall sign and agree to a Construction Management Plan (CMP) with the City of Evanston prior to issuance of the Building Permit. The CMP shall include but is not limited to the following: construction phasing/staging plans; construction hours; site access including traffic and pedestrian safety plans; contractor parking; damage control and vibration monitoring; construction exhibits; project communication and signage. (D) Waste: Prior to issuance of building permit, the Applicant shall develop and obtain the Director of the Public Works Agency’s approval of a garbage and waste management plan for the subject property. (E) Landscape Plan: Prior to issuance of building permit, the Applicant shall develop and obtain the Director of the City’s Public Works Agency’s approval of a revised Landscape Plan with a tree list. (F) Snow: Prior to issuance of building permit, the Applicant shall develop and obtain the Director of the Public Works Agency’s approval of a snow removal management plan for the subject property. (G) Update to Plans: The Applicant shall update the plans for the project to show the public sidewalk extending through the driveways off Howard Street. (H) Construction Schedule: Pursuant to Subsection 6 -9-1-9(A)(4) of the Zoning Ordinance, the planned development shall be completed within two (2) years of the issuance of the special use permit for the planned development. (I) Recordation: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-6-10 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Applicant shall, at its cost, record a certified copy of this ordinance, including all exhibits attached hereto, with the Cook County Recorder of Deeds, and provide proof of such recordation to the City, before the City may issue any permits pursuant to the Planned Development authorized by the terms of this ordinance. Attachments: Ordinance 8-O-20 Planned Development, 999-1015 Howard Street, 19PLND-0012 Plan Commission meeting minutes excerpt, draft - December 11, 2019 Page 11 of 45 SP5.Page 89 of 137 12/18/2019 8-O-20 AN ORDINANCE Granting a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development Located at 999-1015 Howard Street in the B2 Business District WHEREAS, the City of Evanston is a home-rule municipality pursuant to Article VII of the Illinois Constitution of 1970; and WHEREAS, as a home rule unit of government, the City has the authority to adopt ordinances and to promulgate rules and regulations that protect the public health, safety, and welfare of its residents; and WHEREAS, Article VII, Section (6)a of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, which states that the “powers and functions of home rule units shall be construed liberally,” was written “with the intention that home rule units be given the broadest powers possible” (Scadron v. City of Des Plaines, 153 Ill.2d 164); and WHEREAS, it is a well-established proposition under all applicable case law that the power to regulate land use through zoning regulations is a legitimate means of promoting the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, Division 13 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11 -13-1, et seq.) grants each municipality the power to establish zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to its home rule authority and the Illinois Municipal Code, the City has adopted a set of zoning regulations, set forth in Title 6 of the Evanston City Code of 1979, as amended, (“the Zoning Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, David Block, Director of Development for Evergreen Real Estate Group, and representative of 1015 Howard LP (the “Applicant”) located at 999- Page 12 of 45 SP5.Page 90 of 137 8-O-20 ~2~ 1015 Howard Street, Evanston, Illinois (the “Subject Property”), legally described in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, applied, pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, specifically, Section 6-3-6, “Planned Developments,” to permit the construction and operation of a Planned Development located at the Subject Property in the B2 Business District (“B2 District”); and WHEREAS, the Applicant sought approval to construct a four (4) story, 73,017 square foot addition to the existing CJE Senior Life building , with sixty (60) affordable dwelling units for seniors, and fifty-five (55) parking spaces; and WHEREAS, construction of the Planned Development, as proposed in the application, requires exception f rom the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance with regards to building height, number of parking spaces, interior yard setback, rear yard setback, and loading zone vertical clearance; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 6-3-6-5 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council may grant Site Development Allowances to the normal district regulations established in the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on December 11, 2019, in compliance with the provisions of the Illinois Open Meetings Act (5 ILCS 120/1 et seq.) and the Zoning Ordinance, the Plan Commission held a public hearing on the application for a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development, case no. 19PLND-0012, heard extensive testimony and public comment, received other evidence, and made written minutes, findings, and recommendations; and WHEREAS, the Plan Commission’s written findings state that the application for the proposed Planned Development does not meet applicable standards Page 13 of 45 SP5.Page 91 of 137 8-O-20 ~3~ set forth for Planned Developments in the B2 Zoning District per Subsection 6-9-3-3 and 6-9-1-9 of the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Plan Commission recommended the City Council approve the application; and WHEREAS, on January 13, 2020, the Planning and Development (“P&D”) Committee of the City Council held meetin gs, in compliance with the provisions of the Open Meetings Act and the Zoning Ordinance, received input from the public, carefully considered and adopted the findings and recommendations of the Plan Commission, and recommended approval thereof by the City Council; and WHEREAS, at its meetings of January 13, 2020 and January 27, 20 20, held in compliance with the Open Meetings Act and the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council considered the recommendation of the P&D Committee, the Applicant’s application, received additional public comment, made certain findings, and adopted said recommendation; and WHEREAS, it is well-settled law that the legislative judgment of the City Council must be considered presumptively valid (see Glenview State Bank v. Village of Deerfield, 213 Ill.App.3d 747 (1991)) and is not subject to courtroom fact -finding (see National Paint & Coating Ass’n v. City of Chicago, 45 F.3d 1124 (7th Cir. 1995)), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are hereby found as facts and incorporated herein by reference. Page 14 of 45 SP5.Page 92 of 137 8-O-20 ~4~ SECTION 2: Pursuant to the terms and conditions of this ordinance, the City Council hereby grants the Special Use Permit applied for in case no. 19PLND- 0012, to allow construction and operation of the Planned Development described herein. SECTION 3: The City Council hereby grants the following Site Development Allowances: (A) Building Height: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted for an approximately fifty-one (51) feet maximum building height, whereas subsection 6- 9-3-8 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a maximum allows building height of forty-five (45) feet in the B2. (B) Parking Spaces: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted permitting fifty-five (55) parking spaces, whereas table 16-B of subsection 6-16-3-5 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of sixty-nine (69) parking spaces. (C) Interior Yard Parking Setback: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted permitting an interior yard parking setback of zero (0) feet from the Subject Property line, whereas subsection 6-9-3-7(F) of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of a five (5) foot interior yard setback from the Subject Property line for this building in the B2 District. (D) Rear Yard Parking Setback: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted permitting a rear yard parking setback of zero (0) feet from the Subject Property line, whereas subsection 6-9-3-7(G) of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of a fifteen (15) foot rear yard setback from the Subject Property line for this building in the B2 District. (E) Loading Area: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted permitting a loading area with a vertical clearance of eleven (11) feet ten (10) inches, whereas subsection 6-16-4-5 of the Zoning Ordinance requires all loading areas to have a vertical clearance of at least fourteen (14) feet. SECTION 4: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-5-12 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council imposes the following conditions on the Spec ial Use Permit granted hereby, which may be amended by future ordinance(s), and violation of any of which Page 15 of 45 SP5.Page 93 of 137 8-O-20 ~5~ shall constitute grounds for penalties or revocation of said Special Use Permit pursuant to Subsections 6-3-10-5 and 6-3-10-6 of the Zoning Ordinance: (A) Compliance with Applicable Requirements: The Applicant shall develop and operate the Planned Development authorized by the terms of this ordinance in substantial compliance with: the terms of this ordinance; the Site and Landscape Plans in Exhibits D and E, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; all applicable legislation; the Applicant’s testimony and representations to the Design and Project Review Committee, the Plan Commission, the P&D Committee, and the City Council; and the approved documents on file in this case. (B) Continued Design Development: The applicant shall continue to work with staff on design details on the east and west building elevations. (C) Construction Management Plan: The Applicant shall sign and agree to a Construction Management Plan (CMP) with the City of Evanston prior to issuance of the Building Permit. The CMP shall include but is not limited to the following: construction phasing/staging plans; construction hours; site access including traffic and pedestrian safety plans; contractor parking; damage control and vibration monitoring; construction exhibits; project communication and signage. (D) Waste: Prior to issuance of building permit, the Applicant shall develop and obtain the Director of the Public Works Agency’s appro val of a garbage and waste management plan for the subject property. (E) Landscape Plan: Prior to issuance of building permit, the Applicant shall develop and obtain the Director of the City’s Public Works Agency’s approval of a revised Landscape Plan with a tree list. (F) Snow: Prior to issuance of building permit, the Applicant shall develop and obtain the Director of the Public Works Agency’s approval of a snow removal management plan for the subject property. (G) Update to Plans: The Applicant shall update the plans for the project to show the public sidewalk extending through the driveways off Howard Street. (H) Construction Schedule: Pursuant to Subsection 6-9-1-9(A)(4) of the Zoning Ordinance, the planned development shall be completed within two (2) years of the issuance of the special use permit for the planned development. (I) Recordation: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-6-10 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Applicant shall, at its cost, record a certified copy of this ordinance, including all exhibits attached hereto, with the Cook County Recorder of Deeds, and provide proof of such recordation to the City, before the City may issue any permits pursuant to the Planned Development authorized by the terms of this ordinance. Page 16 of 45 SP5.Page 94 of 137 8-O-20 ~6~ SECTION 5: When necessary to effectuate the terms, conditions, and purposes of this ordinance, “Applicant” shall be read as “Applicant’s tenants, agents, assigns, and successors in interest.” SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval, and