I-294/I-57 Landuse and Economic Development Plan

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan January 14th, 2014

94

290

90

290

CHICAGO

88 294

Lake Michigan

94

es

20

mil

es

55

15

mil

90

ILLINOIS INDIANA

57

10 mil es

55

94

5m

iles

294

Study Area 57 355

80 80

“Capitalizing on regional access to spur local job growth and create a welcoming and vibrant front door to the communities of Dixmoor, Harvey, Markham, Midlothian and Posen.“

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Table of Contents 1.

2.

3.

4.

Introduction: Purpose and Scope

Background Data Review

Existing Conditions of the Study Area

Vision Statement and Opportunities

Page 3

Page 7

Page 21

Page 37

5.

6.

7.

Key Redevelopment Sites

Signage, Gateways and Corridors

Implementation

Appendix

Page 43

Page 55

Page 63

A- Methodology for Economic Analysis

B- Pre-Development Tool Kit C- Marketing Sheets

(This page has been intentionally left blank.)

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Acknowledgements Steering Committee Project Sponsor

Ed Paesel, South Suburban Mayors and Managers Association Thomas Vander Woude, South Suburban Mayors and Managers Association Reggie Greenwood, Chicago Southland Economic Development Corporation

Transportation Agencies

Rocco Zucchero, Illinois State Toll Highway Authority Kevin Donahue, Illinois State Toll Highway Authority Barbara Stubblefield, HNTB – Outreach Manager for I-294/I-57 Interchange project Jay Ciavarella, Regional Transportation Authority David Tomzik, Pace Suburban Bus Jessica Mitchell, Pace Suburban Bus

Municipal, County and Regional Officials and Staff

Dominic Tocci, Cook County Department of Planning & Development John Thompson, City of Markham and Village of Dixmoor LaTonya Rufus, City of Harvey Sharon Rybak, Village of Midlothian Donald Schupek, Village of Posen Jessica Gershman, Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning

Consultant Team Teska Associates, Inc. Team Lead, Planning and Landscape Architecture

Business Districts, Inc. Market Analysis and Economic Development Strategies

Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. Transportation Planning

Barron Chisolm Planning Community Engagement

This project was funded through the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning’s (CMAP) Local Technical Assistance (LTA) Program.

(This page has been intentionally left blank.)

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

1. Introduction: Purpose and Scope The municipalities of Dixmoor, Harvey, Markham, Midlothian, and Posen currently share a unique distinction with just one other location in the country. These communities are all within the study area of the Interstate 57 and Interstate 294 Interchange, which is currently under construction.

This Interchanges was one of just two places nationally where two interstates intersected without connecting to each other. Bounded by Kedzie Avenue on the west, 159th Street on the south, Dixie Highway on the east, and the community boundaries of Midlothian, Posen, and Dixmoor on the north, the I-57/I-294 Interchange Project study area is poised to undergo dramatic changes 94

290

90

290

CHICAGO

88 294

Lake Michigan

94

es

20

mil es

55

57

10

mil

es

55

As a result of this improvement being undertaken by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), in partnership with the Illinois Tollway Authority, the multijurisdictional area composed of the communities of Dixmoor, Harvey, Markham, Midlothian, and Posen, is in need of a series of land use and economic development recommendations to allow for meaningful redevelopment and implementation strategies in their communities. As proposed, access to and from these communities will not be provided at the location of this interchange, so the focus of this study shifts to the analysis and improvement of major corridors surrounding the interchange as a result of the effects that this addition will have on those locations.

Anticipating the land use and economic development benefits generated by an improvement of this magnitude, municipal officials have identified a desire to coordinate and maximize development potential in the immediate areas surrounding the interchange. Through an evaluation of existing land uses and economic development it is the desire of the I-57/I-294 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan to provide a series of specific recommendations which will ensure that these major corridors may be enhanced and transformed in a manner which will allow them to thrive and prosper.

ILLINOIS INDIANA

15

mil

90

as a result of this improvement. These include but are not limited to a reduction in travel times and congestion on local routes currently being used to facilitate the absence of the interstate to interstate linkage.

94

5m

iles

294

Study Area 57 355

80 80

N O R T H

Figure 1: Regional Location Map (Prepared by Teska)

Page | 3

1. Introduction

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Legend Redevelopment parcelsLegend

3

Harvey

M���������

1

ine

15

3

Si bley Blvd Sib lvd

str ic

tL

Cook County

2

4

Di nd sl a kI Ro c etr a M e Lin ct str i Di nd sla kI Ro c M

7 294

C��� C�����

11

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

Radio Station Park

Pulaski

4 5

d

a Ro

9

14

W 150th Street

9

H����� W 154th Street W 154th Street

10 13

12

M������ 3

6 8

Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

5

way ie High ighDwixay

Donnelly Park

6

W 147th Street

W 150th Street

57

2 1

W 147th Street

83

Dixie H

etr a

C��� C�����

Bremen High School

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

83

1 2 4 3

Kedzie Avenue

Country Aire Park

2 Street Wood WoodStreet

Crawford Avenue

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

ad

D������

1 Ave

Markham

2

83

ilro

Western

!

H Midlothian

P����

6

Ra

Ave

Posen Midlothian Dixmoor Posen Harvey Dixmoor

4

Western

7

Midlothian Municipal Boundaries Markham Study Area Boundary

7

Roesner Park

6

8

th W 159th Street W 159 Street

15

N 0

Figure 2: Study Area Map

Exhibit 20: Land Redevelopment Parcels I294-I57 Use and Economic Development Plan

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 4

1. Introduction

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Regional Assets The Study Area sits within a dynamic region that has many assets that can benefit communities within and near the I-57/I-294 interchange. These assets are highlighted on the following map, including:

• Markham Courthouse, located along Kedzie Avenue just

• • • • •

• •

north of 167th Street. This Cook County facility draws people from throughout the County, providing opportunities for local businesses to provide goods and services to a regional audience including dining and fuel.

Harvey CN Intermodal Yard, which provides significant regional opportunities to industrial and warehouse activities to capitalize on this major rail facility.

Ingalls Hospital, located in Harvey just east of the study area is a major employer.

Metra rail service, located just to the east and west of the study area. To the east is the Metra Electric Line and to the west is the Rock Island Line service.

Country Club Hills Theater, located just southwest of the study area, providing a summer-time regional draw that could help support local dining and hospitality options.

Regional shopping clusters, such as the Walmart at 167th and Pulaski and the powercenter development along Harlem south of I-294 will impact the potential retail mix within the Figure 3: Map highlighting the regional assets around the study area (Prepared by Teska) study area.

Cargo-Oriented Development (C.O.D.), being proposed on the border between Dixmoor and Harvey on the former Wyman Gordon site.

Regional open space system, including many Cook County Forest Preserves and several private Country Clubs is also an important asset to the study area.

N O R T H

Page | 5

1. Introduction Process and Participants Representatives from CMAP, SSMMA, CSEDC, IDOT and the Illinois Tollway Authority, along with the municipalities of Dixmoor, Harvey, Markham, Midlothian and Posen, have combined with community stakeholders and local institutions to provide the foundation for the I-57/I-294 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan. Through on-going Steering Committee cooperation, one-on-one interviews, community surveys, and a series of stakeholder meetings and planning workshops, the participating municipalities and the consultant team have worked together to collectively ensure that all issues, concerns, desires, and priorities are clearly defined and recognized by all participants.

The Land Use and Economic Development Plan process has involved:

• a detailed and thorough identification and evaluation of the area’s land use concentrations,

• • • •

regulatory restrictions, and exterior physical conditions, as well as an analysis of existing vehicular and pedestrian mobility systems and streetscape characteristics for primary corridors; planning and visioning workshops with the public, village staff, Steering Committee members, and community stakeholders in order to gain local input on the strengths, weaknesses, issues, and opportunities of the area; meetings with key area businesses, institutions, and agency stakeholders to assess needs, desires and opportunities; meetings with municipal and Steering Committee representatives to review findings, evaluate development recommendations, prioritize implementation strategies, and research and locate funding sources in order to execute the plan; and presentation of the I-57/I-294 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan to municipal and community stakeholders and Steering Committee members for input and ultimate approval of the Plan.

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Interview Summary An early step in the planning process was to interview both public and private sector individuals familiar with the study area and its unique opportunities. Key highlights of this effort are summarized below:

Opportunities

Challenges

Industrial Potential

High Cook County Property Taxes

Several TIF’s in Place

Competition with Indiana

Prairie a Hidden Gem

“Double Toll” at I-294/159th

Green Energy

Lack of Roadside Service Signs on I-294

Potential for Kedzie/I-57 Interchange1

Need to Assemble Some Key Development Sites

Unique TOD Opportunities Right-of-way acquisition in Midlothian required for 147th Street improvements and impact on adjacent properties Based on engineering standards and cost limitations, this opportunity was eliminated early in the planning process.

Table 1: Summary of the opportunities and challenges of the study area as noted during the interviews 1

Goals & Objectives The goals and objectives of the I-57/I-294 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan have been developed in order to build upon the opportunities inherently accompanied by the construction of the I-57/I-294 interchange.

Based upon this information the Plan will attempt to achieve a series of goals including: • Assess new opportunities and transformation potential for surrounding areas as a result of changes in economic conditions generated by the Interchange.

• Capture opportunities, values, and ideas for the surrounding area through the identification of potential development locations, landscape and streetscape characteristics, signage and wayfinding locations, and market supportable land use and business/industry mix.

• Combine conceptual improvement alternatives, economic development initiatives, and zoning/procedure amendment recommendations to create a unified Land Use and Economic Development Plan.

These goals will ensure the delivery of a study providing an articulate strategy to achieve economically viable, accessible, well-connected, efficient, and safe development environments throughout the Interchange study area.

Page | 6

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

2. Background Data Review Where We Started In order to fully understand the Land Use and Economic Development issues presented in the I-57/I-294 Interchange study area, various documents and supporting materials were reviewed in order to generate a solid foundation from which to begin our work. The documents include regional studies, local plans and codes, as well as prior and ongoing projects occurring within the participating municipalities and throughout the vicinity. These reports/studies include:

Regional • GO TO 2040 Plan (CMAP) • Chicago Southland’s Green TIME Zone (SSMMA/CSEDC) Comprehensive and Future Plans • Dixmoor, Harvey and Posen do not have current comprehensive plans. Hence • • • • • • •

summaries for these communities were not provided.

Village of Markham Comprehensive Plan (1967) Village of Midlothian Comprehensive Plan (2001) and Village Center Enhancement Plan (2005) Village of Midlothian Zoning Map City of Harvey Zoning Map City of Markham Zoning Map Village of Posen Zoning Map Village of Dixmoor Zoning Map

Land Use and Transportation Improvement Plans • I-57/I-294 Interchange Development Plan (IDOT/Tollway) • Midlothian Active Transportation Plan • Harvey Area TSP Demonstration Project • The Chicago Southland Transit-Oriented Development/Cargo-Oriented Development Corridor Planning Study (SSMMA/CSEDC)

• City of Markam Opportunities Analysis and Brownfields Site Identification and Prioritization

Financial Partnership Tools

Tax Increment financing and Enterprise Zones: • Harvey • Markham • Dixmoor • Posen

Figure 4: Graphic from CMAP’s GO TO 2040 Plan highlighting the recommendation of an efficient freight network (Prepared by GINKGO Planning & Design, Inc, Source-http://ginkgoplanning.com)

Page | 7

2. Background Data Review

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Regional Plans GO TO 2040 Plan The GO TO 2040 Plan completed by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning marks a critical moment for the City of Chicago and the seven-county area that defines the region. As an economic hub in possession of a countless array of physical and environmental assets, today the Chicago region is positioned to further establish itself as one of the world’s elite locales.

However during past decades of rapid but largely uncoordinated expansion, the Chicago region grew in ways that were not sustainable, with residential development occurring far from the region’s employment centers and development patterns posing serious implications to our natural resources. The GO TO 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan is an opportunity for the region to address these challenges and implement an innovative set of ideas aimed at promoting economic prosperity and an improved quality of life for decades to come.

Over the course of three years, CMAP and its partners conducted research, gathered public input, and built consensus to develop the comprehensive regional plan. The GO TO 2040 Plan sets clear priorities for coordinating policies, capitalizing on investments, and promoting a transparent public decision making process, enabling communities to work both collectively and independently towards an overall goal of sustainable prosperity.

Adopted by the CMAP Board in October 2010, the goals of GO TO 2040 are now being put into action around the region. Implementation is designed to create more compact and livable development, providing residents with more options for transportation and housing. Jobs will be created in areas nearest where people live, parks and open space will allow for positive lifestyle habits while preserving the environment and these communities will offer a higher quality of life.

Figure 5: Cover page, CMAP’s GO TO 2040 Plan (Source- http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/)

Page | 8

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

2. Background Data Review

Chicago Southland’s Green TIME Zone The southern suburbs of Chicago have evolved and grown, aided by a combination of creating residential communities with access to downtown jobs and establishing industrial centers among the region’s freight rail network. After years of successful development, the participating communities, like the rest of the south suburbs, began a period of economic hardship as residents and business aband development practices have refocused themselves on strategies which will allow for these communities to again transform themselves into desirable neighborhoods possessing good jobs, access to transportation, and safe and environmentally sustainable destinations.

The effect that the planned interchange will have on the area is widespread and its impact on promoting local freight zones will spread even further beyond the countless jobs that may be added through improved accessibility in the area. The greatest transformation may occur on the major corridors surrounding the interchange. In combination with development mechanisms such as Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), Cargo-Oriented Development (COD), and Green Manufacturing, the local communities can once again capture the economic benefits of associated with improving intermodal freight movements through an evolution of land uses and enhancements to these adjacent corridors.

Chicago Southland’s Green TIME Zone

Green Transit, Intermodal, Manufacturing, Environment Zone A Core Element of the Southland Vision 2020 for Sustainable Development

© Center for Neighborhood Technology 2010

Figure 6: Cover page, Chicago Southland’s Green TIME Zone (Source- http://www.cnt.org/)

Page | 9

2. Background Data Review

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Comprehensive and Other Plans Comprehensive Plans While the Village of Dixmoor and the City of Harvey do not have comprehensive plans, the comprehensive plan for Posen was not available for review. The City of Markham is currently beginning an update to their comprehensive plan which was created in 1967. The existing plan was created before the construction of I-57. While it sontains some good historical background, this 45 year-old document has long-ago outlived its useful life.

Village of Midlothian Comprehensive Plan and the Village Center Enhancement Plan The Village of Midlothian prepared the ‘Plan for Our Community’s Future’ in 2001, to represent the resident’s vision, business community and institutions for the future growth and development of the Village. The vision stressed on offering a wide range of housing options, multi-generational neighborhoods, business growth, quality of life and creation of an attractive village center for the community. The Plan was organized in three sections, namely:

Concept Plan Figure 4-4

Concept Plan

143rd St

Near Term Commercial/Mixed Use

Pulaski Rd

14 144th St

Rd sf or d Rd

sf or d

tt

west neighborhoods.

Rd

Pedestrian-Oriented Core

sf or d

tt Ab

bo 149th St

Millard Ave

North

with mixed-use buildings.

Trumbull Ave

148th Pl

Residential

8 Large parcel residential Streetscape streetscape

1 Pedestrian-oriented core 11 147th Street

redevelopment sites.

woodedto site. connect to north and promenade development with 12area Pedestrian public and commuters) west neighborhoods. treatments.

10 Residential structured parking (for link east and west side of redevelopment once floodplain issues have 3 The "Midlothian" Village as feasible. railroad tracks. been resolved.

Potential 12 Pedestrian promenade to public and commuters) Green.

Streetscape Village location. issues large-scale, mixed use 4 A link east and west side of onceHall floodplain have 13 Pulaski Road streetscape 11 147th Street streetscape development with treatments. been resolved.

5 Commuter treatments. parking Potential structured parking (forrailroad tracks.

12 Pedestrian promenade to expansion area. location. public and commuters) Village Hall link east streetscape and west side of once Auto-Oriented floodplain issues haveUses Road 13 Pulaski 147th St railroad tracks. been resolved. Potential 6 5Floodplain mitigation area. Village treatments.

Commuter parking HallAuto location.

14 sales opportunity 13 Pulaski Road streetscape 5 Commuter areas. treatments. parking mixed-use 7 Large-scale, expansion area. expansion area. Auto-Oriented Uses opportunity site and 15 Facade, parkingAuto-Oriented lot and Uses 6 area.

Floodplain mitigation area.

6potential Floodplain mitigation Village Hall 14 Auto sales opportunity 14 Auto sales opportunity landscape enhancements, areas.

7 Large-scale, mixed-use location. and/or site anddevelopment, areas. 15 Facade, 7 Large-scale, mixed-use opportunityoutlot parking lot and Village Hall site reuse. landscape enhancements, opportunity site and potential location.

Homan Ave Central Park Ave

148th St

development with

treatments.

A large-scale, 4structured 9 Residential parkingmixed (for use 2 New road segment development on 11to 147th Street streetscape

Clifton Park Ave

Hamlin Ave

Avers Ave

10

wooded site.

10 Residential redevelopment as feasible.

Notes: 3Green.

The "Midlothian" Village Streetscape as feasible.

potential Village Hall location.

Homan Ave

Lawndale Ave

Ridgeway Ave

3 Village Green

10

development on

9 Residential development on

site.

Villagewooded Hall Options

10 Sales Residential redevelopment Auto Opportunity Areas

3 The "Midlothian" Village

Homan Ave

149th 149th St St

10 147th Pl

8

Lawndale Ave

148th Pl

7

2 4

St Louis Ave

148th St

8

Existing Structures 9 Residential

connect area to north and west neighborhoods.

Av e

bo

Ab

Midlothian Metra Station 12 Promenade

St Louis Ave

148th Pl

Springfield Ave

Millard Ave

Millard Ave

Keystone Ave

10

Lawndale Ave

Hamlin Ave

148th St

Lawndale Ave

10

Hamlin Ave

Pulaski Rd

10

10 10

147th St 1

147th Pl

3

8

10

148th St

8

2connect New road segment area to north andto

5 147th St

Springfield School

11

8 3

6 2 New road segment to

large-scale, mixed use 4 A Green.

147th Pl

7

147th St

Village Green

149th St

146th St

Near TermResidential Commercial/Mixed Use Residential

Mixed Use 8 Term Large residential 8parcel Large parcel residential core Long Mitigation redevelopment sites. with buildings.

Redevelopment Priority Sitesites.

Areamixed-use redevelopment with mixed-use buildings.Residential

144th St

Clifton Park Ave

4

Village Green

7

13

10

12 Promenade 2

4

9

Hamlin Ave

2

148th St

av er ly Av e

Ab

bo

tt

Hamlin Ave

Avers Ave

Hamlin Ave

Avers Ave

Springfield Ave

St. Christopher School & Church

Springfield Park

Central Park Ave

1

11

Metra Station 12 Promenade

8

Figure 4-4

Concept Plan

Floodway 1 1Pedestrian-oriented core Pedestrian-oriented

145th St

Midlothian

1

148th St

149th St

5

8

8

11

Pedestrian-Oriented Pedestrian-Oriented CoreCore

15

Midlothian Metra Station 8

147th St

Auto Sales Opportunity Areas

Auto Sales Opportunity Areas

Notes: Notes:

5

Springfield School

Springfield School

Village Hall Options

Village Hall Options

14

146th St

146th St

10

St. Christopher School & Church

145th St

Karlov Ave

10

Springfield Ave

Keystone Ave

Karlov Ave

13

13

Springfield Park

Pulaski Rd

Based on the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan, the Village of Midlothian in 2005 completed the Village Center Enhancement Plan, to resolve transportation and stormwater issues while creating a pedestrian-oriented commercial district, new mixed-use district and a large green area.

147th St

Keystone Ave

strategic plan for a shorter time frame (3 to 5 years) to achieve the plan’s objectives.

St. Christopher The Midlothian Pathway Plan is a part ofSchool & Church this Plan.

Karlov Ave

Part III- Midlothian’s Strategic Implementation Plan – Detailing a

Springfield Park

Pulaski Rd

143rd St

145th St

Existing Structures

Existing Structures

W Lawndale Ave av er ly Av e W

15

Pulaski Rd

Goals, objectives and policies guiding development for the next 10 to 20 years.

Ridgeway Ave

15

Residential Redevelopment Priority Site

6

Lawndale Ave

Ridgeway Ave

Part II- The Comprehensive Plan –

144th St

Long Term Mixed Use Residential Redevelopment Priority Site

Mitigation Area

W av er ly

9

6

Trumbull Ave Trumbull Ave

9

Long Term Mixed Use Use Near Term Commercial/Mixed

Floodway Mitigation Area Floodway

Clifton Park Ave

14

Central Park Ave

the existing conditions and constraints of the community influencing land use and development decisions.

St Louis Ave

Pulaski Rd

Part I- Community Context – Describing

Figure 7: Village of Midlothian ComprehensiveFigure Plan4-4 (prepared by Camiros in 2001)

143rd St

development, and/or 15 Facade, outlot parking lot and

site reuse. landscape enhancements, outlot development, and/or site reuse.

Village of Midlothian Village of Midlothian Village Center Enhancement Plan Village Center Enhancement Plan

North

prepared by:

Figure 8: Village of Midlothian Village Center Enhancement Plan (prepared by URS)

prepared by:

149th St

North

VillagePage of Midlothian | 10 Village Center Enhancement Plan

2. Background Data Review

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Village of Midlothian Zoning Code and Map 147th Street is a primary corridor expected to benefit from the I-57/I-294 interchange. With the majority of 147th Street making its way through the Village of Midlothian, a mix of zoning districts can be found resulting in a range of business/commercial oriented uses (B-1 through B-3) and residential (R-1 through R-4). Commercial business zoning designations allow for most forms of general retail, services, office, and municipal commercially oriented uses. Significant pockets of both B-3 (Community Commercial) and B-2 (Village Center) are located along the 147th Street corridor at both Cicero Avenue and Pulaski Road.

B-1 (Neighborhood Business Residential) designation is located intermittently along the Corridor interrupted by residentially zoned areas R-2 (Single Family) and R-4 (General).

• B-1 – Neighborhood Business Residential V Viillllaaggee ooff M Miiddllootthhiiaann,, IIlllliinnooiiss – provides areas for small scale, low intensity Official Zoning Map (2009) business, office, mixed-use, and residential opportunities appropriate in scale, bulk, and intensity to adjacent development.

TUR

BOB BY

LOC KE

LN.

HIA N

GE

N

MARGARET CURTIS

LN.

EXISTING ROADWAY - NOT DEDICATED

LN.

and preserves higher density residential development promoting an efficient use of land and infrastructure. R-4 development offers a variety of types and sizes and is designed to be compatible with adjacent uses.

CLIFTON PAK AVE.

.

LY

152ND

AVE. AVE. D

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

R FO TTS

KEDZIE

SAWYER

SPAULDING

TURNER

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

HOMAN

ST. LOUIS

CLIFTON PARK

TRUMBULL

AVE. MILLARD

CENTRAL PARK

D R FO TTS O B AB

AVE.

AVE. LAWNDALE

RADAY

ST.

AVE.

AVERS

AVE.

HAMLIN

RIDGEWAY

AVE.

AVE.

HAMLIN

DR.

SPRINGFIELD

HARDING AVE.

AVE.

PULASKI RD.

AVERS

152ND

152ND

ST.

CENTRAL PARK

AVE.

ST.

AVE.

152ND PL.

LY

AVE.

ER AV W

B-3

P. & .I.

BREMEN HIGH SCHOOL

CITY LIMITS

D

1 inch = 1,000 feet Updated: June 2009 ST.

MILLARD 153RD

AVERS

154TH

153R

ST.

153RD

HARDING AVE.

Source: Cook County, Illinois 1:1200 - Scale 1998 Street Midlines, Version 1.0, March 2002 2004 Parcels, 2004

LAWNDALE

HAMLIN

OPEN SPACE

RIDGEWAY

OI

PL.

ST.

154TH

153RD

PL.

ST.

Figure 9: Village of Midlothian, Zoning Map

Page | 11

KEDZIE

TURNER

HOMAN

TRUMBULL

ST. LOUIS

CLIFTON AVE. 150TH

AVE.

ST.

B-1 B-2

AVE.

AVE.

RD

.

AV E

AVE.

AVE.

CENTRAL PARK

W AV ER

.

