conduct to be followed during the public comment period and
the duration of all committee and City Council, meetings,
profane vulgar, threatening abusive or disruptive language
is not permitted. Demeaning discriminatory or harassing
behavior and speech directed towards others is not
permitted disruptive behavior, including disruptive or
disrespectful conduct during others presentations is not
permitted, banners flyers, or signage are not permitted
backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color that do not exceed 12 by 12
by 6. In will be permitted in our subject to search health
food and beverages including in metal canisters are not
permitted cell phones. Must be placed on silent prior to
entering the meeting room. Individuals must remain, seated,
public comments speakers are permit.
to stand only when providing public comment, small handheld
devices may be used only while seated and the user must
refrain from interfering with the view or hearing of other
individuals, individuals or groups failing to adhere to.
These rules will be asked to see such disruptive conduct
and failure to comply. Will result in there being subject
to removal from the meeting by the sergeant-at-arms.
City of Chicago city council rules of conduct for public
meetings, 2023 to 2027, pursuant to the Chicago city
council Rules of Order and procedure rule, 49, the Sergeant
at Arms sets forth. The following rules of conduct to be
followed during the public comment period and the duration
of all committee and City Council, meetings, profane vulgar
vulgar, threatening abusive or disruptive language is not
permitted. Demeaning discriminatory or harassing behavior
and speech directed towards others is not permitted,
disruptive behavior.
Including disruptive or disrespectful contacting. Others
presentations is not permitted, banners flyers, or signage
are not permitted backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects
are not permitted. Clear bags, not tinted in color that do
not exceed 12 by 12 by 6. In will be permitted in our
subject to search all food and beverages including in metal
canisters are not permitted cell phones. Must be placed on
silent prior to entering the meeting room. Individuals must
remain seated. Public comments are permitted to stand only
when providing public comment, small handheld devices may
be used only while seated and the user must refrain from
interfering with the view or hearing of other individuals,
individuals or groups failing to adhere to. These rules
will be asked to see such disruptive conduct and failure to
comply. Will result in there being subject to removal from
the meeting by the Sergeant at Arms.
City of Chicago city council rules of conduct for public
meetings, 2023 to 2027, pursuant to the Chicago city
council Rules of Order and procedure rule, 49, the
sergeant-at-arms sets forth, the following rules of conduct
to be followed during the public comment period and the
duration of all committee and City Council, meetings,
profane vulgar, threatening abusive or disruptive language
is not permitted demeaning discriminatory or harassing
behavior and speech directed towards others is not
permitted disruptive behavior, including disruptive or
disrespectful conduct during others presentations is not
permitted, banners flyers, or signage are not permitted
backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color that do not exceed 12 by 12
by 6. In will be permitted in our subject to search all
food and beverages including in metal canisters are not
permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the
meeting room. Individuals must remain seated, public
comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing
public comment, small handheld devices may be used only
while seated and the user must refrain from interfering
with the view or hearing of other individuals, individuals
or groups failing to adhere to. These rules will be asked
to see such disruptive conduct and failure to comply. Will
result in their being subject to removal from the meeting
by the sergeant-at-arms.
City of Chicago city, council rules of conduct for public
meetings, 2023 to 2027, pursuant to the Chicago city
council Rules of Order and procedure rule, 49, the
sergeant-at-arms sets forth, the following rules of conduct
to be followed during the public comment period and the
duration of all committee and City Council, meetings,
profane vulgar, threatening abusive or disruptive language
is not permitted. Demeaning discriminatory or harassing
behavior and speech directed towards. Others is not
permitted disruptive behavior, including disruptive or
disrespectful.
Full content. During others presentations is not permitted,
banners flyers, or signage are not permitted backpacks,
large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted. Clear
bags, not tinted in color that do not exceed 12 by 12. By 6
inches will be permitted in our subject to search all food
and beverages including in metal canisters are not
permitted cell phones. Must be placed on silent prior to
entering the meeting room. Individuals must remain seated,
public comments speakers, are permitted to stand only when
providing public comment, small handheld devices may be
used only while seated and the user must refrain from
interfering with the view or hearing of other individuals,
individuals or groups failing to adhere to. These rules
will be asked to see such disruptive conduct and failure to
comply. Will result in there being subject to removal from
the meeting by the Sergeant at Arms.
City of Chicago city, council rules of conduct for public
meetings, 2023 to 2027, pursuant to the Chicago city
council Rules of Order and procedure rule, 49, the
sergeant-at-arms sets forth, the following rules of conduct
to be followed during the public comment period and the
duration of all committee and City Council, meetings,
profane vulgar, threatening abusive or disruptive language
is not permitted. Demeaning discriminatory or harassing
behavior and speech directed towards others is not
permitted disruptive behavior, including disruptive or
disrespectful conduct during others presentations is not
permitted, banners flyers, or signage are not permitted
backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color that do not exceed 12 by 12
by 6. In will be permitted in our subject to search all
food and beverages including in metal canisters are not
permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the
meeting room. Individuals must remain seated, public
comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing
public comment, small handheld devices may be used only
while seated and the user must refrain from interfering
with the view or hearing of other individuals, individuals
or groups failing to adhere to. These rules will be asked
to see such disruptive convict and failure to comply. Will
result in there being subject to removal from the meeting
by the sergeant-at-arms.
Good morning. Good morning folks. Please take your seats,
we'll start in just a minute.
Good morning. If everyone would please take your seats.
The committee will come to order.
Morning, it is 10:15 a.m. on september 17th.
The chamber will come to order.
Please take a seats pipe down. Let's go.
The meeting of Chicago city council committee on zoning
landmarks and building standards is called to order. We'll
start off with a roll call.
Uh, all in the spa.
Alen Hopkins.
All the woman Dao Allen Hall.
All the women Harris.
Only deal.
All the women Ramirez.
Almond Moore.
All the Mosley Army, Moore's present virtually, we'll get
right to you all the future Lopez.
All the person Fuentes.
Vice mayor, Bernett. Its remote. All the woman Crews
Remote, all the Conway.
All the men Ramirez rozar.
Almond viegas.
Allen Riley.
Alderman.
All the woman clay.
Vice chair Lawson is present.
No.
um,
just comments over guys.
To someone.
Oh, all the women. Dow
Sorry, I don't know. I don't know how we missed this who we
missing.
Is not a member.
We don't have it short 1.
Uh my apologies, we're short 1 member uh that will be here
shortly. We'll recess for just 5 minutes. Thank you.
All right. Uh committee will come back to order uh, for
purposes of Quorum. We've been joined by Alderman Beale.
uh,
that gives us a quorum.
Right, others. Viegas, Conway, Crews and more have
requested to attend. This meeting by remote means of the
provisions of rule 59 due to unrelated circumstances other
person cuentas makes a motion to approve the author's
requests. All in favor say I
Any opposed say, nay, the chair of the eyes have it?
Welcome. Alders moving on. I will now read the items to be
deferred. I will read the page number and the description,
and then a, take a motion for all at the end.
On page 1. Document number 02024, D 0110982 regarding the
designation of alternates to the Zoning Board of Appeals,
On page 2 Western Avenue Corridor map amendments. A 8900
and a 8891 moving on to page 11 file number 2252021 for the
address, commonly known as 1150, West diversity Parkway
noting that the item has been withdrawn by the applicant
Now we have all of page 20, including document number
z001 0959 regarding Dynamic signed messages file 22499 for
the C address. Commonly known as 6240 to 50. North
Broadway, file number 225241 for the address. Commonly
as 4920, North Sheridan, Road file number 22493, for the
address commonly known as 909 through 931, West Belmont
Avenue
All of page 21 including file 22508 for the address commonly
known as 935. West Webster Avenue file 22494 for the
address commonly known as 4959. North Augusta Boulevard and
file 22491 for the address commonly known as 37, South
Sangamon. Lastly, all of page, 22, including file number
22497 for the address. Commonly known as 200. Through 222
West, 89th Street and file. Number 22522 for the address,
commonly known as 337 South Morgan.
If no questions by committee members, uh, all their claim
makes a motion to defer the previously listed items. All in
favor. Say I
Any opposed say, nay cleaning the chair, the eyes have it
and the items are deferred at this time, we will begin the
public comment period. Uh the public comment period will be
limited to 30 minutes out of respect for everyone's time.
We're doing how many speakers?
So we had a number of people sign up uh bear with us. We're
We're going to do 15 speakers. Uh, we try to get as many of
the topics as folks signed up because the order was a bit
off, they're all going to get 2 minutes. So, uh, apologize.
If we cut anybody off, but we do want to hear, from, as
many folks as possible.
Yes. All the mobile.
Uh, based on the number of people that I see in the
gallery, the chairman has the discretion to allow as many
speakers as possible, and it does not have to be limited to
30 minutes and so I would I would make the recommendation
that you allow people to speak.
Certainly so, uh, the number would not would be
if we gave them all 1 minute, to be honest. So um, so Mr.
I, I I'm I'm willing to to add
A chamber will come to order.
Thank you. Uh, I'll be I'll be willing to add the chamber
will come to order.
Uh, I would be willing to add another 5 speakers for 2
minutes. If you if I mean I'm we're not going to do 3 hours
of public comment. But I, well, Mr. Chairman, let me just
say when you have people that take off from work.
Uh and go out of their way to come down here to be heard. I
think it's uh our duty and obligation to hear as many
people as we possibly can. Uh and so
You know, I've always I've always disagreed. I've always
disagreed with limiting public testimony Mr. Chairman
because years ago, we would be here until 10 11 oclock at
night sometime, hearing people out and so that's just, you
know, my recommendation, no ultimate bill. I appreciate
that. Um, the church does not have the authority, uh, to,
uh, extend that that 30 minute time period. They do for
rule 50.
8. Um, Mr. Chairman, it's the discretion of the chairman
bill. I got you. Okay? You know, I love you. I know. Well,
I want to feel I do, I do want to get more people in today.
We've got a lot of people on the that have come here and we
appreciate that. We have a lot of items on the agenda. So
that's why I've I've added more people with a little bit
less time so we can we can hear as many things as we can
obviously Lopez
Thank you. Uh, thank you, chairman. I also, like to Second
Alderman. Be, um, also want to make sure you make it clear
and abundantly clear that is important to give voice to the
people. As chair of the housing committee, I have extended
public comment for an hour. We have the Chicago Housing,
Authority, because many people wanted to speak. I also
think it's particularly important because in this council
chambers as people often times say that we need to make
sure that local all the persons are given the courtesy to
vote on local matters. There is an attempt today to defer
an item in the 25th World which is again, the comment. No
no I I will be your son of it. I I'm not sure I'm a
sentiment. He has been a clear and, and always honest
conversation in terms of the item that I have for years. I
think it is a shame that they are holding items that have
the community support and they are demanding support using
all the all demands as sponsor, I would like people to, I'm
going to ask you, you're out of order. I've made my just
Vision. We're doing 30 minutes of public comment. I have 15
speakers first up. Is Steven Vance followed by Tuan Sims
For 2 minutes, each.
I'm ready. Alright, please proceed, hello. My name is
Stephen Vance. I'm a South Loop renter, a member of urban
environments, Illinois, the ordinance is to proactively
upzone, Western Avenue will be voted on today in this
committee, although I believe you deferred 1 of them, the
ordinances will rezone nearly all of the 4 and a half. Mile
stretch from Addison to Howard to be 3-3, zoning allowing
multi family housing to be built. As of right without
further, approvals from the local, Alder person, or this
committee and then all 3 of the older persons had in
Vasquez and Martin have given their support to this plan. I
also fully support this plan, but I believe there is a
technical flaw in this plan that could hinder the goal of
adding more housing
so, to take advantage of the bonuses that the connected
communities ordinance offers
Those property owners who want to maximize those bonuses
and maximize the number of homes that they can build, they
would still have to go through a type 1 zoning map
Amendment. This would require more meetings,
and would not achieve the initial uh, the intended, effect
of cutting the tape to build new housing,
so I would like City Council Members to implement more
proactive upzoning across Chicago, including on Western
Milwaukee Broadway. Less busy streets, like 35th Street and
mckenley Park. But to do so effectively and to maximize the
number of homes that we build to achieve housing abundance
in this city to lower rents, we need to do more to uh tweak
the uh connected communities ordinance to eliminate that
hurdle, to get the type 1 zoning map Amendment. And so I
so, I believe that is something that this body can amend to
uh, expedite the construction of more housing in Chicago.
So, uh, thank you for listening. Um, I yield my time
Great, thank you. I'm sorry. We're trying to shuffle some
things here. I don't know who I said, was next. Whoever I
said
Taiwan Sims please proceed.
Followed by uh, Mattel.
not was was was, was was
So um, thank you. When y'all ready?
There's a great disconnect in this um body of people that
represent us.
and I understand this from all the people behind me, it's
like polish Latino and a host of other
But they all divided and over there is probably the
developers that called us clowns. He said, welcome to the
circus and it is a circus but I would say that the actors
in this theater right now, all the clowns are on that side
over there.
And not over here.
It's in decent that y'all will consider the turn sacred
ground. All these people that came in and and I was here
for that meeting. They came in and spoke heartfelt.
Spoke and said, hey, you know what we want to continue on?
Utilizing our Sacred Space as a Sacred Space, okay? We
understand poor people came from over there.
What we want to continue having our church? You can keep
looking up there. Keep looking up there for time to go
away, but we going to hope for you to go away and it's ill
representation.
The ill representation because you could care less about
these people in this room, you can care less about your
other constituents. And that's the heartlessness of you.
So all these people I'm with y'all I'll say because I'm a
Believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, the only thing I got in
this earth.
So I believe that they should hire their Sacred Space, but
also believe that we should have proper representation in
the city of Chicago.
Where is our finance and our education and all other things
are considered properly.
These people came from spaces off Alderman. Bill said it,
they took off time from work. Why should they have to?
Y'all should consider what we consider.
y'all take the hard way we take the heart, we shouldn't
have to waste our time coming in this room to come to y'all
and gravel
We got to gravel before y'all. Hey. Hey, help us. Hey
Enough is enough so we can sit in y'all as ineffective.
Representation enough is enough, get these people. What?
They ask that's a little bit. Y'all can do a little bit,
please.
Thank you, Mr. SS, uh, next uh, MRSA
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, my name is my friend.
She is reading my date.
Good morning.
Um, Lasha has been a resident since 1989 and a stain of
delbert's pioner since that time.
Saying that Albert has been a place of worship for over a
hundred years. It is a place of beauty and great importance
to the Polish and Mexican communities. Today we will not be
able to build such a remarkable architectural structure
with unique exterior and interior.