publication in the manner provided by law. SECTION 7: Except as otherwise provided for in this ordinance, all applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and the entire City Code shall apply to the Subject Property and remain in full force and effect with respect to the use and development of the same. To the extent that the terms and provisions of any of said documents conflict with the terms herein, this ordinance shall govern and control. SECTION 8: All ordinances or parts of ordinances that are in conflict with the terms of this ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 9: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is ruled unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 10: The findings and recitals herein are hereby declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. Introduced:_________________, 2020 Adopted:___________________, 2020 Approved: __________________________, 2020 Page 17 of 45 SP5.Page 95 of 137 8-O-20 ~7~ _______________________________ Stephen H. Hagerty, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Devon Reid, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ Michelle L. Masoncup, Corporation Counsel Page 18 of 45 SP5.Page 96 of 137 8-O-20 ~8~ EXHIBIT A Legal Description LOTS 3 TO 18, BOTH INCLUSIVE, IN GRANT AND GRANT'S HOWARD RIDGE ADDITION TO EVANSTON, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 1 (EXCEPT THE SOUTH 43 FEET DEEDED TO THE CITY OF EVANSTON FOR HOWARD STREET ) IN CORRECTION PLAT OF SUBDIVISION OF LOT 9 (EXCEPT THE NORTH 24 FEET THEREOF) IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION OF UNSUBDIVIDED LANDS IN THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF LOT 13 IN COUNTY CLERK'S DIVISION OF PART OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 14 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PINs: 11-30-12-057-0000; 11-30-12-042-0000; 11-30-12-043-0000; 11-30-12-044-0000; 11-30-12-045-0000; 11-30-12-046-0000; 11-30-12-047-0000; 11-30-122-048-0000; 11-30-122-049-0000; 11-30-122-050-0000; 11-30-122-051-0000; 11-30-122-052-0000; 11-30-122-053-0000 COMMONLY KNOWN AS: 999-1015 Howard Street Page 19 of 45 SP5.Page 97 of 137 8-O-20 ~9~ EXHIBIT B Development Plans Page 20 of 45 SP5.Page 98 of 137 EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, IL 125 S CLARK ST, SUITE 2070; CHICAGO, IL 60603SPONSOR:CJE SENIORLIFE3003 W TOUHY AVE, CHICAGO, IL 60645P: 773.508.1000WWW.CJE.NETCONTACT: THOMAS LOCKWOODDEVELOPER:EREG DEVELOPMENT LLC560 W LAKE ST, SUITE 400; CHICAGO, IL 60661P: 312.234.9400WWW.EVERGREEN.COMCONTACT: DAVID BLOCK, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENTARCHITECT:URBANWORKSARCHITECTURE,INTERIORS AND PLANNING P:312.202.1200WWW.URBANWORKSARCHITECTURE.COMCONTACT: ROBERT NATKE, PRINCIPALCODE AND PROJECT DATASITE AREA = APPROX. 39,120 SFZONING = REZONED TO UNDERLYING B2WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENTPARKING = 55 PARKING SPACES TOTALBY LEVEL:UPPER DECK: 20LOWER DECK: 35 BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWNTOTAL IMPROVEMENTS = 70,573 SFCOMMERCIAL = 8,900 SFRESIDENTIAL = 61,673 SFTOTAL DWELLING UNITS - 60DWELLING UNITS - 1 BED (54 UNITS)10% ACCESSIBLE 1 BED UNITS - 6 UNITS20% ADAPTABLE 1 BED UNITS - 12 UNITS2% SENSORY 1 BED UNITS - 1 UNITDWELLING UNITS - 2 BED (6 UNITS)10% ACCESSIBLE 2 BED UNITS - 1 UNIT20% ADAPTABLE 2 BED UNITS - 2 UNITS2% SENSORY 2 BED UNIT - 1 UNIT17 EXTERIOR RENDERING - NORTH FACADEDATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5DRAWING INDEXCOVER2 SITE LOCATION MAP6 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN3 SITE SURROUNDING IMAGES4 AMENITIES MAP5 AMENITIES LIST9 SECOND FLOOR PLAN8 SITE PLAN AND FIRST FLOOR PLAN10 THIRD AND FOURTH FLOOR PLAN11 ENLARGED UNIT PLANS13 BUILDING SECTION DIAGRAM14 ELEVATIONS7 LOWER LEVEL PLAN12 BUILDING MASS SECTIONS15 EXTERIOR RENDERING - SOUTH FACADE18 WALL SECTIONLOWER = 897 GSFLEVEL 1 = 6,736 GSF + 8,900LEVEL 2 = 16,732 GSFLEVEL 3 = 19,876 GSFLEVEL 4 = 19,876 GSFTOTAL = 73,017 GSFSF BREAKDOWN BY FLOORLOT AREA = 400' X 97.75' = 39,120 SF73,017 / 39,120 = 1.87 FAR (MAX PERMITTED FAR 2.0)1 DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY16 EXTERIOR RENDERING - SOUTH FACADEREV. 512.31.2019Page 21 of 45 SP5.Page 99 of 137 EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, IL11015 Howard-CJECook County GIS Dept - Imagery from 2017January 14, 201900.010.020.005mi00.0150.030.0075km1:500© 2017 Cook County. All Cook County geospatial data and maps are copyrighted. All materials appearing on the web site are transmitted without warranty of any kind and are subject to the terms of the disclaimer.Please note, the outlined area makes up the total amount of parcels involved in the proposed development.1015 Howard Street, Evanston ILPIN: 11-30-122-05711-30-12-04211-30-12-04311-30-12-04411-30-12-04511-.30-12-04611-30-12-047999 Howard Street, Evanston ILPIN: 11-30-12-04811-30-12-04911-30-12-05011-30-12-05111-30-12-05211-30-12-053= DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT BOUNDARYDATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 22 of 45 SP5.Page 100 of 137 SITE LOCATION MAPN HOWARD STPUBLIC ALLEYN RIDGE AVEEVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, ILSITELEGEND:EXISTINGCJE BUILDING2DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 23 of 45 SP5.Page 101 of 137 NEVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, ILVEST.DOWNUP22' - 5"36' - 0"UNEXCAVATED400' - 0"97' - 8"11' - 0"35' - 11"13' - 8"PROPERTY LINE3132333435363739 40 41 42 43 44 453038LOWER LEVEL PLAN25' - 0" 50' - 0"100' - 0"0' - 1" =50' - 0"0'SCALE:LEGEND:CIRCULATIONSUPPORT7GENERAL NOTES1.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL AREAS INDICATED ON THE FLOORPLAN ARE NET INTERIOR AREAS.2.NET INTERIOR AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE INSIDE FACE OFWALLS SURROUNDING A ROOM OR DWELLING UNIT.3.GROSS AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE OUTSIDE FACE OFEXTERIOR WALL AND TO THE CENTERLINE OF DEMISING ANDCORRIDOR WALLS.PROPOSED FINISHES-RESIDENTIAL UNITS1.RESILIENT FLOORING: THROUGHOUT2.CERAMIC OR PORCELAIN TILE: BATHROOMS3.PAINTED DRYWALL: ALL WALLS AND CEILINGSVANACCESS.VANACCESS.VANACCESS.VANACCESS.FITNESSLAUNDRY MECHSTORTELST-137' - 0"DOWNUPG SPACES11' - 0"35' - 11"13' - 8"1672627282947 48 49 5052535455565724' - 0"25465112'-0"12'-0"LEVEL 10'-0"LOWER LEVEL-10'-0"21232425272931323337433839404142444546474897.54'97.30'2226VANACCESSVANACCESS283034353649505152535455 CJE BUS - 23' x 8' 11'-0" x 21' 11'-0" x 20' N/APARKING SPACE DIMENSIONSTAG SPACE DIMENSION PROVIDED DIM. REQUIRED ACCESS AISLE AVAN ACCESSIBLE 11'-0" x 20' 11'-0" x 18' 5'-0"STANDARD 11'-0" x 17'-3" 8'-6" x 17'-3" N/ACJE BUS - 24' x 8' 11'-0" x 25' 11'-0" x 24'-6" N/AB2B1COMPACT 11'-0" x 15' 8'-6" x 17'-3" N/ACS2S1STANDARD 8'-6" x 18' 8'-6" x 18' N/AS1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S1S2S2S2AALOWER LEVEL PARKING FORRESIDENT AND CJE STAFF PARKINGTRANSFORMERPAD17'-3"TYP.S117'-3"TYP.8'-6"TYP.17'-3"17'-3"18'-0"TYP.TYP.11'-0"5'-0"11'-0"8'-6"DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5EL-2STAIRLOBBYBIKE STOR.MECHREV. 512.31.2019Page 24 of 45 SP5.Page 102 of 137 SENIOR ACTIVITY AREAFITNESSLAUNDRY MECHSTOROFFICELOBBYVEST.TELST-3ELE 2ST-1HOWARD STPUBLIC ALLEYDOWN37' - 0"DOWN400' - 0"97' - 8"ELE 1VEST.ST 1204' - 5"100' - 10" UP48 PARKING SPACESCUBBIES36' - 0"UPDROP-OFFWAITINGSTOFF.OFF.11' - 0"35' - 11"13' - 8"32' - 0"29' - 7"36' - 0"EXISTING CJE BUILDINGEXISTING TREESEXISTING TREES1 2 3 4LINE OF BUILDING ABOVE5 6 7 8 91617181920212223242627282947 48 49 50515254555657CONTINUE PARKING TO LEVEL 224' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"254651VANACCESS.SENIOR ACTIVITYAREAFITNESSLAUNDRYMECHSTORTELLOBBYST-3VEST.ST-1SEC.ELE 2T.R.MAILOFF. OFF.UTILITYRR RRSENIOR ACTIVITYAREADROP OFFFITNESSMECH/PLUMBTELSTAIRVESTS OFFICERREBYVESTSTAIRVESTST STVEST10SHORT LOADING BERTH(10' x 35')8 9765432120 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11UPART MURAL WALLCOVERED OUTDOOR WAITING AREAVISITOR VISITOR VISITOR VISITOR VISITOR VISITOR VISITOR VISITOR VISITORCJEVANCJEBUSCJEVANCJE VANCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSTRASHKITCHENETTESENIOR ACTIVITYROOMRRLAUNDRYSTORAGETRASHLOBBYELECTRICALSITE PLAN AND FIRST FLOOR PLAN25' - 0" 50' - 0"100' - 0"0' - 1" =50' - 0"0'SCALE:CJE EXPANSIONCOMMUNITY SPACESCIRCULATIONSUPPORTOFFICELEGEND:NEVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, ILPDF underlays can only be viewed in the 2D wireframe visual style.8GENERAL NOTES1.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL AREAS INDICATED ON THE FLOORPLAN ARE NET INTERIOR AREAS.2.NET INTERIOR AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE INSIDE FACE OFWALLS SURROUNDING A ROOM OR DWELLING UNIT.3.GROSS AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE OUTSIDE FACE OFEXTERIOR WALL AND TO THE CENTERLINE OF DEMISING ANDCORRIDOR WALLS.PROPOSED FINISHES-RESIDENTIAL UNITS1.RESILIENT FLOORING: THROUGHOUT2.CERAMIC OR PORCELAIN TILE: BATHROOMS3.PAINTED DRYWALL: ALL WALLS AND CEILINGS18'-0"5'SHORT LOADING BERTH45 DEGREE LINE OF SIGHT20'-0"10LINE OF BUILDINGABOVELEVEL 10'-0"97.54'11101213141516LEVEL 214'-6"BUS112'-0"12'-0"VANACCESS16'-0"23456789BUS17181920BUSCJEBUS CJE BUS - 23' x 8' 11'-0" x 23' 11'-0" x 20' N/A20'-0"FLAT1110121312'-0"LEVEL 297.30'PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONSTAG SPACE DIMENSION PROVIDED DIM. REQUIRED ACCESS AISLE AVAN ACCESSIBLE 11'-0" x 20' 11'-0" x 18' 5'-0"STANDARD 11'-0" x 17'-3" 8'-6" x 17'-3" N/A12'-0"15'-0"89CJEBUSAAACJE BUS - 24' x 8' 11'-0" x 25' 11'-0" x 24'-6" N/AB2B1NO ACCESS POINTS FROM ALLEYCOMPACT 11'-0" x 15' 8'-6" x 17'-3" N/ACS2S15'-0"STANDARD 8'-6" x 18' 8'-6" x 18' N/AB1B1B1B1B2B2S1S1S1B1B2B217'-3"23'-0"CCCCS2S2S2S2S2S212'NEW RESIDENTIAL TRASHENCLOSURE W/ SLIDING GATE ONALLEY SIDE FOR TRASH PICK-UPNEW EXIT STAIRS FROM DECKTO EMERGENCY EXIT DOORLEVEL 1 SF BREAKDOWNVANACCESSVANACCESS5455VANACCESSVANACCESS535455S2AACJEVANCJEVANCJEBUSCJEVANCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEBUSCJEVANVISITORVISITORVISITORVISITORVISITORVISITORVISITOR45 DEGREE LINE OF SIGHTTRANSFORMERPAD11'-0"25'-0"TYP.TYP.TYP.TYP.11'-0"23'-0"11'-0"TYP.11'-0"TYP.20'-0"18'-0"A18'-0"8'-6"TYP.TYP.11'-0"5'-0"11'-0"10'-0"11'-0"TYP.11'-0"TYP.11'-0"TYP.11'-0"TYP.11'-0"TYP.11'-0"TYP.DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5EXISTING CJE TRASH PICK-UP TO REMAIN12'-0"24'-0"8'-0"11'-0"REV. 512.31.2019REV. 512.31.2019VISITORDROP OFFPage 25 of 45 SP5.Page 103 of 137 SECOND FLOOR PLAN25' - 0" 50' - 0"100' - 0"0' - 1" =50' - 0"0'SCALE:CJE EXPANSIONCOMMUNITY SPACESCIRCULATIONSUPPORT1 BEDROOM2 BEDROOMLEGEND:NEVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, ILPDF underlays can only be viewed in the 2D wireframe visual style.UNIT 11 BEDOUTDOOR DECKELE 1BRIDGE LOUNGELOBBYST 1UNIT 22 BEDUNIT 31 BED67' - 11"OPENLINE OF BUILDING ABOVEUNIT 41 BEDUNIT 141 BEDUNIT 131 BEDST 3100' - 10"74' - 10"177' - 0"47' - 4"400' - 0"97' - 8"UNIT 121 BEDUNIT 111 BEDUNIT 101 BEDUNIT 91 BEDUNIT 81 BEDUNIT 71 BEDUNIT 61 BEDUNIT 52 BED7' - 0"10 11 12131415CONTINUE PARKING TO FIRST FLOOR - SEE FIRST FLOOR PLAN49' - 9"249' - 5"51' - 9"9ELE 2GENERAL NOTES1.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL AREAS INDICATED ON THE FLOORPLAN ARE NET INTERIOR AREAS.2.NET INTERIOR AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE INSIDE FACE OFWALLS SURROUNDING A ROOM OR DWELLING UNIT.3.GROSS AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE OUTSIDE FACE OFEXTERIOR WALL AND TO THE CENTERLINE OF DEMISING ANDCORRIDOR WALLS.PROPOSED FINISHES-RESIDENTIAL UNITS1.RESILIENT FLOORING: THROUGHOUT2.CERAMIC OR PORCELAIN TILE: BATHROOMS3.PAINTED DRYWALL: ALL WALLS AND CEILINGSOUTDOOR COVEREDPATIO20'-0"FLAT97.30'DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 26 of 45 SP5.Page 104 of 137 25' - 0" 50' - 0"100' - 0"0' - 1" =50' - 0"0'SCALE:CJE EXPANSIONCOMMUNITY SPACESCIRCULATIONSUPPORT1 BEDROOM2 BEDROOMLEGEND:NEVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, ILF underlays can only be viewed in the 2D wireframe visual style.BRIDGE LOUNGEST 1300' - 5"UNIT 21 BEDUNIT 12 BEDUNIT 121 BEDUNIT 131 BEDUNIT 231 BEDUNIT 221 BEDUNIT 211 BEDUNIT 201 BEDUNIT 191 BEDUNIT 181 BEDUNIT 171 BEDUNIT 161 BEDUNIT 151 BEDUNIT 142 BEDUNIT 31 BEDUNIT 41 BEDUNIT 51 BEDUNIT 61 BEDUNIT 71 BEDUNIT 81 BEDUNIT 91 BEDUNIT 101 BEDUNIT 111 BED67' - 11"ST 250' - 11"249' - 5"THIRD AND FOURTH FLOOR PLANELE 2GENERAL NOTES1.