O B AB

AVE.

RD

.

RIDGEWAY LY W AV ER

HAMLIN

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

LAWNDALE

SPRINGFIELD

AVERS .

AV E

IE IR A PR

AVE.

.

LN

151ST

HARDING ST.

149TH

.

R TE R 152ND

ST.

ST.

R.R

KEDVALE AVE. CE

150TH

P. R.R

.

.

.I.

& E AV

C.R

KEELER

TRIPP

ST.

151ST

R-2

R-5

SPRINGFIELD

RD.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

KARLOV

KEYSTONE

149TH

AVE. ST.

KILDARE

KOSTNER

KILBOURN

KENTON 151ST

PL.

ST.

148TH

PL.

ROESNER PARK ST.

ST.

150TH

KOSTNER PARK

R-1

R-4

147TH

ST.

148TH

148TH

149TH

AVE.

CONCORDIA CT.

R-3

ST.

147TH

ST.

PL.

AVE.

ST.

149TH

ST.

150TH

ZONING LEGEND

ST.

146TH

SPAULDING SCHOOL

ST.

149TH

ST.

149TH

KNOX

ST.

ST.

148TH

ST.

148TH

JOSEPH CT.

KILPATRICK

149TH

ST.

148TH

KENNETH

CICERO

LECLAIRE

ST.

ST.

148TH

A

ST.

KETELLAAR

148TH

148TH CT.

149TH

KOLMAR

DR. CT.

KEATING AVE.

LAVERGNE

147TH ST.

ST.

145TH

ST.

147TH

ST.

147TH

PL.

147TH

MEMORIAL PARK

ST.

145TH

146TH

147TH

ST.

147TH

GOLF CT.

148TH

HARDING AVE

PULASKI

KEYSTONE

KARLOV

KEELER

TRIPP

KILDARE AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

KOLIN

KOSTNER

KILBOURN

KOLMAR

KENTON

KNOX

KILPATRICK

LAMON

CICERO

AVE.

ST. STEPHEN CHURCH

ST.

147TH

ST.

147TH

ST.

147TH

ST.

147TH

ST.

147TH

ST.

147TH

AVE.

ST.

147TH

AVE.

ST.

AVE.

147TH

LAPORTE

LONG

LAVERGNE

SPRINGFIELD SCHOOL ST. CHRISTOPHER CHURCH/SCHOOL

ST.

146TH

ST.

146TH

ST.

146TH

ST.

ST.

AVE.

AVE.

KEDVALE

KEATING 146TH

SPRINGFIELD

AVE.

145TH CT.

145TH

ST.

145TH

ST.

144TH

AV E

KEYSTONE

146TH

ST.

145TH

ST.

145TH

AVE.

ST.

ST.

AVE.

145TH

PULASKI

• R-4 – General Residential – provides

ST.

I 294

ST.

detached, single-family development on lots that are a minimum 6,125 square feet. R-2 also provides for a limited amount of public and institutional uses.

145TH

ST.

145TH

ST.

144TH

ST.

144TH

144TH

ST.

144TH

C.R

• R-2 – Single Family Residential – allows for

D

MIDLOTHIAN COUNTRY CLUB

• B-3 – Community Commercial District – is

designed to promote a broad mix of retail, service, and office uses at a variety of scales.

ST.

144TH

PL.

144TH

KENNETH

LINDER

CENTRAL

commercial development on a pedestrian scale, permitting a mix of uses that enhance physical character and provide identity. Use, orientation, and bulk standards in B-2 zoning districts are provided to reinforce the Village’s desire for a true Village Center.

RO A

ST.

ST.

144TH

MAPLE LN.

XF

D OR

MILLARD

RE

E

• B-2 – Village Center District – focuses

PL.

AVE.

IVAT

143RD

MAPLE LN.

.

AVE.

RD

RD.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

AVE.

PR

AVE.

I 294

RD.

PRIVATE

AVE.

ST.

143RD

NPIKE

FRA NCIS CIR

HA

MID LOT

HIA N

NPIKE

WALTER

MID LOT

TUR

2. Background Data Review

OA K LE Y AV E

AU

LD

IN

DI X IE

PA UL I N A S T

E

SPAU L D IN G AV E

LI N CO L N AV E

LD

IN

G

AV

HO N OR E AV E

HO Y NE AVE

AU

E

14 9 TH S T

VA IL AV E

14 9 TH P L WE S TE R N AV E

AR T ES I A N AV E

SP

RO B EY AV E

SE E LE Y AV E

CO O PE R AV E

LE AV I T T AV E 14 8 TH S T

14 8 TH P L

CA M PB E L L AVE

AV

IL 8 3 OA K LE Y AV E

MA P LE W O OD AVE TA LM A N AV E

G

JO L IE T ST

1 4 8 T H ST

RO C KW E L L AVE

WA S HT E N AW AVE

14 5 TH S T

MA R SH F I EL D AV E

H WY

PA LM E R AV E

MC K IN L E Y AVE

SP

14 6 TH S T

14 9 TH S T

FA I RF I E LD AVE

WO O D S T

RO B EY AV E

14 4 TH S T

VA IL AV E

D A VI S ST

BL A IN E AV E

E

14 6 TH S T

14 6 TH S T

IL 83

CA L IF O R NI A AVE

AV

14 5 TH S T

14 7 TH S T

W 150th Street

15 0 TH S T

15 0 TH P L

Zoning Districts

15 1 ST P L

Light Manufacturing

HM

Heavy Manufacturing

MI

Medical Institutional

IN G AL L S D R

RO C KW E L L S T

15 6 TH S T

E NE AV

CA L IF O R NI A AVE

HO Y

15 8 TH P L

FR O NTA GE R D

LE AV I T T AV E

HA M ILTO N AV E

LE AV I T T S T

OA K LE Y AV E

IR VI N G AV E

WE S TE R N AV E

16 0 TH S T

SI

TE

1 OR

ND

AL

E

AV

E

I T T AV E

P OP L

AR

AV

E

TH

16 2 ND S T

R

16 0 T

AV

E

E

AN

AV

CL A RE M O NT AVE

BELL A VE MP

LE

16 1 ST S T

H WY

DR

DA

AR

DG RI

M

15 8 TH P L

W 159th Street

DI X IE

RO C KW E L L AVE

E C T

R

EL

CA

CL E D

PA GE AVE

RO C KW E L L AVE

15 7 TH P L

15 7 TH P L

15 9 TH S T 15 9 TH S T

PA UL I N A S T

15 7 TH S T

OA K LE Y AV E

15 7 TH S T

16 2 ND S T

DA M EN AVE

WA S HT E N AW AVE

15 6 TH P L

Figure 10: City of Harvey, Zoning Map

IR

PA GE AVE

15 5 TH S T

15 5 TH P L

15 8 TH S T

C

PA UL I N A S T

Highway Commercial

LM

W 155th Street

15 5 TH S T

PA UL I N A S T

HC

WI N CH E S TE R AV E

Downtown Business

15 4 TH P L

15 4 TH P L

SE E LE Y AV E

DB

15 5 TH S T

15 3 RD S T

HO Y NE AVE

Neighborhood Commercial

OA K LE Y C T

NC

CL A RE M O NT AVE

Multi Dwelling Unit

OA K LE Y AV E

RM

CL A RE M O NT C T

Two Dwelling Unit CA M PB E L L AVE

R2

y

Single Dwelling Unit

RO C KW E L L AVE

15 3 RD S T

R1D

LE AV I T T S T

ighwa

Vacant

15 2 ND S T

CO O PE R AV E

E DR

15 2 ND S T

Single Dwelling Unit

Dixie H

RA C

15 1 ST T ER

TE R

R1

EY

14 4 TH S T

V E TE R A N S D R

14 8 TH S T

RV

MA R SH F I EL D AV E

ST

OA K LE Y S T

SH O RT S T

14 4 TH

HA

PA GE AVE

14 3 RD S T

DAVI S ST

DI V IS I O N S T

SH E RM A N AV E

CA M PB E L L AVE

PA LM E R AV E

MC K IN L E Y AVE

AV E

•

TE R N

•

14 3 RD S T

NO R RI S ST

BL A IN E AV E

•

WE S

•

14 5 TH S T

BL A IN E AV E

•

corridors devoted to commercial establishments that cater specifically to the needs of motor vehicle trade and highway oriented commercial activities, to encourage arterial commercial uses.

NC – Neighborhood Commercial District- is the most restrictive commercial district due to its proximity to residential uses and promotes commercial uses that compliment or maintain the quality and integrity of the neighborhood.

LM – Light Manufacturing – established as a transitional zone between residential/retail uses and heavy manufacturing activities that emit offensive fumes, etc. The intent of this district is also to provide space for light manufacturing assembling, finishing of products, wholesaling, warehousing and storage without adversely affecting the health, safety and welfare of the people living and working nearby; as well as to protect the manufacturing district from incompatible uses thereby ensuring adequate space for future manufacturing developments.

R1D – Single Dwelling Unit Residential District – devoted to detached single family dwellings and intended to promote open space and low density development consistent with residential areas.

R2 – Two Dwelling Unit Residential District – devoted to two-unit dwelling units in traditional single unit neighborhoods and intended to provide suitable residential environment for families living in townhomes and duplexes.

RM – Multi Dwelling Unit – established to provide high-density multi-dwelling units in close proximity to major activity centers and transportation routes, with the intention of transitioning single dwellings to multi-dwellings where the full component of public and private services are readily available.

MB

• HC – Highway Commercial – established to provide avenues/

A majority of the study area falls within the City of Markham which has a number of different zoning designations as below• R1 – Single Family Residential Districts (Minimum lot width of 80ft) • R2 – Single Family Residential Districts (Minimum lot width of 70ft) • R3 – Single Family Residential Districts (Minimum lot width of 60ft) • R4 – Single Family Residential Districts (Minimum lot width of 45ft) • R5A – Group House and Garden Apartments • C-1 – Neighborhood Shopping Districts • C-2 – Community Shopping Districts • C-3 – Hotel – Office – Research • L-1 – Light Manufacturing Districts • L-2 – Light Manufacturing Districts • L-3 – Motor Freight Terminal Districts

CA

The segment of Dixie Highway within the study area in the City of Harvey is mostly fronted by commercial and light industrial uses as defined below and shown on the map.

City of Markham Zoning and Zoning Map

CA M BR I D GE

City of Harvey Zoning and Zoning Map

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Page | 12

2. Background Data Review

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan Village of Dixmoor Zoning District Map The Village of Dixmoor has 10 zoning districts, half of which are residential.

The parcels within the study area are a combination of neighborhood and general shopping along Western Avenue, general industrial for the parcels along the railroad and residential for the remaining parcels.

Village of Posen Zoning District Map The Village of Posen has 7 classes or zoning districts as follows:

• “A” and “B” Residential District- This includes single-family

•

• • •

Figure 11: Village of Dixmoor, Zoning Map (September, 1978)

dwellings, churches, schools, libraries, public museums, parks and recreational buildings, police and fire stations, and temporary buildings used for construction “C” Residential District- Besides any uses permitted in the A and B Districts, this district includes two-family dwellings, hospitals, homes for the aged, funeral parlors, health clinics, lodge halls and private club houses “D” District- Besides any uses permitted in the A, B and C Districts, this district includes apartment buildings and hotels, and parking lots for adjacent business establishments “E” and “F” District- This includes all business and commercial uses “G” District- This includes all industrial uses

DISTRICTSC/R Conservation /Recreation R1 Single Family Residential R2 Single Family Residential R3 Limited General Residential R4 General Residential R5 Mobile Home Park B1 Neighborhood Shopping B2 General Commercial I1 Restricted Industrial I2 General Industrial

Page | 13

2. Background Data Review

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

The map below displays the existing zoning for the parcels within the study area.

Western Ave

Ra

P����

!

H Midlothian

ilro

D������

83

M��������� Sibley

Legend (Zoning Categories)

Blvd

83

Lin ct str i Di nd sla kI

Wood Street

C��� C�����

Multi Family Residential Neighborhood Commercial Community Highway Commercial Hotel/Office/Research Light Manufacturing

Ro c

W 147th Street

Two Family Residential

Kedzie Avenue

Crawford Avenue

e

Single Family Residential

etr a

ad

W 150th Street

M

Industrial

57

ighway

Institutional

Donnelly Park

Dixie H

Motor Freight Terminal Districts

294

Municipal Special Use Parks

Dresser Park

W 154th Street

Illinois Prairie Municipal Boundaries Study Area Boundary

C��� C�����

H�����

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

M������

Radio Station Park

Pulaski

W 159th Street

6 Roesner Park

ad Ro

N 0

Figure 12: Existing zoning for parcels within the study area

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 14

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

2. Background Data Review

Land Use and Transportation Improvement Plans I-57/I-294 Interchange Development Plan The new I-57/I-294 Interchange will undoubtedly affect both the immediate and surrounding areas including the municipalities of Dixmoor, Harvey, Markham, Midlothian, and Posen. Led by the Illinois Tollway and Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) a number of improvements will be necessary in order to construct the interchange between the Tri-State Tollway and Interstate 57. Initial improvements include the widening of bridges carrying I-294 traffic over 147th Street, the realignment of Dixie Creek, and the re-construction of the existing north and southbound I-57 bridges over I-294.

Upon completion of the I-57/I-294 interchange, a reduction in congestion on local routes, enhancement of economic development opportunities, and an overall improvement to transportation throughout the region is expected.

The full interchange is expected to be completed in 2024. The only new local access will be the construction of new I-294 ramps at 147th Street, with a new northbound entrance ramp and a new southbound exit ramp provided by the end of 2014.

Figure 13: Map showing the project phases for the I-294/I-57 Interchange Project (Source- http://www.illinoistollway.com/)

Midlothian Active Transportation Plan The primary objectives and recommendations found in the Midlothian Active Transportation Plan focus on improving connections between people and key places in Midlothian. Through the classification of landmarks, parks, and schools, districts, and corridors, the Midlothian Active Transportation Plan employs the use of a series of maps and diagrams to encourage the implementation of certain recommendations to improve a number of key intersections, pedestrian and bicycle circulation routes, and public transit.

Both the 147th Street corridor and Pulaski Corridor are identified as key corridors in the Midlothian Active Transportation Plan as well identified as significant in the future I-57/I-294 interchange. Consisting of the northern boundary of the I-57/I-294 interchange study area, the 147th corridor is recommended as the primary east-west bicycle and pedestrian connection in the village. Particular implementation tasks include connecting sidewalks, adding bicycle lanes, as well as a formal traffic study with IDOT to investigate the possibility of a reduction of travel lanes to one-lane each direction or conversely reducing travel lane width to 10 feet. Lining the eastern edge of the study area, the Pulaski Corridor serves as the primary north-south corridor in the Village. As in the case of the 147th Corridor, sidewalks should be connecting and a bikeway may be incorporated into the design of the thoroughfare by reducing lane widths to 10 feet. Coordination with Cook County will be necessary to re-stripe the corridor to incorporate the improvements. Remaining improvements in the Plan address a range of pedestrian/bicycle/transit improvements, as well as policy and program recommendations and implementation strategies.

Figure 14: Cover Page, Active Transportation Plan, Village of Midlothian

Page | 15

2. Background Data Review Harvey Area Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Demonstration Project The Harvey Area TSP Demonstration project was a pilot project implemented to address a number of transit related goals including: • Improving transit mobility; • Improving transit reliability; • Improving general traffic mobility; Included on both the 147th and 159th corridors, the TSP Demonstration Project was implemented at strategically selected signalized intersections along Pace bus routes to improve bus mobility and reliability in order to provide enhanced transit services to better meet both current and future needs, attract additional riders, and increase user satisfaction.

Through the implementation of this system, buses were provided the technology to extend green lights or shorten red lights with the aid of the Central Management System servers at Pace Headquarters in order to reduce travel delays and improve schedule adherence. As a result of the TSP Demonstration Project travel times were reduced an average of 15%, bus delays were reduced by 27 minutes at TSP intersections during peak times, average travel time for all traffic was reduced by six minutes, and the number of stops made by buses at signalized intersections was reduced by a range of three to 13. Pace plans to begin Phase 2 deployment in the coming months.

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan The Chicago Southland Transit-Oriented Development/Cargo-Oriented Development Corridor Planning Study– Phase III SSMMA retained the architectural firm of Solomon Cordwell Buenz to examine several south suburban TOD/COD opportunities, several of which are in or near the study area including a site in Markham and a site on the border between Dixmoor and Harvey. This study, completed in 2013, provided detailed analysis and site studies for the following study area locations: 1. Dixmoor/Harvey – This COD opportunity site is known locally as the Wyman-Gordon site after a former forging plant located on the site that closed in 1986. The 68 acre site is located just outside the 294/57 project study area, just north of the intersection of 147th Street and Wood Street and along the north side of the CN Rail Line. Portions of the property are owned by the respective municipalities (Dixmoor and Harvey), while portions are still in private ownership. Harvey and Dixmoor have signed an inter-jurisdictional agreement that commits them to remediate the environmental challenges on the site and encourages redevelopment.

The recommended plan outlines a phased redevelopment strategy that addresses remediation challenges and provides for a variety of industrial/ manufacturing uses that could take advantage of the excellent rail access.

Figure 15: Dixmoor Site from the SSMMA COD Study

Page | 16

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

2. Background Data Review City of Markham Opportunities Analysis and Brownfields Site Identification and Prioritization

2. Markham – This COD opportunity is comprised of 174 acres located on the south side of 159th Street just east of I-294. The property was originally platted for single-family residential use, but was only partially developed.

The Village has acquired a significant portion of the property within this site. Like the Dixmoor/Harvey site, a portion of this site will require some environmental remediation – in this case due to illegal dumping. The plan calls for retail/commercial use along the 159th Street frontage, with industrial/warehouse type of uses to the south and preservation and enhancement of the existing, more established portion of the existing single-family area west of Western Avenue.

The City of Markham completed an above noted study in 2004. Key highlights of the plan included: • Opportunity for a quality hotel development • Enhancements to Canterbury Shopping Center • Major regional office opportunities once the 294/57 interchange is completed • Creation of a Prairie Land Visitor Center • Creation of a Skilled Building Trade Park along Crawford Avenue and 167th Street (just outside the 294/57 Study Area) • Additional industrial infill development along Dixie Highway, south of 159th Given shifts in the economy since completion of this study, opportunities for major office development and quality hotels seem limited today (see market analysis on Page 22). However, other recommendations – particularly enhancements to the Canterbury Shopping Center and additional visitor amenities to capitalize on local prairie resources remain appropriate suggestions.

Figure 16: Markham Site From SSMMA COD Study – Looking Southwest from 159th and Dixie Highway

Page | 17

2. Background Data Review

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Tax Increment Financing and Enterprise Zones Harvey, Markham and Posen have established Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Districts to promote public/private partnerships to achieve mutual redevelopment goals within the study area.

Harvey

The entire City of Harvey is within the Harvey-Phoenix –Hazel Crest Enterprise Zone, which is set to expire in 2016. This enterprise zone offers a number of incentives to businesses that locate within the area, including a variety of potential tax credits and a sales tax exemption on building materials.

Harvey created a Dixie Highway TIF in October, 2012. This TIF extends along Dixie Highway, containing 115 acres. Goals include improving physical conditions in the area, increasing sales tax base and increased property tax base, and generally improving the quality of live in the area and the City as a whole. This newly created district was established for a 23 year period, and offers significant opportunities to partner with the private sector in redevelopment by tapping future property tax revenue to offer financial incentives to make public improvements, assist in land assembly, address environmental clean-up issues, and many other categories as outlined in State Statutes.

The City of Harvey also has a Dixie Square Mall TIF, a Sibley Boulevard/Dixie Highway TIF #2, and a Wyman Gordon TIF. While the Dixie Square Mall TIF is certainly relevant and within the study area, the other two noted districts are both just outside the 294/57 study area.

Markham

The City of Markham also has several TIF Districts within the 294/57 Study area. The Canterbury TIF includes the shopping center at the southeast corner of 159th Street and Kedzie. This TIF was created in 1991, which suggests it is set to expire in 2014. Markham also has a Dixie Highway TIF which includes the existing industrial area along Dixie Highway and additional property fronting on 159th Street between Western Avenue and Francisco Avenue. A third TIF currently exists on the north side of 159th Street, just east of Francisco Avenue and containing 21 acres including the existing Comfort Suites Hotel. This TIF was created in 1992 and will expire in 2015.

Posen

The Village of Posen is served by TIF Districts along most of the major arterials within the study area. The Sibley Boulevard TIF serves all the commercial uses along Sibley Boulevard, and extends north and south along Kedzie Avenue to the west and up along Western avenue to the east. The parcels to the southeast of I-57 are included in TIF-2.

Dixmoor

Approximately half of the Village of Dixmoor are served by three TIFs. Areas within the study are along Western Avenue are served by TIF I which is to the east of I57 and Western, and TIF II to the north of I-57 including all the industrial districts. The third TIF is the 144th Street and Wood Street TIF which is not within the study area.

Page | 18

2. Background Data Review

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Western

!

H

ilro

Ave

P���� Midlothian

Ra

M���������

e Lin ct

C��� C�����

TIF#2 Canterbury TIF

Country Aire Park

Di nd sla kI Ro c

Bremen High School

ighway

Dixie Square Mall TIF

W 150th Street

Dixie H

Dixie Highway Corridor TIF

etr a

W 147th Street

Donnelly Park

Wyman Gordan TIF

57

Sibley Boulevard TIF

H�����

294

Posen - 2 TIF Dixmoor TIF

Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie

Wood Street

str i

Study Area Boundary

Kedzie Avenue

Crawford Avenue

Municipal Boundaries

83

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

Dixie Highway TIF

M

D������

83

Legend

W 154th Street

Dixmoor - 2Preserve TIF Nature

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

ad

Dixmoor - 144th St and Wood St TIF

C��� C�����

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

M������

Radio Station Park

W 159th Street

Pulaski

6 Roesner Park

d

a Ro

N 0

Figure 17: Map showing the Tax Increment Financing boundaries around the study area

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 19

2. Background Data Review

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

(This page has been intentionally left blank.)

Page | 20

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

3. Existing Conditions of the Study Area Demographics

2013 Estimates for the Study Area

Five communities: Table 2A summarizes the population, racial and ethnic composition, and age

groups of the five communities that are a part of the study area. With respect to race, majority of Midlothian’s population is white, while Markham and Harvey have a majority African American population. The racial mix in Dixmoor and Posen is more diverse. Dixmoor is around 53% African American which is nearly a 5% decrease since the 2000 census. Posen is around 57% White which is a 20% decrease since the 2000 census. Posen has also seen a considerable increase in the ethnicity of Hispanic or Latino population within the community. This changing trend of demographics is important from a regional perspective in terms of the community facilities to be provided.

Population

Markham

Harvey

Dixmoor

Posen

Midlothian

12,508

25,282

3,644

5,987

14,819

1,594

13%

2,516 10%

965 26%

3,410 57%

10,982 74%

10,129

81%

19,170 76%

1,928 53%

1,035 17%

1,662 11%

785

6%

1,136

4%

495 14%

692 12%

837

7%

4,799 19%

1,295 36%

3,171 53%

Race White African American Some other race

1,106

7%

Ethnicity Hispanic or Latino

3,043 21%

Age Under 20

4,136

33%

20 to 24

803

6%

25 to 34

1,454

12%

35 to 49

2,379

50 to 64 65 and over

8,838 35% 1,909

8%

1,247 34%

4,311 29%

6%

418 7%

3,297 13%

559 15%

849 14%

2,163 15%

19%

4,667 18%

682 19%

1,322 22%

3,178 21%

2,162

17%

3,930 16%

552 15%

881 15%

2,761 19%

1,574

13%

2,641

372 10%

431 7%

1,428 10%

10%

232

2,086 35%

978

Table 2A: Demographic information for the five communities within the study area (Source- 2010 U.S. Census Bureau)

7%

Population

7,648

Race White African American Some other race

2,081 4,153 1,415

27% 54% 19%

Ethnicity 2,698 35% Hispanic or Latino Table 2B: Demographic information for the five communities within the study area (Source- 2013 estimates by Claritas/Nielsen Solution Center)

Study area: The total population within the study area boundary is estimated to have changed from 7,507 to 7,648 between 2010 and 2013 (as per the Claritas projections) resulting in a growth of 1.9%. Over the next five years, the population is projected to grow by 2.8%.