It is a cultural heritage of all Catholics of Chicago.
Granting saying that Albert's Church, The Landmark status
is extremely important because without it the arch, Diocese
of Chicago would leave it to complete devastation.
Let me tell you why I think so. This would be the case on
Sunday. Septembar, 15th 2024, I called the police because
the door and gate were open in St. Delbert's church. I
believe that someone did it on purpose, to devastate the
church because the doors are made of metal and are
difficult to open.
There was a thick chain and a large padlock on the gate. I
reported to Father Enright that the windows were broken up
both sides, but he didn't fix it. I prayed for granting
saying that delbert's, the landmark status. Thank you for
listening to me and God bless America.
Thank you, thank you very much. Um, next we have candelario
Rodriguez
Who will be followed by Julie sowiecki?
This is Deacon candelario. And as I'm my name is Dana and
I'll be speaking for him, right? Is that okay, see.
Okay.
Both residents of.
The 25th Ward members at St. Paul Church.
Today we come to you telling you that the voices of the
community members of the residents and of the parishioners
of St. Paul have been ignored
The record that was forwarded to city. Council this morning
proves that we have been ignored, it doesn't include an
expert report that we shared talking about how the Saint
Adalbert property does not. In fact, meet the criteria for
landmarks as it is written today. It doesn't show the
petition of hundreds of parishioners and residents of St.
Paul who stand in opposition and it does not include the
maps that we shared. Showing you a scattergram of residents
in pilson, who are against landmarking versus those who are
for it and live in the outskirts, not only of our
community, but of the city
what we are asking as Property, Owners, neighbors, burdened
and affected by the 1.5 million dollars. In costs, we have
already had to assume for this building is for you to defer
the vote. Because as it is written today, the landmark
request
It is not beneficial to the community. It's going to create
a burden, we need a little bit more time. We know we want
to work with the city. We know we want to work with the
neighbor's, if we can. We know we want to do that. And
we're asking you to defer because you have not received
everything that chamber will come to order. May I begin
again.
Excuse me. If you cannot be quiet, you cannot stay here.
Please respect the speaker. As you would expect anyone to
respect every speaker. Please restore her time and
continue.
You have not received this information because you have to
make a, if you are forced to make a decision today, we are
for asking you to vote. No, and we have been here since
8:15, this morning, parishioners of St, Paul Church to ask,
for this, thank you, great. Thank you very much. Um,
I'll just point out for committee members, uh, some of the
materials she referenced is in your packets. Not every
letter of support that we received, that, that is emailed.
Um, but the heat map certainly are, uh, if there's any
questions on that. Uh, let staff know. Um, up. Next is, uh,
Julie Seiki followed by, uh, Jimmy Rothschild.
Good morning. My name is Julie, sikhi. And I am the
President of the Society of said Alberts. We formed our
Organization for the specific, purpose of carrying on the
Catholic Mission of Santa delberts and keeping it a
Catholic site as it has been for the past 150 years.
To correct, the former speaker St. Paul's is not the owner
of sad delberts. It is the arch dasis of Chicago, as we all
know also to correct. The former speaker, there is a Polish
donor who gave 3 million dollars for the repair of the
church. And other funds were raised which the arch, Diocese
of Chicago returned in of repairing, uh, the church as
needed. Um, also, um, I would like to correct the former
speaker and remind her that in the landmark commission
meeting. It was proven that Santa delbert's meets for out
of the 7 criteria for landmarking. Now, to allay any fears
because I have spoken with several aldermen over the past
and I uh, I thank you for your time with me. I don't live
in your ward, but you opened your door to me and met with
and and heard and listened about the sad. Albert situation.
There is a plan for the long term future of sad delberts.
It is not real estate development. The church cannot
survive on its own. Its needs the benefits of the buildings
around it. In order to survive, we came up with a
Plan, that not only satisfied, the Polish Community that
built it and wants to keep it as Catholic. This is what our
ancestors sacrificed for. But it also is sensitive to the
needs of the pilson community, who has been resisting the
pressures of gentrification and do not want to see any type
of real estate development here. Our plan is simply to keep
the church as a shrine to convert the convention to a 40
room B&B style Retreat House. We've done a whole business
plan for this and this Retreat House will generate
sufficient Revenue not only to do the repairs but also to
sustain it long term and build an endowment for the church
so that there is money long term for the church. It's a
plan that creates jobs for the community. It's a plan that
doesn't disrupt the demographics or population density of
the area. Thank you very much. You'll hear more from me.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wiki, uh, for, uh, purposes of
the, we've been joined by Alderman, Reilly and Alderman,
Romero's. Rosa, I know we have non-members Cardona and
Haden here as well. Uh, next up is uh, Jimmy Rothschild
followed by George Blakemore,
Uh, good morning. My name is Jimmy Rothschild. I'm a
resident of the 33rd Ward and a staff member at the Jewish
Council on Urban Affairs, where I support our housing and
economic Justice work. Our organization has been is now in
its 60th year of fighting against displacement and 4
housing, Justice and affordability. The Northwest
preservation ordinance that's before you today.
Fits squarely in that mission.
Every time a 3 flat home is torn down or gutted. That's 3
families that are gutted as well. Um, their relationships
that keep them rooted and safe are disrupted as their force
from their homes and out of their neighborhoods. In
gentrifying neighborhoods like Logan Square in Albany Park,
where I live in uptown where I rented in such a 3 flat. For
many years, I've seen how this process harms our neighbor's
and our neighborhoods, making them more expensive, less
diverse, and less vibrant when families are forced out. So
are their local culture, their knowledge, their
relationships, their businesses, Etc,
Making up more expensive for developers to do this will
keep more of that affordable housing in our neighborhoods.
It will keep people in their homes, making it and making it
easier for tenants to buy their own buildings. Will reverse
those harmful Trends, making people more rooted in their
neighborhoods, not less.
In order for this to be effective, those fees need to be
high enough to make a meaningful disincentive on that
harmful, uh, development and make it a significant uh uh
support for those tenants seeking to buy those homes.
That's why the 20 or $60,000 fee is necessary. Many of
jca's members are immigrants or the children, and
grandchildren of immigrants, and refugees. My grandmother
was a refugee and when she landed in Southshore, a
multi-family unit, like this allowed, her parents to put
down roots that have kept this family vibrant in the city
for 5 Generations. We need this in Logan and we need this
Beyond in Albany Park in uptown in South Shore and
everywhere where people are forced from their homes. Thank
you.
Thank you, Mr. Rothschilds, uh, we have George Blakemore
followed by Anna.
Lea.
Sure, it's Blake Moore.
The church is the w**** in bride of Christ. The the
calculate uh my guy actually have failed to protect his
church from a landmark historical church. What what's going
on now? Is that the whites are moving back to pills from
They are moving in and now they gonna move the Hispanics
out.
So, and the Alton is a part of the problem I was appalled
to hear.
That this man up here, whatever he is calling set. The the
chairman.
If it's a 100 people that come out, you getting paid to sit
on your way and listen to that 100.
if it takes all day or all night, because you are a public
So the reason why this goes on in the city of Chicago,
because it's a 1 40 system.
1, what's that 1 quarter? The Democrats, the Democrats
machine, what what did you say this man? The machine say,
vote for the donkey and you vote but there's no 2 party is
worse than coming is Russia. A fascist Germany, a 1 party
system.
So, the system now is turning on you, you and you and you
can change this.
You can call them all out.
All of them.
In these communities that have these public meetings. If its
50 people show up, if it's a 100, they let them all speak.
And what you getting paid on. 7, is a sick and
Say, picking out, how many you work for?
And 100 of them. You tell them.
Thank you, Mr. Blackmar.
Up next with Anna Lea.
1 sec.
Good morning Mr. Greg thank you. Uh please please proceed,
good morning, honorable all the women, and all the men of
the committee on zoning, landmarks, and building standards,
please, please, stand closer to the microphone. I have to
do this. My name is Anna, Leah. And I am a member of the
congregation of sound. Adalbert church, and the Polish
Latino. Those are the group of sound Alberts first. I would
like to read a testimony given by Dr. Anita Blanchard
nesbett given to the commission on Chicago landmarks.
I was, this is a quote. I was a member of the landmarks
commission, appointed by former mayor Ram Emmanuel, I
worked with earners Wang and re revant toy at the time.
During my tenure, I led the program committee for
commissions. I greatly enjoyed the meeting and appreciate
of commission to preserve architectural Treasures. The
highlight of my work was discovering structures of
unrecognized importance, to Landmark of the city given my
past experience with the commission. I am writing in
support of the landmark, designation for sand, Adalbert
Church in Pilsen. As you know, Sandra Delbert church was
built in the 1914 by Kush lacks. I, it was heralded as 1 of
the finest Villages architectural structures in Chicago
schlacks was inspired by Roman churches and chose the
altar. Marble for the church on 1 of his visits to Rome
essay Delbert church is a remarkable and beautiful
structure and atrocious Chicago.
Landmark from a Catholic religious standpoint, send that
Albert is a major concern of Poland. The church is, a
significant commemoration of his work and his significance
of the Polish Community, the stained glass windows of the
church highlight, his important Mission. It was a place of
Refuge for many immigrants arriving in Chicago and those
who settled in pills and neighborhood as the neighborhood
has become more culturally diverse, the church continued to
significant for Latino community.
As a place of worship and celebration of significant
religious event.
I just my
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much, Miss Leah.
Um, next uh we have uh Michael Giordano who will be
followed by Adrian Chan.
Hi, good morning morning. My name is Michael Girardeau, I'm
the executive director of the Portage Park Chamber of
Commerce. We are the sole service provider for SSA 286
corners.
I'm here today to voice the chamber support for GW
properties development at the former people's guest site.
This retail and residential project is 1 of the final
pieces to the revitalization of 6 corners.
Our businesses need the 350 plus residential units at its
core 6 Corners has always been a vibrant shopping hub for
years. It was known as the downtown of the northwest side.
That is why this project has an exponentially and will have
an exponentially positive impact on 6 corners and Portage
Park.
The Portage Park Chamber of Commerce has also provided a
letter of support for this project to Mitch, Golds of GW
properties.
Thank you. Uh, Mr. Garrano uh, that letter is in your
packet as well. Um, Adrianne Chan, good morning morning. Uh
my name's Adrian Chan. I'm on the board of directors of the
older Irving Park Association. Um, our neighborhood is
located on the eastern boundary of the proposed
development. Um, we are here to speak in favor of um the
proposed development at 3955 North Milwaukee Avenue. Um
we've worked for a number of years with the developer, um,
to come up with a plan that's acceptable to Residents and
the neighboring Civic groups. Um, it's been a long process
and we're excited about the current plan that um, provides
mixed use residential as well as commercial properties. We
think it's critical to both the development of the 6 Corner
shopping district, as well as, um, the Irving Park
commercial District, um, to the east that, that, um,
anchors our neighborhood. Um, we hope that the council will
go ahead and move forward today. Um, with approving this
project, um, today so that it can finally get started and
start benefiting our
Communities. Thank you. Thank you. Um, we that is on the
agenda for vote today. Um, next we'll have Julie cook
followed by Karen shein.
Good morning. My name is Julie cook. This is regarding
application. A
88.99 to rezone the property. At 4116 North Clark Street
from an R3. I'm sorry, an RS3 to a b31. We lived in a
property directly adjacent to this building. And we are
opposed to the zoning to b31, and we respectfully request
that you change it to a B13. There is a proposal for a
music school to move into this facility, which we are in
favor of
um, and the B1 zoning should allow the music facility to
operate as they are Desiring, which includes classes, a
small entertainment venue up to 149, people as well as an
incidental liquor license that allows them to serve alcohol
during performances.
We adamantly oppose B3 Zoning for this property as it's too
broad for the property and the location which is embedded
in a residential neighborhood. Additionally, the property
is within 4 feet of 1, of the bedrooms in my home.
If the music school vacates, the B3 property would the B3
zoning? Would allow the property to be used for restaurants
and taverns including roof do rooftop decks.
Um in addition to many other uses, as I said, we're 4 feet
away from this, and it would be very disruptive to our
peaceful living. We've been there since 2005, and we're
very happy with the residential location.
Other examples of businesses allowed under B3 include body
art Services, medium or large entertainment. Venues holding
up to 1,000 people, banquet or meeting Halls, hotels Motel
electronic, dated storage centers, and entertainment,
cabarets, all of, which we do not want to live next door to
we've given, we've been given verbal. Assurances that the
property will not be used for any of these uses, but we
strongly feel that the purpose of zoning laws is to put
this into coding and codify the zoning as opposed to giving
verbal assurances. We feel B13 would give them the music
school, the opportunity to operate as they function and um,
we would appreciate you approving that instead of B3. Thank
you.
Thank you, Miss Cook.
Uh, next we have Karen shein who is followed by Maria
Hernandez.
Hi, my name is Karen shein and I live in the Washington
Park. Third third, ward. And I am here to, uh, tell you my
my, uh, support to the uh, Sunshine Gospel Ministries, uh,
Community Center, that's coming to the 20th. Ward, um, I
support all viable businesses that come to the Washington
Park wood lawn area. That bring resources to the community
without take Taking resources out. Uh, the sunshine
Community project offers diverse opportunities.
For the community and I fully support their efforts uh as a
member of or as a resident of uh Washington Park. Thank
you.
Thank you uh, very much Miss shine. Uh, it's Maria
Hernandez followed by Jeremy. Esparza.
I'm here to speak as part of Maria Hernandez.
We are here for the landmarking of Cena delberts. In the
entire campus would if it's Landmark will be severely
hindered to our Parish of abilities to find a buyer for the
property. If we are unable to sell this property, our
Parish will continue to be burdened. By all the cost of
maintaining, the T Canadian site, our parish is considered
late same calls. And here it is the Senate Alberts that
upwards to 1.5 million dollars. The debt that we are now
carrying and are on our books will continue to be carried
for the years to come, in addition to the Vandal, our
vandalism, and our Parish parishioners, we that we have to
deal with protesters outside of our all of our masses
actually, for the last 2 years. It's been a big issue.
Landmarking in delbert's threatens, our survival of St.
Paul Church. My family has gone through various different
Church closings. This would be the third 1 that we would
have to go through most vocal Pro proton.
Of landmarking, are people who no longer live in the 25th
Ward and should know have no say in who in in our future.
This
In our campus, they left us they left us the residents of
the former parishioners are crumbling property with no
resources.
Or yeah, to maintain it, the location of St. Albert's
campus makes it an ideal site for the very development as a
residents. I ask you and as families of pilson, why we
cannot build this affordable housing for the numer.
Sorry, sorry. Sorry.