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL AREAS INDICATED ON THE FLOORPLAN ARE NET INTERIOR AREAS.2.NET INTERIOR AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE INSIDE FACE OFWALLS SURROUNDING A ROOM OR DWELLING UNIT.3.GROSS AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE OUTSIDE FACE OFEXTERIOR WALL AND TO THE CENTERLINE OF DEMISING ANDCORRIDOR WALLS.PROPOSED FINISHES-RESIDENTIAL UNITS1.RESILIENT FLOORING: THROUGHOUT2.CERAMIC OR PORCELAIN TILE: BATHROOMS3.PAINTED DRYWALL: ALL WALLS AND CEILINGS1025' - 0'SCALE:DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 27 of 45 SP5.Page 105 of 137 ENLARGED UNIT PLANSEVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, IL4' - 0" 8' - 0" 16' - 0"0' - 1/8" = 1' - 0"0'SCALE:9'-9"10'-0"11'-4"LIVING ROOM175 SFBEDROOM150 SFBEDROOM145 SFKITCHEN140 SFTYPICAL 2 BED UNIT LAYOUTGROSS AREA=9 NET AREA= 8 BATHROOM70 SFSTORAGE144 CFCLOSET CLOSET10'-0"11'-10"LIVING ROOM180 SFBEDROOM150 SFKITCHEN140 SFBATHROOM70 SFSTORAGE108 CFTYPICAL 1 BED UNIT LAYOUTGROSS AREA= NET AREA= CLOSET11TYPICAL 2 BED UNIT LAYOUTGROSS AREA = NET AREA = TYPICAL 1 BED UNIT LAYOUTGROSS AREA = NET AREA = 28'-0"15'-10"28'-0"15'-10"GENERAL NOTES1.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL AREAS INDICATED ON THE FLOORPLAN ARE NET INTERIOR AREAS.2.NET INTERIOR AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE INSIDE FACE OFWALLS SURROUNDING A ROOM OR DWELLING UNIT.3.GROSS AREAS ARE MEASURED FROM THE OUTSIDE FACE OFEXTERIOR WALL AND TO THE CENTERLINE OF DEMISING ANDCORRIDOR WALLS.PROPOSED FINISHES-RESIDENTIAL UNITS1.RESILIENT FLOORING: THROUGHOUT2.CERAMIC OR PORCELAIN TILE: BATHROOMS3.PAINTED DRYWALL: ALL WALLS AND CEILINGS665 SF580 SF1021 SF921 SFDATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 28 of 45 SP5.Page 106 of 137 EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, IL12BUILDING MASS SECTIONBUILDING SECTION A-A THROUGH PARKING LOOKING SOUTHBUILDING SECTION B-B THROUGH PARKING LOOKING NORTHSENIOR ACTIVITY AREAFITNESSLAUNDRYMECHSTOROFFICELOBBYVEST.TELST-3ELE 2ST-1HOWARD STPUBLIC ALLEYDOWN37' - 0"DOWN29' - 0"400' - 0"97' - 8"ELE 1VEST.ST 124' - 0"204' - 5"3' - 0"100' - 7" 10' - 1" 12' - 7" 24' - 1"UP48 PARKING SPACES14' - 0"CUBBIES36' - 0"UPDROP-OFFWAITINGSTOFF.OFF.11' - 0"35' - 11"13' - 8"32' - 0"29' - 7"36' - 0"AASENIOR ACTIVITY AREAFITNESSLAUNDRYMECHSTOROFFICELOBBYVEST.TELST-3ELE 2ST-1HOWARD STPUBLIC ALLEYDOWN37' - 0"DOWN29' - 0"400' - 0"97' - 8"ELE 1VEST.ST 124' - 0"204' - 5"3' - 0"100' - 7" 10' - 1" 12' - 7" 24' - 1"UP48 PARKING SPACES14' - 0"CUBBIES36' - 0"UPDROP-OFFWAITINGSTOFF.OFF.11' - 0"35' - 11"13' - 8"32' - 0"29' - 7"36' - 0"BBDATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 29 of 45 SP5.Page 107 of 137 EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, IL13BUILDING SECTION DIAGRAMT e c t o n i c C o p y r i g h t 2 0 0 7 LEVEL 10' - 0"LEVEL 214' - 6"LEVEL 325' - 6"LEVEL 436' - 6"ROOF47' - 6"PARAPET50' - 6"LOWER LEVEL-10' - 0"DCAB21.07°RESIDENTIAL RAMP UPRAMP DN6'-0"6'-0" WALL HEIGHTMAINTAINED AT PARKING LOTTO PREVENT HEADLIGHTEXPOSURE TO NEIGHBORS54' - 0"51' - 0"38' - 10"26' - 8"DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 30 of 45 SP5.Page 108 of 137 ELEVATIONEVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, ILSOUTH ELEVATIONEAST ELEVATION14WEST ELEVATIONRECESSED WOOD SLATS TO COVER VTACLOCATIONS. EXTERIOR FACE TO BE FLUSH WITHFACE OF PRECAST PANEL (FINISH TO MATCHEXISTING CJE EXTERIOR BRICK)LIVING GREEN WALL IN FRONT OFVERTICAL PRECAST CONCRETEALUMINUM SLIDING WINDOWS(ACCESSIBLE)PAINTED ALUMINUM FRAMEARCHITECTURAL PRECAST CONCRETEPANELS WITH SCORING PATTERNLIVING GREEN WALL IN FRONT OFVERTICAL PRECAST CONCRETESTOREFRONT GLAZING W/ KYNARFINISH ON MULLIONSOUTDOOR BALCONY WITHWOOD RAILINGEXISTING BRICK MASONRYNEW ALUMINUMCLERESTORY WINDOWSTEXTURIZED ARCHITECTURALSTRUCTURAL CONCRETE WALLEXIT STAIRVERTICAL WOOD SLAT IN FRONTOF GLAZINGCEDAR WOOD FENCE STAINED TO MATCHWOOD SLATS AT NEW CONSTRUCTION25' - 0" 50' - 0"100' - 0"0' - 1" =50' - 0"0'SCALE:PARAPET51' - 0"26' - 8"38' - 10"54' - 0"PARAPET54' - 0"ROOF51' - 0"LEVEL 438' - 10"LEVEL 326' - 8"LEVEL 214' - 6"LEVEL 10' - 0"DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 31 of 45 SP5.Page 109 of 137 EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, IL15EXTERIOR RENDERING - SOUTH FACADEDATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 32 of 45 SP5.Page 110 of 137 EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, IL16EXTERIOR RENDERING - SOUTH FACADEDATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 33 of 45 SP5.Page 111 of 137 EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, IL17EXTERIOR RENDERING - NORTH FACADEDATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 34 of 45 SP5.Page 112 of 137 EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, ILWALL SECTION14' - 6"12' - 2" 12' - 2" 12' - 2" 3' - 0"GRADE FLOOR EL 0'-0"OVERALL BUILDING HEIGHT54' - 0"SECOND FLOOREL 14'-6"THIRD FLOOREL 26'-8"UNIT2ND FLUNIT3RD FLUNIT4TH FLSIDEWALK W/ 2% SLOPEEXTERIOR STOREFRONT GLAZINGUNEXCAVATEDLOWER LEVEL EL -10'-0"ENTRY VESTIBULETHIRD FLOOREL 38'-10"ROOFEL 51'-0"PARAPETEL 54'-0"1ST FLPRECAST INSULATED CONCRETE WALL PANEL(R-17 WALL ASSEMBLY)STRUCTRAL CONCREETE BEAMCONCRETE COLUMN BEYONDPRECAST STRUCTURAL CONCRETE DOUBLE TEE W/ 3" FINISH TOPPINGACCESSIBLE OPERABLE SLIDING WINDOW W/ .32 U FACTOR, TYP2' - 0"6'-0"ABELOW GRADE10' - 0"CLEAR HT8' - 6"PRECAST STRUCTURAL CONCRETE DOUBLE TEE W/ 3" TOPPINGREBATE IN PRECAST TO RECEIVE ROOFING MEMBRANE AND ALLOW MASTIC SEALSTRUCTURAL CONCRETE BEAM2" MINERAL FIBER FIRESTOP2" MINERAL FIBER FIRESTOP2" CONT. RIGID INSULATIONSTEEL STUD FRAMINGHORIZONTAL JT BETWEEN PANELSGYPSUM BOARD FINISHPRE-FINISHED ALUM. STOREFRONT WINDOWFINISHED GYPSUM BOARD CEILING1/8" MIN SLOPEEMBEDDED ANGLE ANCHOR PLATE4' - 0" 8' - 0" 16' - 0"0' - 1/8" = 1' - 0"0'SCALE:18DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5Page 35 of 45 SP5.Page 113 of 137 8-O-20 ~10~ EXHIBIT C Landscape Plans Page 36 of 45 SP5.Page 114 of 137 20' - 0"40' - 0" 80'-0"0' - 1" = 40'- 0"0'SCALE:NEVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING999-1015 HOWARD ST. EVANSTON, ILPDF underlays can only be viewed in the 2D wireframe visual style.6PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANLANDSCAPE NARRATIVE:The streetscape elements will conform to the City of Evanston’s streetscape standards for Howard Streetand will be coordinated with the City’s Howard Street Corridor Improvements Project currently underdevelopment. Tree varieties will include Swamp White Oak (Quercus bicolor) and Schuette’s Oak(Quercus x Schuettii) as a nod to the legacy of the Oakton Historic District where the project is located,an area once forested with oak trees, as well as Accolade Elm, (Ulmus x Accolade).Vines such as Boston Ivy (Parthenocissus tricuspidata), Silver Lace Vine (Polygonum aubertii) andTrumpet Honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens), will be used to reduce the visual and environmentalimpact of the building and parking garage from the public right of way on both the north and the southsides of the development. Vines offer seasonal interest at different times of the years.A green wall mounted along the perimeter of the amenity deck to provide a vegetative screen betweenthe amenity deck and the apartment units will be in-built planters with decorative metal trellis panels toallow twinning vines to grow up the wall. Irrigation system will be implemented to maintain the vines.VINES100Boston IvyParthenocissus tricuspidata1 Gallon 48" o.c.100Silver Lace VineFallopia aubertii 1 Gallon48" o.c.'GREEN SCREEN'DATE 12/31/2019: ISSUE FOR CCPCD - REVISION 5PLANT SCHEDULEQTY.COMMON NAMEBOTANICAL NAMESIZE SPACINGSTREET TREES3Hybrid ElmUlmus "Morton" 212"BBPer Plan3Schuette OakQuercusxschuettei 212" BBPer Plan3Swamp White OakQuercus bicolor 212" BBPer PlanSITE TREE1Upright OakQuercus "Regal Prince"4" BBPer PlanORNAMENTAL GRASS1400Prairie DropseedSporobolus heterolepsisQt12" o.c.VINES100Boston IvyParthenocissus tricuspidata1 Gallon 48" o.c.100Silver Lace VineFallopia aubertii 1 Gallon48" o.c.REV. 512.31.20192 L-100 UPEXT ST90MAILBOXESTRANSFORMERPADNEENAH FOUNDRY NEENAH FOUNDRY NEENAH FOUNDRYNEENAH FOUNDRY 97'-8"24'-0"24'-0"SENIOR ACTIVITY AREA35'-1"12'-0" LOBBYOFFICEELECST 1DROP-OFF3'-6"CORRIDORLINE OFEXISTING BUILDINGPUBLIC ALLEYHOWARD STPROPERTY LINEST 1VEST46 PARKING SPACES12'-0"OFF.WAITINGOFF.CUBBIESVEST.36'-0"FITNESSLAUNDRYBOSTON IVY & SILVER LACEVINES ALONG ALLEYTEL97'-4"400'30'-0" TYP.15'-0"CLEARMIN.15'-0"CLEARMIN.15'-0"CLEARMIN.15'-0"CLEARMIN.15'-0"(200) PRAIRIE DROPSEEDSHADE TREESIN TREE GRATES15'-0"STREETLIGHT(TYP.)SIDEWALK w/ ACCENT PAVER PANELSPER HOWARD STREET MASTERPLANACCOLADEELMACCOLADEELMACCOLADEELMSWAMPWHITE OAKSWAMPWHITE OAKSWAMPWHITE OAKSCHUETTEOAKSCHUETTEOAKSCHUETTEOAK(600) PRAIRIEDROPSEED(400) PRAIRIE DROPSEEDVESTMECH/PLUMBUTILITYRRRRELEVELEVSTORAGEOPEN OFFICESHORTLOADINGBERTH(10'x35')5'-0"COVEREDOUTDOORWAITING AREADROP-OFF AREA(1) REGAL PRINCE OAKw/ (80) PRAIRIE DROPSEED111 SFSTAIRST2.12YD-TB2YD-TB2YD-TBTRASH ROOMTRASH PICK-UPPage 37 of 45 SP5.Page 115 of 137 DRAFT- NOT APPROVED Page 1 of 8 Plan Commission Minutes 12/11/19 MEETING MINUTES EXCERPT PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, December 11, 2019 7:00 P.M. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, James C. Lytle Council Chambers Members Present: Peter Isaac (Chair), George Halik, Andrew Pigozzi, Jennifer Draper, Members Absent: Carol Goddard, John Hewko, Jane Sloss Staff Present: Scott Mangum, Planning and Zoning Manager Meagan Jones, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Brian George, Assistant City Attorney Presiding Member: Chairman Isaac 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. 2. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: November 13, 2019 Commissioner Pigozzi made a motion to approve the minutes from the October 30, 2019 meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Draper. A voice vote was taken and the minutes were approved unanimously, 4-0. 3. NEW BUSINESS A. Planned Development 999-1015 Howard Street 19PLND-0012 David Block, applicant, submits for a Special Use for a Planned Development to construct a 4-story, 73,017 square foot addition to the existing CJE Senior Life building. Addition includes 60 affordable dwelling units for seniors and 55 parking spaces, in the B2 Business District. The applicant seeks site development allowances for: 1) A building height of 51’ where 45’ is allowed, 2) To reduce the required interior side yard setback for parking to 0’ where 5’ is required from the east property line, 3) To reduce the required rear yard setback for parking to 0’ where 15’ is required from the north property line when adjacent to a residential district, and 4) To reduce the required number of off-street parking spaces from 69 to 55. Page 38 of 45 SP5.Page 116 of 137 DRAFT- NOT APPROVED Page 2 of 8 Plan Commission Minutes 12/11/19 The applicant may seek and the Plan Commission may consider additional Site Development Allowances as may be necessary or desirable for the proposed development. Mr. Mangum provided an overview of the proposed development, explaining the site layout, public benefits and the addition al site development allowance to allow a loading area with a vertical clearance of 11’-10” where a minimum clearance height of 14’ is required. The applicant, David Block then gave an introduction of the development team and CJE staff. He explained that the proposed project is 2 years in the making and provided more information on CJE’s services and partnership with Evergreen Real Estate Group. He stated that there is shuttle service, programming and meals for approximately 40 seniors, Monday through Friday. He then explained that the proposed project would provide housing for independent seniors that participate in the street life and economic life of the area and revitalize that corner on Howard Street. Mr. Block provided information on the unit cost, stating they were all