The population in the United States is estimated to grow by 2.0% between 2010 and 2013, with a projected growth of 3.3% over the next five years.

Thus, the increase in population of the study area is not too far behind the national trend. More than 50% of the population within the study area is African American, with less than a third of the total population being White. With respect to ethnicity, there has been an increase of 15% in the Hispanic or Latino population since the 2000 Census. With respect to age, the median age for this area is 32.6. Nearly 35% of the population is below the age of 20, emphasizing the importance of access to educational and recreational facilities for kids, teens and young adults.

Page | 21

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Current Market Conditions The I-57/I-294 markets, examined for this existing conditions assessment, are focused on the 147th Street and 159th Street corridors. Key demographics are shown in Table 4 below.

These demographics display four important markets for 147th and 159th Streets (at Dixie Highway) in considering potential opportunities for new uses throughout the I-57/I-294 study area. These markets include: a .5-mile pedestrian market; a traditional developer 3-mile market; a 5-minute convenience drive time market; and a 15-minute destination market. Dixie Highway serves an initial focus, given the prevalence of potential redevelopment sites along that corridor. Overall, these demographics are as expected. All markets are densely populated. The median ages for the 159th Street geographies are slightly older than those for 147th Street. The developer and convenience drive-time markets are well populated with sufficient employee counts. Average and median incomes reflect the diversity of income levels within each market, particularly the pedestrian markets. These income levels strengthen as these target geographies expand. Median incomes in the pedestrian and convenience drive-time markets are low when compared with the larger markets. Owneroccupied housing within these same two markets is 81-85%, with vacant housing units at 15-19% of the existing unit counts. Consumer expenditures are adequate, given each market size.

As noted on Page 30, traffic counts (ADTs) along Dixie Highway are at 16,000, with counts on 147th near Dixie at 32,100 and on 159th near Dixie at 23,900.

Strong traffic counts (above 20,000 ADTs) and market density are among the important site selection factors for auto-oriented retail and restaurant uses.

159TH STREET .5 Miles

3 Miles

147TH STREET

5 Minutes

15 Minutes

.5 Miles

3 Miles

5 Minutes

15 Minutes

Total Population

1,905

87,305

25,152

383,417

2,956

105,032

32,024

434,437

Total Households

572

28,732

8,021

139,462

959

34,691

10,419

155,849

Employees

1,158

37,979

12,447

149,258

702

38,492

14,270

146,548

Population Density (per Sq. Mi.)

3,405

3,235

3,366

3,086

3,715

3,663

3,690

3,546

36

34

33

37

33

33

32

37

Occupied Housing Units

85.40%

89.30%

85.60%

92.80%

81.60%

88.20%

85.90%

91.90%

Average Household Income

$46,251

$60,086

$51,821

$70,494

$45,687

$55,165

$50,614

$67,371

Median Household Income

$34,102

$47,943

$39,603

$56,972

$39,877

$43,756

$40,184

$54,489

Median Age

Consumer Expenditures Apparel

$871,105

$47,875,557 $13,133,024

$235,778,641

$1,650,170

$58,003,005

$17,219,898

$262,714,659

Groceries

$1,953,585

$114,081,143 $29,457,945

$593,094,339

$3,494,571 $135,410,092

$40,086,167

$643,802,229

$756,232

$55,089,243 $12,920,628

$311,206,664

$1,493,595

$18,387,410

$325,310,475

Food Away from Home

$64,576,325

Table 4: Demographics for 147th Street and 159th Street (Source: Š 2013, by Experian Š 2013 Alteryx, Inc)

Page | 22

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Potential Uses in the Study Area Inherent in considering the study area’s demographics is the opportunity for possible retail and restaurant uses along Dixie Highway. Available sites exist that could accommodate auto-oriented restaurant options and certain retailers requiring larger development sites for their stores. Restaurants, such as McDonalds, have made investments along and near the Dixie Highway sites. For the I-57/I-294 study area, those categories of uses and potential tenancies that can succeed financially will prove important to residents, employers, and the study area communities.

As part of this preliminary look at possible retail and restaurant uses within the study area, the following example was developed. This example assumes a hypothetical Wal-Mart Super Center location at a currently available site near 151st Street and Dixie Highway. Certain demographic characteristics for this hypothetical store location are compared to those of existing nearby Super Center stores in Table 4 below. The market for all stores listed is a 7-minute drive time, a typical market for this store type (See Table 5 below).

In Figure 18 on the next page, the 7-minute drive times for the stores nearest the Harvey site are contiguous. Incomes are significantly higher in the markets for the Matteson and Evergreen Park stores. While the Stewart Avenue store on Chicago’s south side has the most similar average and median incomes to the Harvey location, the total population and density are much greater than those of the Harvey site. Visibility from and access to I-57 are important for the Country Club Hills store, and Crestwood has access to the largest number of employees. The demographics for each store are also generally comparable to those of the hypothetical Dixie Highway location. Ultimately, retailers and restaurants will rely on their individual site selection metrics to select the best potential location for their store or restaurant.

Before attracting retailer and restaurants, the growth of the local markets and the need for additional amenities will require initial attention by the five study area communities. Preliminary uses identified for the study area take advantage of current initiatives throughout the south suburbs to ensure long-term business, employment, and population growth. New amenities that can potentially enable business growth and attract more residents or visitors represent strategic economic development priorities. For the short- to mid-term, possible uses include: • Capitalizing on ongoing regional efforts to expand distribution and inter-modal transport and related industries throughout the south suburbs. Ultimately, this focused work will assist in regional workforce development, add employment, and increase the study area’s daytime population.

• Related to the above regional work, assisting and growing current businesses, including office tenants, will incrementally increase the area’s employment 15104 Dixie, Harvey

16771 Torrence, Lansing

19255 S. Halsted, Glenwood

21410 S. Cicero, Matteson

2500 W. 95th, Evergreen Park

4005 167th, Country Club Hills

4700 135th, Crestwood

8331 S. Stewart, Chicago

Total Population

54,678

49,907

41,384

42,126

58,335

34,438

52,795

85,791

Employees

22,181

20,016

20,419

18,774

17,076

10,127

25,977

23,769

3,443

3,764

2,445

1,741

6,731

2,660

2,943

9,947

$52,613

$63,914

$77,527

$83,204

$86,404

$70,996

$67,694

$58,049

16,000

25,900

23,700

17,900

25,800 (95th) 27,900 (Western)

17,200 (167th) 22,400 (Pulaski)

17,600 (135th) 39,800 (Cicero)

15,800

Population Density (per Sq. Mi.) Average Household Income Traffic Counts (ADTs)

Table 5: Walmart Example- Preliminary Demographics by Store Location (Source: © 2013, by Experian © 2013 Alteryx, Inc)

Page | 23

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

base over time.

• Identifying recreational uses. Certain sites within the study area

are unsuitable for development for any use. As open space, these sites can be linked, maintained and packaged as a new amenity for residents, employees, and visitors to the study area.

• Using interim land-use strategies. Approaches, such as land banking, may be necessary in less desirable sites or locations to await long-term market growth.

• Improving study area housing stock. This includes the addition of new residential development on suitable sites and the rehabilitation of existing single family and multi-family housing. Residential development is occurring on 147th Street at the entrance to Midlothian. Senior housing services have grown throughout the study area and surrounding region. As housing improves nationally, these ongoing improvements can grow study area markets over time and address the current housing vacancy rate noted in the study area’s current demographics.

Sustained employment growth, as the mechanism to develop local markets, residential development as appropriate, and the introduction of recreational uses will ultimately create the necessary market demand for new future uses, such as hotels, truck stops, or other hospitality uses.

Existing Land Use The land uses within the study area are typically commercial uses along the major roadways, with light industrial uses around the interchange areas, and residential and open space/recreational uses in the internal areas (Figure 19). A large percentage of the central portion of the study area is dedicated to open space and the Gensbury Markham Prairie Nature Preserve. This is important from the point of view of providing connections to this recreational area from the surrounding neighborhoods, and forest and nature preserves. A large number of vacancies were observed along the commercial corridors of 147th Street, Dixie Highway and 159th Street. One of the prominent uses is the Canterbury Shopping Center at the south east corner of 159th Street and Kedzie Avenue. This center has an extensive parking lot area that has a potential of being converted to outlots if needed.

Figure 18: 7-minute drive time comparison by Walmart store location (Source: © 2013, by Experian © 2013 Alteryx, Inc)

Page | 24

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Legend Ave Western

Study Area Boundary Single Family Residential Multi Family Residential Mobile Homes

P����

Commercial Light Industrial

!

H Midlothian

Institutional Government Open Space and Recreation Vacant Parcels

Sibley

e Di

W 147th Street

C��� C����� W 150th Street

M

etr a

Ro c

kI

sla

nd

Country Aire Park

83

Wood Street

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

Blvd

Kedzie Avenue

Lin

ad

M���������

Crawford Avenue

ct

ilro

D������

83

Municipal Boundaries

str i

Ra

57

Donnelly Park

ighway

Dixie H

Bremen High School

294 Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

C��� C�����

H����� W 154th Street

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

M������

Radio Station Park

Pulaski

W 159th Street

6 Roesner Park

ad Ro

N 0

Figure 19: Map showing the existing land uses within the study area

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 25

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Transportation The study area is comprised of several major travel corridors that are important routes in the hierarchy of the State roadway system. The facilities include the interchange of I-294 and I-57, as well as arterials that feed the interstate system (147th Street and 159th Street) and those that complement it (Dixie Highway).

These principal roadways, along with major collector type roadways, are designed, in many cases, with multiple lanes and medians or turn lanes serving a multitude of auto centric land uses. As a result, the environment along these corridors caters to the automobile at the expense of the pedestrian with wide roadways and frequent, large driveways.

While there are numerous Pace bus routes within the study area, pedestrian access to transit along major roadways such as 159th Street, Dixie Highway and Kedzie Avenue is compromised by a vastly incomplete sidewalk system. In addition, pedestrian connections are often missing to commercial areas along these corridors, even those adjacent to intense residential density. On the other hand, the urban design along 147th Street appears distinctly different with a smaller scale and improved pedestrian connections to nearby neighborhoods The area has many transportation challenges and opportunities with the eventual construction of the new interchange. New economic growth is expected and consequently new facilities are needed to support it, including improvements for motorized and non-motorized modes. Although vehicular capacity and access are very important to commercial viability and personal mobility, other modes often suffer as a result. Later steps in this study will explore the opportunity to merge auto and pedestrian/bikes into a comprehensive network. This will be very important to new economic development resulting from the new interchange.

Roadway Network The study area has a very good network of roadways providing both regional and local access. The two interchanges at 159th Street provide options for motorists, but also define it as high volume roadway. The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has classified both 159th Street and Dixie Highway as Strategic Regional Arterial (SRA) Routes. An SRA route, as defined by IDOT, is a highway designated to accommodate long-distance regional traffic, to complement a region’s major transit and highway facilities, and to supplement the freeway system. There are a number of key components that further define an integrated system or network of roadways. These are discussed further below and are shown on the identified exhibits. Together these are intended to give an overall picture of the study areas’ roadway network and its operations.

Functional Classification The roadways within the study area are classified according to the character of service they are intended to provide, which is a process known as functional classification. This process recognizes a hierarchy of roadways and the fact that they do not function independently, but as a system-wide supportive network. By creating this hierarchy, an orderly system is created giving streets different classifications. The standard classifications and those found in the various local municipality plans are as follows: • Interstate Highway • Strategic Regional Arterial • Principal Arterial • Minor Arterial • Major collector • Minor collector

Page | 26

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Interstate

Legend Traffic Lights 35

Minor Arterial

Speed Limits

Ave Western

SPEED LIMIT

Strategic Regional Arterial (SRA)

Principal Arterial Major Collector

P����

!

H Midlothian

83

M���������

D������

SPEED LIMIT

Sibley Blv

e Lin ct

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

kI

Dixie H

Ro c

40

W 150th Street SPEED LIMIT

ighway

M

55

Bremen High School

Donnelly Park

57

H�����

294 Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

W 147th Street

SPEED LIMIT

C��� C�����

etr a

83

Wood Street

str i

d

Kedzie Avenue

Crawford Avenue

Di

ad

35

Country Aire Park

nd

ilro

SPEED LIMIT

40

sla

Ra

W 154th Street

SPEED LIMIT

55

C��� C�����

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

SPEED LIMIT

M������

Radio Station Park

45

Pulaski

6

SPEED LIMIT

SPEED LIMIT

40

SPEED LIMIT

35

W 159th Street

45

Roesner Park

ad Ro

N 0

Figure 20: Functional classification of the roadways within the study area

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 27

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Roadway Jurisdictions and Average Daily Traffic Roadway jurisdiction is an important factor of how a roadway functions and how it is maintained. The major roadways within the study area (non - local) are either under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) or the Cook County Department of Transportation and Highways. IDOT has jurisdiction of I-57 while I-294 is under the jurisdiction of the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (Tollway).

A key component of roadway operations depends on differing volumes in traffic including truck volumes. Volume measurements are taken in a number of ways, one standard being Average Daily Traffic (ADT). The ADT in the study area (non-Interstate roadways) ranges from a high of 32,100 along Dixie Highway to 15,900 along Kedzie Avenue. Trucks are also an important component of the overall system for obvious reasons, not the least of which is commercial vitality. Generally speaking, heavier vehicles are defined as Class I trucks. The next category is lighter vehicles defined as Class II trucks. Class II trucks are permitted on some regional arterials – in this case 159th Street (US 6). Class I trucks (except for local deliveries) are confined to major facilities like Interstates). Roadway jurisdictions and overall ADT are shown on Figure 22. Truck ADT is shown on Figure 23.

Estimated 2030 increase in ADT on Interstates and local roads- The estimated increase in traffic for 2030 due to Interstate to Interstate movements is shown on the sketch below. This will also increase ADT on local roads like Kedzie Avenue, Dixie Highway and 159th Street, which in turn may lead to quicker deterioration of the roadways than normally accounted for.

Traffic Control and Speed Limits Traffic control and speed limit designation is determined, among other things, by volumes and intersecting roadways. Pedestrian consideration and accident data is also a factor in some areas. There are 16 traffic signals in the study area. The locations are as follows: • Dixie Highway at 147th, 150th, 154th and 159th • 147th at I-57 ramps, Cleveland & Harrison Ave, Sacramento St, and Kedzie Ave • Kedzie Avenue at Country Aire Dr and 155th Street • Pulaski Road at 159th St • 159th at Central Park, Kedzie and Francisco Ave/Richmond Ave Speed limits along the primary corridors vary from a high of 45 miles per hour (mph) along 159th Street to 35 mph along 147th Street. Traffic control and speed limits are shown on Figure 22. In addition, there is a 10 ton/axle weight limit along 147th Street.

Roadway Cross Sections The roadway widths, or cross sections, are generally determined by volumes, available right of way, and safety measures. Roadway geometry is important in determining traffic capacity. Throughout the study area, the important arterials all contain a minimum of 4 lanes, some with separate turn lanes at intersections. The various cross sections of roadways are shown on Figure 24.

Page | 28

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Ave Western

Legend XXXX

Estimated 2030 increase in ADT along interstates

XXXX

Estimated 2030 increase in ADT along local roads

Sibley Blv

d

0

0

,5

Lin ct str i Di nd sla kI Ro c M

etr a

Wood Street

5,100

0

W 150th Street

0

2

294

0

Ne

e

le gib

Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

C��� C�����

H�����

gli

N

ighway

le

ib g

li

,45

57

Dixie H

,7

2

g

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

,5

10

Bremen High School

W 147th Street

0

1

Kedzie Avenue

Country Aire Park

83

0

0

540

Crawford Avenue

e

7 Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

ad

10

20

M���������

ilro

D������

8,2

9,3

!

H Midlothian

P����

Ra

W 154th Street

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

M������

Radio Station Park

a Ro Pulaski

6

7,080

W 159th Street Roesner Park

d

N 0

Figure 21: Estimated 2030 increase in ADT on Interstates and other routes due to the addition of the I-294/I-57 Interchange

Exhibit 1: Existing Roadway Jurisdictions and Average Daily Traffic Counts

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 29

3. Existing Conditions Legend

Illinois Department of Transportation Cook County Highway Authority Tollway

Speed Limits

Average Daily Traffic 15,200

XX,XXX

!

H Midlothian

24,300

17,900

Ave Western

35

83

P����

M���������

Sibley Blv

10

SPEED LIMIT

4,8

d

32,100

Lin ct str i

15,900

SPEED LIMIT

kI M

55

Bremen High School

1

16

Ro c

W 150th Street

0

0

,9

Donnelly Park

57

H�����

19,500

294 Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

22,700

40

5

0

W 147th Street

ighway Dixie,0H00

etr a

83

Wood Street

e

00

Di

ad

SPEED LIMIT

C��� C����� Kedzie Avenue

Crawford Avenue

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

Country Aire Park

nd

ilro

35

40

sla

Ra

D������

SPEED LIMIT

22,400

0

0

,0

3

1

1

15,600

Traffic Lights SPEED LIMIT

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

W 154th Street

SPEED LIMIT

55

C��� C�����

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

SPEED LIMIT

M������

Radio Station Park

45

24,700

Pulaski

6

SPEED LIMIT

40

SPEED LIMIT

26,800

35

SPEED LIMIT

45

W 159th Street 23,900

Roesner Park 50,700

20,600

ad Ro

N 0

Figure 22: Roadway jurisdictions and Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for the study area

Exhibit 1: Existing Roadway Jurisdictions and Average Daily Traffic Counts

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 30

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Legend Traffic Lights Ave Western

Class I Truck Route Class II Truck Route XX,XXX

Truck Average Daily Traffic

P����

!

H Midlothian

83

SPEED LIMIT

625

1,

M���������

Sibley Blv

d

,30

40

Lin ct str i Di Ro c etr a

40

W 150th Street

0

5

,8

5 SPEED LIMIT

ighway

M

55

Bremen High School

Donnelly Park

57

H�����

294 Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

W 147th Street

Dixie H

kI

sla

nd

Country Aire Park

1,300

Wood Street

e

0

83 SPEED LIMIT

C��� C����� Kedzie Avenue

Crawford Avenue

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

ad

0

17

SPEED LIMIT

ilro

D������

90

35

Ra

0

0

,7

5

W 154th Street

SPEED LIMIT

55

C��� C�����

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

SPEED LIMIT

M������

Radio Station Park

45

1,275

Pulaski

6

SPEED LIMIT

35

SPEED LIMIT

40

SPEED LIMIT

1,100

W 159th Street

45

Roesner Park

ad Ro

N 0

Figure 23: Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for truck traffic within the study area

Exhibit 5: Existing Truck Routes and Avergae Daily Counts

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 31

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Legend Traffic Lights 35

Ave Western

SPEED LIMIT

Speed Limits 4 to 5 lanes

P����

6 to 7 lanes

!

H Midlothian

D������

SPEED LIMIT

Sibley Blv

Lin ct

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

SPEED LIMIT

C��� C�����

Country Aire Park

kI Ro c

40

W 150th Street

Dixie H

etr a

W 147th Street

83

Wood Street

str i

d

Kedzie Avenue

Crawford Avenue

e

40

Di

ad

35

M���������

nd

ilro

SPEED LIMIT

83

sla

Ra

SPEED LIMIT

ighway

M

55

Bremen High School

Donnelly Park

57

H�����

294 Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

W 154th Street

SPEED LIMIT

55

C��� C�����

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

SPEED LIMIT

M������

Radio Station Park

45

Pulaski

6

SPEED LIMIT

SPEED LIMIT

40

SPEED LIMIT

35

W 159th Street

45

Roesner Park

ad Ro

N 0

Figure 24: Roadway cross sections, speed limits and traffic signals

Exhibit 3: Existing Conditions

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 32

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan Planned Roadway Improvements

In addition to the new interchange connecting I-294 to I-57, there are key roadway improvements planned for 147th Street (IL 83). These include a number of local intersection improvements and widening; changes to the I-57 ramps; and construction of a northbound on-ramp and a southbound off-ramp at I-294. Much of this is in anticipation of future growth (and traffic) along the 147th Street corridor and other neighboring roads. Figure 25 shows both the planned local improvements as well as the new interchange. In addition, dual left turn lanes will be added on the north bound, south bound, and east bound approaches at Dixie Highway and 147th.

Legend IDS completed Ave Western

Project Limits

I294 Ramps

P����

!

H

Midlothian

e Lin ct str i Di kI Ro c M

Dixie H

etr a

W 150th Street

ighway

Donnelly Park

Bremen High School

57

H�����

294 Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

C��� C�����

W 147th Street

C��� C����� Kedzie Avenue

Country Aire Park

83

Wood Street

Crawford Avenue

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

nd

ad

I57 Ramps

M���������

vd

sla

ilro

D������

83

Sibley Bl

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

Ra

W 154th Street

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

M������

Radio Station Park

W 159th Street

Pulaski

6 Roesner Park

d

a Ro

N 0

Figure 25: Planned local improvements Exhibit 6: Planned Improvements

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 33

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Non - Auto Modes Pedestrian It is important to understand that the study area is primarily auto oriented and as a result, pedestrian mobility suffers. The characteristics of the area will no doubt change with the interchange and related improvements as new capacity will be needed for autos. Accordingly, the roadway profiles will change and a new effort needs to be made to fix the vast pedestrian disconnected network and improve bicycle mobility. With the exception of 147th Street, most facilities in the study area are severely pedestrian deficient. Pedestrian disconnects are shown on Figure 26.

Legend Pace Bus Routes Western

Incomplete Sidewalks

P����

!

H

Midlothian

D������

M���������

SPEED LIMIT

Sibley Bl

Country Aire Park

e Lin ct kI Ro c

40

W 150th Street Dixie H

etr a

W 147th Street

83 SPEED LIMIT

C��� C����� Kedzie Avenue

str i

vd

Wood Street

Crawford Avenue

Di

ad

35

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

nd

ilro

SPEED LIMIT

83

40

sla

Ra

Ave

Missing Pedestrian Crossings

SPEED LIMIT

ighway

M

55

Bremen High School

Donnelly Park

57

H�����

294 Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

W 154th Street

SPEED LIMIT

55

C��� C�����

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

SPEED LIMIT

M������

Radio Station Park

45

Pulaski

6

SPEED LIMIT

SPEED LIMIT

40

SPEED LIMIT

35

W 159th Street

45

Roesner Park

a Ro d

Figure 26: Sidewalk gap analysis and public transportation route

N 0

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

Exhibit 7: Existing Pedestrian Access- Map showing incomplete sidewalks

DRAFT

Page | 34

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

3. Existing Conditions

Mass Transit The area has several Pace bus routes that are summarized in the table below. These routes travel to numerous employment centers and other destinations.

The Metra Rock Island service is located approximately 1.3 miles away at the Midlothian station. The Metra Electric District is located approximately 2.3 miles away at the Harvey station. Transit options are shown on Figure 27.

Route Number

Title

Route Description

349

South Western

Provides daily service between the Pace Harvey Transportation Center and 79th/Western in Chicago. The route serves Evergreen Plaza, Metra Rock Island District Blue Island / Vermont Street Station, Metra Electric Line Harvey and Blue Island Stations, Metro South Medical Center, Ingalls Memorial Hospital, and St. Rita High School as well as the communities of Harvey, Posen, Dixmoor, Blue Island, Evergreen Park and Chicago. Between 79th/Western & Vermont/Western buses serve posted stops only

354

Harvey – Oak Forest Loop

Clockwise and counter-clockwise loop service from the Harvey Transportation Center on 147th St, Cicero, 167th St, Dixie and 154th St through Harvey, Dixmoor, Posen, Midlothian, Oak Forest, Country Club Hills, Hazel Crest and Markham. Route provides direct service to South Suburban College’s University, College Center in Oak Forest, Markham Courthouse and also serves Pace South Division.

359

Robbins/South Kedzie Avenue

North/South route which operates from Homewood Metra Station to 95th Dan Ryan CTA Station. Also serves the Blue Island Metra/Electric Station, Metro South Medical Center, Markham Courthouse, South Suburban Hospital, Lydia Health Care Center, Waterford Estates and Grenoble Square Shopping Center. Between CTA Red Line 95th St. & 124th/Halsted, buses serve posted stops only.