Excuse me. Excuse me, please. If you're not respect the
speakers, thank you as a as a resident, I asked you why we
cannot cite this as a Redevelopment into for more green
space for our children and families in pilson.
Thank you.
Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hernandez, uh, we have
Jeremy Esparza followed by Mary Gonzalez.
Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Jeremy. Esparza I'm a
business agent with Labor's Local 1 and the chairman of the
Cook County Building Trades organizing committee. I
represent over 1600 labors and over 80,000 construction
craft workers throughout the 9 County area, many of which
work outside of the 9 County area, as well here today to
thank Alderman, Jim Gardner and chit, Vice chair Bennett
Lawson.
For the courage today to stand up for those that have been
voicing their concerns about the project at 3955. North
Milwaukee specifically that the developer was not inclined
to sign a project labor agreement which would include
significant and robust protections for those working on the
project and it would be beneficial for the community in
terms of its timeline. Um here today to say that that
project labor agreement has been signed by the developer
which means that it would result in again a much better
situation for those that are building the project.
This 110 million project. Now has significant robust,
worker protections the developer, excuse me.
Those that are building, the project are going to get paid
a living wage. They will be trained in the work that they
perform, which will likely reduce injuries that could
possibly occur in the workplace.
Projects with the project, labor agreement are more likely
to finish on time about 20% more on time compared to a non
a project. That doesn't have a project labor agreement.
That's a win for the community because that means that, uh,
significant timeline delays or congestion in the area will
um, be heated by, you know, this project, liver agreement
that's in place.
The clarendale, which was built 200 feet away, was
constructed under a project, labor agreement Northwestern
Medicine about a mile East was constructed under a project,
labor agreement. So this Project's know different 346 units
would be great for the community but we want to make sure
that those that are building at our respected as well.
So again, I want to thank uh, Alderman, Jim Gardner, and
vice chair Bennett Lawson for their support and standing up
for what's right? And standing up for the workers. Thank
you.
Thank you, Mr. Esparza
Our final speaker is Mary Gonzalez.
Thank you. Uh, my name is Mary Gonzalez. I moved into
pilson to the
25.
Please please, please, let Miss Jackson, Leave the chamber.
just,
that's,
But let's let's let's clear the way.
All right. Thank you everyone for your patience. Uh please
continue. Sorry about that. Thank you. My name is Mary
Gonzalez. I moved into the 25th, Ford. In fact, it wasn't
the 25th Ford at that time, but I moved into that
neighborhood in 1958. I have not left that neighborhood.
I've stayed there all of those years, I'm part of St. Paul,
Catholic Church. And I'm here to ask you to please do, uh,
if if you cannot give us additional time to work with the
city on on, on what we're going to do with with Shane of
Delbert property then please vote. No, you know several
years ago I worked most I'm going to ask again that
everyone respect the speaker with many residents and
homeowners as well as
Put the aldermen and we went door to door and got
certificates signed by homeowners saying please do not make
our community a Historic Landmark because it's going to be
a phenomenal burden on our community. The city agreed.
With the support of our aldermen. We are totally shocked
that now our aldermen thinks that we should be burdened
with Landmark status for just 1 congregation. I appreciate
that. People would like that facility to remain open, but
St. Paul, Catholic Church, not the Arch dasis St. Paul
Catholic Church is paying the bills. We are the ones,
securing the building. We are the ones called in the middle
of the night. We are the ones that have to deal with
Pickers. The very people who are here today. Picking our 10
oclock mess every single Sunday. So this is what we're
having to endure this lady yelling that who just left. We
endure this every week, every single week for 2 years and
all we want is to take this burden off of ourselves. We'd
like to sell the property, we were working with the city to
make this happen. And all of a sudden on Thursday, we got
word that the alderman was going to present it today. We
know there's been a lot of lobbying, I see him walking
around talking to Alderman and
I, I just want to ask you to, please defer it or vote. No,
thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Gonzalez.
The chamber is going to remain folks.
I'll ask the sergeant-at-arms if you if you are not able to
keep quiet, then you will be asked to leave or removed. So
please act like adults. Thank you.
all right, um,
Andrew the agenda. Uh, first item up is document number.
02024 011, 01 introduced by Alders Ramirez. Rosa Rodriguez,
Sanchez, Cardona Fuentes cicho, Lopez and laspada regarding
the amendment of the municipal code titles, 5, and 17. By
adding new chapter 5-11 entitled, the tenant opportunity,
purchase block, 606, District pilot program, and by
modifying section 17-70, 0590 redefining the boundaries of
the 6066 district. This item has a substitute ordinance and
the committee members will find a copy with their
informational packets. Uh, although the spot it makes a
motion to accept the substitute all in favor. Please say, I
any opposed nay making sure the eyes have it. And the
substitute is before us, uh, we have Charles suredge policy
director of the committee on zoning landmarks, and building
standards present on this matter, as well as Ray Phillips
Santos from the Law Department. Jung you from the mayor's
office and Edwin Ortiz, Ras for the Department of Housing
to answer any questions.
Can everyone hear me, okay?
Okay. Um, good morning committee members for the record,
Charles surridge director of policy for the committee on
zoning, landmarks and building standards. I am going to
share some information with you. Now about the northwest
side, housing preservation ordinance,
Um, I'm sorry, I'm having trouble with the slides.
Thank you. Um, thank you Nicole. If you wouldn't mind going
to the next slide. Uh, thank you. Um, so I want to start by
providing some background information on the affordable
housing stock in the Avenue or mosa Humble Park, Logan
Square and Westtown neighborhoods which are covered by this
ordinance and which informed the development of the
ordinance, the majority of the affordable housing in the
neighborhoods. Covered by this ordinance is what planners
and policymakers call. Naturally occurring affordable
housing. Uh this term refers to housing that is Affordable
to low and moderate income residents without receiving any
government subsidy and without any legal restriction, on
the rent that the owner can charge
In the neighborhoods, covered by this ordinance, the
majority of the naturally occurring affordable housing
stock is found in Legacy 23 and 4 flats. This housing stock
is particularly important in these neighborhoods. As it is
not only a source of affordable housing, but the primary
source of affordable family-sized housing as well.
Alarmingly 1 of the most significant housing Trends in the
city in recent years, has been the loss of this 2 to 4 flat
housing stock.
This trend and its implications for housing affordability
in the city have been well documented and I want to
highlight for everybody that your package contains 4,
Recent research reports, which speak to this issue. And um,
that information I'm sharing is pulled from those reports.
The northwest side housing preservation ordinance, Builds
on the success of 2 Companion. Ordinances passed in 2021.
These ordinances established a minimum, D established
minimum density, standards and a pilot program, which
established a surcharge on building on demolition permits.
Excuse me for residential buildings within designated
boundaries around the 606 Trail on the northwest side and
in the pilson neighborhood on the lower west side.
Um this ordinance, the northwest side housing preservation
ordinance, builds upon these 2 ordinance in several ways.
Um, first the ordinance, expands the boundaries of the
Northwest pilot area and you can see a map of the proposed
expansion, um, on the slide. Um, and I just want to um,
note here that all Alders um, with portions of the of their
Awards represented in this uh, pilot area are in support of
the ordinance.
the ordinance increases the surcharge on demolition permits
from dollars per unit um or 15,000 per building to 20,000
per unit um or $60,000 per building.
Uh, because the surcharge provision was piloted in both the
Northwest 606 area and the Pilon area, the ordinance
raises, the surcharge amount in both, the new expanded
Northwest boundaries and the existing pilson area. Um, I
want to note here that the Piston area is represented by
Alderman Byron C, Joe Lopez, who is in support of this
increase.
Uh, Additionally, the ordinance, expands the existing
minimum density. Provisions within the Northwest pilot
area, disallowing the conversion of 2 flats 3 flats and 4
Flats to luxury single family homes on blocks where the
majority of the buildings are multi family.
Um, Additionally, the ordinance legalizes, the construction
of new 2 flats by right on standard size residential, lots
in areas. Currently zoned, only for single family homes
within the Northwest area. Um, it does so, by reducing the
minimum lot area per unit requirements, in the RS3 district
from 2500 square feet per unit to 1500 square feet.
And lastly uh, this ordinance establishes a tenant right of
of first refusal within the Northwest area, giving tenants
and opportunity to purchase their building. When it goes on
sale, similar Provisions, have allowed tenants to buy their
homes, across the United States.
So for this last ombre, the first refusal provision in the
ordinance, the ordinance divides rental properties into 3
tiers with a different timeline, for each tier established
in the ordinance. Uh the 3 tiers are 1 for buildings with 1
to 2 units, 1 for buildings with 3 to 4 units and 1 for
buildings with 5 or more units. Um, so for buildings with 1
or 2 units, um, the owner or the ordinance would be
required to give tenants 30 days notice of their intent to
sell before, listing the property for sale following this
30-day notice period. The owner must notify. Tenants of any
third-party offers they received that they intend to
accept, uh, tenants then have 15 days from receiving this,
notice to exercise their right of first refusal by
notifying the owner in writing of their intention to match
the third-party offer for buildings in this tier with 1 to
2 units and offered a purchase, can be made by 1 Tennent.
Um, and the formation of a tenant association would not be
necessary once, um, a tenant submits an offer. Um, they
have 60 days to secure financing and complete the closing
process.
For buildings in the next tier with 3 to 4 units. Um, the
owner, similarly must give tenants 30 days notice of intent
to sell.
Following this notice period. Um, again they must notify,
tenants of any third-party offers they receive tenants then
then have 30 days from receiving this notice to exercise
right of first refusal. In this case, um, and offered a
purchase by tenants, must be made collectively by more than
50% of the tenants in renter occupied units.
um and if um they make this offer they the tenants will have
60 days to secure financing and close
and then lastly, for buildings with 5 or more units, um,
the owner must provide 60 days notice to tenants of intent
to sell
Um again any after this period, any uh third-party offers
received the owner uh would need to notify um, a tenant
association for an exists or each tenant, if no tenant
association exists. Um, once, um, the tenants or the tenant
association received, notice they have 9, I'm sorry. Um,
once the notice is given, um, if there is no tenant
association, tenants would then have 90 days to form a
tenant association, and exercise their right of first
refusal, um, in the case of 5 or more unit buildings, um,
and offer to purchase must come from a tenant association
which must represent at least 75% of the renter occupied
units. Um, and in this case, um, a 10 Association would
have 120 days to exercise the right of first refusal um and
then secure financing and close on the property. Um and I
I just want to highlight here that this provision is
revenue neutral. Um, and a couple things 1. It does not
regulate the sales price of any property. So tenants who
wish to exercise the right of first refusal would need to
match.
A third-party market rate offer to exercise this right? Um
the ordinance does not um regulate the rent that an owner
can charge. Um and then also just want to flag for
everybody that um there are um
Um quite a few exceptions in the ordinance. Um, and just a
couple of notable ones, I want to highlight for everybody
would be um if the owner of a building wants to transfer
ownership to a family member or if the property is involved
in any type of Court proceeding
um and then I just want to end by sharing some data um from
the Department of Housing um they did an analysis of permit
data from the period 2017 to 2023. Um this analysis found
that during this period demolitions and Decon conversions
were down significantly in both pilot areas where the
search charge was in effect. In the Northwest 606 area
demolitions were down 81% and Decon conversions down. 72%
over this period in the Poulsen area, demolitions were down
66% and Decon conversions were down 65% during this period.
And, um, you have additional data from the Department of
Housing, um, in a memo that should be in your packet. Um,
and then, um, also want to let everybody know. Um, in
addition to, um, lowering the conversions and demolitions,
um, the demolition sir, charges over this period generated
225,000 in Revenue, which was allocated to the Chicago
Housing Trust. Uh, this Revenue provided acquisition Gap.
Financing for 2 properties. Totaling. 8 units in the here
to stay community.
Land Trust portfolio, um, in the Northwest area um as well
as funding um the rehabilitation and repairs of 2
properties totaling, 12. Owner occupied units in the
Poulsen housing Cooperative portfolio in pilson.
Um, I will just end by noting that all older people, as I
said earlier, whose Wards are impacted by this ordinance
are in support that the ordinances language was drafted and
vetted by the Department of Housing Department of planning
and developments Department of Law, as well as the policy
team in the mayor's office and just note that um,
representative from all of those, uh, departments are here,
um, with me today to answer any questions. Thank you,
great. Uh, thank you Mr. Sir. Just before we move on, uh, I
have want to recognize, uh, Alderman Mosley for purposes of
Quorum and also all the women Harris's request to attend
the meeting by remote meetings, at a provisions of rule 59,
uh, all their Dao makes a motion to approve all the woman
Harris's requests all in favor say I
Post say I the eyes have it, welcome to you, both. Um, all
right. Uh is anyone else presenting or are we on to
questions?
Questions. Wonderful questions from committee members,
we'll start with all them on the spot.
Thank you so much, sir. I more more than questions. I'll
just make comments because this is the work that
I've been a part of going past even my time is older person
with a lot of our
Youth leaders in the Logan Square area who fought for this
work. The whole concept of this is driven by people's lived
experiences in the Logan Square in Humble Park communities.
And to have been a part of this work with ottoman. Rosa
then ottoman Maldonado last term and put forth and I idea
as a pilot and to see
how broadly and successful it was in the purposes that it
put itself to has been very encouraging. I will say 3
things and then I'll hand over the mic.
Number 1, I know that there are questions out there about,
how does this?
Impact development, is this something that is
anti-development or anti-growth? And I would say that it's
been more about how we guide development in our
communities. I, I think the wonderful thing that we've seen
about this in the first Ward is it didn't result in a
reduction in
Development or development. Proposals, it changed the
character of the development proposals that we were seeing
we saw more people looking to add units. The zoning cases
to perhaps do a bump up or an additional floor rather than
Terror a property down folks, who are taking properties
that probably, 6 years ago would have been demolished
Are doing for 80 years in the basement. This is what we want
to see. It's been profoundly impactful.
I will also say to see an ordinance.
Where those who support preservation and those who support
growth and development are on the same side and supporting
the same ordinance.
Says that we have threaded, a very difficult needle on this
ordinance and that is very exciting to me as well.
And finally, I'll say something that excites me in this is
not only preserving what we have, but starting to gain back
what we've lost being able to, within the same envelope of
any rss3 zoned property to be able to do a 2 flat, the same
development, the same building that I've lived in for a
long time, the same kind of development that my wife and I
now own over a 2146, North Campbell bringing back that 2
flat housing stock into our communities.
feels impactful in ways that we will only fully appreciate
4 or 5 years down the line. So I'm so excited for this for
the collaboration of an incredible group of Partners and
collaborators and Alders in this work. And I'm very proud
that we get to bring this before the committee today. Thank
you, chair.