affordable ($400 to $1000 per month) with the intention of not having more than 30% of a resident’s income going towards rent. $75,000 is projected in property taxes to start. He then explained how circulation through the site would occur, mentioning CJE vehicle parking, general parking access and connection from the old building to the new. He mentioned that the proposed decks would be secured due to some clients with dementia. He added that some of the design and material choices are due to cost constraints that need to be abided by per I HDA and explained the requested site development allowances and emphasized that the proposed parking is all enclosed. Chair Isaac opened the hearing to questions from Commissioners. Commissioner Halik stated that he thinks the development is a nice looking project and is a clever use of the site. He then inquired about why the number of parking spaces works for the site, if moving vehicles need the 14 ft. clearance and what kind of lighting would be on the proposed outdoor decks. Mr. Block responded that the lighting is low cut-off lighting with some being uplighting to illuminate the deck (a lighting study can be done if needed to make sure light is not escaping from the deck). He then explained that research had been done regarding move-ins and it was found that small/medium moving trucks as well as Fedex and UPS deliver trucks can clear the 11 ft. height. He added that the team tried to get as many parking spaces as possible on -site. He added that the reason for comparable developments being included was to ensure that the requirements for residents would be met. Commissioner Pigozzi asked if the accommodation took CJE requirements into account. Mr. Block responded yes and that the staff report looke d at both the existing site requirements and new use requirements for parking with a reduction provided for the inclusionary housing provided. Page 39 of 45 SP5.Page 117 of 137 DRAFT- NOT APPROVED Page 3 of 8 Plan Commission Minutes 12/11/19 Commissioner Draper asked if the existing utility poles would be buried as there looks like there is some encroachment into the site. Mr. Block replied that the development will need to accommodate utility relocation and/or work around them. Commissioner Halik asked if the DAPR comments had been incorporated into current plans. Mr. Block responded that the most rob ust conversation centered on garbage pick-up and the concern that handlers would have enough access. He worked with Groot at the site to create possible configurations and alternate scenarios were created from that. He added that solar energy was also discussed by DAPR. The building is beginning the evaluation for ComEd energy efficiency standards which are intended to be met. Mr. Block added that the site is a good location for solar and that if additional funding is found that will be included. No windows are intended to be added to the east wall as it is a shear wall and the neighboring property could be redeveloped into a building that covers that wall. Chair Isaac asked if the current CJE activities will be expanded. Laura Prohov, Vice President of Community Services, responded that programming will continue as it currently exists with some renovation being done to the existing building to enhance the current programing but not increase it or the number of clients. There is a 50 client capacity with 35-40 clients currently being served Monday through Friday, 9:30am to 3:30pm. She added that there are 11 vans and 22 staff members, including drivers. Chair Isaac inquired if additional staff is anticipated with the proposed addition. Ms. Prohov responded that no additional staff is anticipated for CJE. Mr. Block added that a half-time building manager and full-time custodian would be added with the addition of residences. Chair Isaac then asked what the average age of residents is expected to be. Mr. Block stated that entry age point is 62 with the average age being in late 60s and early 70s. Chair Isaac then asked about the railing on the proposed decks. Mr. Block responded that it is a 6 ft. barrier, likely with additional railing above, as a security meas ure for current CJE clients. Chair Isaac inquired if a specific number of parking spaces had been promised. Mr. Block responded no, he would not have promised something he was not sure he could deliver. Chair Isaac continued, asking for clarification on the affordable housing requirements. Chair Isaac then informed the public of the ability of residents within 1,000 feet of the property to submit a written request for a continuance for the purpose of rebutting testimony provided during the hearing. He then opened up the hearing to questions from the public. Ms. Lois Headman stated that she was lead to believe the allowances requested would Page 40 of 45 SP5.Page 118 of 137 DRAFT- NOT APPROVED Page 4 of 8 Plan Commission Minutes 12/11/19 not be asked for and the applicant would work with the neighborhood. She would like to get the presented information to neighbors as there are significant changes to what was initially presented to the community. Chair Isaac clarified the process for requesting and granting of continuances. Ms. Clare Kelly inquired whether or not the DAPR comments had been read by the Commissioners. Commissioner Halik responded that he read all of the report and wanted the applicant to point out, for the public, how those items would be addressed on the plans. Ms. Kelly then inquired about the AMI for the units. Mr. Block responded that there will 6 units at 30% AMI, 24 units at 60% AMI and 30 units at 50% AMI. Ms. Kelly requested that the Commission not grant the allowances. Mr. Steve Friedman, attorney for the applicant, inquired about the continuance process and why they are generally granted. He added that there should be public comment and questions but was uncertain why a continuance would be granted to share information. Chair Isaac replied that Ms. Headman had concerns regarding the testimony made during the hearing and intended to inform neighbors who would come in to assist in rebutting that information presented. Ms. Shannon Hackett stated she did not know variances were being requested. She then inquired about the opening in the rear of the building and if it is intended to be a permanent opening. Mr. Block responded that is intended to be an emergency exit and locked gates are to be in place to limit access and provide security for patients. Ms. Hackett then emphasized that parking is an issue in the area and any project wit h additional vehicles is a problem. Mr. Block responded that as many parking spaces as possible are provided in the garage as well as considerations for turning radii and general circulation within the parking area. Ms. Hackett then asked how trash will be handled and who will maintain the cement facade and expressed concern about the building going to the edge of the lot. Mr. Block stated that there will be a trash chute in the building and Evergreen Real Estate will be responsible for maintaining the faça de. Ms. Headman clarified if the loading deck would be accessed off of Howard Street then inquired about the walls around the proposed deck and connections to access the decks. Mr. Block responded that the rear deck will be at least 6 ft. in height with a possible railing on top of that. He added that this was the best location to also have sunlight and still have ease of access for CJE. Chair Isaac inquired about the space between parking space for the CJE buses and if the intention is for that space to be for loading then parking. It seems as if more parking spaces could be added if that space between some of the spaces were eliminated. Mr. Block clarified that there are support columns that create additional space between some of the parking spaces and that all of the loading would happen at the front door of CJE. Page 41 of 45 SP5.Page 119 of 137 DRAFT- NOT APPROVED Page 5 of 8 Plan Commission Minutes 12/11/19 Chair Isaac then opened the hearing up to public testimony. Lois Headman emphasized that parking is a concern and the promises of residents having no cars is a low ball number due to employee s and possible visitors needing parking. She added that she agrees that Howard Street doesn’t look great but to have a building placed there just because it is better is not the way. The exterior should match the beauty of the work done on the interior and also fit into the neighborhood. She also has concerns about building to the alley line and the building height, stating that she will now be looking at concrete instead of the sky and she hopes that the comments provided are taken into consideration. Mr. Matt Rodgers stated his support for the project. He explained that Evanston has been trying to figure out affordable housing and that this is a commercial street where a larger building should be. Other uses along that stretch are commercial in nature and the façade works for the site given the budget constraints. Mr. Rodgers added that having a place in Evanston where someone can lease an apartment for $300 is great to have. He empathized with the neighbors regarding parking issues as his neighborhood has less available parking but feels the project is one that should be supported. Ms. Sue Loelbach of Connections for the Homeless and Joining Forces for Affordable Housing stated that she is excited that Evergreen is working on the project and that there is reasonable use of site development allowances. Parking is an issue with every affordable development and she hopes that conversations for the development are not centered on that and Evanston can address it on a broader level. Chair Isaac then asked Ms. Headman if houses in the area are largely single family homes, if they have garages and if parking issues are largely seen during the day or night. Ms. Headman stated that most nearby homes are single family but she is unsure as to how many have garages. She added that people will drive from other neighborhoods to park and leave their vehicles for long periods of time. The Parking sticker and restriction for overnight parking after 6:00pm helped but does not monitor all parking. Mr. Block stated that he appreciates the respectful conversation and added that he understands that this can be a hot button topic. He disagrees with some of the statements made regarding the building. Chair Isaac asked for clarification on the building and parking setbacks and ask ed if the drive aisle is part of the parking. Mr. Mangum replied that the drive aisle is considered part of the parking area. The Commission then began deliberations. Page 42 of 45 SP5.Page 120 of 137 DRAFT- NOT APPROVED Page 6 of 8 Plan Commission Minutes 12/11/19 Commissioner Halik stated that he believes buildings should be quality and this is a good building. He added that being old and brick is not the only measure of a good building. He stated that the 6 ft. difference in height is not significant but the setback and parking allowances are. He explained that the trend is to provide less parking a nd there are garages that have additional parking available and a neighborhood parking restriction in place. The Commission is not able to prove one way or the other if parking is needed but Evergreen has done many other projects. He continued, stating tha t the number of parking spaces is a concern and he believes steps have been taken to mitigate the structure being on the property line. Commissioner Pigozzi stated that this is a good project. It is a difficult site and there are some issues to iron out with utilities. This is a project the City should support but the numbers must work. He added that he does not believe the applicant is being insensitive but attempting to make the project work on the site. Howard Street needs this and he hopes the project is successful. Commissioner Draper expressed concern with the development being lot line to lot line with single family homes. Being on Howard Street, this is the best site versus another location in Evanston. She added that she is glad to see amenity spaces. She stated that she is hesitant for the green wall past the 1 st floor and that, since it will take some time to grow, other