364

159th St

Serves major east-west cross-town arterial from Hammond Transit to Orland Square Mall. Serves River Oaks Shopping Center, the central pulse point of Pace South in Harvey, and various smaller centers as well as Oak Forest, St. Margaret and Ingalls Memorial Hospitals, and South Suburban College. Weekend service operates between Orland Square Mall and Hegewisch. Route serves Posted Stops Only along the entire route.

890

South Suburbs UPS Hodgkins

Provides express service from the Chicago Heights Terminal, Homewood Park-n-Ride, Harvey Transportation Center, and Harvey Metra Station to the UPS Hodgkins facility.

Table 5: Walmart Example- Preliminary Demographics by Store Location (Source: Pacebus.com)

Page | 35

3. Existing Conditions

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Legend Traffic Lights Ave Western

Pace Route 349 Pace Route 354 Pace Route 359

P����

Pace Route 364

!

H Midlothian

Pace Route 890 Metra Rock Island District

Ra

ilro

D������

83

M���������

Sibley Blv

d

Lin ct str i Di nd sla kI Ro c M

Dixie H

etr a

W 150th Street

ighway

Donnelly Park

Bremen High School

57

H�����

294 Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

C��� C�����

W 147th

Street

Wood Street

Country Aire Park

W 147th Street

C��� C����� Kedzie Avenue

Crawford Avenue

e

83 Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

ad

W 154th Street

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

M������

Radio Station Park

W 159th Street

Pulaski

6 Roesner Park

ad Ro

N 0

Figure 27: Pace bus routes

Exhibit 4: Existing Public Transportation

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 36

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

4. Vision Statement and Development/Redevelopment Opportunity Sites After review of existing conditions within the study area, the Steering Committee concluded that the focus of the Land Use and Economic Development Plan should be on specific development sites. A simple vision statement was developed to guide this process:

Capitalize on regional access to spur local job growth and create a welcoming and vibrant front door to Dixmoor, Harvey, Markham, Midlothian and Posen.

Based on field observations and discussions with local municipalities, a number of key opportunity sites have been identified within the study area. These sites were identified based on their development potential. Some sites are currently vacant, while other sites are fully or partially in use but underutilized given their market potential. Development or redevelopment of specific sites will be driven by the private sector. However, local municipalities will also play a key role in the development of these properties. In addition to regulating the use and development of properties through zoning and subdivision regulations, municipalities are often asked to partner with the development community in extending needed infrastructure or assembling properties to create appropriate development sites. This partnership can take many forms, but is typically memorialized in a development agreement and may or may not involve some financial participation on the part of the municipality in the form of TIF or other programs.

The following map and table highlight identified development/redevelopment opportunities. The table provides a summary of the size of each site, existing zoning and land use, a summary of key site conditions, and a recommended proposed use or uses. The use are based on a combination of community desires based on input throughout the planning process and land use economics as identified in the market study conducted for this project. Clearly the 37 development/redevelopment sites will take a number of years for the market to absorb. This plan should be viewed as a long-range (10 plus year) strategy.

Based on current market conditions, the table identifies priorities for development/redevelopment. These priorities are:

Short Term – Sites that should be actively pursued by both municipalities and property owners/developers within the next couple of years. These sites are

typically already assembled and have access to needed infrastructure.

Medium Term – Sites that have strong market potential, but will require some effort to prepare for development (land assembly, infrastructure improvements, etc.). These projects should also be actively pursued by both municipalities and property owners, but it is recognized that some additional work will be needed to make these projects ready for the market place. A three to six year time frame would be a reasonable target for medium term priority sites.

Long Term – Sites that would be more attractive for development in the future, after development of some or all of the short and medium term priority sites, have been classified as long term priorities. These sites often do not have the visibility or immediate market appeal of other properties.

Municipal efforts should be focused on actively working with property owners to market and promote development for short-term sites consistent with the plan. Local efforts should also strive towards preparing medium term sites for development. However, the market will determine the timing of any specific project. For example, if a developer comes forward with a proposal for a site identified as a long-term site in 2014, the municipality should certainly seize that opportunity provided it is consistent with the plan and community interests.

As noted within the ‘site conditions’ portion of the following table, several sites are within either the 100 or 500 year flood plain. While any development will need careful engineering design to address stormwater management issues and comply with the regulations of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District

Page | 37

4. Vision Statement & Opportunity Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

(MWRD), sites which include property within the 100 year flood plain are of particular concern. Development is strongly discouraged within 100 year flood plain areas by the Army Corps of Engineers, and while flood plain boundaries can be modified to permit efficient land development, the approval process is engineering intensive and can be very time consuming. Given these constraints, where possible it is recommended that areas within the 100 year flood plain be left open. However, for highly visible sites such as Site 3 in Posen, it may well make sense from an economic perspective to seek modification of the flood plain boundaries to accommodate additional development while still providing for appropriate protection from flooding.

Legend Redevelopment parcelsMidlothian

3

Markham Dixmoor Harvey

Lin ct

83

M���������

P����

6 4

1

15

Di

Sundrop Prairie Nature Preserve

kI Ro c etr a M

7 294

C��� C�����

11

Gensburg Markham Prairie Nature Preserve

Radio Station Park

ad Ro Pulaski

6

9

9

14

H����� W 154th Street

10 13

12

M������ 3

6 8

Dresser Park

Paintbrush Prairie Nature Preserve

5

ighway

Donnelly Park

4 5

W 147th Street

83

W 150th Street

57

2 1

d

1 2 4 3

C��� C�����

Bremen High School

Midlothian Meadows (Cook County Forest Preserve)

2

Sibley Blv

Dixie H

sla

nd

Country Aire Park

3

ad

D������

1

2

Kedzie Avenue

str i

2

ilro

Wood Street

Crawford Avenue

e

!

H Midlothian

Ra

Ave

Posen

4

Western

7

7

Roesner Park

6

8

W 159th Street

15

N 0

Figure 28: Map showing the redevelopment parcels

Exhibit 20: Land Redevelopment Parcels I294-I57 Use and Economic Development Plan

750

1,500 Feet

Prepared on August 12th, 2013 by the Consultant Team of:

DRAFT

Page | 38

4. Vision Statement & Opportunity Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Table 6: List of Redevelopment Opportunity Sites including site conditions and proposed use/zoning Community and Site Number

Site Acreage

Existing Zoning/Use

Site Conditions

Proposed Use

Priority

Midlothian 1

6.9 (4 parcels) B-3/Vacant building (former Portions of the site acquired by a church for a Learning Academy but plans appear to have State of Illinois offices) stalled. Water and sanitary sewer service available at site.

Office, Commercial/B-3

Medium

Midlothian 2

0.7 (8 parcels) NC/Commercial

Single ownership; Water and sanitary sewer service available at site.

Restaurant/retail

Short

Markham 1

5.3

L-2/Vacant industrial/ warehouse building

Water and sanitary sewer service available at site.

Reuse for light industry or potential hotel site

Short

Markham 2

2.0

C-1/Hot Dog Stand

Limited site development – not paved, small building; Water service available, sanitary sewer service needs extension.

Restaurant/retail

Medium

Markham 3

5.7

L-2/ vacant site

Visibility, but no access from 159th Street. Water and sanitary sewer available at site.

Hotel, office, light industry

Long

Markham 4

0.5

C-1/vacant site

Shallow lot depth. Water and sanitary sewer service available at site.

Retail, restaurant or office

Medium

Markham 5

4.7

C-1/vacant site

Multiple ownerships, some drainage issues to south. Water and sanitary sewer service available at site.

Retail, restaurant or office

Medium

Markham 6

134.0 (100 plus parcels)

R-5/mix of single family homes and vacant lots

Multiple property ownerships (many owned by the Village), some environmental constraints, limited existing utilities. Within a 500 year floodplain (0.2% annual chance of flood hazard) and also has portions within a 100 year flood plain. Water and sanitary sewer service available to the site.

Cargo Oriented Development Medium to Long (C.O.D.) with some retail th potential along 159 (See Page 17 for Concept Sketch)

Markham 7

12.0 (46 parcels)

C-2/Vacant land

Within a 500 year floodplain, some shallow marsh/wet meadow area (.69 acres). Water and sanitary sewer service available to the site.

Truck Stop, Hotel, C.O.D.

Medium

Markham 8

11.0 (10 parcels)

C-2/Existing Superior Truss & Panel and Positive Connections Bus Yard

Within a 500 year floodplain. Water service available, extension of sanitary sewer service required.

C.O.D., big box retail

Short

Markham 9

30.7 (7 parcels)

C-2/Canterbury Square Shopping Center

Façade and landscape improvements needed. Water and sanitary sewer service available to the site.

Retail and restaurants, public Short gathering place

Posen 1

7.5

Light Industrial/Vacant office/warehouse building

Great visibility at interchange but no direct access to 147th. The portions along the ramps are Office/ Light Industry, within the 100 year flood plain. No water and sewer service information available. potential redevelopment for hotel/restaurant

Medium

Posen 2

3.3

Light Industrial/Vacant office/warehouse building

Great visibility at interchange but no direct access to 147th. The portion along the ramps and roads are within the 100 year flood plain. No water and sewer service information available.

Short

Office/ Light Industry

Continued on the following page

Page | 39

4. Vision Statement & Opportunity Sites Community and Site Number

1

Site Acreage

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Existing Zoning/Use

Site Conditions

Proposed Use

Priority

Posen 3

15.7

Commercial/Vacant Lot

Prime commercial opportunity at interchange. The portion along the ramps and the upper half of the site is within the 100 year flood plain, while the lower half of the site is a brownfield. No water and sewer service information available.

Retail/restaurants, hotel, home improvement, truck stop 1

Short

Posen 4

0.5

Exempt/Vacant Lot

Single owner for some parcels. No water and sewer service information available.

Restaurant/retail, office

Medium

Posen 5

1

Exempt/Vacant Lot

The site is a brownfield. No water and sewer service information available.

Restaurant/retail, office

Medium

Posen 6

1.2

Residential/Vacant Land

Multiple owners.

Office, apartments

Medium

Posen 7

0.6

Industrial/Commercial/ Vacant Lot

Multiple owners, the portion along the roads is within the 100 year flood plain. No water and Commercial, office sewer service information available.

Long

Dixmoor 1

2.5(23)

B-1 and R-2/Vacant Lot

The site is within a 100 year floodplain. Water and combined sewer service available to the site.

Office, restaurant, retail 1

Long

Dixmoor 2

1.5(1)

B-1/Vacant Lot

The site is within a 100 year floodplain. Water and combined sewer service available to the site.

Office, restaurant, retail 1

Long

Dixmoor 3

2(26)

Industrial/Commercial/ Vacant

Multiple Owners, site is within a 500 year floodplain. Water and combined sewer service available to the site.

Commercial, townhomes

Short

Dixmoor 4

2.3(30)

Exempt/Vacant Lot

Multiple Owners, site is within a 500 year floodplain. Water and combined sewer service available to the site.

Townhomes

Medium

Harvey 1

3.8(9)

LM/Vacant Lot

The southern edge of the site is within a 500 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a combined sewer.

Retail, Grocery, restaurant

Short

Harvey 2

3.5

R-M, NC/Vacant Lot

The eastern edge of the site is within a 500 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a combined sewer.

Retail, restaurant

Short

Harvey 3

3.5

HC/Vacant Gas Station and Vacant Lot

The eastern half of the site is within a 500 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a combined sewer.

Commercial

Long

Harvey 4

9.0(60)

LM/Vacant Lot

The site is within a 500 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a combined Retail, Grocery, restaurant sewer.

Short

Harvey 5

2.2

R-M/Vacant Lot

The site is within a 100 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a sanitary sewer.

Multi-family residential 1

Long

Harvey 6

1.6

HC/Vacant Lot

No water service, but the site is served by a sanitary sewer.

Restaurant, office

Medium

Harvey 7

8.8

R-1/Vacant Lots

The site is within a 100 year floodplain. No water service, but sanitary sewer service can be extended to the site.

Multi-family residential 1

Long

Provided floodplain issues are resolved.

Continued on the following page

Page | 40

4. Vision Statement & Opportunity Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Community and Site Number

1

Site Acreage

Existing Zoning/Use

Site Conditions

Proposed Use

Priority

Harvey 8

19.7(14)

LM/Vacant Lots and Commercial Buildings and 1 Single-Family Home on Western Avenue

Multiple ownerships, possible environmental issues, western portions of the site are within the 100 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a sanitary sewer.

Harvey 9

44.0(5)

HC/Vacant – former Dixie Square Mall

Site was recently cleared. No water service, but sanitary sewer service can be extended to the Big Box Retail site.

Harvey 10

24.0(125)

R-M, HC and R-1/Vacant Lots, primarily vacant apartments

Co-op apartments blighted, lower half of the site is within a 100 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a sanitary sewer.

C.O.D. 1

Long

Harvey 11

36.5

R-1/Vacant Lots and Singlefamily homes

Streets in poor condition, some bottomland forest area and large portions of the site are within the 100 and 500 year floodplain. No water service, but sanitary sewer service can be extended to the site.

Residential and open space/ recreation short-term, with long-term C.O.D. potential after sites near 159th Street are developed

Long

Harvey 12

36.5

R-1/Vacant Lots and Single Family Homes

Streets in poor condition, some bottomland forest area and the north eastern portion of the site is within the 500 year floodplain. No water service, but sanitary sewer service can be extended to the site.

Residential and open space/ recreationin the near term, but site has long-term C.O.D. potential

Long

Harvey 13

5.6

HC/Vacant Commercial Building

The southern edge of the site is within the 100 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a sanitary sewer.

C.O.D.

Long

Harvey 14

22.7

R-1/Vacant Lots

No water service, but sanitary sewer service can be extended to the site.

C.O.D.

Medium

Harvey 15

11.5

HC/Vacant Lot

Site is heavily wooded and within the 100 and 500 year floodplain. No water service, but the site is served by a sanitary sewer.

Open space

Long

Entertainment use 1

Short

Medium

Provided floodplain issues are resolved.

Page | 41

4. Vision Statement & Opportunity Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

(This page has been intentionally left blank.)

Page | 42

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

3 MIDLOTHIAN

1POSEN

359

2-3 RESTAURANT/RETAIL SPACES 1 DRIVE THRU 7,500 Sq.Ft 57 CARS (7.6 cars/1000 SF)

EXISTING SIDE WALK

349

SCREEN FENCE

ALLEY

KEDZIE AVE

SANTER AVE

SIDE WALK

OUTDOOR DINING AREA I-5 7

EXISTING PACE SHELTER 147th STREET

NEW SIDEWALK

PERIMETER LANDSCAPE EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

354

EXISTING RESTAURANT

DIXMOOR TOWN CENTER NEW OUTLOT 4000 Sq.Ft.

RN AVE

SITE DATA:

PACE BUS ROUTE

MIDLOTHIAN #2

50

150

.

OUTLOTS: 28,OOO Sq.Ft. RETAIL: 80,000 Sq.Ft. 500 CARS (6cars/1000SF)

400

WHIPPPLE

FRANCISCO

DIXIE

364

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

OPT 3 ADD PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL & CROSSWALKS TO PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TO PARK & MALL

REORGANIZE PARKING & THRU LANES TO CREATE WIDER PEDESTRIAN WALKS AND OUTDOOR SEATING.

LANDSCAPED POND LANDSCAPED POND

ROESNER PARK LANDSCAPED MULTI-PURPOSE PLAZA SPACE • FOOD TRUCKS • FARM MARKET • EXPANDED PROGRAMMING FROM PARK TO EAST

160TH SAWYER

MALL FACADE ENHANCEMENTS PEDESTRIAN WALKS/CROSSWALKS

HWY

(600 cars) RETAIL 160k Sq.Ft.

PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL

ABBOT STREET

RETAIL 40k Sq.Ft.

ROBEY AVE

(600 cars)

3 ACRE PAD SITE

RETAIL 40k Sq.Ft. (500 cars) 2.4 ACRE PAD SITE RETAIL 200k Sq.Ft.

HARVEY FIRE DEPT. STATION #3

CITY OF HARVEY POLICE DEPT.

COOK COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY

HOYNE AVE

COOPER AVE

LEAVITT AVE

5 DIXMOOR 349

NEW SIDEWALK

Marketing sheets for each of these sites have been prepared and are included in the Appendix C.

JESSE JACKSON JR. SENIOR CENTER

(160)

1860 CAR PARKING 4.2 PER 1000 SF OF RETAIL

STATE OF ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES

ROBEY AVE

EXISTING PACE BUS STOP

151st STREET

SENIOR LIVING

SHERWOOD

PACE BUS ROUTE

COOPER PARK

DIXIE

This analysis examines the feasibility for the selected sites proximate to the I-294/I-57 interchange.

Observations about the necessary public investment strategies and specific development potential as well as site, streetscape and public safety improvements are noted for each of the sites. Cost estimates have also been included for each site and reflect the results of assumptions based upon current market conditions (included in Appendix A). The following pages include redevelopment scenarios for each of the five sites.

2 ACRE PAD SITE

GHAM

SEELEY AVE

NOTTIN

2HARVEY HOYNE AVE

PLAZA ENHANCEMENTS

COOPER AVE

Dixmoor Sites 3 and 4: Commercial uses along Western Avenue with options for residential or commercial use for the remainder of the site

349

PROPOSED PACE BUS STOP

LEAVITT AVE

5.

ENTRY FEATURES NEW SIDEWALK • SIGNAGE • LANDSCAPED PONDS • OVERLOOKS

354

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

MCDONALD’S

VAIL AVE

Canterbury Shopping Center (Markham Site 9): Enhancements to the existing mall and site (including the Pace bus stop) and the addition of public amenities

159th STREET EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

SIBLEY BLVD

PACE BUS ROUTE EXISTING PACE BUS STOP

ND

4.

364

EXISTING COMMERCIAL SUBWAY HAROLD’S CHICKEN DUNKIN DONUTS SPA NAILS

EXISTING SIDEWALK

ADD NEW RRFB TO PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS TO MALL & MCDONALD’S McDonald’s

JOLIET

NEW OUTLOTS 8000 Sq.Ft.

MO

Midlothian Site 2: A small scale commercial development

NEW OUTLOT WITH DRIVE THRU 4000 Sq.Ft.

NEW OUTLOTS 8000 Sq.Ft. 354

RICH

3.

4 MARKHAM ALBANY

IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS

TROY

Harvey Site 9: Major mixed use development of the former Dixie Square Mall site

FAMILY DOLLAR

NEW OUTLOTS 8000 Sq.Ft.

KEDZIE

2.

ALDI

RETAIL 80,000 Sq.Ft.

980’

Posen Site 3: Large box retail store with outlots

NEW SIGNAL ALIGNED WITH EXISTING RI/RO AT COMMERCIAL CENTER TO EAST

EXISTING COMMERCIAL

The five priority redevelopment sites selected for analysis include: 1.

WESTE

Developers, particularly retail developers, continue to face challenges as a result of the recent economic downturn. For the communities included in the study area, infill development at certain available sites remains an opportunity, particularly given the enhanced access and visibility offered by the new I-294/I-57 Interchange. The ultimate challenge for new development in the study area may be real estate taxes. The area’s higher tax rates limit the market rents per square foot that developers and owners require to meet their project financial thresholds. These lower lease rates subsequently diminish potential investment returns and owner options for reinvestment, particularly when compared with similar, but lower cost locations. Ultimately, the redevelopment potential described in this section remains an investment decision by both business owners and real estate developers.

SP AU

EXISTING PACE SHELTER

LD

IN

G

10k

AV E

WESTE

5k

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

WESTERN AVENUE COMMERCIAL : 20k SF 100 Cars + Outdoor Storage SPAUDLING AVE/ DAVIS COURT COMMERCIAL : 45k SF 135 Cars + Outdoor Storage (15 Cars + Outdoor Storage per each 5k SF Building)

PEDESTRIAN PATHS/ SIDEWALKS

364

154th STREET

0

250

500

1000

FEET

PACE ROUTE 364 EXISTING PACE BUS STOP

5k

RN AV

10k

E DAVIS COURT

EXISTING SIDEWALK

5k

HARVEY #9 DIXIE SQUARE MALL SITE

5k 5k

5k 5k 5k 5k

143RD STREET PACE BUS ROUTE

Page | 43

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Posen Site 3 Site description Located at the intersection of Sibley Boulevard (147th Street), Interstate 57 and Dixie Highway, this site has an area of 15.7 acres and has great visibility from I-57. The site is well served by public transportation (Pace bus routes) connecting it to the surrounding communities as well as locally. Given this access to public transportation, site improvements must be made to support pedestrian access. Much of the northern half and western edge of the site are within the 100 year flood plain, demanding specific attention to stormwater management. In spite of this constraint, the location of the site with respect to the new I-294/I-57 Interchange makes it a key site for retail development. The site allows for commercial, hospitality and retail uses and falls within the Posen TIF 2 District that runs through 2022.

Figure 30: Perspective view showing potential redevelopment (Prepared by Bondy Studios)

Figure 29: Site location is well served by transit

Page | 44

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

I-5 7

Conceptual development potential and estimate NEW SIDEWALK EXISTING RESTAURANT

DIXMOOR TOWN CENTER WES

NEW OUTLOT 4000 Sq.Ft.

TERN AVE.

SITE DATA: OUTLOTS: 28,OOO Sq.Ft. RETAIL: 80,000 Sq.Ft. 500 CARS (6cars/1000SF)

EXISTING COMMERCIAL

NEW SIGNAL ALIGNED WITH EXISTING RI/RO AT COMMERCIAL CENTER TO EAST

ALDI

RETAIL 80,000 Sq.Ft.

FAMILY DOLLAR

NEW OUTLOTS 8000 Sq.Ft.

Use

Estimated Total Project Value Cost All Retail and Outlots $17,634,667 $22,008,780 Table 5.1: Development potential for Posen Site 3 (See Appendix A for Economic Analysis Methodology)

980’

NEW OUTLOTS 8000 Sq.Ft.

NEW OUTLOTS 8000 Sq.Ft.

EXISTING COMMERCIAL SUBWAY HAROLD’S CHICKEN DUNKIN DONUTS SPA NAILS

EXISTING SIDEWALK

SIBLEY BLVD

354

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

349

MCDONALD’S

EXISTING PACE BUS STOP PROPOSED PACE BUS STOP DIXIE

Figure 31: Site plan showing potential redevelopment (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

Estimated Land Value ($4,374,113)

Observations

JOLIET

354

PACE BUS ROUTE

The adjacent sketch shows the development of an 80,000 square foot large box retailer such as home improvement center or hardware store with multiple outlots. This scenario retains certain existing retail and restaurant uses located along both arterials. The major retail use can capitalize on the visibility and access from Interstate 57, favorable traffic counts (ADTs) and transit availability along Sibley Boulevard and Western Avenue. Parking for the store was calculated at 6 spaces per 1,000 square feet for the large box retail and at 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet for the outlot restaurants.

The development potential for this scenario is summarized in the table below. Besides sidewalk connections between existing and proposed bus shelters and the retail pads, landscaping and stormwater detention areas need to be provided for stormwater management. A portion of the north and west edges of this site are within the 100 year flood plain. This sketch assumes some mitigation on the southern portion of the site.

The Posen development, as considered, will likely require a public private partnership. This scenario assumes a known tenant. Most major retailers prefer to own their stores and work with a preferred development partner. Assuming developer interest, Village officials will need to understand the value of the land holdings, based upon reasonable market conditions, and develop a highly competitive incentive package. Such incentives will likely include ‘pay as you go ’ Tax Increment Financing funding, real estate tax incentives, sales tax sharing agreements, and potential land acquisition with remediation. The resulting value to the Village will require careful consideration. The value of these incentives will also likely reduce the effective rent paid by any big box retailer to a figure significantly below what is shown in the example.

Page | 45

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Harvey Site 9 Site description This is the former Dixie Square Mall site and at 44-acres it is the largest of the five priority sites, as well as one of largest retail development sites in Chicago’s south suburbs. Its location along Dixie Highway gives it access to the two busy regional corridors of Sibley Boulevard to the north and 159th Street to the south, as well as Interstates 294 and 57. The traffic count numbers at this location are acceptable and has the potential for a signalized entrance. The site has been cleared and is ready for immediate development with access to sanitary sewer service nearby. Currently, the site zoning allows for commercial uses and falls within the Dixie Square TIF that runs through 2016.