Thank you, Alderman, laspada. All the person Fuentes.
Thank you chair. Uh, very similarly to my colleague. I want
to provide comments.
Yeah, I have been doing housing work for over a decade in
the 26 Ward. And I've lived in the 26 Ward. Almost my
entire life and I grew up in a 3 flat bond in between uh,
hers on that same block. We have had 2 to 4 Flats the
converted into multi-million dollar single family homes,
the building that I grew up on is now for sale for 3
million.
We just received a round of tax Assessments in the west
chicago, Township in which my residents have seen anywhere
from 35 to 60% assessment. Increase
our communities are on the real threat of gentrification
and displacement, we have seen hundreds of families move
out of our Wards because they cannot afford to live there.
The average rent in the 26th. Ward for a 2 bedrooms about
25 to 2,800 a month.
Our residents.
Our house poor.
They are rent burden.
And many of our homeowners.
Do not see a future in our communities because these new
tax assessments have just told them they've been bought
out.
This is 1 tool on the tool box for how we protect families.
We cannot allow 2 to 4 Flats to continuously be Deon and
turned into multi-million dollar Mansions displacing.
Families that have been in these communities for decades.
And so it's extremely important to us and all the Alders,
by the way that represent this particular ordinance. And
the geographical map that is outlined here support this
ordinance. They are sponsors of disorders because we are
listening to our constituents
Our constituents elected us because they want to be able to
continuously live and afford to live in their communities.
This is just 1 tool, 1 tool and a real Big Tool Box that we
have to continue to leverage so that when we look up 10
years from now, 20 years from now the families that are
here today can still live in our communities and so I asked
our colleagues to support this ordinance, our constituents
have asked us to do this. There are over 50 organizations
that have been in our communities for decades supporting
this ordinance. Uh you know, and we haven't we haven't had
opposition and I think that this is what can be a model for
the rest of the city of Chicago when we think about
preserving naturally occurring, affordable.
Housing and how you truly sustain and preserve uh
communities across the city. Thank you chair. Thank you.
Uh, all the been rumors. Rosa, followed by the Lopez.
Thank you so much. Uh chairman Lawson. Uh, this ordinance
has been many years in the making. Um, it was our community
in Logan Square that came together to advocate for the 606
Bloomingdale Trail, and that's a wonderful Community Asset.
It took uh vacant uh unused uh infrastructure and it turned
it into a wonderful path for running for cycling for people
to gather and to enjoy the outdoors. But what we saw was
once that amenity had been built in our community, the
historic 2 3 and 4 flat apartment buildings and Courtyard
buildings along the 606 began to be deconversion.
together with policy analysts our community came together
and said what can be done to address this displacement and
what can be done?
To preserve this middle housing in Planning and Zoning. We
talk about middle housing. We have skyscrapers, we have
single family homes but the vast majority of people live in
that middle between those 2 extremes. That's Courtyard
buildings. It's the 14 unit. 1926 building that I live in.
It's the 2 flat that Alderman laspata lives in. Um, that's
where most of our families find the affordability. That's
where most of, uh, the Working Families in the city of
Chicago are able to find an affordable place to call home,
and oftentimes these families come together and they
purchase that building collectively, uh, my parents bought
their 4-unit building in the 1970s, and it was my theas and
Theo, my aunt, and uncles living in that building my
cousins living in that building. That helped them cover the
cost of that mortgage and help them achieve the dream of
owning their own home here in this country. And so we want
to preserve that American dream. We want to preserve that
middle housing in a lot of parts of the country,
particularly on the west.
Coast when so much of their Housing Development occurred in
the post-world War II era, they talk about the missing
middle, right? They have skyscrapers downtown and then they
have a lot of single family homes all around that. But in
Chicago, the middle is not missing. But if we don't take
action to preserve this housing stock, it will be missing
and our schools will suffer from lower enrollment, our city
small businesses will suffer from lacking the um
The residents necessary to support their small businesses.
And so, I'm very proud of of the Coalition, the very broad
Coalition that came together, uh, to push this ordinance
forward. And I really want to thank Jessica Vasquez and
Charles searidge. I definitely want to thank Edgar at the
Department of Housing, Jung, and the mayor's office and Ray
Phillips Santos. Uh, they worked many many hours. Did a lot
of research, uh, went through a lot of, uh, you know,
Corrections and changes. Uh, and of course, I want to thank
Patrick Murphy as well. The department Planning Development
for working with us on legalizing, uh, 2 flats by right in
this ordinance. I think this is a great way to promote that
density and to promote uh that middle housing in our
neighborhoods. Um, so I would like to to motion do pass
once every colleague is at an opportunity uh to uh speak or
have their uh questions uh, answered on this question. Um,
question. Um, but I do want to bring your attention to this
packet. Uh, obviously there's a letter from Palenque Logan
Square neighborhood, association signed by dozens of
organizations and local elected officials.
In the area covered, there's a letter from Urban
environmentalists that's been advocating for increased. Uh,
density in abundant housing in our neighborhoods. Uh,
there's a letter from bicker deck, Redevelopment
Corporation, North River commission communities, United,
Hannah Center the Puerto Rican cultural uh, Center. So
there's a lot of organizations who have signed on
collectively in support of this. Um, but there's also, a
lot of organizations that have issued their own individual
letter because they see how our families live. We live in
these 2, 3 and 4 Flats. We want to preserve those 2 3 and 4
flats. And this is a really smart comprehensive policy.
That's informed by data that will help protect the historic
character and the diversity of our neighborhoods. Thank
you. Thank you. Uh, Alderman, Alderman Lopez followed by
Alderman Vasquez Rodriguez Sanchez. Thank you. Uh, chairman
and and thank you to, um, to all my colleagues have work on
these important piece of legislation. I I would like to
speak especially on the need um in pilson just yesterday.
We heard a very contested hearing on fine.
Finance because of the distrust and the lack of protections
that is more homeowners often have is small businesses
communities including churches and I welcome. And thank all
the members of the S other Church who are here. Um it is
very important for our community to talk about the plans.
It was in 2019 that our community was suffering from
tremendous amount of displacement. Um, the number of tear
downs and demolitions were very real
The solution that we had at the time in 2019, was actually
to Landmark a thousand homes.
A thousand is more homeowners that were already burdened by
property taxes. That could barely pay for the repairs and
the proposal. At the time, was actually to make it even
more expensive.
I'm glad that we have taken always our time as a community.
I want to thank all the community leaders, everybody who
sits down and especially our colleagues. Because when we
come together and truly listen to our communities, we
develop important solutions that really protect the social
buy fabric of our neighborhoods in pilson. I said,
These protections can help us. You can see in the data. A
stop developers from tearing down homes convert converting
to luxury units. And now we have a very important plan. Not
only to protect our community, but also to help those small
home, owners who are in dire need to help to get repairs
for legalizing basement. Coach houses, uh, addicts
Just a few months ago, I had 1 of our community leaders who
actually died in an attic because the attic did not have a
far detector.
That is the reality that many of our communities live on.
And I'm very glad that our community came together to
protect us from the big development that does not
distinguish between any of community members. What they
always see is money, they do not see our communities as
such, so I'm grateful that the community came together and
with the support of the Department of planning and housing,
there was an alternative development to have anti- the
conversions and demolition fees that today are protecting
our community but we do need the support from the city.
That's what I'm proud to have a comprehensive plan that
we're going to take your time so that 80 use can receive
support for those as more homeowners who are in dire need
and yes I'm Bibi public. And that's what I'm asking my
colleagues to respect the will and the self-determination
of our communities. Because part of this plan is actually
to protect churches that in the past will also be converted
converted in expensive condos instead of allowing us an
opportunity to repurpose them for things that the community
the community the community will elected me. Developers did
not elected me. My community elected me to
To protect them from those unethical practices of the past.
When zoning decisions were exchanged by biography pills,
our community is no longer for sale. So with that I said
that this is part of a comprehensive plan. As you see all
pilson, all our community is in this protection area. We
also want to bring resources, Steve money, that should be
used to protect and help expand adus so that we can help
her protect or protect our community. Today, we have not
only closing churches
We also see the the risk of closing schools which is not
something I'm going to sit and watch because of families do
not have a place to live today. I said, respect not only or
or write to have these protections but also help us in a in
a important and urgent call to protect some other as a
landmark. What democratically vote it was done by the Lamar
commission and this is part of the same plan. Thank you so
much for all the men, all their Vasquez, please.
Thank you, chairman. Um, first I want to thank our
colleagues, both president, and former um, for really
taking on this endeavor. Um, there are a number of us when
we were running, uh, to get into these seats in 2019,
really had affordable housing at the Forefront thinking
about the different communities. We represent whether it's
when it's currently experiencing gentrification or some
that are post gentrification and seeing a different level
of it, scaled up as well. Um, so really, it is heartening
when you see uh, work like this being done and so I'm very
appreciative of that. Um, I do have questions so I want to
make sure to get to that. What data was used to determine
the area as far as the pilot? Like what were the
determinants to figure out? How you got to like these
Wards? This area was going to be the part of the pilot.
Um yeah, thank you for the question Alderman. Happy to speak
to it. Um so the you know this ordinance and the boundaries
it was all um data driven, right? So as I mentioned there's
a 4 studies in your packet which are like where the primary
studies that we looked at in crafting these boundaries. Um
there's 3 recent studies from The Institute for housing
studies um 2 of them pertain to the um importance of the 2
to 4 flat housing stock in Chicago neighborhoods and the,
um, as I mentioned, the issues that are resulting from the
loss of that housing stock, which they've documented.
There's another study from The Institute for housing
studies at to Paul, um, the 2023 state of rental housing,
um, which um, was 1 of the, the main studies in
determining, the boundaries that study looked at, um, US
Census public, use microdata areas, which are collections
of usually 3 or 4 Community areas that setting particular
found that the, uh, public use microdata area, which is
made up by um, Logan Square Avondale and orosa was the, um,
the public use microdata in the
in the city that saw the greatest, uh, decrease in the, um,
supply of rental housing, that's affordable to low-income
renters corresponding with the greatest, um,
Decrease in lower income renters. So um, those were some of
the main studies that um, helped us uh, craft these
boundaries, in addition, to 1 other study in your packet,
which is a, um, study that was, um, commissioned by the
city. It's the 2019, um, affordable rental housing study,
which looked at each community area and broke down the
affordable housing, stock by the, um, natural occurring,
affordable housing, and then versus legally restricted. So
those are the, uh, the studies that sure. So, when you're,
when you're looking at that and you're trying to identify
decrease, I'd imagine you're looking at points in time,
right? You're looking at when it started to, when you're at
now to gaze the decrease, what were those 2 points in time?
Um,
would have to look back at the study. Um, the, um,
The state of potential housing study, like I mentioned, it
was, um, 2023 state, of rental housing. So, um, I guess I,
I don't want to, um, you know, if I get a turn I don't
quite remember, the starting period that the, the ending
period was 2023. So that's very recent data, really? As
recent as we can get it, yeah, because the reason I asked
that is, right, so let's say an area like 40th Ward, 47th
Ward
Would have already gone through that decrease. Right.
Right. You if you go to 40 at the ward, you're not finding
the affordable housing because it ain't there anymore. So,
if you're, if you're collecting data on decrease, and it
starts at a point past where you've already lost right,
then it couldn't compete as far as decrease because it's
already gone. Right? And so I think that's that's I'm
curious about that because 1
I'd want to see like a heat map of the whole city based on
what the decrease looks like and also seeing it go back
further because although I completely understand my
colleagues in the moment that they're in, in those Wards
saying we have to make sure we're preserving this because
we're watching it, like, go. There are those of us who came
in a situation where it's already gone, and are making sure
that you don't lose even further and it wouldn't come up as
as steep a decrease because you don't have enough to begin
with. So that's something that I want to make sure is
considered because again, there's a number of us who
were this drafted in the different manner would have been
like just add us to the list and so I want to get that
because something that's really cool about what they put
here that I want to notate is
Not only the preservation, but the fact that you're single
family, only home single family, only home zoning in effect
doesn't exist in that area. And so there's been a number of
us, myself included that think we need to get to a city
where you don't have it anywhere. And that's not to say,
you can't build single family only but that you wouldn't be
limited to only build that. So, if someone wants to do a 2
or 4 flat, they have all the ability to without having to
go through a rigorous zoning process. So if a number of us
wanted to then either, expand expand the pilot first
because I, you know,
Lord knows what 80u when you try to expand Pilots here.
People have different takes but if a number of us wanted to
do something similar copy paste introduce and pass.
What's the possibility of doing so?
Can you hear me? Okay. Uh, see your policy analyst with the
Department of Housing? Um, Alderman. We'd be happy to sit
down with you and talk about, uh, the current housing needs
in your community. What the department can do to support
you, and what policies would be a good fit to address any
of affordability issues um, that you are struggling with.
Um, if you would like to reach out to the department, we
will be, we will welcome those conversations and really,
we're looking at a number of policies across the city. We
understand that, not every policy is a good fit for every
community in the city. So we want to make sure that the
solutions that we are putting forward are the correct fit
for the needs of that particular area. Awesome. Um, so
yeah, reach out to us, we would love to talk to you about
this. Yeah, actually, if I met on that, I I would actually
ask that the department, uh, do that Citywide study and
reach out to the Alders instead. Um, because I think this
has come up with a lot of our, our colleagues that there's
opportunities across the city that we may be missing
because we've just really looked at this area. And so um if
that works with uh Albert Vasquez, I know Albert D wanted
to add a point.
There 2. I'll wait for the point. Sure.
Uh uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, I was just going to ask the
do representative if he could expound on some of the
options. They're looking at currently, right?
Because that's not clear and what he just said.
Um so we have a number of policies um number of programs
that address different needs in different communities. To
give you just an example, we have this particular policy,
this particular ordinance that we are supporting for this
uh region of the northwest side. Um, we also have programs
like rebuild and rebuild 2.0. Coming through our Bureau of
housing preservation, which address preservation and
communities that don't, um,
aren't experiencing the same steep increases in housing
costs in the same rate of the conversions demolitions, uh,
but that are losing housing stock for other, uh, reasons
such as, you know, buildings falling into disrepair, uh,
blight and being demolished and turned into vacant land.
Um, that's just a short extent, uh, short list of things.
We're doing. We, you know, we also have all of our
development policies and programs, but there is a whole
tool set of things that the department does to both promote
development, preserve housing, um and preserve different
housing stocks and we would like to fit the solutions to
the needs of that particular community.
Mr. Chairman he said, I could follow up on 1 last point of
his as long as Andre says. Okay, Andre said it was okay.