options should be considered. She agreed with Commission Halik regarding the parking concerns as the requested development allowance is a large one but agreed this is a good project for the area. Chair Isaac echoed the Commissioners’ statements and added that, on a whole, the project is easy to support. He suggested that if the building were retail, it could not go lot line to lot line and that would be an ask of a different development as well. Parking is a concern. CJE would get 100% of their parking but take from the residential portion of the development. Parking has been an issue in the evening while C JE uses spaces during the day. It could be possible to add language that sets aside a certain number of spaces for residents. Mr. Mangum shared that there are currently 26 parking spaces on site. Mr. Isaac then stated that 33 spaces are needed for CJE and 22 for residential use. If CJE only uses 26 spaces then 29 would go to residential and only a 7 space reduction would be needed. Mr. Block added that this is a mixed use development. It will be largely used during the day with vans being parked at night. He stated he can commit to solving potential issues on-site. Chair Isaac asked for more clarification on the vehicle use of CJE employees. Ms. Prohov stated that 19 employees drive to work while others take public transportation. Buses are pulled out so employees are able to park. There are 8 drivers and 11 employees use other spaces. Shalom buses are used for 98% of the clients, as is required by the Illinois Department of Aging, and some have family members drop them Page 43 of 45 SP5.Page 121 of 137 DRAFT- NOT APPROVED Page 7 of 8 Plan Commission Minutes 12/11/19 off. Commissioner Pigozzi stated that he does not believe parking will be as big an issue. The Zoning Code does not address this type of use. Chair Isaac responded that he is attempting to figure out the net effect, not make a value judgement. Commissioner Draper clarified where the ADA parking spaces are located in the garage. Chair Isaac asked if there will be a charge for parking. Mr. Block replied that there will not be but that it will be gated since it is not intended to be open to the public. The Commission then reviewed the standards and largely found that they had been met with the exception of some disagreement on Item 2 in Section 6-3-5-10 and stating that full effects on property value testimony had not been presented. Commissioner Pigozzi made a motion to recommend approval of the planned development as presented by staff. Commissioner Halik seconded the motion. Chair Lewis suggested an amendment to the motion regarding making the project affordable in perpetuity. Mr. Block clarified that there is a 30 year affordability requirement from both IHDA and the City of Evanston. Staff then added that the affordability aspect is not under the purview of the Commission so the ame ndment was rejected. A roll call vote was then taken on the main motion for the planned development and the motion passed, 4-0. Ayes: Isaac, Draper, Halik, Pigozzi Nays: 5. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. 6. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Pigozzi made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Draper seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the motion was approved by voice vote 4 -0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:51 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Meagan Jones Page 44 of 45 SP5.Page 122 of 137 DRAFT- NOT APPROVED Page 8 of 8 Plan Commission Minutes 12/11/19 Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Community Development Department Page 45 of 45 SP5.Page 123 of 137 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Sarah Flax, Housing & Grants Administrator CC: Johanna Leonard, Community Development Director Subject: Partnership Investment HOME in $2 of Allocation Million and Affordable Housing Fund Dollars for Evergreen Real Estate Group/CJE Senior Housing Project Date: January 21, 2020 Recommended Action: The Housing and Homelessness Commission and staff recommend approval of $2,000,000 from the City’s HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) grant and its Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) for the Evergreen/CJE Senior Housing Project at 1015 Howard Street. This 60 -unit senior housing project will provide much-meets needed affordable rental and City underwriting standards. Funding Source: Up to $500,000 in HOME funding, account 240.21.5430.65535. The City has $184,500 of its 2019 receiving anticipates HUD, with credit of and its in available grant HOME line approximately $300,000 per year in 2020 and 2021 that can be allocated to the project. $1,500,000 or the balance to total $2,000,000 from the City’s Affordable Housing Fund, account 250.21.5465.65530. The AHF currently has a cash balance of approximately $3,500,000. Council Action: For Action Summary: On February 4, 2019 City Council voted to approve a letter of support for up to $2,000,000 for this project as part of Evergreen’s application to the Illinois Housing Development Authority for Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC). City funding would be contingent on Evergreen receiving a LIHTC allocation, approval of the planned development, and City underwriting. Evergreen received an allocation of $14,847,030 in LIHTC equity that will provide the bulk of the financing for the project. Additional sources include $438,075 equity in donation tax credits, $2,639,947 of soft funds from IHDA, $990,000 Seller Note, estimated $171,570 in SP6.Page 124 of 137 equity from the ComEd Energy Efficiency Program, $500,000 in deferred Developer fee, $100 in General Partner contribution and $2,000,000 from the City of Eva nston. Total capital stack includes construction financing of $14,200,000 that will convert to a $3,180,000 first mortgage. Staff has underwritten the project following the City's HOME underwriting standards as outlined in the HOME Policies & Procedures manual. The project met all requirements including: • Minimum debt service coverage ratio (the ratio of the Project’s net operating income to its debt service) of 1.05 on all debt, excluding cash flow notes, for the 20 -year HOME affordability period; • Annual cash flow after debt service (Net Operating Income/Total Debt Service) of at least $100 per unit for the HOME affordability period; and • Replacement reserve (funds for repairs and replacement of building components and equipment) of $400 per unit on an annual basis. Staff recommends the following terms for the City’s $2,000,000 in funding: • HOME funding as a zero interest, 20-year forgivable loan. This matches the 20-year affordability period for new HOME-funded rental housing and complies with HUD regulations; and • AHF funding as a zero interest, deferred loan, payable if the property is sold or is not maintained as primarily affordable following the 30-year LIHTC affordability period. Staff recommends investing the majority of City funds early in the project timeline in order to reduce construction loan interest costs and timed based on historic patterns of receipt of our HOME grants. If 2020 and 2021 HOME grants are larger than estimated, additional HOME funding would be recommended, based on the develo per capacity to comply with HOME requirements. It is anticipated that four draws would be made at key benchmarks: • $500,000 at closing in June 2020 (est. $184,500 in HOME and $315,500 of AHF) • $1,000,000 at 35% construction completion in Q4 2020 (est. $2 00,000 in HOME and $800,000 of AHF) • $300,000 at 75% construction completion in Q2 2021 (est. $300,000 of AHF) • $200,000 at project completion in Q3 2021 (est. $115,500 in HOME and $84,500 of AHF) HOME funding would be invested in all 60 units and restricted at the following income levels, which are different from the LIHTC levels. In this case, the most restrictive income levels apply: • 12 units at 50% AMI (all one-bedroom) • 42 units at 60% AMI (23 one-bedroom and 1 two-bedroom) • 6 units at 80% AMI (1 one-bedroom and 5 two-bedroom) In actuality, the twelve 50% HOME units will be 30% AMI LIHTC units, six of which will have PBV. Twenty four of the 60% HOME units will be 50% AMI LIHTC units with PBV operating support. The remaining eighteen 60% HOME units and the six 80% HOME units will be 60% Page 2 of 14 SP6.Page 125 of 137 AMI LIHTC units. The rationale for this apparent mismatch of HOME units and income restrictions is to minimize compliance issues for the HOME units due to the lower rent levels used by the HOME program than the LIHTC program. It also would offer flexibility to use income averaging that could allow a portion of units at 80% AMI under LIHTC regulations following the initial 15-year affordability period. This project addresses the following housing needs in Evanston identified through the City’s affordable housing planning process, as well as in the Consolidated Plan and Age Friendly Evanston Action Plan: • Increases the supply of housing affordable to low income seniors identified as a high need by providing 60 new units, 12 at 30% AMI, 24 at 50% AMI and 24 at 60% AMI. Half of all units will have Project Based Vouchers (PBV) from the Housing Authority of Cook County and the Illinois State Referral Network, so residents will pay 30% of their income toward rent and utilities and the PBV will cover the remainder. • Adds new affordable units at a low per-unit cost ($33,333) to the City by leveraging federal, state and regional resources. The units will be affordable for a minimum of 30 years, resulting in an investment of $1,111 per unit per year (current dollars) which is less than the current per-month subsidy for a household receiving Tenant Based Rental Assistance; it is also less than the $40,000 average cost of a CDBG rehab of a single-family home. • Expands the supply of accessible units; 6 units (10%) will be fully accessible; 2 units will be designed for persons with sensory impairments; 6 more units will be adaptable, in compliance with Fair Housing requirements. All units include additional Universal Design features that exceed requirements. The project is in partnership with CJE Senior Life, with CJE contributing much of the project site, which addresses one of the biggest challenges to the development of affordable housing. CJE’s existing building will be renovated as part of the project and its senior day services and transportation services will continue to be provided there. In addition, the entire project will be on the property tax rolls as required with LIHTC funding, and will add an estimated $65,000 - $70,000 in new property tax revenue annually, about 20% of which will be the City’s portion. The project will also activate the long vacant Dairy Queen site and further the City’s goals to redevelop the Howard Street corridor. Legislative History: The Housing and Homelessness Commission unanimously recommended approval of the allocation of $2 million, comprising up to $500,000 of HOME funding, and $1,500,000, or the balance to total $2 million, from the AHF for the Evergreen/CJE 60-unit senior housing project at its meeting on January 9, 2020. Commissioner Bobo recused herself from the discussion and vote as required by her employer, the Illinois Housing Development Authority. City Council voted to approve a letter of support for up to $2,000,000 for this proje ct as part of Evergreen’s application to the Illinois Housing Development Authority for LIHTC on February 4, 2019 Attachments: Evergreen-CJE Senior Project at 1015 Howard St-Financials Page 3 of 14 SP6.Page 126 of 137 FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 © 2012-2013 FormWorks LLC December 27, 2019 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing projectPage 4 of 14SP6.Page 127 of 137 Project Summary:CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL HUD Metro FMR Area 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 12/27/2019 COMBINED RESIDENTIAL-COMMERCIAL Summary Uses of Funds Total Per Unit 0BR 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5BR Acquisition 1,580,000$ 26,333$ 60% AMI Incomes 37,440$ 42,780$ 48,120$ 53,460$ 57,780$ 62,040$ Construction 17,365,864$ 289,431$ 60% AMI Rents 780$ 836$ 1,003$ 1,159$ 1,293$ 1,426$ Soft Costs 2,490,319$ 41,505$ HUD Fair Market Rents 1,221$ 1,397$ 1,617$ 2,057$ 2,464$ Financing Costs 887,750$ 14,796$ Estimated Market Rents 1,200$ 1,500$ 1,700$ 2,000$ 2,200$ 2,000$ Reserves 442,789$ 7,380$ Utility Allowances 94$ 101$ 120$ 139$ 158$ 168$ Developer Fee 2,000,000$ 33,333$ Total Uses:24,766,721$ 412,779$ 60% AMI - Unsub LIHTC 19 5 24 21,295$ 40.0% 50% AMI - PBV LIHTC-S8 23 1 24 28,717$ 40.0%Summary Sources of Funds Total Per Unit Gross Monthly Commercial RevenueLIHTC-S8 6 6 7,134$ 10.0%Residential First Mortgage 3,180,000$ 53,000$ 30% AMI - Unsub LIHTC 6 6 2,252$ 10.0%City of Evanston 2,000,000$ 33,333$ Gross Monthly Residential Revenue 0 54 6 0 0 0 60 59,398$ Seller Note 990,000$ 16,500$ 0.0%90.0%10.