Figure 32: Perspective view showing potential redevelopment (Prepared by Bondy Studios)

Page | 46

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

151st STREET

ROBEY AVE

SEELEY AVE

HOYNE AVE

COOPER AVE

LEAVITT AVE

VAIL AVE

COOPER PARK

Conceptual development potential and estimate

2 ACRE PAD SITE JESSE JACKSON JR. SENIOR CENTER

SENIOR LIVING

DIXIE

(160)

HWY

1860 CAR PARKING 4.2 PER 1000 SF OF RETAIL

STATE OF ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES

(600 cars) RETAIL 160k Sq.Ft.

PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL

ABBOT STREET

RETAIL

RETAIL

40k Sq.Ft.

ROBEY AVE

(600 cars)

3 ACRE PAD SITE

40k Sq.Ft.

(500 cars) 2.4 ACRE PAD SITE RETAIL 200k Sq.Ft.

HARVEY FIRE DEPT. STATION #3

CITY OF HARVEY POLICE DEPT.

COOK COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY

364

HOYNE AVE

PEDESTRIAN PATHS/ SIDEWALKS

COOPER AVE

LEAVITT AVE EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

Use

Estimated Total Project Value Cost All Retail, Outlots (3), and $116,595,273 $111,844,875 Senior Housing Units

Estimated Land Value $4,750,398

Table 5.2: Development potential for Harvey Site 9 (See Appendix A for Economic Analysis Methodology)

Observations:

154th STREET

0

The development scenario for this site includes 440,000 square feet of retail development, multi-family housing and three restaurants for each of the three outlots. This scenario assumes that 160,000 square feet of the retail includes two large retailers at 80,000 square feet each. Both are paying the High Volume Retail rent shown in Table A1 in the Appendix. The remaining retail and restaurant uses are paying the net rental rates noted in the same table.

The multi-family housing component consists of 480 small residential units, assumed to be senior housing, to capitalize on neighboring facilities. Net rent used is comparable to current rents at the Jesse Jackson Jr. Senior Housing Facility.

The site plan provides for extensive landscaping and drainage, with landscape buffers between residential and commercial uses. Pedestrian access throughout the site is also provided by pathways and sidewalk connections.

Parking is at established zoning standards for all uses. The development potential for this scenario is summarized in the table below.

250

PACE ROUTE 364

500

1000

FEET

This mixed-use scenario is preferred to only retail, as the retail scenario alone results in a negative land value of over $6.8 million. It is also the assumption that this site is ready for development and would be subject to a rational development process and timeline, and that major tenants would be secured in advance of any development.

EXISTING PACE BUS STOP

Figure 33: Site plan showing potential redevelopment (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

Page | 47

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Midlothian Site 2 Site description this site is located at the northwest corner of busy Sibley Boulevard (147th Street) and Kedzie Avenue. While the smallest of the five sites at 0.7 acres, it is diagonally across from a Walgreens and proximate to other retail uses along Sibley Boulevard. The site is served by water and sanitary sewer service and is currently zoned commercial. The average daily traffic count at this location is 37,600, which is great for retail development. The site is also served by Pace bus routes with an existing bus stop at the corner of the site. Besides the auto traffic, it also has the potential of attracting pedestrian customers from the surrounding neighborhood.

Figure 34: Perspective view showing potential redevelopment (Prepared by Bondy Studios)

Page | 48

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Conceptual development potential and estimate This scenario considers a 7,500 square foot restaurant or retail development. Access to the existing Pace bus shelter is enhanced by an outdoor plaza that can be used for restaurant seating. Sidewalk connections to the surrounding neighborhood provide pedestrian access to the site.

Landscape buffers are provided between the development and existing residential uses. The development potential of this scenario is summarized in the table below and assumes three (3) small restaurants and 57 parking spaces at the site.

359

2-3 RESTAURANT/RETAIL SPACES 1 DRIVE THRU 7,500 Sq.Ft 57 CARS (7.6 cars/1000 SF)

EXISTING SIDE WALK

ALLEY

Retail/Restaurant

KEDZIE AVE

SIDE WALK SANTER AVE

Use

SCREEN FENCE

Total Project Cost $1,525,875

Estimated Land Value $38,898

Table 5.3: Development potential for Midlothian Site 2 (See Appendix A for Economic Analysis Methodology)

Observations

OUTDOOR DINING AREA

By capitalizing on the traffic volume of 147th Street and the proximity to Midlothian’s downtown, this scenario has the potential to be a catalyst project for this area of the Village.

Costs to demolish any existing structures or to deal with any site contamination are not included in these estimates.

Given these exclusions and the low estimated value above, some development incentives will likely be required to spur redevelopment.

EXISTING PACE SHELTER 147th STREET

Estimated Value $1,564,773

PERIMETER LANDSCAPE EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

Figure 35: Site plan showing potential redevelopment (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

50

150

400

Page | 49

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Canterbury Shopping Center (Markham Site 9) Site Description This site is the existing Canterbury Shopping Center along 159th Street- a highly traveled corridor in the south suburbs. With access to Interstates 294 and 57, this center serves shoppers from the region as well as the local community. The corridor and site have a mix of different retailers and is near major employers in Markham including the Cook County Courthouse. The site is also close to Markham Park District’s facilities at Roesner Park and the Gensburg-Markham Prairie Nature Preserve, making it a nexus for recreation and retail activities. Restaurant and other retail options across the street from Canterbury and the surrounding residential neighborhood also generate significant pedestrian traffic. However, the lack of complete sidewalks and crosswalks make the area unsafe for pedestrians. In addition, the large expanse of paved parking and minimal outlots set the Center back further from the road, diminishing the pedestrian’s sense of place along the corridor. The site does however lie within a TIF District that runs through 2014. Hence there is the potential to enhance the character of the center for shoppers and residents alike and improve the value of the property.

Figure 36: Perspective view showing potential redevelopment (Prepared by Bondy Studios)

Page | 50

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Conceptual development potential and estimate

Use

Estimated Center Net Income

Center Improvements including Outlots Current Income and Value Estimated Income and Value After Improvements

Center Value

Estimated Cost

$3,595,300 $2,549,534

$33,993,792

$3,095,863

$41,278,176

364

159th STREET

NEW OUTLOT WITH DRIVE THRU 4000 Sq.Ft.

ADD NEW RRFB TO PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS TO MALL & MCDONALD’S FRANCISCO

ALBANY

TROY

IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS

WHIPPPLE

Table 5.4: Improvement potential for the Canterbury Shopping Center (See Appendix A for Economic Analysis Methodology)

McDonald’s

ENTRY FEATURES • SIGNAGE • LANDSCAPED PONDS • OVERLOOKS

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

NEW SIDEWALK

ADD PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL & CROSSWALKS TO PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TO PARK & MALL

REORGANIZE PARKING & THRU LANES TO CREATE WIDER PEDESTRIAN WALKS AND OUTDOOR SEATING.

LANDSCAPED POND LANDSCAPED POND

The development scenario costs in Table 5.4 include façade, site and land improvements, and the addition of one outlot (restaurant use) and other suggested site improvements.

The estimated cost of improvements is compared to two center values- the current center value, based upon current average net rents ($18 per square foot) and occupied space (about 171,000 square feet) as published by the center’s leasing broker, and to a potential value, given an updated center incorporating this site concept and fully leased at the same average net rent less expenses.

KEDZIE

ROESNER PARK LANDSCAPED MULTI-PURPOSE PLAZA SPACE • FOOD TRUCKS • FARM MARKET • EXPANDED PROGRAMMING FROM PARK TO EAST

160TH

HM

SAWYER

RIC

MALL FACADE ENHANCEMENTS

ON D

PEDESTRIAN WALKS/CROSSWALKS PLAZA ENHANCEMENTS

NOTT

PACE BUS ROUTE

364

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

This site development scenario differs from the other sites, as it examines the opportunity to improve the existing center while providing for a new public gathering space and an enhanced Pace bus stop. Sidewalk connections and crosswalks at major intersections are provided to improve pedestrian access to the site. Some of the unused surface parking is replaced with naturalized detention ponds that help with stormwater management while enhancing the character of the site. Plazas between and along the Shopping Center provide for outdoor seating and activities, while a landscaped multi-purpose plaza provides for outdoor community events. This plaza also connects the park across the street to the Center and has the potential of providing a trail head connection for the GensburgMarkham Prairie Nature Preserve. Facade enhancements for the existing buildings are also proposed.

SHERWOOD

EXISTING PACE BUS STOP

Figure 37: Site plan showing potential redevelopment (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

INGH

AM

Observations: The analysis indicates that an improved center can potentially achieve investor and community objectives by creating an additional $7million in value versus the estimated cost. Markham has available TIF funds and could partner with Canterbury’s ownership to improve the center, incorporating the new public space. In turn, center ownership can attract additional tenants to a better center to ensure increased occupancy and tenant quality.

Page | 51

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Dixmoor Sites 3 an 4 Site Description These sites are along Western Avenue, but have high visbility from Interstate 57 with access from the 147th Street/ Interstate 57 interchange. Access along Spaulding Avenue is also provided. While currently vacant, the site falls within the Dixmoor TIF. The site area along Spaulding Avenue is zoned industrial with the area facing Western Avenue zoned commercial. While adjacent to residential uses, the site is close to successful commercial, retail and restaurant developments, including major national tenants. Two alternative development concepts were considered.

Figure 38: Perspective view showing the residential option for redevelopment (Prepared by Bondy Studios)

Page | 52

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Conceptual development potential and estimate

Option A: Residential Development Table 5.5A: Residential Use Potential for Dixmoor Sites 3 and 4 (See Appendix Commercial- One 6,000 square foot building A for Economic Analysis Methodology) Residential- 66 Townhomes

Estimated Value $1,836,000

Total Project Cost $1,709,460

Estimated Land Value $126,540

$9,900,000

-

$1,683,000

349

NEW SIDEWALK

SP AU

EXISTING PACE SHELTER 6

66 TOWNHOME UNITS LD

IN

G

REAR LOADED 2 CAR GARAGES HOMES FRONT ONTO GREEN SPACES ON-STREET VISITOR PARKING

AV E

6

This concept consists of two smaller sites comprising a triangular block with Western Avenue as the western boundary. The site plan includes one 6,000 square foot commercial space. Most of the site shown as occupied by 66 owner-occupied townhomes. One business tenant is assumed to occupy the commercial space. Given the site’s market characteristics, any retail or restaurant use would necessarily have to be a destination. One restaurant does exist nearby. Western Avenue’s traffic counts are lower (8,200 ADTs) in this area and the nearby daytime population (within a 5-minute drive time) is about 5,900.

The residential development would include 66 townhomes (each 1,600 square feet) with a price point of $150,000. This price point is typical for the area.

Some addtional site features include: The buildings are oriented to face open space rather than the adjacent railroad tracks; Sidewalks are proposed along all the major streets to improve pedestrian access to the surrounding residential areas and the existing Pace bus shelter; Landscaped buffers between existing and proposed uses are recommended.

6

Observations

6

WES T AVE

EXISTING SIDEWALK

DAVIS COUR T

ERN

COMMERCIAL 6000 Sq.Ft.

6 6

6 6

7 5 143RD STREET PACE BUS ROUTE

Figure 39A: Site plan showing Option A- residential development (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

Any development at this site will likely occur over the long-term, given its challenged market attributes. While the resulting land values are positive numbers, two issues must be considered. While the resulting land value for the commercial use appears reasonable, this is a challenged site for potential uses that would complement the nearby townhomes. For the townhome component of the scenario, the land value solution represents 17% of the total project value (17% of $9,900,000 or 66 townhomes sold at $150,000). This site may require additional site preparation for residential development that would affect how much an experienced residential developer would pay to acquire the land.

Page | 53

5. Key Redevelopment Sites

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Option B: Commercial Development Use Eleven Non-Residential Commercial Buildings

Estimated Total Project Value Cost $11,552,273 $12,011,955

Table 5.5B: Commercial Potential for Dixmoor Sites 3 and 4 (See Appendix A for Economic Analysis Methodology)

WESTERN AVENUE COMMERCIAL : 20k SF 100 Cars + Outdoor Storage SPAUDLING AVE/ DAVIS COURT COMMERCIAL : 45k SF 135 Cars + Outdoor Storage (15 Cars + Outdoor Storage per each 5k SF Building)

349

NEW SIDEWALK

SP AU

EXISTING PACE SHELTER

LD

IN

G

10k

AV E

Estimated Land Value -$459,682

Conceptual development potential and estimate This concept consists of two smaller sites comprising a triangular block with Western Avenue as the western boundary. The site plan includes new commercial space for 11 smaller users. The assumed uses are auto-related or other commercial uses not dependent upon high traffic counts, as Western Avenue has a lower traffic count (8,200Â ADTs). Similar kinds of uses are nearby. Proposed parking for the two 10,000 square foot buildings total 100 spaces. Each of the nine 5,000 square foot buildings includes 15 parking spaces. All of the 11 buildings include provisions for outdoor storage for the likely commercial uses. The buildings are oriented to face open space rather than the adjacent railroad tracks. Sidewalks are proposed along all the major streets to improve pedestrian access to the surrounding residential areas and the existing Pace bus shelter. Landscaped buffers between existing and proposed uses are recommended.

Observations

WES T

5k

VE ERN A

With 11 smaller buildings, the overall project cost estimate is higher than if the project consisted of one 65,000 SF building. Any costs for demolition of existing structures or any remediation, if necessary, are not included in these estimates. Suitable development of this site and the identified parcels would likely need to occur over time through site sales to individual business operators seeking to own and construct a building for their commercial use.

5k 10k

DAVIS COURT

EXISTING SIDEWALK

5k 5k 5k

5k 5k 5k 5k

143RD STREET PACE BUS ROUTE

Figure 39B: Site plan showing Option B- commercial development (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

Page | 54

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

6. Signage, Gateways and Corridors

“Capitalize on regional access to spur local job growth and create a welcoming and vibrant front door�

- Project Vision Statement

Introduction In addressing CMAP’s goals of Livable Communities and Regional Mobility, the creation of gateways and enhancement of transportation corridors is key to the efficient movement of people and traffic through the area while encouraging investment in the community. This study area is defined by high traffic transportation corridors. The addition of the I-294/I-57 Interchange will further facilitate the traffic in the area, which in turn will benefit the surrounding commercial uses and provide for more residential options that have access to the region via these interstate routes. Clear directional and informational signage will make the area more inviting to visitors and residents alike while creating a sense of place.

Signage As the study area has five communities besides the County, a hierarchy of signage should be utilized to help inform motorists and pedestrians about the community they are visiting, as well as direct them to and through the area.

Figure 41: Bridge Enhancements: Example of ornamental railing

Concept: Patterned plates with raised lettering (as shown in the images below) Base material: Laser cut corten steel or other material Lettering: Raised aluminum letters Use of such signage along bridges and overpasses is recommended to inform and welcome the motorist to the community. These are non structural improvements and can be further enhanced with decorative panels, ornamental railing and appropriate lighting.

Figure 42: Bridge Enhancements: Example of gateway signage

Figure 40: Signs: Example of laser cut corten steel with raised aluminum lettering

Figure 43: Bridge Enhancements: Example of decorative panels

Page | 55

6. Signage, Gateways and Corridors

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

In addition, the use of plantings and landscaping along the roadways will help improve the character of the area, further emphasize the corridor and provide for naturalized areas for stormwater management. Some examples of landscaping treatments include ornamental grass groupings, linear tree plantings and natural stone outcroppings.

Figure 44: Community entry plantings and regional identity landscaping: ornamental grass groupings, linear tree plantings and natural stone outcroppings.

Page | 56

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

6. Signage, Gateways and Corridors

Directional Signage Directional or way finding signage is the first opportunity to greet visitors to the area. To tie all the signs together, a regional logo panel is recommended that has a prairie theme reflecting the region’s prairie. These signs are specifically to guide motorists and can be located along the off ramps and other arterial road intersections leading to the different communities. Such signs paired with appropriate landscape treatments will help define the character of the area.

Figure 45: Regional logo for signage (Designed by Teska Associates, Inc.)

S C

i

Figure 46: Directional Signage (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

Page | 57

6. Signage, Gateways and Corridors

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Community Identification Signage Community identification signage further welcomes the visitors to the specific community. Such signage is recommended in the same material and design as the gateway signage, with the regional prairie logo. However, the raised letters on the sign would reflect the specific community it is located in. Unlike the gateway signage, this signage will cater to motorists and pedestrians and would need to be sized and located accordingly. In addition, the same signs can also be used on fabric banners mounted to lightpoles within the community, further defining a sense of place.

The cost for the corten steel community gateway signs are approximately $15,000 per sign including the landscaping around it. The pole mounted fabric banners would be around $1,500 per piece depending on the material and method of installation. Each community would have to work with IDOT for implementation of the signs that are within IDOT’s right of way.

Figure 47: Community Gateway/Identification Sign (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

Figure 48: Fabric banner mounted to existing lightpole (Prepared by Teska)

Page | 58

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

6. Signage, Gateways and Corridors

The signage and landscape treatments outlined in this section are to be used to define the regional gateways in the community, specifically at the I-57 and 147th Street/Sibley Boulevard Interchange and I-57 and 159th Street Interchange as shown below and on the following page.

Figure 49: Regional Gateways - I57 and 147th Street Interchange (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

Page | 59

6. Signage, Gateways and Corridors

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Figure 50: Regional Gateways - I57 and 159th Street Interchange (Prepared by Teska Associates, Inc.)

Page | 60

6. Signage, Gateways and Corridors

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Corridor and other improvements

Figure 51: Missing sidewalks to Pace bus shelter W 150th Street

7

5

6

9

8 11

Dresser Park

nsburg Markham airie Nature Preserve

14

158th Street

7

160th Street

Existing Traffic Signal

8 Irving Avenue

6

hway

Radio Station Park

ig Dixie H

294

D������

13

Western Avenue

����

H�����

Based on the redevelopment plan, road improvements are also recommended along Western Avenue from158th Street to 167nd Street to accommodate truck access. A full access signalized intersection at Irving Avenue along 159th Street is also recommended to improve access to these sites.

154th Street

10

12

PROPOSED LOCAL TRUCK ROUTE AND ACCESS

The study area has a number of corridors, namely 147th Street/Sibley Boulevard, Dixie Highway/Western Avenue, 159th Street and Kedzie Avenue. These corridors experience high auto traffic and are also well served by Pace bus routes.

However, incomplete or missing sidewalks, lack of sufficient landscaping and minimal signage diminish the character of the corridor and pedestrian safety. Completing the sidewalks, ensuring that they are accessible and providing crosswalks at intersections will improve pedestrian accessibility.

162nd Street to 167th Street

Figure 52: Map showing roadway improvements

Proposed (new) Full Access Signalized Intersection

159th Street

15

Existing Full Access too close to ramps to signalize

Improve Existing Roadways to accomodate truck traffic

N 0

750

1,500 Feet

Figure 53: Examples of streetscape improvements

Page | 61

6. Signage, Gateways and Corridors

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

(This page has been intentionally left blank.)

Page | 62

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

7. Implementation To implement key recommendations from this study, significant action will be required to achieve successful redevelopment of both private property and within the public right-of-way. Specific recommendations are provided below.

Site Redevelopment To capitalize on the new I-294/I-57 interchange, a three step implementation strategy has been developed as illustrated in the following diagram. First, the stage must be set. Based on the analysis of existing conditions, it is clear that certain steps are needed to enhance opportunities for development and make each site development-ready. Second, based on the market analysis and local vision, this plan outlines specific development targets for each site. Once the site is ready, solicitation of development proposals is in order. Third, a deal must be struck to create a partnership between the local municipality and a developer.

Page | 63

7. Implementation

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Setting the Stage 1. Land Assembly Accommodating the parking, stormwater management, and other components of development often requires assembly of multiple parcels of property into a larger development site. In many cases, a developer can assemble two or three properties together to accommodate a project. However, in situations where multiple small parcels must be assembled it is often necessary for the municipality to step in and assemble an appropriate development site – particularly for large scale industrial and commercial developments like those anticipated within the study area. This is particularly true in regard to sites in both Markham and Harvey, where properties were platted into small residential lots but in many cases homes were never constructed. The City of Markham has been very active in acquiring properties south of 159th Street, and while some additional acquisition is needed they are well on their way to having a consolidated redevelopment site.

A unique opportunity to acquire and prepare sites for redevelopment is available locally through the Brownfields Redevelopment and Intermodal Promotion Act. This recently adopted state legislation is particularly well suited for situations like those within key redevelopment opportunity sites located between I-294 and Dixie Highway where some brownfield issues and multiple ownerships have made redevelopment difficult in the past. The act specifically identifies a “South Suburban Brownfields Redevelopment Zone” which includes Dixmoor, Markham, Harvey and Posen. The program is designed to produce industrial/ warehouse/intermodal type development which results in jobs and an improved tax base. A separate fund has been created to assist redevelopment efforts within the Zone, funded by incremental income taxes attributable to new employees.

2. Pre-approved zoning Time is money in the development business. The need to rezone a property for the desired use can take months or even years in some cases. To avoid the uncertainly that might go along with the need to rezone a property, projects that are on a short timeline will often rule out sites that do not already have the proper zoning in place. A recommended zoning is provided for each redevelopment site in Table 6 (pages 39 to 41). For sites that will require rezoning, it is recommended that the local municipality work with the property owner(s) to rezone the property appropriately as soon as possible to facilitate fast-track projects that cannot or will not wait for the development to go through a public hearing process. Key zoning changes are also noted in the following list (see Figure 28 on page 38 for site locations). If a site is not listed, the existing zoning is appropriate for the recommended redevelopment.

•

Markham – Site 6 is primarily zoned residential currently, but is planned for Cargo Oriented Development with some retail potential. It is recommended that this property be rezoned to L-2 – Light Manufacturing District. When a developer has a specific proposal, some modifications to this base zoning may be needed. Ideally, a master developer would be found for all of Site 6. With a master development plan, planned development zoning could be put in place that would accommodate both retail and industrial uses. The Chicago Southland Transit Oriented Development/Cargo Oriented Development Plan – Phase III of the Corridor Planning Study done by SSMMA addressed this site in detail and provides more specific recommendations for this site including a phasing strategy.

•

Dixmoor – Site 4 in Dixmoor currently is zoned for industrial use along Spaulding Avenue, with the remainder of the property zoned R-2. Since both residential and commercial uses have been suggested as alternatives for this site, rezoning would be more appropriate after a developer has a specific proposal.

Page | 64

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

•

7. Implementation

Harvey – A variety of sites in Harvey will require rezoning to accommodate proposed redevelopment, including: »» Site 1 is currently zoned for light manufacturing. Rezoning to Highway Commercial is recommended given the sites location at the corner of Sibley Boulevard and Dixie Highway. »» Site 4 generally has a mix of Highway Commercial along Dixie Highway and Single Family (R1D) to the west. It is recommended that the residential zoning be changed to Highway Commercial. »» Site 6 is currently zoned Multi-Family, but is recommended to be rezoned for Highway Commercial use. »» Site 7 is currently zoned for Single-Family, but is recommended to be rezoned for Multi-Family Dwellings (RM). »» Site 9 is currently zoned Highway Commercial would accommodate most of the proposed development. However, the suggested additional multi-family development along 151st Street would require rezoning to Multi-Family (RM). »» Site 10 is currently zoned Highway Commercial along Dixie Highway and Single-Family to the west. Rezoning of the entire area to Light Manufacturing (LM) is recommended. »» Sites 11, 12, and 14 are all currently zoned Single Family. However, the plan calls for future Cargo Oriented Development in this area. Rezoning to Light Manufacturing (LM) is recommended.

3. Public Improvements Public improvements include both infrastructure items like water, sewer, cable/fiber, electricity and natural gas service and surface improvements such as roads, sidewalks, streetscape, etc. The availability of both types of public improvements is necessary to accommodate development. For the vast majority of sites, the infrastructure is already in place to accommodate proposed redevelopment. However, the one exception to this is in the area in both Harvey and Markham generally south of 154th Street, west of Dixie Highway, and East of I-294. Much of this area was originally platted for single family homes. However, many lots were never developed and today the area has only a few scattered homes within the areas illustrated for redevelopment. Depending on the end user of sites 10, 11, 12 and 14 in Harvey and sites 7 and 8 in Markham, improvements to the water and sanitary sewer system may be needed to accommodate redevelopment.

Recommended surface improvements are detailed in the section on Right-of-Way improvements on Page 70.