Always, okay with that. Uh, are you still looking at the
middle housing? The middle housing uh, initiative?
Want to talk about that.
Um, I do not, I'm personally not connected to that
initiative, I know that there's work coming out um on the
mayor's office for uh the missing middle. I can get you
more information on that program uh, through the chair.
Once I hit, follow up with them, thank you. Would like to
get that. Yeah, I I was going to to follow up on that like,
if you got a comprehensive list of those programs because I
think a number of us have different tools that we want to
use in. Our Awards, don't potentially know where to start.
And because the nature of our jobs, we're busy taking care
of potholes, tree, trims, legislation, and not even talking
to each other about things that we're doing. So being able
to get that to us, I think it would be extremely helpful.
Um, yeah. City-wide heat map would be great. And also, we
will absolutely be following up with you because we want to
show up maybe in a couple months with an expansion of this.
So, uh, thank you so much and thank you chairman.
Right. Yeah, I'm not in the committee, but I'm in support.
See. Thank you. Uh, were there any other committee members?
We had questions.
Um, I know that uh, so I belong
Um I know I had some questions. I had asked for some data
that was given out and I appreciate that but I like I said,
I do think we need to look at options uh for this type of
housing across the city. I think there's ALS density issues
in neighborhoods that are have a lot of Investments and and
that don't have much investment. So um, and preserving and
protecting that is important to to keeping our city
growing. So uh, I look for uh, follow-up on that through
the committee, uh, this and housing, all right, and
anything else?
To.
I'm I'm sorry. I'll have a bill. How long does the pilot?
Uh, the question is, how long was the pilot?
I know it was in a few stages, you explain that
Uh the ordinance passed in January of 2021. And we did our
report though for the data that you have in the memo in
front of you uh, up until December of last year.
So 2021, through 2023, 3 years and the existing ordinance
uh has or does not have a sunset.
Uh, the existing ordinance does have a sunset at the end of
this year, um, that has been extended twice. It was sunset
at the end of last year. It was extended until April and in
March, I believe, or April this year was extended until the
end of 2024,
Okay, so the the ordinance in front of us extends it
through.
2028, right? Uh. Oh, the the 2029, right? The substitute
ordinance. The Substitute Sunset is when yes, the
substitute ordinance extends it through 2029, the end of
2029 great, thank you. Uh on Riley.
Yeah, thank you chairman. Um, and I want to thank uh, older
person Fuentes for coming and sitting with me and
Explaining this issue. Uh, I don't have, um, a whole lot of
this type of housing stock in the world. I represent
downtown, uh, and I am sympathetic to the issues that
gentrification are bringing to a lot of neighborhoods. Um,
I think there are components of the pilot that are. I think
very positive especially giving residents the opportunity
through a right of first refusal, if you will, um, to
purchase these buildings when they are put on the market. I
think that
Is a fair way to to handle these types of things. What I'm
trying to get my my mind around, I know this is a pilot and
I don't want to extend this conversation too long is is why
if if all of the Alters who represent this,
Subject area.
Agree. Um, that they don't want to see deconversion of
multi-unit uh or the loss of additional rental housing
stock to single family development.
Why they can't um, use their discretion and prerogative to
limit that activity. My, my my real basic issue here.
is how you're treating properties that are literally 100 ft
ft away from each other across a street based on how the
boundaries are set. And again, um, this is a pilot and I'm
certainly not going to encourage folks to to vote against
it. Um, I'm just trying to understand that 1 piece and I'm
not sure which of the sponsors would like to handle that
but um that might help inform my vote on this issue.
I think all the fences or the spot I would like to handle
it. Yeah, that's okay. Uh, just simply there are some
matters in which prerogative um, cannot be levied. There
are some zoning on properties that would allow the owner to
sort of decomp convert without its owning change.
Um and demolition. Uh, also right now as long as you sort
of pay the fee
You can get it done. And so this is a way to sort of put
some parameters around. Uh, how much of that is controlled?
Okay, thank you for that. And then I, I guess I have a
follow-up on that. It's kind of related to process because
you mentioned demolitions and that is something I'm super
familiar with because we have a lot of landmark buildings
downtown that uh, are often at risk of being demolished.
Um, we have a demolition delay for those. Um, does this
pilot include anything like that for properties within the
subject boundaries, um, to require, you know, a pause of of
3 or 4, months of the city can review that with local alter
people and the community? Um, is that part of the, I don't
know if 1 of the sponsors or the Departments. What the,
what a demo apartment has applied for what's the process
basically, right? No, no. Okay. The the question is, um,
under this pilot ordinance,
Are there special demolition delays built into it?
To protect these properties and trigger a community review.
I think we have an answer, but I think it's no
Um, I thought I saw Alderman list spot his hand. So um,
Alderaan if you want to speak
I'll I'll take the rebound after you know just something to
to answer this question. 1 person great. The answer. The
answer is no, no. Okay. Um, well, look, I'm not gonna, I'm
not gonna slow down the proceedings here. Um, and I can
follow up with the co-sponsors after the fact. But, um,
obviously if you're looking to extend, the pilot that
suggests to me that the longer term goals for this area,
Um is to continue a policy like this um and I would just
Advocate that. Um, there be some consideration given to a
demolition delay.
Type of trigger. Um,
And and again, the debate can continue over whether you
should Levy a per unit deconversion fee or not. Um but at a
base minimum having that demolition delay in place of 3 or
4 months, would Empower, I think the community um the local
alter person and the relevant City departments to really
dive in head first and we've seen that contribute to saving
a lot of important Landmark buildings across the city that
that very same process works. That's worked so well for
decades. So just some um, constructive input and uh, thanks
for answering my questions.
Thank you, Alderman. Any anyone else on this?
Um, seeing none all in Ramirez. Rosa makes a motion, do
pass all in favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay?
The chair. The eyes have it out. The item is passed as
substituted.
All right, uh,
All right, we're going to move on. Thank you. Uh first up,
have document number 0 2024 D, 000103 78, the historical
landmark designation for St, adelbert's Parish complex, at
1622 through 1658 West 17th Street and 1633 through 1659
West 16th Street. We have Daniel cber of the historic
preservation division of the Department of Planning and
Development here, to present the matter and answer any
questions.
Great Mr. Clever
Good morning, Dan klyber with the Department of Planning
and Development. My co-workers de kuvalo and Matt Crawford
are here with me as well.
The commission on Chicago landmarks is recommending to the
city council that the St, Adalbert. Parish complex, located
at 1622 through 58 West 17th Street and 1633 through 59
West, 16th Street be designated as a Chicago Landmark, the
St. Adalbert, Parish complex is located in the lower West
Side Community area, pilson neighborhood and 25th Ward
For orientation the St, Adalbert, Parish complex consists of
4 buildings on a campus bounded on a city block, between
Marshfield on the East Palina on the West 17th Street on
the south and 16th Street on the North.
Specifically the proposed Landmark, designation includes
the 4 primary buildings on the campus. The church is right
in the middle at 1636 through 40 West 17th as represented
by the red star.
Just to the west of the church is the directory at 1646
through 50 West 17th Street as represented by the blue star
to the east. Is the convent at 1626 through 30 West 17th,
which is the yellow star. And then to the north, the school
is at 1641 West 16th Street and represented by the green
star.
The commission on Chicago landmarks finds that the complex
meets the necessary criteria for designation. As you know,
under the Chicago landmarks ordinance, The Landmark
designation must meet at least 2 criteria for designation,
plus the separate Integrity Criterion
So, building by building the Crown Jewel of the complex is
the church at the center of the cohesive campus.
The commission finds that the church building meets
criteria for Heritage architecture, architect, and that the
building is a unique visual feature in the city.
the complex, exemplifies, the history of Polish and Mexican
immigration and the cultural heritage and influence of
these communities in Chicago,
it would be hard to overestimate the critical role. That
religious institutions played in the history and
development of Chicago's neighborhoods.
with its Grand Portico, entryway 8, smooth columns with
Corinthian, capitals Granite Limestone, and Terra Cotta
details throughout the commission recommends that the
church building is an excellent example of the Renaissance
Revival style of architecture.
The church building was designed by Henry J. Schlacks a
prolific ecclesiastical architect. In the city, he designed
multiple other churches in the city, including St, Ignatius
and Rogers Park St. Iota St. Mary of the Lake St. Bonus as
well as St. Chalacas, a designated Chicago Landmark. The
city council has previously found schlacks to be a
significant architect.
In addition, the St. Adalbert, complex encompasses, half of
a city block and includes a large-scale Renaissance.
Revival church with 2, 185 foot Towers surrounded by
low-scale residential and commercial buildings. It has been
a prominent and familiar visual feature of the pilson
neighborhood for over a century.
Next to the church to the West is the rectory building the
Heritage Criterion refers to the Social and historic
contributions that St. Adelbert's made to the city for over
a century. The commission recommends that this residence
for the parish priests who led the congregation is
important to the parish's Heritage, with respect to
architecture, though, not as Grand as the church. It's a
dignified Renaissance, Revival design, the compliments, the
other Parish buildings, it too was designed by schlacks as
we discussed a significant and is part of the complex. It
contributes as a unique visual feature within the
neighborhood setting.
Next is the convent building. Immediately to the east of
the church, the building housed The Sisters of the Holy
Family of Nazareth, who taught generations of children. At
the Parish School, the social cultural and economic
benefits that these religious women contributed to the
parish and Community should not be overlooked. The
commission recognises this and finds that the convent meets
the Heritage Criterion architecturally, the billing
symmetry like color and projecting cornice place it within
the architectural quality of the entire complex, such that
the commission recommends, it meeting the architecture
Criterion,
Just like the rectory, this convent is part of distinct
visual character of the whole complex which is outstanding
in the context of pilson.
And finally, there is the former Parish School building.
Elementary schools were and are a critical part of Catholic
parishes in Chicago neighborhoods. Educating generations of
young people
Therefore commission recommends that the school building
represents aspects of the city's culture and history. The
commission also recommends that the building meets the
architecture criteria and as he ample windows for natural
light and the carved Limestone entrance Portico point to
the building's function. And 2 colors of brick, masonry,
and visual interest. As with the other 3 buildings in the
complex, this building contributes to the whole as a
significant visual feature.
The commission recommends that the Saint Adalbert complex,
possesses, sufficient Integrity to convey its historic
architectural and cultural significance.
The existing buildings of the St, Adalbert complex remained
in their original location. It's setting was and remains
largely a late, 19th century neighborhood.
In 2014 the arch, diocese installed, scaffolding at the
church building and in 2019 the parish was closed and more
recently, the rectory and convent have been boarded up.
Clearly there is deterioration of the church building that
needs to be addressed. However the commission recommends
that all 4 buildings have largely retained their original
character-defining features materials and overall design
and therefore sufficiently convey their historic
significance. Again, the complex is located into 25th Ward
and Alderman Byron sichel, Lopez supports the designation.
The commission on Chicago, landmarks recommends, that the
significant historical and Architectural features of the
complex, be identified as all exterior elevations,
including roof lines of the 4 buildings that make up the
same adleberg complex. The church rectory Convent, and
school buildings building Interiors are excluded from the
significant features. In addition the single-story
accessory Building located north of the directory is also
excluded from the significant features. In addition for the
purposes of section 2120 d740 of the municipal code,
governing the
Review of permit applications. The following additional
guidelines shall also, apply the commission's review of
proposed work, should ensure that the significant historic
and Architectural features of the exteriors and roof lines
of the 4 buildings are preserved while allowing reasonable
change and flexibility to meet new needs in accommodating
future uses including potential new construction on
undeveloped portions of the parcel.
You have an ordinance to that effect and that concludes the
presentation. Thank you.
Thank you enough. Al Lopez.
Thank you. Chairman. And I want to thank, um, the
on Landmark for making this possible. This has been 50
years in the making
um, also I also pass along with my colleagues, a timeline
of of how many efforts we made to make sure that we have a
process. That is don't write, especially for the people of
our community, parishioners and residents, polish Mexican,
and many other immigrants who have contributed to our
community to this architecture gems, that today we have.
And that the need to be repurposed always with the
commission with the committee, and with our community at
heart.
I want to make sure that we we do not fall for the
misinformation.
We are communists piece.
Only a few months ago, some parishioners or some other, but
were arrested.
Arrested because they were protesting and asking for this
to take place.
We have been working with the commissioner of the
Department of planning. We've been working with the
landmark commission. We've been working with our community
so that we have a repurpose that is fair this transparent.
And in line with the values and principles of our community
that occur. Again once again respects or history
And we want to make sure that this Council also respects
our right to self-determination. This was done again.
In conjunction with City departments and again that there
already some proposals at the table but what we cannot
continue to have is the unrest that is speech and
parishioners against each other.
People against each other and something that should not be
controversial. This Landmark meets the majority of the
criteria to be landmark. And as we done with the previous
ordinance, we do have a plan, a preservation plan.
That puts people over profit.
I want to make sure also that b, a b remission to say but I
we did get a letter from there to disses of the Chicago. In
August early August is this year saying that they are going
to collaborate with us in this process rather than fighting
as opposition is against each other.
I'll hold these document as proof that they must be closure
on something that's created and rest an unnecessary
controversy.
This Landmark is being landmarking with every single
provision and criteria with the due process. And with this
support of the majority of my community. I asked of the
colleagues, I ask all my colleagues.
Just as I have always have.
Always respect for each Community. I am not called Alderman
of any Community. I am the representative of my community
who has elected me to represent them, who has elected me to
preserve or community and social Fabric, and we do have a
plan that includes everybody.
parishioners residents elected officials departments and we
have proposals at the table I asked and again,
They're being controversies on this committee for items
being called and Justified.
Another issue is, I am asking my colleagues to respect the
due process and putting it in writing. We do have a plan to
make this finally a reality after 50 years of contributions
of Polish and Mexican communities that are coming together
to finally come to a plan that respects our social Fabric
and our right to self-determination to have a place of
worship to have a place where we can come and and join or
history.
I'm asking an urgent. This has a the support of preservation
is community groups residents.
All the community overwhelming and I'm committed again to
work with the S Paul and any other Parish to make sure that
this process continues to be an inclusive transparent and
respectful process. I'm asking my colleagues to support
this item that is in the 20t word as we done in other items
and no respect or right to self-determination or right to
protect our history or legacy and our social fabric. Thank
you very much.
Thank you. Alderaan do I have other questions by committee
members?
Almond Riley. Um, thank you, chairman. And we just on the
last item talked about landmarks
Um, and certainly, I don't think anyone is going to dispute
what a a beautiful building and what an important part of
History, it's served in the community. Um, and I my
inclination is always to support the local ottoman of
record. Uh, we've been elected to do this job and sort
through Community process. Uh, and I've always respected
that boundary, um, that hasn't always been the case in this
committee.