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%Annual:712,773$ ComEd Energy Grant 171,570$ 2,859$ IHDA Gap Funds 2,639,947$ 43,999$ Tenant Name GLA Retail/Office Lease Type Rate Term Renewal Escal. Rate Revenue Deferred Developer Fee 500,000$ 8,333$ CJE Senior Care 10,000 Retail NNN 3$ 1 19 3.00%30,000$ LIHTC Equity - [Source]14,847,030$ 247,451$ Gross Monthly Commercial Revenue 30,000$ IAHTC Equity 438,075$ 7,301$ GP Contribution 100$ 2$ Projection Summary Total Sources:24,766,722$ 412,779$ 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Combined Revenue 743,673$ 758,855$ 774,351$ 790,165$ 806,306$ 822,780$ 839,594$ 856,755$ 874,270$ 892,147$ Surplus/(Gap):0$ 0$ Combined Vacancy (42,766)$ (43,622)$ (44,494)$ (45,384)$ (46,292)$ (47,218)$ (48,162)$ (49,125)$ (50,108)$ (51,110)$ Effective Gross Income 700,906$ 715,233$ 729,856$ 744,781$ 760,015$ 775,563$ 791,432$ 807,630$ 824,162$ 841,037$ Debt Service Mortgage Type Principal Amount Annual Payment Leaseup Expenses 1,523$ 1,568$ 1,615$ 1,664$ 1,714$ 1,765$ 1,818$ 1,872$ 1,929$ 1,987$ Residential First Mortgage 3,180,000$ 186,068$ Payroll Expenses 101,947$ 105,005$ 108,155$ 111,400$ 114,742$ 118,184$ 121,730$ 125,381$ 129,143$ 133,017$ Rate: 4.73%, Term: 35 yrs, Amort: 35 yrs Administrative & Office Expenses 80,359$ 82,345$ 84,382$ 86,472$ 88,616$ 90,815$ 93,071$ 95,385$ 97,759$ 100,194$ Utilities 55,845$ 57,521$ 59,246$ 61,024$ 62,854$ 64,740$ 66,682$ 68,683$ 70,743$ 72,865$ Operating & Maintenance 79,150$ 81,524$ 83,970$ 86,489$ 89,084$ 91,756$ 94,509$ 97,344$ 100,264$ 103,272$ 2019 Combined Operating Budget Taxes 81,336$ 84,590$ 87,973$ 91,492$ 95,152$ 98,958$ 102,916$ 107,033$ 111,314$ 115,767$ Operating Category Total Per Unit Insurance 33,495$ 34,500$ 35,535$ 36,601$ 37,699$ 38,830$ 39,995$ 41,195$ 42,430$ 43,703$ Leaseup Expenses 1,523$ 25$ Financial Expenses 1,523$ 1,568$ 1,615$ 1,664$ 1,714$ 1,765$ 1,818$ 1,872$ 1,929$ 1,987$ Payroll Expenses 101,947$ 1,699$ Reserve Deposits 21,315$ 21,954$ 22,613$ 23,291$ 23,990$ 24,710$ 25,451$ 26,215$ 27,001$ 27,811$ Administrative & Office Expenses 80,359$ 1,339$ Other Operating Expenses -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Utilities 55,845$ 931$ Total 456,491$ 470,575$ 485,105$ 500,097$ 515,564$ 531,523$ 547,989$ 564,980$ 582,512$ 600,604$ Operating & Maintenance 79,150$ 1,319$ Taxes 81,336$ 1,356$ Residential NOI 244,415$ 244,658$ 244,751$ 244,685$ 244,451$ 244,040$ 243,443$ 242,650$ 241,650$ 240,434$ Insurance 33,495$ 558$ Debt Service (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ Financial Expenses 1,523$ 25$ Cash Flow 58,347$ 58,590$ 58,683$ 58,617$ 58,382$ 57,972$ 57,374$ 56,581$ 55,582$ 54,365$ Reserve Deposits 21,315$ 355$ Residential OCR 1.54 1.52 1.50 1.49 1.47 1.46 1.44 1.43 1.41 1.40 Other Operating Expenses -$ -$ Residential DSCR 1.31 1.31 1.32 1.32 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.30 1.30 1.29 Total 456,491$ 7,608$ 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Combined Revenue 910,393$ 929,016$ 948,024$ 967,425$ 987,227$ 1,007,439$ 1,028,070$ 1,049,127$ 1,070,620$ 1,092,559$ Combined Vacancy (52,132)$ (53,175)$ (54,238)$ (55,323)$ (56,429)$ (57,558)$ (58,709)$ (59,883)$ (61,081)$ (62,303)$ Effective Gross Income 858,261$ 875,841$ 893,786$ 912,102$ 930,798$ 949,882$ 969,361$ 989,244$ 1,009,539$ 1,030,256$ Leaseup Expenses 2,046$ 2,108$ 2,171$ 2,236$ 2,303$ 2,372$ 2,443$ 2,516$ 2,592$ 2,670$ Payroll Expenses 137,008$ 141,118$ 145,351$ 149,712$ 154,203$ 158,829$ 163,594$ 168,502$ 173,557$ 178,764$ Administrative & Office Expenses 102,692$ 105,256$ 107,886$ 110,584$ 113,352$ 116,193$ 119,107$ 122,098$ 125,166$ 128,315$ Utilities 75,051$ 77,303$ 79,622$ 82,011$ 84,471$ 87,005$ 89,615$ 92,304$ 95,073$ 97,925$ Operating & Maintenance 106,371$ 109,562$ 112,849$ 116,234$ 119,721$ 123,313$ 127,012$ 130,822$ 134,747$ 138,789$ Taxes 120,398$ 125,214$ 130,222$ 135,431$ 140,848$ 146,482$ 152,341$ 158,435$ 164,772$ 171,363$ Insurance 45,014$ 46,365$ 47,756$ 49,189$ 50,664$ 52,184$ 53,750$ 55,362$ 57,023$ 58,734$ Financial Expenses 2,046$ 2,108$ 2,171$ 2,236$ 2,303$ 2,372$ 2,443$ 2,516$ 2,592$ 2,670$ Reserve Deposits 28,646$ 29,505$ 30,390$ 31,302$ 32,241$ 33,208$ 34,204$ 35,230$ 36,287$ 37,376$ Other Operating Expenses -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total 619,272$ 638,537$ 658,417$ 678,934$ 700,107$ 721,958$ 744,511$ 767,787$ 791,810$ 816,606$ Residential NOI 238,989$ 237,305$ 235,369$ 233,169$ 230,691$ 227,923$ 224,850$ 221,457$ 217,729$ 213,650$ Debt Service (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ (186,068)$ Cash Flow 52,921$ 51,237$ 49,301$ 47,101$ 44,623$ 41,855$ 38,782$ 35,389$ 31,661$ 27,582$ Residential OCR 1.39 1.37 1.36 1.34 1.33 1.32 1.30 1.29 1.27 1.26 Residential DSCR 1.28 1.28 1.26 1.25 1.24 1.22 1.21 1.19 1.17 1.15 Page 5 of 14SP6.Page 128 of 137 Development Budget: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Basis Calculations DPDCode Total Total Per Unit Residential Units % Deprec 9% LIHTC basis 4% LIHTC basis HTC basis 01 Land & Acquisition Costs 575,000$ 9,583$ -$ -$ -$ 2 01-001 Land Acquisition 575,000$ 9,583$ 502,486$ 1 01-002 Building Acquisition 100.00% 2 01-003 Land Lease 4 01-004 Closing/Carrying Costs -$ -$ -$ 90.00% 3 01-005 Other/Non-Residential 100.00% 5 01-006 Transfer Taxes 15,000$ 250$ 13,108$ 0.00% 3 01-007 Seller Note 990,000$ 16,500$ 865,151$ 100.00% Subtotal, Land & Acquisition Costs 1,580,000$ 26,333$ #1,380,745$ #-$ -$ -$ 02 Construction Costs 17,365,864$ 289,431$ 15,809,797$ 15,809,797$ 17,257,093$ 26 02-001 Site Work 775,419$ 12,924$ 677,630$ 95.00%643,749$ 643,749$ 736,648$ 26 02-002 Demolition 15,000$ 250$ 13,108$ 43 02-003 Environmental Remediation 55,000$ 917$ 48,064$ 34 02-004 Direct Utility Payments 165,000$ 2,750$ 144,192$ 90.00%129,773$ 129,773$ 165,000$ 26 02-005 Site Preparation: Other 40,000$ 667$ 34,956$ 90.00%31,460$ 31,460$ 40,000$ 26 02-006 Site Preparation: Other 90.00% 26 02-007 Site Preparation: Other 90.00% Site Preparation Costs 1,050,419$ 17,507$ #917,950$ #804,982$ 804,982$ 941,648$ 11 02-009 Residential: Construction 13,236,629$ 220,610$ 13,236,629$ 100.00%13,236,629$ 13,236,629$ 13,236,629$ 11 02-010 Residential: Structured Parking 100.00% 11 02-011 Residential: Surface Parking -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 11 02-012 Residential: FF&E -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 11 02-013 Residential: Other Construction -$ -$ -$ 0.00%-$ -$ -$ Construction - Residential 13,236,629$ 220,610$ #13,236,629$ #13,236,629$ 13,236,629$ 13,236,629$ 13 02-015 Commercial: Construction 478,820$ 7,980$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ 478,820$ 13 02-016 Commercial: Structured Parking -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 13 02-017 Commercial: Surface Parking -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 13 02-018 Commercial: FF&E -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 13 02-019 Commercial: Temporary Buildout -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ Construction - Commercial 478,820$ 7,980$ #-$ #-$ -$ 478,820$ 11 02-021 Community: Construction -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 11 02-022 Community: Structured Parking -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 11 02-023 Community: Surface Parking -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 11 02-024 Community: FF&E -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 11 02-025 Community: Other Construction -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ Construction - Community -$ -$ #-$ #-$ -$ -$ Construction Costs before Markup 14,765,868$ 246,098$ #14,154,579$ #14,041,611$ 14,041,611$ 14,657,097$ 14 02-028 Contractor's General Requirements 798,833$ 13,314$ 698,092$ 100.00%698,092$ 698,092$ 798,833$ 15 02-029 Contractor's Overhead -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 16 02-030 Contractor's Profit 798,833$ 13,314$ 698,092$ 100.00%698,092$ 698,092$ 798,833$ 20 02-031 Contractor's Liability Insurance 77,824$ 1,297$ 68,009$ 100.00%68,009$ 68,009$ 77,824$ 20 02-032 Contractor's Bond/LoC Premium 155,647$ 2,594$ 136,018$ 100.00%136,018$ 136,018$ 155,647$ 13 02-033 Other Contractor Charges 100.00% General Construction Costs 1,831,137$ 30,519$ #1,600,212$ #1,600,212$ 1,600,212$ 1,831,137$ 28 02-035 Construction Contingency 768,858$ 12,814$ 671,897$ 25.00%167,974$ 167,974$ 768,858$ Subtotal, Construction Costs 17,365,864$ 289,431$ #16,426,688$ #15,809,797$ 15,809,797$ 17,257,093$ 03 General Development Costs 2,490,319$ 41,505$ 100.00%1,458,394$ 1,458,394$ 1,703,057$ 54 03-001 Architect-Design 530,756$ 8,846$ 463,822$ 100.00%463,822$ 463,822$ 530,756$ 55 03-002 Architect-Supervision 178,994$ 2,983$ 156,421$ 100.00%156,421$ 156,421$ 178,994$ 57 03-003 Architect-Reimbursables 10,000$ 167$ 8,739$ 100.00%8,739$ 8,739$ 10,000$ Subtotal, Architectural Fees 719,750$ 11,996$ #628,982$ #628,982$ 628,982$ 719,750$ 111 03-005 Construction Management -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 56 03-006 Engineering Fees 155,647$ 2,594$ 136,018$ 100.00%136,018$ 136,018$ 155,647$ 72 03-007 Environmental Studies, Testing, Reports 65,000$ 1,083$ 56,803$ 100.00%56,803$ 56,803$ 65,000$ 19 03-008 Building Permits 310,111$ 5,169$ 271,003$ 100.00%271,003$ 271,003$ 310,111$ 21 03-009 Town Impact/Mitigation Fees 100.00% 34 03-010 Water/Sewer Connection Fees -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 19 03-011 Other Review and Processing Fees 100.00% 66 03-012 Historic Preservation Fees 100.00% 74 03-013 Other Permits, Fees and Testing 100.00% Subtotal, Permits, Fees and Testing 530,758$ 8,846$ #463,824$ #463,824$ 463,824$ 530,758$ 60 03-015 Surveys 24,000$ 400$ 20,973$ 100.00%20,973$ 20,973$ 24,000$ 48 03-016 Legal Fees - Transactional 125,000$ 2,083$ 109,236$ 65.00%71,004$ 71,004$ 81,250$ 64 03-017 Legal Fees - Organizational 25,000$ 417$ 21,847$ 25.00%5,462$ 5,462$ 6,250$ 88 03-018 CJE Legal 46,000$ 767$ -$ 80.00%-$ -$ 36,800$ 73 03-019 Title & Recording 40,000$ 667$ 40,000$ 0.00%-$ -$ -$ 63 03-020 Audit & Cost Certification 30,000$ 500$ 30,000$ 0.00%-$ -$ -$ 69 03-021 Appraisal 8,500$ 142$ 8,500$ 100.00%8,500$ 8,500$ 8,500$ 70 03-022 Market Study 9,500$ 158$ 9,500$ 100.00%9,500$ 9,500$ 9,500$ 66 03-023 Historic Consultant -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 68 03-024 TIF Consultant 100.00% 67 03-025 NMTC Consultant 100.00% 74 03-026 Other Consultants 90,000$ 1,500$ 78,650$ 100.00%78,650$ 78,650$ 90,000$ 95 03-027 Taxes during development 36,810$ 614$ 32,168$ 80.00%25,734$ 25,734$ 29,448$ 94 03-028 Builder's Risk Insurance 45,000$ 750$ 39,325$ 100.00%39,325$ 39,325$ 45,000$ 93 03-029 General Property & Liability Insurance 40,000$ 667$ 34,956$ 67.00%23,420$ 23,420$ 26,800$ 93 03-030 Directors & Officers Insurance 25.00% 93 03-031 Environmental Insurance 25.00% Subtotal, Insurance, Consultants, Fees, Surveys 519,810$ 8,664$ #425,155$ #282,568$ 282,568$ 357,548$ 97 03-033 Security during development 25,000$ 417$ 21,847$ 100.00%21,847$ 21,847$ 25,000$ 31 03-034 Utilities during development 25,000$ 417$ 21,847$ 100.00%21,847$ 21,847$ 25,000$ 18 03-035 Furniture and equipment 45,000$ 750$ 39,325$ 100.00%39,325$ 39,325$ 45,000$ 102 03-036 Marketing & Advertising 25,000$ 417$ 21,847$ 0.00%-$ -$ -$ 102 03-037 Broker's Commissions 0.00% 107 03-038 Relocation 600,000$ 10,000$ 524,334$ 0.00%-$ -$ -$ 100 03-039 Resident Services 0.00% 47 03-040 Soft Cost Contingency -$ -$ -$ 50.00%-$ -$ -$ Subtotal, All Development Costs 2,490,319$ 41,505$ #2,147,162$ #1,458,394$ 1,458,394$ 1,703,057$ 04 Financing Costs 887,750$ 14,796$ 417,981$ 417,981$ 478,300$ 91 04-001 Predevelopment Funds-Fees 12,000$ 200$ 10,487$ 100.00%10,487$ 10,487$ 12,000$ 90 04-002 Predevelopment Funds-Interest 30,000$ 500$ 26,217$ 100.00%26,217$ 26,217$ 30,000$ 91 04-003 Construction Loan-Fees 106,500$ 1,775$ 93,069$ 100.00%93,069$ 93,069$ 106,500$ 90 04-004 Construction Loan-Interest 440,000$ 7,333$ 384,511$ 67.00%257,623$ 257,623$ 294,800$ 91 04-005 Construction Loan 2-Fees -$ -$ -$ 80.00%-$ -$ -$ Page 6 of 14 SP6.Page 129 of 137 Development Budget: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Basis Calculations DPDCode Total Total Per Unit Residential Units % Deprec 9% LIHTC basis 4% LIHTC basis HTC basis 90 04-006 Construction Loan 2-Interest -$ -$ -$ 80.00%-$ -$ -$ 91 04-007 Line of Credit/Bridge Loan-Fees 100.00% 90 04-008 Line of Credit/Bridge Loan-Interest 100.00% 91 04-009 Collateralized TE Bond-Fees 0.00% 90 04-010 Collateralized TE Bond-Interest 0.00% 77 04-011 Permanent Loan-Fees -$ -$ -$ 0.00% 91 04-012 Permanent Loan-Interest 0.00% Subtotal, Loan Fees and Interest 588,500$ 9,808$ #514,284$ #387,395$ 387,395$ 443,300$ 76 04-014 LIHTC Application Fees 27,250$ 454$ 27,250$ 0.00% 76 04-015 LIHTC Allocation Fees 150,000$ 2,500$ 150,000$ 0.00% 77 04-016 Other Program Application Fees -$ -$ -$ 0.00% Subtotal, LIHTC and Other Program Fees 177,250$ 2,954$ #177,250$ #-$ -$ -$ 86 04-018 Underwriter Discount 0.00% 87 04-019 Underwriter's Counsel 0.00% 89 04-020 POS Printing/Delivery Charges 0.00% 84 04-021 Rating Agency Fee 0.00% 85 04-022 Trustee Fee incl. Legal 0.00% 89 04-023 Issuer Fee 0.00% 82 04-024 Issuer Counsel 0.00% 89 04-025 Out-of Pocket 0.00% 89 04-026 Administrative Fee 0.00% 89 04-027 Remarketing Fees 0.00% 89 04-028 Direct Purchase: Commitment Fee 0.00% 89 04-029 Direct Purchase: Bond Lender Legal 0.00% 89 04-030 Volume cap fee 0.00% 89 04-031 Other Bond Fee:0.00% Subtotal, Bond Costs -$ -$ #-$ #-$ -$ -$ 77 04-033 LOC Application and Renewal Fees 68.00% 91 04-034 LOC Issuance Fee 68.00% 91 04-035 LOC Draw Fees 68.00% 90 04-036 LOC Interest from Draw 68.00% 91 04-037 LOC Collateral (Reserve)68.00% 91 04-038 Other LOC Fee:68.00% Subtotal, Letter of Credit Fees and Interest -$ -$ #-$ #-$ -$ -$ 65 04-040 LIHTC Syndication Fees -$ -$ -$ 0.00% 65 04-041 NMTC Syndication Fees & Legal -$ -$ -$ 0.00% 80 04-042 Lender Inspection Fees 35,000$ 583$ 30,586$ 100.00%30,586$ 30,586$ 35,000$ 97 04-043 CDE construction loan interest reserve -$ -$ -$ 100.00% 69 04-044 Lender Appraisal - Permanent Loan 12,000$ 200$ 10,487$ 0.00% 81 04-045 Lender Plan/Construction Review 67.00% 82 04-046 Perm loan legal 75,000$ 1,250$ 75,000$ 0.00%-$ -$ -$ 82 04-047 CHA Legal 50.00% Subtotal, All Financing Costs 887,750$ 14,796$ #807,607$ #417,981$ 417,981$ 478,300$ 05 Escrows and Reserves 442,789$ 7,380$ -$ -$ -$ 118 05-001 Tax Escrow 41,360$ 689$ 41,360$ 0.00% 117 05-002 Insurance Escrow 34,650$ 578$ 34,650$ 0.00% 121 05-003 Permanent Debt Service Coverage Reserve 0.00% 119 05-004 Operating Reserve 305,779$ 5,096$ 305,779$ 0.00% 115 05-005 Rent-Up Reserve 40,000$ 667$ 40,000$ 0.00% 116 05-006 ACC Subsidy Reserve -$ -$ -$ 0.00% 116 05-007 Section 8 Reserve -$ -$ -$ 0.00% 121 05-008 TIF Debt Service Reserve 0.00% 121 05-009 Construction Loan Debt Service Reserve 0.00% 120 05-010 Replacement Reserve 21,000$ 350$ 21,000$ 0.00% 121 05-011 Other Reserves 0.00% 121 05-012 Other Reserves 0.00% 121 05-013 Other Reserves 0.00% Subtotal, Escrows and Reserves 442,789$ 7,380$ #442,789$ #-$ -$ -$ 06 Developer Fees 2,000,000$ 33,333$ 1,747,779$ 1,747,779$ 2,000,000$ 109 06-001 Developer Fee 1,500,000$ 25,000$ 1,310,834$ 100.00%1,310,834$ 1,310,834$ 1,500,000$ 109 06-002 Fee held for reserves -$ -$ -$ 100.00%-$ -$ -$ 13 ###110 06-003 Deferred dev. fee (13 yrs CF=$ 546,112)500,000$ 8,333$ 436,945$ 100.00%436,945$ 436,945$ 500,000$ 113 06-004 Commercial Developer Fee 100.00% 113 06-005 Other Developer Fee 100.00% Subtotal, Developer Fees 2,000,000$ 33,333$ #1,747,779$ #1,747,779$ 1,747,779$ 2,000,000$ Total Development Costs 24,766,721$ 412,779$ 22,952,770$ 19,433,951$ 19,433,951$ 21,438,449$ Page 7 of 14 SP6.Page 130 of 137 Operating Expenses: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Expense Categories, Revenue Units BLI #Alternate BLI #Total Budget Total Res Budget - PUPY Residential Per Unit - PUPY Total Com. Budget Residential Type A Residential Type B LIHTC-S8 LIHTC 01-00000 Leaseup Expenses 1,500$ 1,500$ 25$ -$ 25$ 25$ 20 02-00100 Staffing and Payroll 02-00190 Office Staff Subtotal 36,720$ 36,720$ 612$ -$ 615$ 609$ 02-00191 Janitorial Staff Subtotal -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 02-00192 Repair Staff Subtotal 63,600$ 63,600$ 1,060$ -$ 1,070$ 1,050$ 02-00193 Security Staff Subtotal -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 02-00194 Services Staff Subtotal -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 9 02-00200 Employee Apartment Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 9 02-00300 Staff Uniforms 120$ 120$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 20 02-00400 Other Staffing -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 20 02-00500 Other Staffing -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 02-00000 Payroll Expenses 100,440$ 100,440$ 1,674$ -$ 1,687$ 1,661$ HFA Limit:7.0%6.75%of gross residential income 11 03-00100 Management Fee 40,800$ 40,800$ 680$ 680$ 680$ 3 03-00200 Office Supplies 2,400$ 2,400$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 1 03-00300 Legal 4,500$ 4,500$ 75$ 75$ 75$ 2 03-00400 Accounting & Tax Return 12,600$ 12,600$ 210$ 210$ 210$ 5 03-00500 Telephone & Answering Service 5,100$ 5,100$ 85$ 85$ 85$ 5 03-00600 Office Internet & Technology 5,040$ 5,040$ 84$ one site, ADP fees84$ 84$ 9 03-00700 Staff Training and Certification 1,050$ 1,050$ 18$ 18$ 17$ 9 03-00800 Staff Travel Expense 840$ 840$ 14$ 14$ 14$ 9 03-00900 Miscellaneous Admininstrative 900$ 900$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 9 03-01000 Other Administrative & Office 4,920$ 4,920$ 82$ bank fees 82$ 82$ 03-00000 Administrative & Office Expenses 78,150$ 78,150$ 1,303$ -$ 1,303$ 1,302$ 48 04-00100 Electricity 20,400$ 20,400$ 340$ 340$ 340$ 49 04-00200 Water & Sewer 25,020$ 25,020$ 417$ 417$ 417$ 47 04-00300 Fuel/Gas 9,600$ 9,600$ 160$ 160$ 160$ 50 04-00400 Other Utilities -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 04-00000 Utilities 55,020$ 55,020$ 917$ -$ 917$ 917$ 31 05-00100 Janitorial & Maintenance Supplies 31 05-00101 Appliances 600$ 600$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 31 05-00102 Electrical Equipment 600$ 600$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 31 05-00103 Exterior Repair 720$ 720$ 12$ 12$ 12$ 31 05-00104 Exterminating -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 31 05-00105 Flooring/Carpeting 720$ 720$ 12$ 12$ 12$ 31 05-00106 Groundskeeping 720$ 720$ 12$ 12$ 12$ 31 05-00107 HVAC -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 31 05-00108 Janitorial 1,020$ 1,020$ 17$ 17$ 17$ 31 05-00109 Locks and Keys 480$ 480$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 31 05-00110 Painting & Decorating 2,700$ 2,700$ 45$ 45$ 45$ 31 05-00111 Plumbing Equipment -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 31 05-00112 Safety and Security Systems -$ -$ -$ 31 05-00113 Snow Removal -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 31 05-00114 Windows/Screens/Doors 600$ 600$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 31 05-00115 Other Supplies -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 31 05-00116 Other Supplies -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 05-00190 Supplies Subtotal 8,160$ 8,160$ 136$ -$ 136$ 136$ 45 05-00200 Third-Party Contracts 40 05-00201 Appliance Repair -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 40 05-00202 Electrician 480$ 480$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 32 05-00203 Elevator Maintenance 10,300$ 8,100$ 135$ 2,200$ 135$ 135$ 28 05-00204 Exterminating 2,400$ 2,400$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 41 05-00205 Flooring/Carpeting 600$ 600$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 27 05-00206 Generator Maintenance 600$ 600$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 33 05-00207 Groundskeeping 8,400$ 6,000$ 100$ 2,400$ 100$ 100$ 30 05-00208 Gutters/Exterior -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 35 05-00209 HVAC 4,200$ 4,200$ 70$ 70$ 70$ 27 05-00210 Janitorial 4,500$ 3,000$ 50$ 1,500$ 50$ 50$ 27 05-00211 Locksmith 300$ 300$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 43 05-00212 Painting & Decorating -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 40 05-00213 Plumber 2,400$ 2,400$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40 05-00214 Safety and Security Systems 4,200$ 4,200$ 70$ 70$ 70$ 34 05-00215 Security Patrols & Alarm Monitoring -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 36 05-00216 Snow Removal 10,600$ 8,400$ 140$ 2,200$ 140$ 140$ 30 05-00217 Windows/Screens/Doors 240$ 240$ 4$ 4$ 4$ 45 05-00218 Other Contracts 6,000$ 6,000$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 45 05-00219 Other Contracts -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 05-00290 Third-Party Contracts Subtotal 55,220$ 46,920$ 782$ 8,300$ 782$ 782$ 29 05-00300 Garbage & Trash Removal 9,600$ 9,600$ 160$ 160$ 160$ 44 05-00400 Misc. Equipment Leasing -$ -$ -$ 45 05-00500 Other Operating & Maintenance 5,000$ -$ -$ 5,000$ -$ -$ 45 05-00600 Other Operating & Maintenance -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 05-00000 Operating & Maintenance 77,980$ 64,680$ 1,078$ 13,300$ 1,078$ 1,078$ 22 06-00100 Real Estate Taxes / PILOT 75,200$ 70,200$ 1,170$ 5,000$ 1,170$ 1,170$ 25 06-00200 Business Licenses -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Page 8 of 14 SP6.Page 131 of 137 Operating Expenses: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Expense Categories, Revenue Units BLI #Alternate BLI #Total Budget Total Res Budget - PUPY Residential Per Unit - PUPY Total Com. Budget Residential Type A Residential Type B 25 06-00300 Auto Excise Tax -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 06-00400 Auto Registration -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 06-00500 Other Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 06-00600 Other Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 06-00000 Taxes 75,200$ 70,200$ 1,170$ 5,000$ 1,170$ 1,170$ 25 07-00100 Auto Insurance -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 23 07-00200 Property & Liability Ins.33,000$ 33,000$ 550$ 550$ 550$ 24 07-00300 D&O Insurance -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 07-00400 Fidelity Bond -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 07-00500 Other Insurance -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 07-00600 Other Insurance -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 07-00000 Insurance 33,000$ 33,000$ 550$ -$ 550$ 550$ 08-00000 Financial Expenses 1,500$ 1,500$ 25$ -$ 25$ 25$ 09-00000 Reserve Deposits 21,000$ 21,000$ 350$ -$ 350$ 350$ 10-00000 Other Operating Expenses -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 00-00000 Total 443,790$ 425,490$ 7,092$ 18,300$ 7,105$ 7,078$ Page 9 of 14 SP6.Page 132 of 137 Sources and Uses: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Summary Uses of Funds - Permanent Summary Uses of Funds - Construction Debt Sizing - Residential Residential Per Unit Commercial Community Total Residential Per Unit Commercial Community Total Acquisition 1,380,745$ 23,012$ 199,255$ -$ 1,580,000$ Acquisition 1,380,745$ 23,012$ 199,255$ -$ 1,580,000$ NOI available for debt svc (yr 1):232,422$ Cap Rate LTV Construction 16,426,688$ 273,778$ 939,176$ -$ 17,365,864$ Construction 16,426,688$ 273,778$ 939,176$ -$ 17,365,864$ Minimum Year 1 DSCR:1.31 6.00%87.00% Soft Costs 2,147,162$ 35,786$ 343,157$ -$ 2,490,319$ Soft Costs 2,147,162$ 35,786$ 343,157$ -$ 2,490,319$ DSCR Constraint:3,032,226$ Minimum DSCR: Financing Costs 807,607$ 13,460$ 80,143$ -$ 887,750$ Financing Costs 807,607$ 13,460$ 80,143$ -$ 887,750$ LTV Constraint:3,370,124$ Use PHA Addback DSCR: Reserves 442,789$ 7,380$ -$ -$ 442,789$ Reserves -$ -$ LTC Constraint:20,657,493$ Developer Fee 1,747,779$ 29,130$ 252,221$ -$ 2,000,000$ Developer Fee 436,945$ 7,282.41$ 63,055$ -$ 500,000$ Actual Coverage in Year 1:1.29 SLF Debt % Total Uses 22,952,770$ 382,546$ 1,813,951$ -$ 24,766,721$ Total Uses 21,199,147$ 353,319$ 1,624,786$ -$ 22,823,932$ Projected Coverage in Year 15:1.15 325$ Levg %:0.25605204 Sources of Funds - Permanent Sources of Funds - Construction Debt Sizing - Commercial / Community Amount Rate Term Amort Payment Constant Amount Rate Term Amort Hard Debt Hard Debt NOI available for debt svc (yr 1):30,000$ Cap Rate LTV Residential First Mortgage 3,180,000$ 4.73%35 35 186,068$ 5.851%Construction/Bridge Loan 14,200,000$ 4.25%Minimum Year 1 DSCR:1.36 7.00%80.00% Second Mortgage/TIF 6.50%8 8 -$ ######Second Mortgage/TIF DSCR Constraint:306,602$ Minimum DSCR: Non-residential Mortgage -$ 6.00%30 30 -$ 7.195%Non-residential Mortgage LTV Constraint:342,857$ Soft Debt Soft Debt LTC Constraint:1,632,556$ City of Evanston 2,000,000$ 2.50%30 30 94,829$ City of Evanston 2,000,000$ Actual Coverage in Year 1:#DIV/0! Seller Note 990,000$ Seller Note 990,000$ Projected Coverage in Year 15:#DIV/0! TIF Loan TIF Loan ComEd Energy Grant 171,570$ ComEd Energy Grant NMTC Non-Residential Revenue %:4.04% AHP Funding -$ AHP Funding IHDA Gap Funds 2,639,947$ IHDA Gap Funds 2,227,618$ Deferred Developer Fee 500,000$ Deferred Developer Fee Gap Funds Needed Gap Funds Needed Equity Net Equity Credits Price LP Pct Equity Equity Sizing LIHTC Equity - [Source]14,847,030$ 1,500,000$ 0.99000$ 99.98%LIHTC Equity - [Source]2,968,139$ Historic Tax Credits:Eligible Basis: HTC Equity - [Source]-$ -$ 0.99000$ 99.98%HTC Equity -$ HTC %:21,438,449$ NMTC B Loan -$ -$ 0.75000$ 99.98%NMTC B Loan -$ Use HTCs:No 20.00%-$ IAHTC Equity 438,075$ 495,000$ 0.88500$ 100.00%IAHTC Equity 438,075$ Acquisition 4% Construction 9% Construction Conventional Equity -$ Conventional Equity -$ Total Basis:-$ 19,433,951$ 19,433,951$ Special Limited Partner -$ 1.00000$ 99.98%Special Limited Partner -$ Less HTC:-$ -$ GP Contribution 100$ 1.00000$ 99.98%GP Contribution 100$ Less Below-Market Debt:-$ -$ Grants Grants Eligible Basis:19,433,951$ 19,433,951$ Grant 1 Grant 1 -$ Basis Boost:100.00%19,433,951$ 19,433,951$ Grant 2 Grant 2 -$ Applicable Fraction:100.00%-$ 19,433,951$ 19,433,951$ Grant 3 Grant 3 Credit Rate (date):3.31%-$ 643,264$ Grant 4 Grant 4 Feb-17 9.00%1,749,056$ Use This Credit:Yes No Yes Subtotal 24,766,722$ Conv. Equity IRR:0.00%Subtotal 22,823,932$ Supportable Credit:-$ -$ 1,749,056$ Yr. 1 Cash-on-cash:0.00%Actual Allocation:1,500,000$ Surplus/(Gap)0$ Surplus/(Gap)(0)$ Credit to Syndicate:-$ -$ 1,500,000$ Sources of Funds - Predevelopment 8.08%Predevelopment Loans TBD 500,000$ 6.00% Predevelopment Source 1 500,000$ 6.00% Predevelopment Source 2 Predevelopment Source 3 1,000,000$ Page 10 of 14SP6.Page 133 of 137 Allocated Development Budget: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Residential Commercial GSF 87.39%12.61% NSF 79.95%20.05% Uses of Funds Total Project Residential Component Commercial Component 01 Land & Acquisition Costs 575,000$ 1,380,745$ 199,255$ 01-001 Land Acquisition 575,000$ 502,486$ 72,514$ 01-002 Building Acquisition -$ -$ 01-003 Land Lease -$ -$ 01-004 Closing/Carrying Costs -$ -$ -$ 01-005 Other/Non-Residential -$ -$ 01-006 Transfer Taxes 15,000$ 13,108$ 1,892$ 01-007 Seller Note 990,000$ 865,151$ 124,849$ Subtotal, Land & Acquisition Costs 1,580,000$ 1,380,745$ 199,255$ 02 Construction Costs 17,365,864$ 16,426,688$ 939,176$ 02-001 Site Work 775,419$ 677,630$ 97,789$ 02-002 Demolition 15,000$ 13,108$ 1,892$ 02-003 Environmental Remediation 55,000$ 48,064$ 6,936$ 02-004 Direct Utility Payments 165,000$ 144,192$ 20,808$ 02-005 Site Preparation: Other 40,000$ 34,956$ 5,044$ 02-006 Site Preparation: Other -$ -$ 02-007 Site Preparation: Other -$ -$ Site Preparation Costs 1,050,419$ 917,950$ 132,469$ 02-009 Residential: Construction 13,236,629$ 13,236,629$ -$ 02-010 Residential: Structured Parking -$ -$ 02-011 Residential: Surface Parking -$ -$ -$ 02-012 Residential: FF&E -$ -$ -$ 02-013 Residential: Other Construction -$ -$ -$ Construction - Residential 13,236,629$ 13,236,629$ -$ 02-015 Commercial: Construction 478,820$ -$ 478,820$ 02-016 Commercial: Structured Parking -$ -$ -$ 02-017 Commercial: Surface Parking -$ -$ -$ 02-018 Commercial: FF&E -$ -$ -$ 02-019 Commercial: Temporary Buildout -$ -$ -$ Construction - Commercial 478,820$ -$ 478,820$ 02-021 Community: Construction -$ -$ -$ 02-022 Community: Structured Parking -$ -$ -$ 02-023 Community: Surface Parking -$ -$ -$ 02-024 Community: FF&E -$ -$ -$ 02-025 Community: Other Construction -$ -$ -$ Construction - Community -$ -$ -$ Construction Costs before Markup 14,765,868$ 14,154,579$ 611,289$ 02-028 Contractor's General Requirements 798,833$ 698,092$ 100,741$ 02-029 Contractor's Overhead -$ -$ -$ 02-030 Contractor's Profit 798,833$ 698,092$ 100,741$ 02-031 Contractor's Liability Insurance 77,824$ 68,009$ 9,814$ 02-032 Contractor's Bond/LoC Premium 155,647$ 136,018$ 19,629$ 02-033 Other Contractor Charges -$ -$ General Construction Costs 1,831,137$ 1,600,212$ 230,926$ 02-035 Construction Contingency 768,858$ 671,897$ 96,961$ Subtotal, Construction Costs 17,365,864$ 16,426,688$ 939,176$ 03 General Development Costs 2,490,319$ 2,147,162$ 343,157$ 03-001 Architect-Design 530,756$ 463,822$ 66,934$ 03-002 Architect-Supervision 178,994$ 156,421$ 22,573$ 03-003 Architect-Reimbursables 10,000$ 8,739$ 1,261$ Subtotal, Architectural Fees 719,750$ 628,982$ 90,768$ Page 11 of 14 SP6.Page 134 of 137 Allocated Development Budget: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Residential Commercial GSF 87.39%12.61% NSF 79.95%20.05% Uses of Funds Total Project Residential Component Commercial Component 03-005 Construction Management -$ -$ -$ 03-006 Engineering Fees 155,647$ 136,018$ 19,629$ 03-007 Environmental Studies, Testing, Reports 65,000$ 56,803$ 8,197$ 03-008 Building Permits 310,111$ 271,003$ 39,108$ 03-009 Town Impact/Mitigation Fees -$ -$ 03-010 Water/Sewer Connection Fees -$ -$ -$ 03-011 Other Review and Processing Fees -$ -$ 03-012 Historic Preservation Fees -$ -$ 03-013 Other Permits, Fees and Testing -$ -$ Subtotal, Permits, Fees and Testing 530,758$ 463,824$ 66,934$ 03-015 Surveys 24,000$ 20,973$ 3,027$ 03-016 Legal Fees - Transactional 125,000$ 109,236$ 15,764$ 03-017 Legal Fees - Organizational 25,000$ 21,847$ 3,153$ 03-018 CJE Legal 46,000$ -$ 46,000$ 03-019 Title & Recording 40,000$ 40,000$ -$ 03-020 Audit & Cost Certification 30,000$ 30,000$ -$ 03-021 Appraisal 8,500$ 8,500$ -$ 03-022 Market Study 9,500$ 9,500$ -$ 03-023 Historic Consultant -$ -$ -$ 03-024 TIF Consultant -$ -$ 03-025 NMTC Consultant -$ -$ 03-026 Other Consultants 90,000$ 78,650$ 11,350$ 03-027 Taxes during development 36,810$ 32,168$ 4,642$ 03-028 Builder's Risk Insurance 45,000$ 39,325$ 5,675$ 03-029 General Property & Liability Insurance 40,000$ 34,956$ 5,044$ 03-030 Directors & Officers Insurance -$ -$ 03-031 Environmental Insurance -$ -$ Subtotal, Insurance, Consultants, Fees, Surveys 519,810$ 425,155$ 94,655$ 03-033 Security during development 25,000$ 21,847$ 3,153$ 03-034 Utilities during development 25,000$ 21,847$ 3,153$ 03-035 Furniture and equipment 45,000$ 39,325$ 5,675$ 03-036 Marketing & Advertising 25,000$ 21,847$ 3,153$ 03-037 Broker's Commissions -$ -$ 03-038 Relocation 600,000$ 524,334$ 75,666$ 03-039 Resident Services -$ -$ 03-040 Soft Cost Contingency -$ -$ -$ Subtotal, All Development Costs 2,490,319$ 2,147,162$ 343,157$ 04 Financing Costs 887,750$ 807,607$ 80,143$ 04-001 Predevelopment Funds-Fees 12,000$ 10,487$ 1,513$ 04-002 Predevelopment Funds-Interest 30,000$ 26,217$ 3,783$ 04-003 Construction Loan-Fees 106,500$ 93,069$ 13,431$ 04-004 Construction Loan-Interest 440,000$ 384,511$ 55,489$ 04-005 Construction Loan 2-Fees -$ -$ -$ 04-006 Construction Loan 2-Interest -$ -$ -$ 04-007 Line of Credit/Bridge Loan-Fees -$ -$ 04-008 Line of Credit/Bridge Loan-Interest -$ -$ 04-009 Collateralized TE Bond-Fees -$ -$ 04-010 Collateralized TE Bond-Interest -$ -$ 04-011 Permanent Loan-Fees -$ -$ -$ 04-012 Permanent Loan-Interest -$ -$ Subtotal, Loan Fees and Interest 588,500$ 514,284$ 74,216$ Page 12 of 14 SP6.Page 135 of 137 Allocated Development Budget: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Residential Commercial GSF 87.39%12.61% NSF 79.95%20.05% Uses of Funds Total Project Residential Component Commercial Component 04-014 LIHTC Application Fees 27,250$ 27,250$ -$ 04-015 LIHTC Allocation Fees 150,000$ 150,000$ -$ 04-016 Other Program Application Fees -$ -$ -$ Subtotal, LIHTC and Other Program Fees 177,250$ 177,250$ -$ 04-018 Underwriter Discount -$ -$ 04-019 Underwriter's Counsel -$ -$ 04-020 POS Printing/Delivery Charges -$ -$ 04-021 Rating Agency Fee -$ -$ 04-022 Trustee Fee incl. Legal -$ -$ 04-023 Issuer Fee -$ -$ 04-024 Issuer Counsel -$ -$ 04-025 Out-of Pocket -$ -$ 04-026 Administrative Fee -$ -$ 04-027 Remarketing Fees -$ -$ 04-028 Direct Purchase: Commitment Fee -$ -$ 04-029 Direct Purchase: Bond Lender Legal -$ -$ 04-030 Volume cap fee -$ -$ 04-031 Other Bond Fee:-$ -$ Subtotal, Bond Costs -$ -$ -$ 04-033 LOC Application and Renewal Fees -$ -$ 04-034 LOC Issuance Fee -$ -$ 04-035 LOC Draw Fees -$ -$ 04-036 LOC Interest from Draw -$ -$ 04-037 LOC Collateral (Reserve)-$ -$ 04-038 Other LOC Fee:-$ -$ Subtotal, Letter of Credit Fees and Interest -$ -$ -$ 04-040 LIHTC Syndication Fees -$ -$ -$ 04-041 NMTC Syndication Fees & Legal -$ -$ -$ 04-042 Lender Inspection Fees 35,000$ 30,586$ 4,414$ 04-043 CDE construction loan interest reserve -$ -$ -$ 04-044 Lender Appraisal - Permanent Loan 12,000$ 10,487$ 1,513$ 04-045 Lender Plan/Construction Review -$ -$ 04-046 Perm loan legal 75,000$ 75,000$ -$ 04-047 CHA Legal -$ -$ Subtotal, All Financing Costs 887,750$ 807,607$ 80,143$ 05 Escrows and Reserves 442,789$ 442,789$ -$ 05-001 Tax Escrow 41,360$ 41,360$ -$ 05-002 Insurance Escrow 34,650$ 34,650$ -$ 05-003 Permanent Debt Service Coverage Reserve -$ -$ 05-004 Operating Reserve 305,779$ 305,779$ -$ 05-005 Rent-Up Reserve 40,000$ 40,000$ -$ 05-006 ACC Subsidy Reserve -$ -$ -$ 05-007 Section 8 Reserve -$ -$ -$ 05-008 TIF Debt Service Reserve -$ -$ 05-009 Construction Loan Debt Service Reserve -$ -$ 05-010 Replacement Reserve 21,000$ 21,000$ -$ 05-011 Other Reserves -$ -$ 05-012 Other Reserves -$ -$ 05-013 Other Reserves -$ -$ Subtotal, Escrows and Reserves 442,789$ 442,789$ -$ 06 Developer Fees 2,000,000$ 1,747,779$ 252,221$ Page 13 of 14 SP6.Page 136 of 137 Allocated Development Budget: CJE-Mixed ADS-Housing project 9% LIHTC Analysis - 60 units FormWorks Hybrid Model v.1.3 rev. 12/28/2016 Residential Commercial GSF 87.39%12.61% NSF 79.95%20.05% Uses of Funds Total Project Residential Component Commercial Component 06-001 Developer Fee 1,500,000$ 1,310,834$ 189,166$ 06-002 Fee held for reserves -$ -$ -$ 06-003 Deferred dev. fee (13 yrs CF=$ 546,112)500,000$ 436,945$ 63,055$ 06-004 Commercial Developer Fee -$ -$ 06-005 Other Developer Fee -$ -$ Subtotal, Developer Fees 2,000,000$ 1,747,779$ 252,221$ Total Development Costs 24,766,721$ 22,952,770$ 1,813,951$ Sources of Funds Permanent Sources 01 Hard Debt 3,180,000$ 3,180,000$ -$ Residential First Mortgage 3,180,000$ 3,180,000$ Second Mortgage/TIF -$ Non-residential Mortgage -$ -$ Subtotal, Hard Debt 3,180,000$ 3,180,000$ -$ 02 Soft Debt 6,301,517$ 6,238,461$ 63,055$ City of Evanston 2,000,000$ 2,000,000$ Seller Note 990,000$ 990,000$ TIF Loan -$ ComEd Energy Grant 171,570$ 171,570$ AHP Funding -$ -$ IHDA Gap Funds 2,639,947$ 2,639,947$ Deferred Developer Fee 500,000$ 436,945$ 63,055$ Gap Funds Needed -$ -$ Subtotal, Soft Debt 6,301,517$ 6,238,461$ 63,055$ 03 Equity 15,285,205$ 13,534,309$ 1,750,896$ LIHTC Equity - [Source]14,847,030$ 13,534,209$ 1,312,821$ HTC Equity - [Source]-$ -$ NMTC B Loan -$ -$ IAHTC Equity 438,075$ 438,075$ Conventional Equity -$ -$ -$ Special Limited Partner -$ -$ GP Contribution 100$ 100$ Subtotal, Equity 15,285,205$ 13,534,309$ 1,750,896$ 04 Grants -$ -$ -$ Total Sources of Funds 24,766,722$ 22,952,770$ 1,813,951$ Surplus/(Gap)0$ 0$ (0)$ Balance 1,312,821$ Page 14 of 14 SP6.Page 137 of 137