4. Develop relationship with key property owners Successful development requires a partnership between the municipality, the property owner, the developer, and often an end user. Although specific developers or end users may not be known, the local municipality can accelerate the redevelopment process by identifying and beginning a dialog with property owners. Initial discussions should include review of plan recommendations, rezoning where appropriate, and in many cases lot consolidation and replatting to create appropriate development sites for commercial/industrial development. In communities where multiple redevelopment sites have been identified, such as Harvey and Markham, it is recommended that the initial focus be placed on the identified key redevelopment opportunities (sites 1, 4 and 9 in Harvey and sites 6, 7 and 9 in Markham).

Page | 65

7. Implementation

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

5. Incentive Tools Given the dual challenge of preparing a site for development and addressing property tax issues within Cook County, development incentives are often required. While these tools can always be added in the future, it is preferable to have them in place prior to attempting to recruit specific developers or end users. Key tools include: •

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) – TIF is a well-established tool that allows local governments to partner with developers to redevelop property within defined areas which have been declared blighted or conservation areas per the terms of State Statutes. TIF is often used to pay for needed public improvements, assemble land, and assist in site preparation including environmental remediation. Dixmoor, Posen, Harvey and Markham all have existing TIF Districts in place as detailed in the Existing Conditions section of this plan. However, the Canterbury Square TIF in Markham expires in 2014 and the Dixie Square Mall TIF in Harvey expires in 2016. It is likely that both of these TIF Districts will either need to be extended through legislative action or perhaps allowed to close and then have a new TIF put in place to achieve redevelopment goals outlined in this plan.

•

Enterprise Zone – All sites in Harvey are currently in an Enterprise Zone, which offers a number of incentives including a variety of potential tax credits and a sales tax exemption on building materials. However, this zone, like many in the state, is set to expire in 2016. It is recommended that all local communities work with SSMMA to create an application for a new Enterprise Zone, with a focus within this study area for properties east of I-294.

•

Cook County Property Tax Incentives – Cook County commercial and industrial property taxes were identified as an impediment to redevelopment during the interview stage of this project. Cook County has created several programs to promote economic development, including the Class 6B and Class 8 programs which may well be needed to create redevelopment projects that make sense in today’s market place.

•

Business Districts – Business Districts are similar to TIF Districts in that they have a defined project area and are used to fund needed public improvements and prepare property for development. However, rather than utilize property taxes a Business District typically assesses an additional sales tax and/or room tax for hotel/motel development. While no Business Districts currently exist within the study area, this may be a tool worthy of consideration should a hotel be proposed or for redevelopment of a major commercial site such as the former Dixie Square Mall (Harvey Site 9).

•

Brownfields Redevelopment and Intermodal Promotion Act – This program is detailed on Page 64 in the Land Assembly section. In addition to being able to fund land assembly, the program can be used to fund other redevelopment costs similar to TIF, including public improvements.

•

Sales Tax Sharing – For retail or restaurants that will produce significant sales tax, municipalities can offer to share this all or a portion of their share (typically 1%) with the business to assist in paying for any extraordinary costs of redevelopment.

6. Staffing Dixmoor, Harvey, Markham, Midlothian and Posen all have very limited staffs and face tight municipal budgets which limit staff expansion. Of these communities, only Markham currently has a full-time Economic Development Director, and that position also includes responsibilities for planning, building and code enforcement.

The Pre-Development Tool Kit (Appendix B) highlights strategies to address this issue in more detail, but the short answer is regional cooperation. Working with the resources available through SSMMA and the CSEDC, these communities can work cooperatively to retain and attract development to the region.

Where ‘staff’ is noted as the responsible party in this implementation strategy, it includes both municipal staff and SSMMA/CSEDC.

Page | 66

7. Implementation

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Targeting Once the community has “set the stage”, it is time to develop specific business targets and attract future developers and tenants. The strong traffic counts and increased visibility offered by the I-294/I-57 interchange will enhance the market potential of the study area. Area municipalities will need to take a proactive stance to take advantage of these assets and expand the local sales and property tax base. All of the communities within the study area have limited staff resources due to tight municipal budgets. As noted in the following table, this pro-active approach recommended to attract new development will take considerable staff time and resources. Fortunately, the resources of the Chicago Southland Economic Development Corporation (CSEDC) and the South Suburban Mayors and Managers Association (SSMMA) are available to assist in this effort. Where ‘staff’ is noted below in the “Who” column, it includes both local municipal staff and staff of the SSMMA/CSEDC.

Objective: Capitalize on opportunities to attract additional high volume businesses

Task

Because leases that bring tenants are between property 1. Identify the leasing decision makers for all one acre or larger parcels within the study area owners and retailers, the key to attracting the high volume retailers that add significant sales tax revenue necessary 2. Attend Chicago region International Council of Shopping Centers (retail) and I.CON: to fund recommended corridor improvements depends The Industrial Conference (industrial development) to learn about tenanting and on strong relationships between property owners and building configuration trends. the local municipality. Frequent communication makes municipal expectations for the property clear.

Objective: Solicit developers via RFQ/RFP for key sites

Task

Particularly for sites owned or partially owned by the The Pre-Development Tool Kit provided in Appendix C details the steps needed to municipality, or sites that are likely to need TIF or other successfully conduct a RFQ/RFP. municipal incentives, a Request For Qualifications (RFQ) or Request For Proposals (RFP) may be appropriate to solicit developer interest. This process highlights the development opportunity, potential incentives, and the criteria the municipality will use in selecting a developer.

Because of the time required to prepare a detailed proposal, it is recommended that a two stage process be used, with an RFQ used to identify qualified developers, and then an RFP from just the top 2 or 3 developers who responded to the initial RFQ.

Who

Cost

Staff

Staff time

Staff

Membership & staff time

Who

Cost

Staff and/or consultant// Village Board/ City Council

$5,000

Continued on the next page.

Page | 67

7. Implementation

Objective: Encourage entrepreneurship as a means of developing unique retail businesses In considering the overall health of study area communities’ economy, municipalities must look beyond sales tax revenue. Retail businesses that are unique and entrepreneurial differentiate a corridor from the sameness of national chain retailers and franchises.

That role is very important because customers travel farther for unique businesses and thereby create a larger market for all businesses. Inherent in any successful entrepreneurial development program is access to counseling and support. Rather than developing its own support programs, municipalities should refer entrepreneurs to existing resources like the local Small Business Development Center at Governors State and Chamber of Commerce.

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Task

Who

Cost

1. Review ordinances to determine whether there is adequate support for temporary businesses, Staff & legal Staff time shared kitchens, and food trucks advisor 2. Develop a relationship with the local Small Business Development Center (SBDC) where Staff Staff time municipalities and the Center refer potential business owners to each other.

3. Offer information sheets on leasing practices, business development assistance, and municipal Staff with Staff time & incentives to residents considering opening a store, restaurant or service.

SBDC printing 4. Provide one year of free Chamber membership to all new businesses.

Staff $4,000 5. Encourage the development of a retail incubator in vintage space that is habitually vacant.

Incubator programs: a) Month to month leases b) Generic but professional spaces from 50 to 500 square feet c) Quarterly meetings and counseling on results 6. Encourage the development of a shared commercial kitchen that can be rented by start-up food businesses 7. Conduct exit interviews with unsuccessful businesses to learn whether there were any municipal policies or regulations that contributed to their demise.

Staff

TBD

Staff

TBD

Staff

Staff time

Page | 68

7. Implementation

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Doing the Deal Land development is a complex process involving careful planning, financing, and coordination between local and sometimes regional/state governments and the developer. The process is best viewed as a partnership between the public and private sector to produce desired development that is both profitable for the property owner/developer and future tenant and provides public benefits in the form of needed access to goods, services, or housing.

The following decision model graphic attempts to summarize key components of the development process for a retail development. The diagram highlights the three main components of any successful real estate deal; the business or tenant, the property owner, and the government. This same model would generally work for other types of commercial or industrial development outlined in this plan by simply substituting the word “business” for retailer.

To assist local municipalities in understanding and working through this process, a detailed pre-development tool kit has been developed and is included in Appendix B.

Business Retention Supporting and helping existing businesses to expand is critical to the economic vitality of local municipalities. Residents should be encouraged to shop locally to support businesses that have chosen to locate in their community. Restaurants and most retail businesses like to cluster together to provide choices and for added convenience for shoppers. The presence of successful local business often will attract additional retailers. In fact, some businesses have co-tenancy requirements – they will typically only locate in the same center or near certain other stores. In the industrial and commercial side of the market, businesses often work closely with other businesses in similar or related fields and like to locate within proximity to each other. By staying connected to existing businesses, municipalities can discover leads and help facilitate expansion plans. Staying in touch also helps to identify problems before they become a larger concern. In today’s competitive economic development environment companies have many options, and the local municipality must learn to earn the loyalty of existing businesses through strong two-way communication and support. Business retention efforts should include: 1. Business Data Base - Identification of all businesses within the study area in each community and, where an existing business license system or other record does not exist, development of a data base with contact name, address, etc.

2. Retention Visit – The Mayor and key staff person responsible for economic development should conduct annual retention visits (maximum of 30 minutes each) that: a. Express appreciation for their commitment to the community b. Inform them of progress in the municipality over the last year c. Provide a brief description of highlights from this and other relevant planning efforts d. Ask for ideas on how the municipality could improve services e. Ask about any remodeling, expansion or contraction plans.

3. Reporting – Report on program results to the Village Board and make policy recommendations based on the results of the retention visits.

Page | 69

7. Implementation

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Right-of-Way Improvements To address the access, pedestrian, transit, and gateway/wayfinding recommendations outlined in the plan will require significant effort, coordination and funding assistance from local, regional, and state governments. These projects are highlighted in the following table.

Each project has been assigned a priority from A to C as follows: • • •

A priority = 0 to 3 years B priority = 4 to 6 years C priority = in conjunction with adjacent development or 7 plus years

Objective 1: Develop a complete sidewalk system, including appropriate crosswalks, along major roadways to facilitate safe and convenient access to transit, shopping, dining, and employment. (See illustration on page 37 for illustration of incomplete sidewalks)

Priority Project Complete identified sidewalk gaps along Dixie Highway between A

Partners

Notes

Harvey, Markham, Pace (south of 154th Street), IDOT, adjacent property owners Markham, IDOT, adjacent property owners, Pace

High priority project given proximity to higher density residential areas including senior housing Active commercial area with many pedestrians crossing 159th at unmarked crossing at Whipple Ave. between fast food restaurants to the north and shops to the south

A

Sibley Blvd. and 159th Street Complete sidewalk and pedestrian crossing recommendations on 159th Street between Kedzie Avenue and Richmond Avenue (near Canterbury Shopping Center.

B

Provide a sidewalk connection along 159th Street over I-294 between Richmond Avenue and Western Avenue

IDOT, Tollway, Markham

Connection will grow in importance as development occurs east of I-294

C

Complete sidewalks along 159th Street between Western Avenue and Dixie Highway.

IDOT, Markham, property owners

This can occur in association with redevelopment of adjacent properties.

B

Complete sidewalk gaps along 159th Street between Kedzie Avenue IDOT, Markham, property owners and Central Park Avenue

B

Provide a sidewalk connection along 159th Street over I-57 between IDOT, Markham Central Park Avenue and Crawford Avenue

Existing pedestrian crossing north of 159th Street is in poor condition and is not accessible.

C

Complete sidewalk along Western Avenue between Sibley Boulevard IDOT, Posen, Dixmoor, property owners and Spaulding Avenue

This can occur in association with redevelopment of adjacent properties.

C

Complete sidewalk gaps along Kedzie Avenue between Route 83/ Sibley Boulevard and 150th Street

Posen, Markham, Cook County

This can occur in association with redevelopment of adjacent properties.

C

Complete sidewalk gaps along the westside of Kedzie Avenue between 155th Street and 159th Street

Markham, Cook County

Sidewalk needed to help provide pedestrian access to existing businesses Continued on the following page

Page | 70

7. Implementation

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Objective 2: Enhance vehicular access to key development sites within the study area to improve safety and accommodate redevelopment.

Priority Project Partners Notes Provide a signal and full access along 159th Street at Irving Avenue IDOT, Markham, adjacent property owners This full access point will be critical to planned C

commercial and industrial development between Western Avenue and Dixie Highway.

IDOT, Markham, adjacent property owners Complete in conjunction with adjacent development and signalization of the 159th/Irving intersection

C

Improve Irving Avenue between 158th St. and 160th Street to accommodate truck traffic

C

Improve 158th or a similar parallel route between Western and Irving, north of 159th to accommodate truck traffic

Markham, adjacent property owners

Complete in conjunction with adjacent development

C

Improve Western Avenue between 154th Avenue and 158th Avenue Markham, Harvey, adjacent property to accommodate truck traffic owners

Complete in conjunction with adjacent development

C

Improve Western Avenue between 160th St. and 162nd Street to accommodate truck traffic

Markham and adjacent property owners

Complete in conjunction with adjacent development

C

Improve 154th Street between Western Avenue and Dixie Highway to accommodate truck traffic

Harvey, adjacent property owners, IDOT for coordination at Dixie Highway intersection

Complete in conjunction with adjacent development

C

Install a traffic signal at the Dixie Highway/152nd Street for access into proposed retail center

Harvey, IDOT, adjacent property owner

Complete in conjunction with adjacent development

B

IDOT, Posen, Dixmoor, adjacent property Create a full access and signalized intersection along Western Avenue, approximately half-way between Sibley Boulevard and I-57 owners, Pace at the existing Aldi entrance and future access into Posen redevelopment site

Full access needed to support existing development, signal needed in conjunction with development of Posen site on Western Avenue

Objective 3: Incorporate Pace bus service into new development to maximize use and safety.

Priority Project Review redevelopment projects with Pace C

Partners Pace, local municipality, developer(s)

Notes See individual site plans for proposed enhancements to cross walks, sidewalks, and potential relocation of some bus stops Continued on the following page

Page | 71

7. Implementation

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Objective 4: Implement gateway and corridor enhancement program to create positive first impression and improve overall image of the area.

Priority Project Develop gateway and wayfinding sign program to identify local A communities, provide directional assistance to motorists, and provide a consistent attractive identity to the area

B

Enhance the I-57 and Sibley Boulevard/147th Street bridge and interchange landscape to welcome visitors to the area and south suburbs

B

Enhance the I-57 and 159th Street bridge and interchange landscape to welcome visitors to the area and south suburbs

C

C

Partners

Notes

See pages 59 and 60 for conceptual sign locations and Dixmoor, Harvey, Markham, Midlothian, themes Posen, SSMMA, Chicago Southland Convention and Visitors Bureau, IDOT, Cook County IDOT, Posen, Harvey, Chicago Southland Convention and Visitors Bureau

IDOT, Markham, Chicago Southland Convention and Visitors Bureau Develop and implement a streetscape improvement program along Markham, IDOT 159th Street between Crawford and Dixie Highway to include decorative street lighting and banners and median landscaping where appropriate Develop and implement a streetscape improvement program along Markham, Harvey, Dixmoor, Posen, IDOT Dixie Highway/Western Avenue to include decorative street lighting and banners

Plans should be coordinated with proposal to add a sidewalk for improved pedestrian safety Plans should be coordinated with proposal to add a sidewalk for improved pedestrian safety Plans should be coordinated with proposal to add a sidewalk for improved pedestrian safety

Page | 72

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

7. Implementation

Funding Sources Multiple funding sources will be needed to implement the numerous recommended improvements. In most cases, multiple sources will need to be combined for each project. Potential funding sources and their application are identified in the following list. Many of these funding sources will require some additional preliminary design work, cost estimates, and a detailed application. It is recommended that local municipalities work closely with SSMMA/CSEDC and CMAP staff in determining appropriate programs.

•

Cook County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and other programs – Cook County has a number of programs available to assist communities with economic development efforts. In particular, they may be a good source for assistance in implementing some of the pedestrian/ sidewalk recommendations within the corridors. Both the Community Development Department and the Economic Development Departments may offer assistance in these areas. http://www.cookcountygov.com

•

Illinois Transportation Enhancement Program (ITEP) – This competitive program can be used for streetscape enhancements including landscaping, gateways, lighting, and pedestrian enhancements. http://www.dot.state.il.us/opp/itep.html

•

The Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO) – A variety of programs are available to assist local governments with economic development efforts. http://www.commerce.state.il.us/dceo/Bureaus/Community_Development/

•

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) – This federal program is coordinated locally by CMAP, and could potentially be used to provide assistance with intersection or bicycle/pedestrian improvements. http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/mobility/strategic-investment/cmaq

•

Municipal budgets – Local municipalities can and should budget funds for improvements within the study area. Most of the grant programs identified require a local match of from anywhere between 10 to 50%.

•

Developer contributions – When there is a direct link to a specific public improvement like intersection signalization, turn lanes, sidewalks, etc. developers are typically required to contribute a portion, and in some cases 100%, of the funds needed for the improvement.

•

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Business Districts (BD) – The area already contains several TIF Districts that can provide funding assistance for public improvements. In addition, communities may wish to consider creation of a Business District, which is a tool that allows creation of an additional sales tax and hotel/motel tax to fund needed pubic improvements.

•

Brownfield/Intermodal Act - This TIF like program is available to local communities in the study area (See description on Page 64 under Land Assembly).

•

Surface Transportation Program (STP) - This federally funded program provides funding for roads, bridges and transit projects on Federal-aid routes.

The program is administered locally by the SSMMA.

Page | 73

APPENDIX A

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Appendix A Methodology for Economic Analysis The assumptions for the five site analyses are as per the adjacent table. These analyses apply a screen to each development concept to determine land value, gauging potential owner response.

Each site feasibility analysis applies these assumptions to estimate project economics by comparing project costs to the value of that site’s development. Incomes, using the net rent assumptions, are the basis for estimating the value of each development, given the assumed and representative investment return. Taking a simple example, a 1,000 square foot space where the property owner has a net operating income of $23 PSF, the gross annual income is $23,000.

The net income (at 85%, or rental income less expenses) would be $19,550, or an 11% return on an investment of $177,727. The construction costs for this example are $125 per square foot.

Therefore, a 1,000 square foot store project costs $125,000 to construct (hard costs). Soft costs, such as marketing and permitting, add 5% to costs, or $6,250. Adding the hard and soft costs, the estimated project cost is $131,250. Table XX summarizes this sample calculation that solves for land value by deducting project total costs from project value.

Sample Calculation Estimated Value

$177,727

Total Project Cost $131,250 Land Value

$46,477

Table A2: Calculation Example In certain estimates, the total project costs exceed the estimated value. This does not necessarily mean that this suggested development scenario is less feasible than one that results in a positive land value. These analyses show why developers seek and lease to a mix of tenants, each paying different rents that make any specific development work financially. It also explains why large box stores often require public/private partnerships with related incentives.

Investment Returns Residential Rental

8%

Untenanted New Development

11%

Tenanted New Development

7.50%

Income/Rental Rates (Per Square Foot) Apartment Rent $1.50 Senior Housing Rent

$1.85

Restaurant/Commercial Rent Market Net Rent

$27

Retail/Commercial Tenant Net Rent

$23

High Volume Large Format Retailer Net Rent

$10

Net Rental Income Less Expenses

85%

Project Costs Additional Soft Costs

5%

Surface Parking Cost/Space $6,000 Construction Costs: Use R. S. Means Quick Cost Estimator.

This tool provides specific costs by building type and location.

Table A1: Assumptions

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Appendix B: Predevelopment Tool Kit PREDEVELOPMENT TOOL KIT To assist stakeholder communities within the SSMMA jurisdictional area, the Predevelopment Toolkit provides detailed descriptions and practical examples concerning municipal preparation for economic development. The descriptions and examples address site identification and planning, and subsequent site redevelopment/development from project initiation through completion including the potential utilization of various municipal developments. The following Predevelopment Tool Kit has been prepared and addresses the following themes:     

strengthening internal municipal capacity mechanisms; effectively planning for desired development; evaluating the potential impacts of the development; soliciting interest from the development community, and determining, where appropriate, public policy variances and/or municipal financing commitment levels as part of any development project.

The Predevelopment Tool Kit includes four sections which summarize the relationship between the priorities and requirements of the private sector when considering development and the public objectives of the municipality in pursuing a vision for the development area. These sections are as follows: 1. The Municipal Checklist: Representative Municipal Inquiries The purpose of The Municipal Checklist is to provide a user friendly overview which highlights the questions which municipal staff and elected officials might ask relative to each stage of the development process. The checklist highlights these questions, answers, and then directs the user to the more complete narrative in the report to provide the answers to these questions.

2. An Economic Development Framework For Municipalities: The “Three-Legged Stool” Approach An Economic Development Framework for Municipalities – The “Three-Legged Stool” Approach discusses the relationship between potential market supportable development; the ability of the public and private sector to agree on a vision based upon market realities; and, the location of land and buildings which can support the development potential.

3. The Municipal Review Process: Guidelines for Evaluating PUD Approval, Zoning Variances, and/or Financial Assistance This underwriting guide provides municipalities with a framework to determine how and when to best use different types of 1

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

development financing incentives. Included within the guide are sample letters, documents, and other information that are typically provided by a municipality to potential developers and other stakeholders involved in the development and redevelopment process.

4. Portfolio of Municipal Economic Development Incentives and Tools: The Portfolio of Municipal Economic Development Incentives and Tools includes a list of strategies and development mechanisms and tools that are successfully utilized by municipalities throughout the country, including numerous sources for additional information and a suggested program for organizing these key economic development and redevelopment efforts.

1.

THE MUNICIPAL CHECK-LIST

Representative Municipal Inquiries Municipal Inquiry: What broad type of support might developers be seeking from my municipality? Why does the private sector need municipal support at times? What are the key factors that create the need for this support?

Response: See page 6 which has a concise list of the eight broad types of support a developer might seek and the seven reasons why particular elements related to a site might require municipal support in order to have a successful development.

Municipal Inquiry: What are the things we can do in advance of actual dialogue about a site with a developer to establish the proper atmosphere for development in our community? Do I need to have a general feel for where the site opportunities may be in my community through a prioritized community inventory.

Response: See page 7 for the list of eight items which a municipality can pursue to create the proper atmosphere for development.

Yes, a prioritized inventory of sites is necessary.

Municipal Inquiry: I understand that establishing development priorities is described as a “three legged stool” process involving:   

The Private Sector Review of Project Potential; The Relationship of Potential Projects to Municipal Goals and Objectives; The Ability of the Site to Sustain the Project.

2

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Municipal Inquiry: What are the issues within each category that should be considered? Is a scoring system ever in order to prioritize sites within my community using the “three legged stool concept?

Response: See pages 8-9 for the eight items related to private sector review; the eleven items related to municipal goals and objectives; and the eight key issues related to the site which are important if the development is to be successful. Yes, a scoring system could be helpful and it is discussed next.

Municipal Inquiry: Until I reviewed these lists, I was not aware that there could be this number of important areas to understand. It sounds like there is a lot of work to do with elected officials and citizens before we actually have a potential development that is going through municipal review. As we bring the three legs of the stool together into our highest priority for sites is there any kind of scoring system which could be helpful?

Response: You are absolutely correct about the pre-development preparation work. This is often the most overlooked area by municipalities. Lack of preparation often leads to developer frustration whereby priorities and rules are being “made up on the fly” by the municipality leading to a lack of municipal direction and excessively long timeframes for the developer.

See pp 9-10 for a potential scoring system and the reasoning behind the system.

Municipal Inquiry: What is a “by right” development request? How is the purpose of this Predevelopment Toolkit different than “by right” development? What is the reason for non-“by right” development requests from developers and property owners?

Response: “By right” development is development where the proposed project fits exactly with zoning and existing municipal policy (i.e. “development approval by the right of zoning and existing established public policy”). Non-“by right” development cannot be done within existing zoning and public policy. Typically, a developer or property owner is attempting to achieve or maximize property value through development not allowed by existing zoning. See page 11 for the seven broad reasons why a non-“by right” request might be made to a municipality and the nine potential reasons peculiar to a site which will require special (non-“by right”) municipal review.

Municipal Inquiry: So, non-“by right” is going to: require much more information from the develop/property owner; much more involvement of all levels of government (and also citizens); and a very proactive approach. This almost sounds like what a bank might do when evaluating a loan. Are there any similarities?

Response: Correct….correct…..correct! Please see page 13 for a summary of the similarities between bank lending and decisions about municipal partnering with the private sector in development.