And I certainly experienced that uh, in Grant Park.
Fighting to keep that free and clear of new buildings and
development. Um, when I was a freshman ottoman here,
Um 1 thing I I wanted to ask given the fact that um the
arch diocese is objecting to The Landmark status and it's
not surprising when a landowner does.
um,
because I understand we only get 1 bite.
At this apple uh landmarking. If this committee rejects
this, that's it. You don't get to try again. So this is a
pretty important proceeding for this property and for the
community,
perhaps the department could handle this question. I know,
Cindy Rubik is here. She's an expert.
When is the deadline for this committee to take up this
matter? Um, so perhaps there might be some further dialogue
about this project. The the and please to the the gallery.
Let me finish um,
The reason I ask is that I know that the alderman has been
working very hard and he's he's documented his efforts.
To try and find a way to repurpose this property in such a
way that it serves the community.
Um, it seems that based on proceedings yesterday, the future
of the pilson Tiff is now in question. Um,
Is there more time?
Left on the clock here. Before we have to act on this in a
definitive and final manner.
Sure, we have both de cavalo and Cindy Rubik Chan de you
want to take that.
Yes. Uh, thank you, um, alderman for the question. So,
there is a section in of the municipal code that deals with
the timeline section 21270, uh, does, uh, mention that the
city council needs to take action within 365 days. Uh, and
if no action is taken in that time, the designation would
pass.
And So based on that, what is the current time frame? When
must we act, uh,
To avoid this automatically occurring.
The uh recommendation from the commission was transmitted
to City Council on June 24th of this year.
okay, so so there is a bit more time um, on the clock, it
seems, um, again my preference would be to try and find a
way to work with the arch, diocese to, to, to make this,
um, I guess a more Cooperative effort. And I guess, for
Alderman sigcho Lopez, the Solace comes with, uh, the fact
that you can always come and call this up on the agenda if
you're not satisfied with how those negotiations go.
Um and I'm sure you're frustrated and probably exhausted by
this particular project and I know it's been controversial
for you. Um but my Approach with with land owners during a
landmarking process has always been to try and afford every
opportunity to reach a compromise that best serves both
parties. And and there have been instances of my own Ward
Where that hasn't occurred, despite my best efforts. And we
went ahead then in landmarks the property against their um
consent um for the greater good of the community. And so I
just wanted to make sure we've exhausted every option here.
Um, before this committee has to make such an impactful
decision today. Uh, thank you chairman, thank you. Oh,
Briefly.
So we again had meetings with the Architects and again I
put it in writing, this is August 5th to 2024.
I met with commissioner Boatright, members of of Department
of planning, as of last week, making sure that we provide
plenty of opportunity and options,
uh, I think as you heard from public comment in even for
people who want more time,
The protests every weekend between parishioners the unrest
between our community on something that should not be
controversial again. We are committed on Department of
planning is committed to ex exhaust all options. There
should I set with a letter themselves and I'm happy to read
the letter. I'm actually asked them to address if you if
they can. Now what I'm saying again once again.
Is that the community has the right?
The community has the right.
To self-determination.
After the aldermen have said, exhausting all options. I do
not want more of our communities. This could be voted in
July.
I took another extra month.
We have August and I met with them just as last week.
The Isis can come.
With their attorneys and then can continue as they done
with the landmark process to delay and create more unrest.
I am here on behalf of more Community, overwhelmingly
asking or counting or or
council members.
This is something that the department, my office, and our
community leaders Community, residents have worked for
months.
For years, I would say, I'mma ask that we take a
determination today.
I'm committed again with a letter in writing to continue to
work with Architects but we are not going to impose buyers
on our community for profit that I'm not going to do. All
right? Thank you Alvin, thank you. That's that's enough.
Um,
I just want to put a clarification as well. The the time
frame starts on June 24th. Um, the first meeting, uh, would
not have given us notice in July for this meeting. So, this
is the first meeting that, it could be heard in the zoning
committee because we did not meet in August. Um, also I
just want for clarifi clarification to note that the
designation status, that's pending protects the buildings
as is currently there would not be allowed to obtain a demo
apartment or enter into a building department without full
review by landmarks as if it is a landmark currently. So we
both have uh, both the time frame, that we understand and
the current protections and what would go forward. Um,
I, uh, have a couple speakers. I did ask representatives
from the arch dasty to come up as the property owner. They
did not speak earlier, I thought that was appropriate. Um,
if there is a short statement uh, you guys want to make and
then take some questions, we have some from other community
members as well, and please identify yourself for the
record.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, my name is James Jolie. I'm the
general counsel of the arch, Diocese of Chicago. Um, we've
brought with us, uh, Bishop um Lombardo, who is the
Episcopal vicar? For the part of the arch. Diocese that
includes pilson includes St. Paul Parish in the former St.
Adalbert parish and he's got a brief statement to make. I
just want to clarify 1 thing because we talk about the
owner and I don't want there to be any confusion. So let me
be the lawyer for 1 second and that is to say that.
The property that is at issue today uh, is uh, held in
trust by a corporation and the beneficial owner of the St.
Albert property is actually St. Paul's Parish not the arch,
Diocese of Chicago, the arch diocese, which has a
corporation, is the trustee, but the the benefit of any
development of this property, the assets go to St, Paul's
parish. And as you'll hear, uh, it's rather critical to the
Future Ministry of St. Paul's that, that that occur. The
last thing I'm going to say is that I I just want to
confirm that in the packets of the committee is a
scattergram map. Yes. So at least when we're talking about
the community, we can see on that, scattergram what the
community actually wants those. Who participated in all the
proceedings of all the, The Landmark commission, filed
petitions submitted letters, spoke are recorded here and
you can see that overwhelmingly in pilson. The position is
to oppose Landmark status. Last word is our request to you
is to endorse Alderaan Riley's request which
Is we are trying very hard to work both with the alderman uh
and with the with the city to work out something that would
be beneficial to everyone, including St. Paul's Parish of
Parish of course. So, our request is that the vote today be
simply to defer the matter. So, that that work can happen.
Now, let me introduce Bishop Robert, Lombardo.
Thank you, briefly quickly. Great. Thank you very much, Mr.
Chairman, I'm very grateful for this opportunity to speak
to you and the members of, of the council. Just to be
when SATs closed the parishioners and the property of St
adverts became part of St. Paul's Parish.
So they bear the burden of the renovations and the upkeep
of that property which has deteriorated over the years.
I could assure you that we want to make sure that all of
the stakeholders, the city, the neighbors, as well as St.
Paul's are taken into consideration. We did have an offer
for the property which would have provided 40% affordable.
Housing
We are concerned about affordable housing in that area. That
was blocked.
and so, let me just say this, we have another
example of a very good project that was done, Cabrini
Hospital.
Was no longer functioning as a hospital.
The chapel has been preserved and development was done
around it.
I don't see why we can't take some time and have cooler
heads prevail. And let's see how we can all come together
and let's work together to find a solution. I think there's
so much division right now in our world in our country, and
in our city, please, let's take some time and work
together. The first time I met with the alderman, we had a
very pleasant, a very nice meeting and I assured you that
we want to work together to find a solution that would be
in the best interests of all parties. I would just simply
ask. Let's do that and if I could say 1 other thing look up
at the picture up there the school has no artistic value.
Let's be real here.
The church does. So by landmarking the whole thing.
and you know, folks if you cannot behave
All right, sergeant-at-arms, I want you in this middle
section back here. The next person who shouts out will be
asked to leave
Behave like adults, please. Thank you.
So again.
Just to conclude, just to conclude.
We do want to make sure that everybody's interests are
taken care of. We can no longer sustain a parish in that
neighborhood. So we have to figure out how best to use
those resources for the good of the mission of the church
as well as assisting the neighborhood. That's part of the
mission of the church to assist our people. So I just want
to make that Assurance to you and to the committee. And I
think we need more time. And it would also say to those who
are disrespectful, you don't help the cause when we're
trying to set up a peaceful respectful manner of
negotiating a settlement, so if you think that your
accomplishing, your goal, I would ask you to address your
comments to the chair. Okay, thank you. I I appreciate the
sentiment though. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We do
have a couple of other hands.
Did did you?
You can go ahead and and have that person uh to make her way
out uh all the middle of the spa, followed by Alderman
Bale.
Sure. I I appreciate the dialogue. I am really proud to
represent some incredible Landmark districts in the First
Ward and some incredible properties that are both have City
Landmark status and also have national landmark status.
in the midst of that though, and I will say, like, in the
First Ward, we have had
moments where I would say there are religious orders and
institutions that sometimes run counter to
Social teaching and economic justice so I can see both
sides on this.
What I have noticed and observed.
Consistently. Is that Landmark status and even having
something close to Landmark status
Adds.
time and cost to the Redevelopment, particularly where
Public subsidy is concerned and I'm wondering like how
anyone can answer on this as a part of it. But how that has
been considered as part of the conversation around Landmark
status?
So I got your question is is the the future plan? The future
future use of the property for example like if you want to
convert a a church by to market rate development,
Stanley. There's very little oversight on that if you want
to do what I, I'm hearing. The community would want to do,
which is something that involves public benefit and public.
subsidy the involvement. For example, if the state historic
preservation ordinance adds significant time and cost and
effort into that. And I'm I'm wondering how that
consideration has been a part of the conversations around
Landmark status. Oh okay, I'll let you both, take it
alderman.
I can respond. So and and and certainly I think that's what
we hear. You know. So cool. Heads can prevail.
Um this is not a new issue. Again, we've been trying to
have this conversation since and that's what I mentioned
that the timeline. And as you mentioned time time is of the
essence, these things take time. And and I think 1 of the
things that we cannot do is coming back to redo the whole
process again.
That's what we asking here. So what I'm asking of my
colleagues is that this is a well thought out process. This
only committee actually voted in 20120
On 2022, actually on a proposal to give us a voice by
downzoning the property.
There was no agreement and the architect is wanted more
time.
We consider more time.
We allow more time and we work on the landmarking.
So that we can get to this point now.
And I will say I agree with exactly what they're saying. In
fact, the letter that's what is important that says
actually the letter actually that we received from the
Judiciary is it says that it's on behalf of something Paul.
Now, what we cannot continue to do is to continue to delay
the process, as you can hear, from our operational and
residents that are at each other's throats.
That is not conducive for a process that already has a
framework. There's 2, proposals, 1 of them fell through,
not, because we blocked it. We got blocked, anything. It
has to be open in the public. And when we start asking
questions, actually, we found out is that 1 of the 1 of the
signatures of our representative that architect is couldn't
even be verified.
So again, please please I interrupt you his question was
about uh I I I'm I'm providing I'm providing. So if you
could say I'm providing documentation on the timeline,
please do. So what I'm saying here is that there is a
landmark in process that again, as per the commissioner or
planning is not stopping any proposal for coming in. I I'll
again, and I know that we here in the directly you're here
in publicly for me, we don't block any proposals, all
proposals,
Are always in the open. There's already a fruit proposal,
you heard it here. Even proposals at the table that could
vary V. That are very visible. I think the attempt here or
modifying and restart the process again will benefit a
specific developers with a specific purposes and I'm not
going to tailor any process to particular people. This
framing is for every developer who has coming forward,
including operational so that we can achieve a goal. You've
done it in our world. I think I'm very qualified at any
other ultimate here to do the same.
May I ask 1 of information.
Actually and answer that point of information point of
information, ottoman, David Moore. That's all the more.
thank you so much, um, in regards to so I can understand
and if and if Auto will correct me. Um I think what he's
asking, which would make sense if if I'm asking, right?
Because I just want to understand that by landmarking and
and and we want to support um Byron Central but the
question becomes by landmarking. I think this is what I'm
hearing. Is there an incremental cost to that development
if we landmark and if there is an incremental cost is that
ecrement cost to that new development going to fall on the
taxpayers?
So I that that would be another part of that. The question
from all the most about this as a response, take a shot.
And then if Bishop Lombardo has we're just brief answers,
we got to log. I think what we're trying to say is that the
opportunity to put together the sort of
Development, that would benefit the community in the way
Alderman. Silts Lopez has has said
Could be much more difficult to even start if you landmark
in advance, if we can work on the kind of proposals, the
alderman is talking about which we are absolutely open to
considering fully with no special favor to any special
developer by any means. Then
The Landmark piece of it, the preservation piece of it can
simply be part of the planning. If you just Landmark the
whole site right now and make it a landmark. So that anyone
you're trying to attract has to deal with those extra costs
and burdens and also barriers to what might be done, even
attracting that partner, becomes much much more difficult.
So the request is for time, not for you to say, no, sure,
no. I understand that. I think, um, the other piece of all,
the more question was about city funding and I I don't
believe there's any city funding committed to this project.
1 second, I'm sorry. All the 1 doll.
Okay.
Exactly, exactly. Uh, to her point that that we would
imagine there would be sitting money in here, based on the
That that was signed that was backed out of had no Public
Funding in. It, it was a private offer for 40% affordable,
housing and preserve the church building. All right, you
know what, we're going to uh, all the spotted. Is that
answer your question may I ask?
Can I have?
A second. You do have the floor? Yes.
Second and final question.
I understand.
sometimes, there are
Aspects of our community that rise to such cultural
significance, that we do act above and beyond what may be
the interest of the specific Institution.
that said,
I I it's a 2-part question chair. I would ask items that
proceeded after this 105. 591 10904, I assume that these
are Landmark status designations with the consent of the
property owners.
Um, we're deferring the first 1. Uh, but revolva theater
does have property owner consent. So from that perspective
and I, I have the letter, I appreciate you handing out the
letter, but it appears to convey
Support for the Tif process and not for the landmark
designation.
I am only asking, is it accurate to say that both the
and the arch diocese currently object, to the landmark
status? And can you share with us?
Why you believe that they currently object?
Okay, we're going to have order here. Uh they can speak to
their objection if you want to add anything.
I would like someone from your team, whoever you choose.
Alderman.
Yeah, first off the church was deconsecrated that's a
church issue. Not a Civic issue.
So it was deconsecrated for a reason, the question was
about the opposition to landmarking, right? So that's yeah.
No further, Danielle castle for the record better price,
and I'm Council the saint St. Paul parish, as well, as the
arch diocese on this matter. First, to answer, um,
Alderman. LaSpada's, question, economic hardship is not a
legitimate consideration at the Landmark commission, stage
nor was it considered. However, now, the zoning committee
and the city council as a whole, can take a holistic
perspective just as they did in very recent memory, when
they decided not to Landmark the pilson neighborhood as a
whole.
So economic hardship, which is going to fall in St. Paul is
a very legitimate consideration that hasn't been taken into
account yet and is not reflected and the materials that the
landmark commission, forwarded, the arch diocese position.
Was that after the June 6th hearing at which the alderman
retracted, some of his May public hearing attacks and said
he wanted to work with us. We said, yes, we will work with
you as well. What would you like our assistance with he
said that, if pilson the pilson Tiff expansion. We are
agnostic. Literally, despite being a religious
agnostic on how this property is ultimately financed.
Except we know that it will require and this is for
dowels Point as well. It will require a third-party who has
third-party who has yet to be identified who is going to be
able to have lenders Equity investors and bring a lot of
money and energy and faith into restoring the church
building.
Which is our goal as well. We would like to see this
property revitalized and we'd like to see it revitalized,
with the church that's going to take private money. It's
going to take public money. It's going to take zoning. It's
going to take the cooperation of the city and it should be
done comprehensively with the landmarking. We are not
saying don't Landmark, we are saying, please do it
carefully. Do it in conjunction with something, which
actually results in third-party investment in the
restoration of the property for reuse. Thank you, Miss
Castle, all. All of them on the spot, does that question?
Further, did you want to briefly Alderman and then we're
going to Alderman bill? I I think that we got to have the
same courtesy to responding adequate time, you know, we got
to be fair. Um, I think that 1 of the things that I, I
would like to say, I didn't retract anything. What I said
is that the city is in Partnership to find a Solutions
because this is an important important part of our
community. I did not retract that just be public on that. I
didn't track anything. The other thing I want to say, and I
want to make sure that the the
Um the commission and the Janna maybe can talk about
economic hardship as well. As you know, the the consent I
think that we discussed also at lent in the landmarking
commission. That was voted unanimously. So, uh, the Janna,
if you want to maybe add to it,
Um, thank you Alderman. So, um, regarding the timing that
this um, took through the commission. Uh, the preliminary
recommendation was taken on August 7 of last year. And um,
as as you all may know, there is a very detailed process in
a timeline that the commission does um seriously uh take
and do all of their due process to make sure that everyone
has an opportunity to comment and, um, and they have a full
record before they take a final vote. Um, that said there,
there were suggestions for landmark, designation for this
property to the program Committee of the landmarks
commission starting in 2016. Uh, there were actually 4
different times that that was suggested to the commission.
So it has been something on the commission's. Um,
I guess, uh, workload for a number of years, um, regarding
the economic hardship. Um,
you know, the uh, there is a procedure in the code that
deals specifically with economic hardship and it does set
out parameters by how we how the commission would evaluate
any applications for economic hardship during the
designation process. The commission is bound to consider
only whether the property meets Landmark criteria, and
those are the criteria that are what they need to make
their final vote and recommend.
Ation to city council. The economic hardship, hardship comes
into play when there is an actual project, if there was a
denial of a permit and the applicant has an opportunity and
hearing and process that is uh available to actually
demonstrate economic hardship and a decision by the
commission which also would be then forwarded to city
council for review. So, I just wanted to clarify that part,
right. Thank you Alderman, bill
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, um,
Mr. Chairman I've, um,
used to be chairman of landmarks years ago and
um, I've been down this road a few times.
And I do believe that it's probably in the best interest of
everyone to take a step back regroup.
Come together and come up with a consensus.
Uh on this particular project and it may take a a another
party to come in to kind of be a mediator on moving forward
with this project. Um anytime you have contentious sides,
Um, for organs. Um,
It's just in the best interest to just, you know, pause.
Um, you know, when I was chairman, I did that numerous
times.
And intervened on behalf of both parties and came up with a
consensus that everybody could live with, where nobody's
totally happy. But everybody could live with
And based on what I'm hearing.
Um, from both sides on this particular issue, there's I can
sense. There's some common ground that we could reach.
But I think we just need to take a step back and regroup. I
don't think we're in a hurry.
To piss people off and I think that's what's we're doing
right now. We're in a hurry to piss people off.
And of backing up.
and coming together to where everybody can again have cool
heads and kind of just move forward on Common Ground And if
that were to happen we still have time. It sounds like we
have until June of next year.
Uh, before this thing actually rolls into effect without
city council approval. So we're not in a hurry.
and so, let's
Take a pause and bring people together, man, because I
guarantee you, when you put people in a room to work an
issue like this out, there's more in common than it is a,
then we have a part.
So, that would be my recommendation and I would hate to
Landmark anything and I've never done that. When I was
chairman. I've never landmarked a piece of property that
the owner was not in favor of that's an injustice to people
people who own a piece of property, okay? And so let's just
that's my recommendation, you can do what you want but
that's my recommendation to kind of have cool heads
prevail, is, is that a motion to defer automobile? All
makes Bill makes a motion to defer, we can.
Absolutely, we can speak on the motion to defer, um, which
is in order, uh, also your next. Thank you so much. Um, so
my question to the architect is is you've mentioned that a
number of occasions a proposal to build housing. There
Would that did that proposal result in the demolition of
any of these buildings? That would be landmarked today?
Well, nothing. Well, the church building was to be
preserved. Uh, we do have our
Yeah, burn, this is sure. And this is a full 5 years ago,
2019. That's how long we've been trying to sell this
property. It preserved every building on the site, the
school remained the school and there was new construction.
Only in the about
Basically the Westerly portion, that's the parking lot and
I believe there was a little bit of an addition on the
easterly side, but it was was able to preserve all
buildings. We never got to the stage where we could see if
it was fully financeable, or that it would be supported by
zoning planning Community stakeholders. But at least on
paper is it was drafted to go to PD intake. It saved all
the buildings and build new affordable housing. So why is
that proposal then incompatible with landmarking? If you're
saying that, that proposal would not have demolished any of
these buildings. As I said, it wasn't fully vetted and it
wasn't the spreadsheets. The numbers is are dpd.
Commissioner said the numbers got a pencil or it ain't real
also, right? And so we're trying to create the flexibility
with the city in collaboration so we can right-size the
landmarking. We also
Don't want to forego the potential financing mechanisms,
that would only be available if there was partial
landmarking.
And again, nobody wants to hear down the church building if
we don't have to, but there was a later, that's true. And
then there was a second.
Deal that was signed up. That would have preserved the
church but would not have preserved all the other
buildings.
and that was the deal that included, forty percent
affordable housing, uh, that we were unable to move forward
on, uh,
Because of resistance it I'm not going to, you know, blame
anybody. I'm just going to say that proposal is the 1 that
was pulled back when the landmark process began. So it was
a proposal to preserve the church building but not the
other buildings. And then the and then the developer
withdrew because of this particular Landmark process. All
were actually saying is at the end of the day. No, 1 is
saying it's impossible to preserve.
Some.
Part or even maybe all of the property but it's much better
to do that. As part of the collaborative process, that
others have spoken of. Because at least then the landmark
process itself is not a barrier to at least having the
kinds of discussions you need. So I don't mean oversimplify
it but really it we're not seeing know we're saying, let's
work on it but it's hard to work on it. If you jump first
and then to go try to find your partner. Thank you. I have
a question for the landmarks division.
So if this item were to be held what I'm hearing is that, if
if the council did not act within a year, The Landmark
designation would automatically go into effect.
Uh, yes, that is what the municipal code States and during
that time, would these properties be protected from
Demolition.
All permit applications would have to be reviewed by the
commission on Chicago landmarks and that started last
August.
Okay.
I, I'm very concerned.
That these properties would be demolished.
It was.
People parishioners many of them, the poorest of the poor
who came together long before. I was born long before
anyone. Here was born and put their dollars together their
coins together to build this Sacred Space. And so for me, I
I think the question before this body is, are these
buildings worthy of landmarking, status and the commission
on landmarks has done their work. And I'll say this, The
Landmark, um, division of dpd in the landmark commission.
They're very conservative. I have a very robust, uh,
preservationist community in, uh, Logan Square and we'd
love to, uh, Landmark a lot more things. Um, but the
landmarks division has a standard that they need to meet.
Uh, the landmarks commission is very judicious and
reviewing what should be
Uh, you know, landmarked or not. And I think that they've
done that work here. And so for me the only question before
before this body is should this be landmarked? Yes or no.
And I think the landmark Division and the landmark
commission has done its work and the question then is, um,
you know, why wouldn't we and, and I think that the only
answer that we can give here is that because we would be
okay with demolishing, any 1 of these buildings. And I
think that the community has said that they would not be
okay with that outcome. And I think about the parishioners
who years ago, put their dollars together to build these
beautiful sacred spaces, and so I'm for landmarking, and I
hope that that's what happens, uh, sooner rather than
later. Thank you, thank you, thank you for all Rosa. I just
want to clarify something, uh, they cannot demolish any
building here without permission from The Landmark
commission. Just like as if it was a final Landmark. So
just for Clarity on that. All the, do you have anything
else you wanted to add?
No, I was going to say what you said. I wanted the
landmarks division to say that this is a orange rated
building, right? So it's like, uh, Corpus Christi, which is
in my ward, which is an orange rated building, um, not
easily torn down. The community doesn't want it torn down,
and we're currently working with a developer to um, figure
out how to right-size that building, you know, use the
convent.
Uh, use the school, enhance, the courtyard. So that, you
know, we could have affordable housing there. Um, perhaps
the city would participate in that process and I would
agree with, uh, former chairman
Of the landmarks committee bill that it's probably in the
best interest of everybody to sit down and try to work it
out.
Uh,
The the, you know, this is a beautiful building, Corpus
Christi is a beautiful building and we should figure out a
way to preserve it. Um, and if People's have the right, uh,
goal in mind, uh, it can be done, but we have to sit down
and talk about it.
Thank you. Thank you. Alvin Alvin Riley, anything else?
Yes. Um, just a couple of final comments and appreciate all
the women dowels. Um, remarks just now,
You know, if we had a looming deadline of a month or 2 and
the gun were truly to our heads here today. My inclination
would likely be to to vote to Landmark
Um, these buildings. Um, but we do have more time here and
as was noted by
The current property owners. Um, when you negotiate a deal
like this, um, to to go and and and basically put the cart
before the horse by landmarking, these properties it does
limit.
The scope of those negotiations there are as, as the
landmarks division would be happy to confirm a number of
financial tools and instruments that can be applied for to
help support these properties. You know, substantial
Financial incentives.
Um, typically you negotiate those things across the table.
With the would-be future developer and like, many of my
colleagues who have um, Church properties, whether they're
the arch diocese or other denominations. Um, we've gone
through that careful process and I think we've seen a lot
of these projects end up being successful, sometimes they
take longer than we'd like. Um, and that is kind of the
nature of negotiating over Landmark properties. Um, but in
a lot of cases putting in that extra time can can lead to a
really positive result. And so again at the end of the day
If the local ottoman were to exhaust that process, and they
aren't able to reach uh, a final agreement.
1 of 2 things happens. Either he ushers this Landmark
designation through this committee and we approve it or no
actions taken. And these properties are landmarked in a
year.
Um, and so I do think that the deck is stacked heavily in
the favor of the local aldermen and the community.
Um throughout the remainder of what's left of the
negotiating time period. So um, I would also, you know,
renew a call for us to take a bit more time and hold this
while the parties try and and work out a compromise but
thank you chairman. Thank you. I see all the more you have
your hand up. Yes. Yeah. Just a point of information on
both what Alderman Dow and what um Autumn or rally just
stayed and he pointed out 2, things that could happen. Uh,
and based on, um, Alderman, Carlos from Rosa, is the third
thing that they, that, that, they, um, who have owns the
property with this Arch dasy or the, the church, I heard
somebody else some other entity who have almost could they
demolished. And if so, and if so, can something be put in
place a letter if it's binding that, no demolition can take
place without the ultimate consent.
all right, I'm gonna I'm gonna ask uh, Diana kavalo from
preservation division to answer that.
On demo.
Yes. Um,
so, the application to demolish would require review by the
landmarks commission. And again, the municipal code does
have a process for that that does involve multiple steps
potentially depending on, um, you know, the, the, the
preliminary in preliminary decision of the landmarks
commission. So namely if there's a preliminary denial of a
demo application, there are steps in the process to discuss
with the property owner. Um, there is a an opportunity to
have, uh, 1-on-1, kind of conversations to reach a reach, a
compromise solution. Um, there is a public hearing, that
would be scheduled if there's no, um, decision on a
compromise. And then a final decision by the landmarks
Commission,
um, what I also wanted to, uh, note is that the landmarks
commission decision on a demolition would be based on
whether the property is contributing or not. At that point.
They are not looking at uh, financial implications or any
other considerations other than if the property is
contributing and based on this recommendation application
for demolition of any of these 4.
Would logically be that. These are contributing buildings.
That is what the commission has already recommended.
um, the only um, consideration that the only opportunity
that there is for demolition that the commission would not
have any say in the matter is, if there is a finding by
Department of Buildings Department of fire um that these
that a property or or a specific building is imminently
dangerous and hazardous to public health and safety that
kicks. Everything out of the commission. Purview
Let me just and I and I'm, I'm very much aware. She
everything that she said, I only asked a question and I
don't know if it's it's upholding while if there was the
vote on to wait and something, be put in writing that
nothing could be demolished without the ultimate sense.
That's it's a yes or no answer let let me get back on that.
So right now the the buildings would have to get approval
of the landmarks commission their recommendation for
demolition. The next step is that it comes to my
commitment. This committee. Yes, don't we approve. Demo
permits for landmark buildings. You would receive a
recommendation if the commission was recommending to
demolish. But if the commission is denying a demolition,
their action is the final action, right? And I think I've
seen,
2, maybe in the 6 years.
I've Vice chair or chief of staff for the committee is
there maybe 1 a year if that
very limited, but that that again is typically when you are
dealing with the landmark District where you might have
non-contributing buildings within the area and even then
it's done that recommendation is done by ordinance. So it
will become before the committee. So we would weigh in on
that all them and more.
So it already is in writing. I I think to to satisfy what
your concern is. Yes.
1, second 1, second.
Yes, thank you. Alvin Moore. Um,
No other hands. If you want a quick point of clarification
that we're going to move to a vote. Yes. So
Again.
Or office, always works in Earnest even if some people may
not disagree.
Some people may disagree with the consent, but we have had
this conversations that you is very much aware of that. We
continue to welcome those conversations but again and and
and I think maybe this is what it needs to be done in
writing. We do not want developers to Blindside us,
We do not want this to be turned down for development. That
does not have the consent of the community. As you asking
for consent, to use of a very Sacred Space. In the
community, we also asking reciprocity,
I I see that some of the colleagues, 1 more time for us to
come back and I think when we can come back to, this is
going to come back to the same thing. We're not going to
allow the demolition of the parishes on on the orange rated
and landmark recommendations, that is not going to change.