3

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Municipal Inquiry: What are the six stages of municipal development review and what are the elements within each stage?

Response: See pages 14-19 for a summary of the six stages of development review and the elements within each stage:      

Pre-proposal meeting (nine elements from the developer; seven elements from the municipality) Application (eleven elements) Due diligence (nine elements) Elected official review Documentation Closing

Municipal Inquiry: I know that at some point in the process we will be reviewing a complex developer financial pro-forma but how do I calculate a “bird’s eye view” of the overall financial feasibility of this project? If the project needs the financial help of my municipality how do I determine how much is enough (or too much)?

Response: See the sample in the appendix which summarizes how the “bird’s eye view” is calculated on various projects and which describes the potential decision matrix relative to the “right amount of municipal support in a project” while also offering further explanation in this regard.

Municipal Inquiry: Separate from being approached by an individual developer or property owner I understand there are occasions where our community will seek out multiple developer interest relative to a site via a RFQ and/or an RFP process. It is assumed that the municipality either controls the site or is in partnership with a cooperative owner before an RFQ and/or RFP is considered. What are the pro’s and con’s of each process and could you describe the various elements in a well written RFQ and RFP? Response: See page 21 for a discussion of the pro’s and con’s of RFQ’s vs. RFP’s and pages 21-22 for a summary of the key elements in a well written RFQ/RFP document. There is also reference to some actual examples from a community which successfully executed and RFQ and then an RFP developer solicitation.

Municipal Inquiry: What is the portfolio of economic development tools available to municipalities and how or where do I find more data on some categories?

Response: See pages 24-27 to review a summary of the tools including internet references to learn more about potential state, regional and national resources.

4

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan Local Tools:    

TIF (including a summary of sixteen TIF eligible expenses) SSA’s (Special Service Assessment Districts) Business Districts (Special Districts to Capture Additional Sales Tax Revenue) Other local tool options o Commercial economic development tools through DCEO o Low/Moderate income tax credits o Historic building preservation options

5

APPENDIX B 2.

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR MUNICIPALITIES

The “Three-Legged Stool” Approach: Overview of Development Scenarios When determining the future vision of a development site, development/redevelopment district, or community as a whole, municipalities have many different potential development scenarios to consider. In order to achieve these scenarios, developers may desire and in specific instances require financial incentives for the project to be feasible. These incentives may take various forms including but not limited to: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

TIF funds Property tax rebates Municipal financed infrastructure improvements that would otherwise be paid for by the private sector Grants such as façade improvement rebates, Waiving of impact fees Waiving of liquor license fees Support for tax credit projects Other waived local required costs

The reasons as to why a property owner (or a business tenant), developer, or both may seek municipal financing incentives/support may include: 1. Land values appropriate for the development are below what is being requested by the land owner.

2. A restrictive financing market that doesn’t cover required borrowing costs (i.e. a 30-40% equity requirement for a loan may be too great a burden).

3. Upfront costs to initiate development (which cannot be financed) are large enough to create a cash burden on the developer/project which cannot be overcome.

4. For residential projects, the added cost of parking requirements which are supplemental to market-based price-points for units may create the need for subsidies to move a project forward.

5. Significant environmental remediation costs associated with development/re-development of a specific site.

6. Costs associated with required historic development and/or green development may not be able to be absorbed into the basic business model.

7. The operating plan based on business sales projections (which drives all other items) may need a financing cushion until the business or development/redevelopment has established a balanced cash-flow or profit margin.

6

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Given the complexity of development / redevelopment scenarios and a developer’s unique financing needs, an underwriting guide has been developed which provides standards for municipalities to evaluate the potential of public-private partnership funds. These standards are based upon an assessment of need and the ability of the project to return the investment to the municipality. At times, some of the return may be viewed as “soft” meaning the full return may not be apparent; however, a new business or project may still have the potential to significantly stimulate revitalization, making it a desirable long-term investment opportunity for municipal administrators.

The Role of Municipal Government Successful economic development often times occurs when a municipality assumes a leadership role and actively builds proper partnerships. As such, having a flexible framework for working through the many different paths of a development/redevelopment can be a significant asset and help save valuable public funds. Such is often required in the complex urban redevelopment scenarios where municipalities must evaluate their role in attracting, stimulating and perhaps cooperating with the private sector. In these scenarios, the role of government can include, but is not be limited to: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Assistance in marketing and advertising to attract private sector development/redevelopment interest.

Attendance at various industry based meetings to help build private sector interest.

Advise and counsel property owners and potential developers and tenants.

Improve the environment for the public sector through infrastructure development and maintenance.

Ongoing enforcement of codes and regulations to maintain the proper environment for successful private sector commerce.

Flexible zoning, density and height review, and design guidelines to match development/re development requirements with the municipal vision.

7. Establishment of an effective developer and tenant review process which renders decisions in a timely and effective manner.

8. Potential partnering with the private sector through the use of the aforementioned tools plus other tools such as tax increment financing (TIFs), tax rebates, sponsorship of grant requests, Special Service Assessment (SSA) districts, and other tools, as appropriate.

In advance of the potential role of government as summarized above, municipalities should consider prioritizing opportunities for development/redevelopment and therefore the appropriate use of the various tools at their disposal. These “prioritized opportunities” are essentially an evaluation of the site-by-site opportunities which exist in the study area for either full redevelopment (new construction) or rehabilitation of existing parcel and/or buildings. Analysis of sites and buildings can and often will encompass multiple traditional economic development scenarios (such as retail, commercial, residential, and multi-use) as well as other 7

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

scenarios which support non-traditional development scenarios (municipal buildings, not-for-profit entities, tourism space, recreational space, open space, etc).

The analysis of these opportunities by site has been organized into a three-phased process which can be described as the “Three Legged Stool” approach, in which each “leg” or tenet of economic development is vital to the successful realization of the proposed project.

1. Private Sector Analysis

Based on the perspective of the development community the market potential analysis should factor in: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8)

Potential anchor tenant(s) and current business cluster strength.

Site access and traffic counts.

Purchasing power within 5- and 10-minute drive times.

Regional economics, market competition, and potential for market growth.

Developer awareness and perception of local issues.

Local costs of doing business, including development costs.

Municipal development review and administrative processes.

Local consensus on development vision within the Study Area and surrounding environs.

2. Relationship of Potential Project to Municipal Goals and Objectives

Based on the capability of the property owner(s) and the municipality, the following items should be considered as potential goals and objectives of the project: 1) 2) 3) 4)

Determine if ownership of the parcel should be retained or sold.

Consider what type of use is desired / warranted (by both the owner and municipality).

Determine the level of urgency for completing the desired project.

Establish realistic expectations considering the existing real estate market (this in particularly relevant during economically challenging times).

5) Recognize and state the need to cooperate with municipal government and interests.

6) Understand the contemporary development process.

7) Provide for adequate support mechanisms (legal, financial, etc).

8) Produce a centralized form of decision making (head of partnership, etc.).

9) Foster municipal consensus on the project vision the project and use of necessary and appropriate financial tools.

10) Establish an efficient municipal development review process.

8

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

11) Ensure municipal relationships with other state agencies as necessary and appropriate for approval of the desired project.

3. Ability of the Proposed Site to Sustain the Project

The ability of the site location, land, and buildings to meet market, property owner, and municipal mutual requirements involves evaluating: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8)

Site access and traffic counts.

Visibility, size, and configuration of the site.

Brownfield, wetland, and relative remodeling costs (i.e. asbestos issues.)

Infrastructure support.

Land costs.

Building adequacy or ability to remodel or raze structures, as needed.

Impact of neighboring properties and abutting districts.

Current zoning, height, density and design regulations and guidelines.

Frequently, municipalities must determine the priority level of a potential project and the related question may be how to create a scoring system which “ranks” projects. This is not unreasonable. However, what must be kept in mind is that the process and projects being discussed here are not simple “by right” projects (“by right” projects can be built “by right” of existing zoning:   

the existing zoning allows for the project; the land owner wants to proceed; the land owner is either the developer or has partnered with a developer/builder; and no unusual issues which require municipal review exist (i.e. environmental; unique traffic issues; etc.).

For projects outside of “by right,” which is the focus of this toolkit, a priority system may be appropriate. Accordingly, relative to a proposed project, each leg of the “three legged stool” (private sector review of project potential; relationship of potential project to municipal goals and objectives; and the ability of the proposed site to sustain the project) could be ranked from 1-3 (1 = excellent; 2 = above average; 3 = average) However, an important consideration in using this scoring system is the following two realities: 1) From 2007-2012 The United States was in the worst development environment of the last 50 years and recovery has been slow; and 2) municipal time and resources are severely stretched in this difficult environment and therefore there is little (if any) flexibility in working with “average” opportunities (and certainly no flexibility in working with below average projects).

9

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

As a result, the following scoring system is recommended: Private Sector Review of Project Potential Required score: 1 = Excellent In this development environment, it is unreasonable to pursue any project that the private sector has not identified as an excellent opportunity based upon the eight factors listed under Private Sector Analysis on page 98. Only excellent opportunities in this marketplace are going to get financed and have the full opportunity to be successful.

Relationship of Potential Project to Municipal Goals and Objectives Required Score: 2 = Above Average The project should have an above average ability to meet all eleven of the eleven listed goals and objectives listed under Relationship of Potential Project to Municipal Goals and Objectives on page 98. Some may not be ranked as a “2” on the first day the project is discussed but the municipality must feel that they can move all of the items to a “2” within a reasonable amount of time (i.e. six-nine months).

Ability of the Proposed Site to Sustain the Project Required Score: 2 = Above Average Whatever site issues keep the site from being above average immediately must be able to be rectified at a reasonable cost (within six-nine months).

Again, it is hard to imagine why a project with a ranking less than excellent in category one would be pursued. For the other two categories, Above Average scores which can be achieved in no more than six-nine months are strongly recommended. Pursuing projects with less than above average scores represent a risk to the municipality which they must evaluate before continuing.

Strong “three-legged stools” raise a property to the highest priority. Once this analysis is complete, the municipality may continue district-level development in the following order:   

apply their community vision to the set of strong “three-legged stool projects” to develop final priorities; establish a strategic plan for various site development/redevelopment; and begin to apply the available tools within the role of government as identified by the strategic plan.

Subsequently, government applies the same level of accountability, timelines, budgets, communication techniques, and evaluative process to its strategy as would be expected in any business operation. Included in the plan will be alternate scenarios to consider as the success of any development/redevelopment process or economic scenario may diminish over time.

10

APPENDIXB

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

3.

THE MUNICIPAL REVIEW PROCESS

Guidelines for Evaluating Projects Requiring PUD Approval, Zoning Variances, and/or Financial Assistance Introduction Municipalities regularly review requests from developers, individual property owners, business owners, and even not-for-profit entities to approve proposals that require changes to the developmental or operational processes of an existing entity. These requests go beyond a simple “by right” permitting process, where there is no unique approval requirement beyond meeting the rights specified by zoning.

Municipalities routinely handle these requests by examining:       

Overall rational of the specific request.

The relationship of the request to the vision for the area as part of a “PUD Type” process.

Degree of variance from the requirements of the existing code and/or regulations.

Impact on surrounding property and districts.

The relationship of the requested development to prior decisions which may be similar in nature.

Potential requirements of municipal financial support.

Overall impact of the project on the progress of the established municipal goals.

However, in some cases the overall magnitude of the requested changes warrants much more information than required by the standard review process. Accelerated reviews are typically associated with larger residential development or business development projects (commercial or retail) which often fit one or more of the following criteria:      

Considered part of a “special planning area” (such as the “PUD” type) requiring full municipal review, approval, and perhaps annexation in order to proceed.

Prohibited by existing zoning.

Dependant on financial assistance from the municipality.

Sized differently than projects which have been built in the municipality.

Significant visibility and positively or negatively impact surrounding properties.

Reliant on greater community consensus than is normally required.

11

APPENDIX B   

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Produce a significant financial impact on the municipality.

Produce significant traffic impacts.

Require an increase in municipal support services once built relative to the overall impact of the project.

Any time such development projects exceed “by right” approval (meaning within the existing zoning and requiring no municipal financial assistance), they are eligible for a more detailed review by the municipality. Certainly, the request for financial assistance (tax rebate, TIF funds, local municipal funds for economic development, waiving of permit fees, etc.) triggers a more intensive review.

However, depending on the size of the request, a significant zoning change or the requirements of a “special planning area” could trigger a similar review.

Regardless of whether or not financial assistance is part of a development request, there are two key elements that constitute a maximum municipal review which are: the need for much more project information and the need for a much more expansive municipal review. “Maximum” municipal review means much more information is required about all aspects of the proposed project including detailed information about the projects financing, proposed tenants and the ability of the development team to successfully meet goals and timelines. This is not normally requested relative to a “by right” project. Secondly, “maximum” municipal review means that since the project is outside typical zoning or public policy much more time will be allocated for elected official and citizen review than would be necessary on a “by right” project.

As municipalities customize their review process to appropriately address the individual situation, they may choose to dilute certain conditions as unnecessary. However, when considering simplifying such requirements for developers, municipalities should keep the following considerations in mind: Information: Municipalities should gain as much information about every aspect of the proposed development/redevelopment as possible if the municipality is prepared to spend significant staff and elected official time on the review and if the development/redevelopment will have a measurable and long term impact on the community.

Review Process: To the extent that the proposed project is visible and perhaps a deviation from municipal “business as usual,” it is important to provide the public with a appropriately rigorous review process in advance of project approval or rejection.

12

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

The following pages provide a prototypical phased approach to undertaking project review of development/redevelopment proposals which meet the special circumstances described above. Throughout this approach, municipalities should remain cognizant of the following tenets: Reasonable Expectations: Municipalities should foster an atmosphere of reasonability regarding the extent to which developers are fulfilling municipal requirements. This of course necessitates that municipalities establish the parameters of what is considered reasonable and should be impartial to whether or not the developer wants to provide the required data, so long as information requests are in fact being met. If the project is within a special planning area (e.g. zoning or overlay district), requires significant zoning review, and/or financial assistance is being requested, a reasonable request should be honored.

Fiscal Focus: When a special planning area exists or municipalities themselves are one of a development project’s financial partners, the evaluation process will greatly benefit when conducted in the manner typically used by banks as opposed to the planning / policy conformance and market analysis processes commonly conducted by municipalities (such as standard reviews of unsubsidized housing and simple commercial development proposals). As an example, before proceeding with a loan, a bank will consider the following:         

What percentage does this proposed loan represent to our overall capital and how does the allocation of this capital affect other future lending opportunities?

How does the project compare with the “vision statement” the bank has prepared to guide its’ operations?

How does the quality of the project relate to the bank’s loan scoring system?

Is the rate of return to the bank adequate?

Does the developer have a track record?

Does the developer have enough of their own money involved in the project?

Are the timelines sufficient to assure that project closure will be achieved in a manageable amount of time?

While every project has risk, is the risk reasonable and is the risk protection adequate?

Separate from the inner workings of the loan committee, would the bank be comfortable in having its’ Board, shareholders and customers know more about the loan?

A municipality should ask the same questions.

13

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Accountable Actions: The following process applies objective evaluation criteria that are designed especially for special planning areas or instances when municipal financial investment is requested. This process goes beyond the normal zoning and code conformance evaluation since the community has invested significant time in creating a vision for the area and a responsibility exists to ensure a proposed development/redevelopment (and developer) meets the goals and objectives of that vision. Furthermore, in the case of a request for government financing, there is an equally strong accountability requirement since the municipality acts in the capacity of an equity partner or a banker depending on whether the assistance is a grant or a loan.

Responsive vs. Proactive Engagement: The following process is designed for the highest threshold of evaluation in a non-RFQ/RFP environment (i.e. the municipality did not seek out developers in a competitive process controlled by the RFQ/RFP guidelines). While the initial reaction of the municipality is responsive (receiving the initial thoughts and ideas of the developer/property owner) once it is determined that this is not a “by right” project the entire municipal approach is proactive.

STAGE ONE: Pre-Proposal Meeting Whenever a developer contacts a municipality regarding the possibility of a development/redevelopment project, the municipality should invite the developer to a pre-proposal meeting. This informal meeting with the leading staff member(s) within the municipality is an opportunity to establish a relationship and share information on the physical, financial, and political feasibility of a project. Such meetings are confidential and should not be discussed beyond the immediate participants.

The developer should be prepared to answer at a minimum, these questions at the meeting: 1. What is the experience of the team in developing similar projects?

2. Who are the team members? It is expected that list would include:  Architects, Planners, and/or Engineers  Lawyers  Partners 3. What ownership rights does the team have?

4. What is the development concept?

5. Are there any unusual physical or access issues that the developer wants to discuss?

6. What level of tenant commitment does the project currently have (if any)?

14

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

7. What are the basic economics of the project (anticipated rents, special financing)? Are those assumptions economically feasible?

8. How much government assistance may be needed, and in what format?

If no request is being made the additional steps of this process may not be necessary; however for a special planning area, the process will continue regardless of the potential for financial assistance. At this pre-proposal meeting, the municipality should not provide feedback on the content of the project (unless it is clearly outside of the parameters of the special planning area), but should provide any and all factual information necessary to complete a development application. That information includes: 1. Maps and development/redevelopment documents that designate flood plain and zoning for the development site.

2. A list of both public and private individuals who may be contacted to assist in the development. This list may include, but is not limited to:  A primary staff contact who can provide planning documents.  Contacts at each public and private utility.

3. Project application forms for all permits and planning processes.

4. A copy of the relevant administrative procedures and zoning information that may be purchased for a reasonable fee.

5. A copy of any special planning area documents (as applicable).

6. Municipal design guidelines (as applicable).

7. A thorough explanation of the application process and anticipated timelines for review based upon the municipalities history with similar projects. Timelines can vary based upon the complexity of the project. However, once a fully completed application has been submitted and assuming that calendars can be coordinated for key meetings it is not unreasonable to assume that project approval can be achieved within three-six months.

Following this meeting, it will typically take a developer up to two months to compile the appropriate information and documentation relative to the project application.

STAGE TWO: Application Once the developer is ready to formally seek municipal approval, he/she should submit more precise and detailed information related to the project. It is expected that the press and local interest groups should be notified of the general development/redevelopment proposal at this time, excluding all financing and tenant information which should be kept confidential unless announced by the developer. The written submittal from the developer should include: 1. Details on the development team’s experience including resumes and references.

15

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

2. A site plan that includes engineering, landscaping, and elevation information.

3. A summary of all other relevant approval processes to be conducted (i.e. those required by transportation and environmental agencies, and others).

4. Letters of intent from respective tenants for 70% space.

5. A pro-forma evaluation showing:  Anticipated rents / incomes.  Anticipated cash on cash return.  The financing gap.

6. A petition for the government funding to close the gap by increasing income (i.e. government rebates, property taxes, etc.) or decreasing project capital costs (i.e. government pays for infrastructure).

7. A financing proposal that shows funding sources for construction with contact information and lists of all government participation necessary to build the project.

8. A project budget.

STAGE THREE: Due Diligence The municipal response to the application should entail a thorough analysis of the physical proposal and careful consideration of the request for financial support. In the case of a special planning area, the conformance of the project to the vision of the municipality’s plan is of prime importance.

As part of this process, the municipality should request that independent market analysis, traffic/parking, fiscal impact, and land use studies be conducted by the municipality’s regular consultants and paid for by the developer. While the developer is completing municipal requested studies, the staff should undertake due diligence. The due dilligence process includes: 1. Check Developer Credentials:  Verify references.  Confirm banking relationships.  Interview any existing tenants of a developer’s current real estate holdings.  Conduct site visits of controlled properties/projects.  Confirm land control issues.

2. Perform a Market Analysis for Project Feasibility (paid for by the developer): 3. Conduct Traffic/Infrastructure Studies (paid for by the developer):  Determine capacity of area roadways.  Identify required access improvements.

16

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Identify water/sewer and utility connections and capacity.

Calculate costs and assign amounts to the appropriate financial stakeholder (federal, state, or local government, developer, etc.).

Conduct a Land Use Impact Study (paid for by the developer):  Evaluate the anticipated impact on adjacent properties.  Contemplate the potential impact on competing businesses (competition should not necessarily be viewed as undesirable).  Consider the potential for spin-off projects.

Conduct a Fiscal Impact Study (paid for by the developer):  Calculate potential increased tax revenue from the completion of the project.  Ascertain the positive and/or negative impact on tax revenue to the surrounding area.  Determine if there are increased safety costs associated with the project.  Factor in the cost of providing infrastructure outside of the project site boundaries.  Weigh the cost of investment against the anticipated revenues to gauge cost effectiveness of the project.

Determine Conformance to Community Policy and Goals:  Consider how the project fits with community standards and expectations.  Consider how well the project corresponds with the established special planning area vision.  Confirm the market analysis is accurate.  Evaluate the potential for new employment that the project may generate.  Ensure that the project’s appearance enhances the local environment.  Consider how the project improves the overall quality of life within the project area and overall community.

Evaluate Site, Building, and Engineering Plans:  Check conformance with applicable zoning regulations.  Check conformance with infrastructure requirements and capacity.  Check conformance with municipal design guidelines (as appropriate).  Evaluate the level of progress being made toward completion of the municipal or regional comprehensive plan(s).

Establish Legal Protections:  Determine the legality of the financial commitment.  Ensure the process is not in conflict with other municipal governing processes.

Municipal Underwriting of Financials and Requested Assistance:  Draw up a financial and construction timeline.  

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

17

APPENDIX B    

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Develop a contingency plan for cost overruns.

Identify a separate funding source(s) for operating business tenants and calculate five years worth of financial projections.

Review and/or develop the project marketing plan.

Identify how the requested incentives relate to overall investment and profitability.

The magnitude of municipal financial involvement (if requested) will vary significantly by municipal size, project scale, market trends, and overall economic conditions. Ultimately municipality must determine:      

The overall strength of the project with or without municipal financial support.

The role of municipal financial support in achieving current market capitalization rates or profitability factors for various project types.

The return on the municipal investment.

The risk factors associated with the return of the municipal investment.

The importance of the project to achieving the municipal vision for the area (i.e. more risk might be considered for a pioneer project as opposed to a proposal within a “successful” area).

Community consensus regarding the project.

The information in the appendix clearly outlines the arithmetic process whereby a municipality can work with a developer to determine a “birds eye view” of where there are “holes” (inadequate financial coverage) in a project which make it unprofitable or slightly profitable but too risky to proceed. The development assumptions that are part of the process are also in the appendix. This information can be utilized on a year-to-year basis by updating the data sources and receiving periodic updates from the consultant and developer communities. It is important to note that two data fields (land preparation costs) and tax revenue from the project can utilize approximations but lend themselves to more specific analysis through an civil engineering firm and a firm that specializes in TIF creation and TIF projections. This “bird’s eye view” does not replace the detailed developer proforma which will be required later in the process.

While there are no “absolute” rules, the following may be helpful: 



Except in rare instances, municipal participation should not exceed 20% of a project. The farther below 20% the better.

The more the participation exceed 20%: the more risk there is for the municipality; and the higher the probability that the municipality is building a project which the marketplace would not build on its’ own.

Muncipal participation typically does not exceed the funds the developer has in the project.

18

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan  

Risk goes beyond how the project “looks and feels.” Municipalities could be liable for project shortfalls with a bank just like the developer.

TIF law may be changing. TIF planning should not always assume today’s law is permanent.

This stage should result in a staff recommendation detailing the project conditions that must be met in order to commit municipal approval and, as applicable, municipal funding. Additionally, a comprehensive summary of all aspects of the project (including financial) should be developed which details the “who, what, when, and how” of both developer requirements and municipal requirements.

STAGE FOUR: Elected Official Review After the staff and the developer agree on the terms and conditions of project approval and the contents of the term sheet, a public workshop is held to present the project. The purpose of this workshop is to forge agreement on the concept plan, grant authorization to proceed with the drafting of a redevelopment agreement, and provide an opportunity for public comment on the project.

STAGE FIVE: Documentation Assuming the municipality authorizes the drafting of a development/redevelopment agreement, such is prepared and negotiated by the staff. As necessary, the municipality then enacts legislation to establish: project approvals; a public private partnership; and, the public funding commitment.

STAGE SIX: Closing The municipality examines the same proof of performance that bank investors require such as title survey, leases, insurance, development/redevelopment agreement, and construction contracts. This examination must take place prior to final project approval and the transferring of funds (where applicable) to the developer. Although funds are not transferred until the project is completed, the potential financial commitment of the municipality is understood to be part of the equity considered by other financing entities.

Additional Requirements of an RFQ / RFP Process When a municipality acquires land and then chooses to seek developers, a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) / Request for Proposals (RFP) process will often be initiated (this may also happen in the rare instance when the municipality agrees to “partner” with a private sector owner who controls land but who has agreed to act in a cooperative manner with the municipality).

19

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

The municipality must first decide whether an RFQ / RFP process or an RFP-only process will be initiated. There is no “right answer” in this regard. The RFQ / RFP process has a lower initial threshold requirement (RFQ) for the development community and therefore has the opportunity to attract the highest level of interested applicants. Accordingly, projects which are complicated and require the greatest creative vision (which are usually larger) often begin with an RFQ in order to encourage the largest developers to apply, such as those who retain the capability and vision as well as the willingness to exploit multiple development opportunities and therefore seek the most efficient entry into the municipal review process. When such firms make the “short list” for the subsequent RFP process, they know that their time-consuming and costly efforts to complete the RFP process have a higher potential return-oninvestment since they are on the “short list.”

Various uses of RFQ and RFP are reasonable depending on the needs of the municipality. Recently, municipalities have been utilizing a process whereby a developer is actually selected after an RFQ process (without a subsequent RFP) and then the municipality goes directly into negotiations with a developer on multiple project issues.

20

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan Summary of Pro’s and Con’s to RFQ’s and RFP’s: Pros RFQ

Easier to/for developers to respond Better probability for wider developer response Easier to draft Provides more options for developer creativity relative to the site Easier to evaluate In difficult current marketplace, almost mandatory, absent a very unique site

RFP

Cons Less specific detail about the site and plans for the site A second level of more detailed developer(s) review will be required later in the process (either and RFP or specific discussions/negotiations with a single developer) Considering # 2, a longer overall timeline from beginning to final developer selection

More specific detail relative to developer plans and developer capability

Severely limits the number of developer responses

Shorter overall timeline

Limits developer creativity relative to the site Harder to draft Requires much more detailed consensus in advance of issuing the RFP at all levels of government and perhaps even with citizens More time required to evaluate the first phase of developer responses

Again, it may also be appropriate to issue and RFQ and then an RFP (to a more limited audience) in sequence.

The RFQ / RFP process should be comprehensive yet very concise. Developers are not interested in reviewing potential contracts with the municipality or legal documents at this stage. If there is something in those documents that is particularly significant, it can be pointed out in a simple manner.

21

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

The following are the key sections that RFQ and RFP documents should contain. Each should provide a concise explanation of what the municipality expects from potential developers: Cover Letter: The cover letter should include (in the following order: a. b. c. d. e. f.

a brief summary of the RFQ/RFP process to be followed; a brief summary of the location and site characteristics; who controls the site and their role; how does the municipality prioritize this development opportunity; municipal planning/preparation steps already taken; municipal flexibility relative to developer creativity about the site; information as to how developers respond and within what timelines; date of pre-submittal meeting/conference call; other municipal contact information.

Project Overview: A brief description of the project Development Objectives: A clear statement of the goals and objectives the municipality hopes to accomplish with the project.

Role of the Municipality: The municipal role in the development process and what other roles the municipality will consider taking on, based upon the quality and impact of the development plan.

Description of the Developer Selection Process RFQ Requirements (if RFQ is used): Should include submittal document format and 6-8 key elements to be contained in the submittal.

RFQ Basis For Evaluation:

Key issues the municipality will evaluate

RFP Submittal Requirements: (if RFQ is used): Initially, the municipality is advising the developer as to what will be required for those on the “short list”.

RFP Basis for Evaluation: Key issues the municipality will evaluate Next Steps for Selected Developer: Should include a request for a “Developer of Record Designation”/ timeline to negotiate a final contract with the municipality.

Proprietary Information: Describe what is proprietary Response Deadline / Due Date: Specific Method of Submittal: Provide a postal address for sending a hardcopy response and/or an email address if the municipality wishes to receive the documentation in electronic format. If the latter, it is standard practice to send a confirmation email to the submitter to ensure the documentation was received.

Attachments and Additional Information: This can be extensive and include: comprehensive plans, a master plan, design guidelines, zoning maps and ordinances, site plans, renderings, and any/all other available information about the project site.

22

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Such information should be posted on a municipal website as opposed to sending an overwhelming package of hardcopy documents.

Again, these concepts can be modified to meet individual municipal requirements; however, the municipality should always balance its “need to know” with the requirements of the established process.

Finally, this underwriting guide is meant to be a sample framework which can be adapted to individual municipal needs. Likewise, documents such as “applications” can be crafted to meet internal requirements.

23

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

4. A PORTFOLIO OF MUNICIPAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES AND TOOLS Municipal economic development incentives are commonplace for communities seeking to offer the greatest flexibility in regards to development/redevelopment assistance. The following list of tools federal, state and local opportunities and capabilities and are packaged as a potential portfolio of municipal options all oriented to economic development. This list of tools represents the composite list of options currently available municipalities.

Traditional Local Tools

Tax Increment Financing (TIF): The following areas are subject to improvement via the use of TIF funds:                

Public infrastructure Streetscape Land write down Land acquisition Planning costs Sewer and drainage Traffic control Landscaping Park improvements Bridge construction and repair Demolition Utilities Street reconditioning and lighting Water supply Environmental remediation Parking structures

24

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Special Service Assessment Districts: These districts generate revenue in the form of a special property tax, approved by property owners, in a defined district. The proceeds from this tax may then used to fund development/redevelopment improvements which benefit the property owners within the district.

Typical eligible expenses include:     

Marketing Planning Streetscapes Maintenance Public/Private Management Organizations

Business Districts (BD’s): Similar to SSA’s, these are specific areas which allow municipalities to capture up to an additional 1.0 % in sales tax which must be reinvested into the respective area. TIF eligibility standards are utilized to define Business Districts.

Other Tools and Development Strategies         

Property tax, equipment tax, and sales tax rebates.

Façade improvement grants which may include consideration of internal build-outs and landscaping as an additional eligible expense.

Liaison with IDOT for private development.

Utilization of currently owned municipal land for development purposes (i.e. no TIF funds would be required for an acquisition or land write down).

Working capital loans (a municipal support mechanism with substantial risk).

Creation of improved public transportation services.

The use of liquor licenses to stimulate quality food and beverage business, which can be used in concert with façade improvement funds, as applicable.

Municipal equity positions in quasi-private buildings (i.e. convention centers).

Parking improvements (includes construction of new parking and improvement of existing lots and facilities. Also, the subsidizing of parking rates can be implemented in an effort to encourage public use).

25

APPENDIX B       

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Granting of zoning and easement modifications.

Acceleration of the municipal review process.

Reductions or elimination of fees for selected development initiatives.

Grants / loans for sustainable projects (i.e. green development).

Assistance to the private sector in the recruitment of candidates for jobs and employee housing options.

Providing municipal security and/or enhanced maintenance for special areas.

Providing capital for marketing events, community initiatives, and/or tenant recruitment.

Additional information related to the above-mentioned tools, and others, is provided below: Commercial Economic Development: The State of Illinois administrates state (and federal) funds through the Department of Community and Economic Opportunity (DCEO) www.commerce.state.il.us/dceo/. A comprehensive array of programs are offered including but not limited to grants to municipalities; the Advantage Illinois Program (small business lending, start-up’s, venture capital); local government assistance and training; low income population support; job training; a revolving business incentive fund; the Main Street Program; urban assistance, and others.

Low-Moderate Income Housing Support: The Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program has been widely used to support residential development throughout the United States. The following web site provides an excellent summary of these programs and the process municipalities can follow to access support: www.danter.com/taxcredit.

Historic Building Preservation Support: The Illinois Historic Preservation Agency administers the tax credit program which supports the costs associated with the renovation of historic buildings. To access this information: www.illinoishistory.gov.

Chicago Southland Economic Development Corporation: CSEDC is responsible for identifying, organizing, and collecting public and private resources in order to promote local businesses. As a result, initiatives led by the CSEDC provide economic growth, job opportunities, and development potential throughout the Chicago southland. (csedc.info) South Suburban Mayors & Managers Association: Located south of the City of Chicago, SSMMA is an intergovernmental agency providing technical assistance and joint services to 42 municipalities representing a population over 650,000 in Cook and Will Counties. SSMMA members work cooperatively on transportation, legislation, land use, economic development, housing, storm water and open space planning, infrastructure, public safety, human resources, recycling and purchasing.(www.ssmma.org)

26

APPENDIX B

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Chicago Southland Housing & Community Development Collaborative: The Collaborative is an inter-jurisdictional approach to address housing and community development in the southern suburbs of Chicago. Through advocacy and by leveraging resources and partnerships, the Collaborative develops regional solutions, programs and educational opportunities to advance the goals of the member communities. (cshcdc.org) South Suburban Land Bank Development Authority: The South Suburban Land Bank and Development Authority is a newly forming organization which aims to incentivize economic development through the management and development of vacant, abandoned, and tax-foreclosed properties. Through the Authority municipalities in the southern suburbs can effectively transform these properties back into productive parcels that reinvest in the community.

Cook County Department of Planning & Development: The Cook County Department of Planning and Development

(http://www.cookcountygov.com )is the principle regulatory body for planning and development issues throughout the county. The Department offers a variety of tools and incentives aimed at promoting economic opportunities and business development. The goals of these tools is to promote: Sustainable community investment.

Business growth, attraction, and retention.

Affordable housing.

Regional planning.

Workforce development Based on the variety of tools and strategies available to municipalities, communities should organize their support for economic development within four packages or categories and select the appropriate level of support on an annual basis. These packages/categories include:    

New Development Existing Building/Site Renovation External Recruitment of Developers and Tenants Downtown / Business District Marketing and Events

27

I-294/I-57 Interchange Land Use and Economic Development Plan

Appendix C The marketing sheets for the five selected redevelopment sites are on the following pages.

APPENDIX C

CHICAGO

DESTINATION

94

Lake Michigan

55 iles

ILLINOIS INDIANA

10 m

POSEN, ILLINOIS

294

Location! Location! Location!

57

Site

355 Key retail opportunity near the new I-294/I-57 Interchange

94

80 80

Excellent Regional Access

Key Features

Sibley Boulevard and Western Avenue

HIGH VISIBILITY

Located at the interchange of Interstate 57 and Sibley Boulevard, with I-57 visibility and near new I-294/I-57 Interchange

Posen and Commercial Area Statistics 10 Minutes

A

Total Population

1 5 9 ,2 7 0

6 ,0 4 4

Average Household Income

$ 5 7 , 7 35

$ 6 2 ,2 7 9

5 4 ,2 2 6

1 ,0 5 8

Consumer Expenditures

$ 6 5 3, 1 2 4 , 5 8 7

$ 4 4 , 9 33, 2 6 0

Eating and Drinking

$ 1 1 6 , 36 0 , 6 8 7

$ 6 , 8 30 , 8 6 1

$ 6 7 , 5 5 1 , 31 5

$ 4 ,4 5 8 ,7 6 3

Total Employees

$

S

Grocery Stores ©

Posen

2 0 1 3, b y E x p e r i a n , ©

2 0 1 3A lt e r y x , In c . Ir v in e , C A

DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL

15.7 acre vacant site zoned Highway Commercial within an existing TIF District

ADJACENT USES

Corner location at Sibley Boulevard and Western Avenue/Dixie Highway surrounded by successful recent development

TRAFFIC COUNTS

Average Daily Traffic counts (ADTs) at the site are 48,100 with over 100,000 along Interstate 57

90

Contacts:

Scan this QR code for detailed site information or go to www.29457landuse.com

Donald W. Schupek

Village President

Village Of Posen 2440 Walter Zimny Drive Posen, IL 60469 708-385-0139

Reggie Greenwood

Deputy Director of Economic Dev.

SSMMA 1906 W. 174th Street, East Hazel Crest, IL 60429 708-922-4671

reggie.greenwood@ssmma.org

Site Plan showing development potential

Proposed Uses Large Format Retail at 80,000 sq. ft. to 100,000 sq. ft.

349

I-5 7

Retail Parking for 280 cars

57

NEW SIDEWALK

Four (4) to Seven (7) Outlot/Pad WEST

DIXMOOR TOWN CENTER

VE. ERN A

NEW OUTLOT 4000 Sq.Ft.

NEW SIGNAL ALIGNED WITH EXISTING RI/RO AT COMMERCIAL CENTER TO EAST

RETAIL 80,000 Sq.Ft. NEW OUTLOTS 8000 Sq.Ft.

980’

NEW OUTLOTS 8000 Sq.Ft.

JOLIET

354 EXISTING SIDEWALK

SIBLEY BLVD

PACE BUS ROUTE

WAY

HIGH

PROPOSED PACE BUS STOP

349

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNALL

DIXIE

EXISTING PACE BUS STOP

N

354

CHICAGO

DESTINATION

94

Lake Michigan

55 iles

ILLINOIS INDIANA

10 m

MIDLOTHIAN, ILLINOIS

294

Location! Location! Location!

57 94

Site

355 Key retail opportunity near the new I-294/I-57 Interchange

90 80

80

Excellent Regional Access

Key Features

147th Street

HIGH VISIBILITY

Located at the busy intersection of 147th Street and Kedzie Avenue.

Midlothian and Commercial Area Statistics A

10 Minutes

Midlothian

Total Population

129,706

14,930

Average Household Income

$57,773

$67,284

48,282

2,460

Total Employees

$

Consumer Expenditures

$941,469,203 $139,234,984

Eating and Drinking

$164,162,746

Grocery Stores

$100,513,520

© 2013, by Experian, © 2013 Alteryx, Inc. Irvine, CA

$21,621,696 $14,603,501

DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL

Northwest corner location with access to both corridors.

ADJACENT USES

A Walgreens is located at the southeast corner of the site, with a Dunkin Donuts, Sharks, and Curves nearby.

TRAFFIC COUNTS

Average Daily Traffic counts (ADTs) at this site are at 37,600 for both corridors.

Contacts:

Scan this QR code for detailed site information or go to www.29457landuse.com

Sharon Rybak

Village President Village Of Midlothian

14801 S. Pulaski Road Midlothian, IL 60445 708 597-5099

Reggie Greenwood

Deputy Director of Economic Dev.

SSMMA 1906 W. 174th Street, East Hazel Crest, IL 60429 708-922-4671

reggie.greenwood@ssmma.org

Proposed Uses 0.7 acre site 7,500 sq. ft. of potential restaurant/retail with drive through Retail parking for 57 cars

Site Plan showing development potential

2-3 RESTAURANT/RETAIL SPACES 1 DRIVE THRU 7,500 Sq.Ft 57 CARS (7.6 cars/1000 SF) ALLEY

EXISTING SIDE WALK SCREEN FENCE

KEDZIE AVE

SIDE WALK SANTER AVE

359

OUTDOOR DINING AREA EXISTING PACE SHELTER

83

PERIMETER LANDSCAPE

147th STREET

354

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

N PACE BUS ROUTE

JOHN’S ITALIAN BEEF

CHICAGO

DESTINATION

94

Lake Michigan

55 iles

ILLINOIS INDIANA

10 m

MARKHAM, ILLINOIS

294

Location! Location! Location!

57 94 90

Site

Key retail opportunity near the new I-294/I-57 Interchange 355

80 80

Key Features HIGH VISIBILITY

159th Street and Kedzie Avenue

Established community shopping center located on one of the south suburbs highly traveled corridor. Highly accessible from both Interstates 294 and 57. 26,000 ADT on 159th and 20,600 on Kedzie Avenue.

Markham and Commercial Area Statistics A v

3 $

S

10 Minutes

Markham

127,5999

12,600

$63,761

$59,939

57,535

3,779

$1,047,080,034

$82,110,194

Eating and Drinking

$169,463,344

$6,830,861

Grocery Stores

$105,107,372

$7,923,492

Total Population Average Household Income Total Employees Consumer Expenditures

© 2013, by Experian, © 2013 Alteryx, Inc. Irvine, CA

DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL In-line spaces and outlots available for immediate occupancy. Located in a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district with potential to improve the center and enhance value.

ADJACENT USES Located near major employers, including the Cook County Courthouse in Markham. Join current mix of tenants serving the local community and regional destination shoppers.

Contacts:

Scan this QR code for detailed site information or go to www.29457landuse.com

Reggie Greenwood

John Thompson

Economic Dev. Director

Deputy Director of Economic Dev.

City Of Markham 16313 S. Kedzie Parkway Markham, IL 60428 708-331-4905

SSMMA 1906 W. 174th Street, East Hazel Crest, IL 60429 708-922-4671

reggie.greenwood@ssmma.org

Proposed Uses ! l 1,400 to 31,510 sq. ft.

12 existing in-line spaces available for rent, ranging in size from New restaurant outlot on 159th Street.

Updated facades and landscaping for improved exterior building appearance and better circulation within Canterbury.

Unique public-private partnership to develop joint Canterbury and Markham festival and event space.

WHIPPPLE

ADD NEW RRFB TO PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS TO MALL & MCDONALD’S NEW SIDEWALK

ENTRY FEATURES • SIGNAGE • LANDSCAPED PONDS • OVERLOOKS

159th STREET

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

Ashley Stewart

KEDZIE

SAWYER

REORGANIZED PARKING & THRU LANES TO CREATE WIDER PEDESTRIAN WALKS AND OUTDOOR SEATING

364

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

FRANCISCO

364

NEW OUTLOT WITH DRIVE THRU 4000 Sq.Ft.

ALBANY

TROY

Site Plan showing development potential

ADD PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL & CROSSWALKS TO PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TO PARK & MALL

LANDSCAPED POND LANDSCAPED POND

Available Spaces

ROESNER PARK

Star Beauty City Trends

Fairplay Foods

160TH

Available Space

Unique

Available Space

CW Price

LANDSCAPED MULTI-PURPOSE PLAZA SPACE • FOOD TRUCKS • FARM MARKET • EXPANDED PROGRAMMING FROM PARK TO EAST

Dollar Tree

RIC

MALL FACADE ENHANCEMENTS

HM ON

PEDESTRIAN WALKS/CROSSWALKS

D

PLAZA ENHANCEMENTS

PACE BUS ROUTE EXISTING PACE BUS STOP

SHERWOOD

NOTT

INGH

AM

CHICAGO

DESTINATION

94

Lake Michigan

55 iles

ILLINOIS INDIANA

10 m

HARVEY, ILLINOIS

294

The Blues Brothers played here!

57 94

355 Key retail opportunity near the new I-294/I-57 Interchange

Site

90

80 80

Excellent Regional Access

Key Features FAMOUS VISITORS

Dixie Highway Harvey and Commercial Area Statistics A

10 Minutes

Harvey

Total Population

114,788

25,408

Average Household Income

$55,888

$47,991

42,015

13,445

$1,113,448,545

$122,319,461

Eating and Drinking

$192,980,853

$25,688,194

Grocery Stores

$114,806,014

$13,536,263

Total Employees

$

Consumer Expenditures

© 2013, by Experian, © 2013 Alteryx, Inc. Irvine, CA

This site was formerly home to the Dixie Square Mall which Jake and Elwood turned into a drive-thru in the movie.

HIGH VISIBILITY Site is located proximate to Interstates 294 and 57.

Access to two busy corridors on 147th Street and 159th Street.

DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL

The site is prepared for immediate development. It is one of the region’s largest available retail development sites at 44 acres and is located in an established Tax Increment Financing district. There is also potentioal for signalized acces.

ADJACENT USES

Nearby major tenants include McDonalds, Aldi, and Family Dollar.

Contacts:

Scan this QR code for detailed site information or go to www.29457landuse.com

LaTonya Rufus

Director of Planning & Dev.

City of Harvey 15320 Broadway Avenue Harvey, IL 60426 708-210-5350

ROBEY AVE

SEELEY AVE

151st STREET

HOYNE AVE

COOPER AVE

LEAVITT AVE

VAIL AVE

(600 cars)

(600 cars)

HWY

1860 CAR PARKING 4.2 PER 1000 SF OF RETAIL (500 cars)

ABBOT STREET

3 ACRE PAD SITE

RETAIL 160k Sq.Ft.

RETAIL

RETAIL

Retail at 440,000 sq. ft.

ROBEY AVE

DIXIE

Plan includes sustainable features such as bio-swales, excellent pedestrian connectivity, and a public events plaza.

JESSE JACKSON JR. SENIOR CENTER

SENIOR LIVING

PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL

40k Sq.Ft.

RETAIL 200k Sq.Ft.

HARVEY FIRE DEPT. STATION #3

364

HOYNE AVE

EXISTING PACE BUS STOP

COOPER AVE

LEAVITT AVE

PACE ROUTE 364

Three (3) Outlot/Pad Sites of 2-3 acres each Outlot Parking for 120 cars

CITY OF HARVEY POLICE DEPT.

PEDESTRIAN PATHS/ SIDEWALKS

Retail Parking for 1,860 cars

40k Sq.Ft.

2.4 ACRE PAD SITE

EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL

SSMMA 1906 W. 174th Street, East Hazel Crest, IL 60429 708-922-4671

Proposed Uses

2 ACRE PAD SITE

STATE OF ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES

Deputy Director of Economic Dev.

reggie.greenwood@ssmma.org

Site Plan showing development potential COOPER PARK

Reggie Greenwood

154th STREET

COOK COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY

Senior Housing (3 stories) with 480 rooms

CHICAGO

DESTINATION

94

Lake Michigan

55 iles

ILLINOIS INDIANA

10 m

DIXMOOR, ILLINOIS

294

57

Site

Location! Location! Location!

94 90

355 Key development opportunity near the new I-294/I-57 Interchange

8 80

Perspective view of the option showing residential development

Western Avenue and I-57

Key Features

Dixmoor and Commercial Area Statistics A

10 Minutes

Dixmoor

Total Population

135,354

3,678

Average Household Income

$56,002

$41,010

46,934

1,046

$909,989,097

$18,365,083

$95,752,642

$2,062,637

$161,649,287

$3,855,672

Total Employees

$

Consumer Expenditures Eating and Drinking

S

Grocery Stores

© 2013, by Experian, © 2013 Alteryx, Inc. Irvine, CA

HIGH VISIBILITY

The site is highly visible from Interstate 57 on Western Avenue, and it is accessible from multiple streets.

DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL

A majority of this site is currently vacant. It is a highly accessible location near the Sibley Boulevard and Interstate 57 interchange.

ADJACENT USES

There are nearby successful commercial, retail, and restaurant developments, including Aldi, Family Dollar, and Checkers.

Contacts:

Scan this QR code for detailed site information or go to www.29457landuse.com

John Thompson

Economic Dev. Director

Village of Dixmoor 170 W. 145th St. Dixmoor, IL 60426 708-389-6121

Reggie Greenwood

Deputy Director of Economic Dev.

SSMMA 1906 W. 174th Street, East Hazel Crest, IL 60429 708-922-4671

reggie.greenwood@ssmma.org

Option 1 Site Plan showing residential development Proposed Uses

349

NEW SIDEWALK

SP AU

EXISTING PACE SHELTER

66 TOWNHOME UNITS LD

6

IN

G

REAR LOADED 2 CAR GARAGES HOMES FRONT ONTO GREEN SPACES ON-STREET VISITOR PARKING

AV E

6

6 6

WES AVE

EXISTING SIDEWALK

DAVIS COUR T

TERN

COMMERCIAL 6000 Sq.Ft.

Opportunity for development of 66 townhome units.

Potential restaurant or other commercial use site of 1.4 acres with ample parking.

6 6

6 6

7 5 143RD STREET PACE BUS ROUTE

Option 2 Site Plan showing commercial development WESTERN AVENUE COMMERCIAL : 20k SF 100 Cars + Outdoor Storage SPAUDLING AVE/ DAVIS COURT COMMERCIAL : 45k SF 135 Cars + Outdoor Storage (15 Cars + Outdoor Storage per each 5k SF Building)

349

NEW SIDEWALK

SP AU

EXISTING PACE SHELTER

LD

IN

G

10k

AV E

WES T

5k

VE ERN A

5k 10k

DAVIS COURT

EXISTING SIDEWALK

5k 5k 5k

5k 5k 5k 5k

143RD STREET PACE BUS ROUTE

Proposed Uses Opportunity for development of commercial uses with ample parking.