I think that what we can expect changing is a real open
process that does not blind our community and puts the
buyer in front of the interests of the parishioners and the
community.
And I do think that that needs to be done publicly because
again, just of the some of the remarks that we've done
today, we continue to be here in Earnest, it will be my,
the desire of our community. We would like to take the vote
today.
I see some of our colleagues that asking otherwise but it
will be my hope and my wish for the sake of a community who
continues to protest each other, that we take a
determination today because you already have the commitment
commitment, the same commitment that you asking. You
already have that today including finding Solutions and
financing to make it happen because that much how we care
it will be the wish of the local aldermen to take a
determination today. And that's what I want to make sure is
in in record and you always have an open hand to make sure
that we do, right. But both s Paul and Albert as well as
the pills and community that has been displaced and step on
for way too long, pson is not for sale. Thank you.
Thank, thank you, Alderman. Um, all right, there's a motion
on the floor is to defer this item. Uh, I will take a roll
call vote for those of you on uh, the remotely. Please
unmute
All them in laspada.
The motion is to defer a, yes vote. Defers. The item to a
future date in this committee, an no vote, uh, would move
to an up or down vote on the item today.
Motion to defer then uh the lucky number 1 Alderman,
Espana.
Almond Hopkins.
All the woman Dal.
Almond Hall. We get him on Zoom.
All the women Harris.
All the women Bale.
All the woman Ramirez.
Almond Moore.
No.
All the Mosley.
Lopez.
All the person Fuentes.
All the Betts, all the woman Crews.
oh,
open Conway.
Yes.
almond Rivers, Rosa
Almond viegas. Yes.
Almond Riley.
All includin.
All the woman clay.
Stepped out on the m v. Yes. All the person fleites
Hopkins was here.
Paris.
All.
Reach.
Crews.
Play.
All right, the item is deferred by a vote of 10 to 4, uh,
and will be held in committee for future discussion. Thank
you everyone for your time.
We got a lot more to go though. So bear with me guys. Let's
go. All right. Um,
All right, for all the men Rodriguez. The next item is
document number 02024 d 0001059, 1 Historic Landmark,
designation for the Jackson storage and Van Company.
Warehouse 3609 to 3611 West Sac, all the woman Dao makes a
motion to defer, the previously, read item, all in favor.
Say I
All post say, nay didn't share the ice, have the item is
deferred.
All right, folks, we still got a lot of meeting left. I know
many of you were here for the St. Alberts. If you could
quietly, make your way out if you're making your way out.
So we can we can keep going here.
All right. Next up, uh,
Document number. Oh, 2024 0001 0904. The Historic Landmark
designation for the ramova theater building at 35008 to
3518 South holstead. Street we have is Kelly of these
historic preservation division of the Department of
Planning and Development to present and answer any
questions. Again, if I could have a little quieter in the
gallery, please.
Please, thank you.
Alush.
Thank you, chairman.
Good morning for the record. I leash Tuffy coordinating
planner for historic preservation with the Department of
Planning and Development. Hold on, I'm sorry I
Folks, be quiet or Leave the Room.
I know the item is over and you're on your way out, but we
have a lot of meeting left to go.
Please.
If I got to have a quiet in the gallery, I leash.
Thank you, chair.
Yeah, I leash Tuffy staffed to the commission on Chicago
landmarks that body has recommended to council that the
ramova theater be designated. As a Chicago Landmark, the
building is located in the 11th ward and alderwoman. Lee is
aware of the proposed. Designation
Designed by architect Meer. Nathan. The ramova was built
specifically. As a movie theater, the commission, found the
building meets 2 criteria for landmark designation.
Under the Heritage Criterion. The theater was commissioned
by Jacob mascali Eunice a businessman from the Lithuanian
community living in Bridgeport. In the early 1900s at that
time, numerous immigrant populations were employed by the
Chicago Stockyards. The main character of Upton Sinclair's
well-known novel. The Jungle was a stark. Stockyard worker
named jurgis rudkus. Who happened to be a Lithuanian
immigrant
next slide.
architecturally the theater is a fine example of the
Spanish Baroque style that was popular during the late 19th
and early 20th. Centuries the commission recommends that
all exterior elevations and roof lines. Be included as
protected elements as well as the restored vertical blade
sign in 1944 Marquee next slide.
to the north of the elaborate theater facade is the
attached commercial shops building, which was a common
addition to smaller neighborhood. Theater buildings, this
type of arrangement is known as a theater block, another
comparable building type
Similar to this. 1 is the music box theater, which opened 4
days after the remova both screening films, starting in
August of 1929.
Next slide.
The movie theater closed in 1985, and after nearly 40 Years
of vacancy, the current owners are Revival, LLC purchased
the property from the city of Chicago.
For $1 in 2022.
The recent year-long Rehabilitation was part of a larger
Tiff, Redevelopment agreement, with the Department of
planning and development. That required owner consent to
Landmark designation.
The ownership entity has provided the required consent
consent. And we are now carrying out the landmark,
designation through the proposed ordinance. This concludes
my presentation,
Thank you, Miss Tuffy, I'm Tyler.
Any uh, questions by committee members?
Uh all the person cuentas moved to pass. I have the
companion music box theater in my word, uh, and they have
just gone through renovation of their own. So happy to see
it. I know I've also spoken to uh all woman Lee who's very
excited about uh what's happening at the remova? Uh, all in
favor, please say, I
Hey post today, please share the eyes, have it? And the item
is passed. Thank you Alish. Next up, we have 3 Historic
Landmark fee waivers. We were here them all together. I'll
read the ward, followed by the address, and take a motion
at the end in the 34th Ward located at 25 East Washington
East Washington in the Fourth, Ward located at 3402, South
Giles Avenue. Lastly, in the Third Ward located at 2401
South Wabash,
There's no further questions about Community member all the
B makes the motion to pass on the orders. All in favor.
Say, I oppose nay penetrate, the eyes, have the orders are
passed. Next up, are large signs over 100 square feet in
area, 24 feet above grade, we'll hear them all together.
I'll read the ward, followed by the address and take a
motion at the end. 1 sign in the Third Ward located at 1300
South Wabash 2 signs of the 12th, Ward located, at 2620
West Persian Road in the 22nd Ward at 3800 West 26th
Street, in the 23rd, Ward at 3734 West 63rd Street in the
23rd Ward, it's 30 6315 South Pulaski in the 25th. Ward at
3115 West 26th Street 3, signs of the 27th Ward located at
1623 West Fulton Street.
Saying, in the 27th, Ward 1. Sign each at 2:20 North Green
Street, 960 West Chicago, Avenue 305 North curious Street,
and 923, West Weed Street in the 32nd. Ward 2401 North
Clybourn and the 35th Ward 1 sign at 2934, North Milwaukee
Avenue in the 41st, Ward 838, Patton Drive in the 42nd w,
1 sign each at 40 East Oak, Street 440, West Randolph Street
225 North wash and 1. West Superior Street 3 signs in the
47th Ward at 3940 North Ravenswood and lastly 1 side and
the 48th Ward located at 5937, North Broadway. There are no
further questions by Community by committee members.
Although the spot Amos do pass on favor, say, I
Post to say nay picking the chair, the eyes have it. Now we
will move on to map amendments and that for to ensure the
committee meeting runs as smoothly as possible the group
together, according to witness and will be heard in that
order rather than word order. We've got witness seats right
up here.
Um, first up.
Um, is that okay if we take 1 quick 1 before yours. All
right. All right. Um, I'm actually going to go to the
bottom of page 4. Uh and then we'll come back to this item.
Um document number a 8901 in the ninth, ward ordinance,
referred 71724, common address is 344 to 34, through 40
West 95th Street, change requests to b31 community shopping
district to rs1 residential single unit. Detest house
district all in the bail.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, this is um basically a simple uh
future land plan usage, zoning change.
right, any questions by committee members,
Seeing none. All the person Fuentes moves do pass all in
favor. Say I opposed say nay the beginning of the chair,
the eyes have it. The item is passed. Thank you alderman.
All right, back to the top of page 4 um, which 1
presentation.
This page 3 page 3. Sorry 1 presentation on 5 aldermanic
map. Amendments for the Western Avenue. Corridor 2 of these
items. A 8900 and a 888.91 were deferred earlier in the
meeting as the title. Search results did not come back in
time for the mailing to take, place the presentation still
concerns those items. However, there will not be voted on
today, but at a future meeting, we have, uh, Daniel krier
from the Department of Planning and Development Katherine
here as well.
Just me solo show today. All right. Thank you Daniel uh, to
present on the items and we'll be taking a vote on the
following items file number, a 88894 and the 49th Ward
address commonly known as 75001 through 7560 Northwestern
Avenue. Change requests is a b32 community shopping
district, to be 333 Community shopping districts. File
number a 88890 in the 40th Board address commonly known as
4900 through 5259 Northwestern Avenue.
2354 West Farragut Avenue 2352 through 56 West Foster
Avenue, 4700 through 40. I'm sorry through 5300,
Northwestern Avenue 4844 through 4874. North Lincoln the
change request is b11, neighborhood shopping, district B13,
neighborhood shopping district, B22 neighborhood, mixed
juice, District b23 neighborhood mixed juice District
b31.5, Community shopping district, b32 Community shopping
district. C22 motor field related commercial districts and
rt4 residential 2, flat townhouse and multi-unit, District
2, a b333, community shopping district.
And final number a 88893 and the 40th Ward for the address
commonly known as 6834 through 6958 Northwestern Avenue and
6801 through 6943 Northwestern, the change request is a b32
community shopping district. C12 neighborhood commercial
District c22 motor vehicle related, commercial district and
rs2 residential single unit detached house district 2, ab33
Community shopping district. As I've said, we have Danielle
Cryder from the Department of Planning and Development to
presents.
That was impressive. Cherry Lawson. Thank you.
Um, yes. So this is um, the basically the zoning
implementation of the Western Avenue corridor plan across
3, different Wars, 40th, 47th and 49th Ward this uh
community-led process began in 2020. Uh the Western Avenue
corridor plan was adopted by the Chicago plan commission
and 2022, and so we've been working with these communities
and these altars for a long time to, um, create a new
vision for Western Avenue, which has been a little
neglected. Uh, we would like, new vibrancy to be brought to
the area, we'd like for it to be more walkable, we'd like
new development, their new density. And so this rezoning is
an implementation step of that greater visioning and see
here. You can see the map. Uh, the study ran from Addison
to Howard Street next slide, please.
Um and it covered more than land use. But we're going to
focus on land, use today at ALS included. Public realm
Transit and Mobility. Infrastructure improvements, Etc.
Next slide. Please.
There was robust Community engagement back, 2020 through
2022 with steering committees. Focus groups virtual events,
mailings um, other pop-up events. So um, a lot of work went
into this with the community next slide, please.
and ultimately what we want to see like I was saying earlier
earlier was more vibrancy, we want, um, more mixed use
activity, but focused understanding that, that can't be
distributed evenly throughout the whole 5 Mile Corridor. We
want it to have more of a sense of identity. We want to be
able to support the current and future businesses and we
want to see new housing investment and development to
support um affordability concerns in the area available to
a range of um of families and individuals next slide,
please.
So we identified 5 neighborhood centers next slide, please.
Um that are distributed along Western Avenue. Those are our
centers of commercial activity and where we would want to
see the most density next slide, please.
And you can see this map here and um our land use framework
consisted of 3 different categories. We have the
neighborhood center, which is that, you know, stronger
commercial, um, stronger ground floor, commercial
environment with the highest density. We have housing
infill, where commercial isn't bad, but we understand that
it might not be consistent. Um, and we have the commercial
transition areas, we recognize that West, that this would
be a big departure from the existing character of much of
this Corridor um as it exists currently. And so if some of
these more auto-oriented uses that are not that don't
create as walkable of an environment remain, they should be
concentrated in the pink areas. Next, slide, please. I
should also note that uh, Western is a trans. It's a
high-quality bus Corridor and it does have a Brown Line
Station.
And so, these are the density recommendations and Zoning
recommendations from the plan, but because these land,
these land use categories are pretty conceptual. There are
multiple zoning, uh, categories that could serve these
purposes and it was really initially designed for um, for
discretionary project approvals like plan developments and
rezoning, and so it has this flexibility, but it
Didn't necessarily articulate exactly what new by right
districts should be next slide, please.
And so the discussion of rezoning was really around by
Wright projects and streamlining the approval of new
development on Western Avenue. And so when we talked
through it after the adoption of the plan we saw these as
being, the biggest benefits of the rezoning, we saw it as
streamlining. The development that we really wanted to see
especially on the smaller Parcels where we could see by
right development. We saw it as a establishing more
consistent development expectations. So that if you had a
partial just like your neighbor's parcel, you had the same
rules.
Um it applied the Aro requirement which is 20% in this area
to buy right projects which is a huge deal. Um, it limits
New auto-oriented Uses that are incompatible with the
vision primarily by eliminating C1 and C2 zoning districts.
It encourages me to go back, please thanks. Um, it
encourages the denser mixed use multi family development
that we talked about um by significantly. Increasing in
some situations the allowed density um and it demonstrates
a commitment to seeing new development in this area to
fulfill this Vision. Next, slide, please.
And so, the rezoning that um was just read off, would
about 600 Parcels going to b33 or b23. We do tend to have
more b33 than you would expect based off of that map. You
saw earlier showing the housing infill and the neighborhood
transition areas just because we were trying to combat
commercial vacancy and um B3 allows a little more
flexibility for those existing ground floor, commercial
spaces. Um, it just seemed like a better Fit For A lot of
the corridor. We didn't touch the plant developments. There
were some properties that were already properly removed
zoned, which were not affected. And then we also, um, did a
lot of analysis to understand.
Any new non-conformities and special use conditions that
would come about as a result of the rezoning. And a big
part of our Outreach was around understanding this next
slide, please.
So uh, you know, we talked about the Western Avenue
corridor plan and all the Outreach that went into that. And
so we understood that there was consensus already around a
vision for this Corridor, but we continued to use the, um,
like the list serve and the web page that we already had to
do Outreach for this effort. We had 2 open houses that were
really focused on talking to the immediate adjacent
property owners that actual Property Owners, helping them
understand the technicalities of what this rezoning would
mean for them and understanding kind of the conceptual
future development ideas.
Which we don't talk about a ton in community outreach. Um
and then we did, or are depending on the area. Um, sending
out the legal, notice for 250, ft all Property Owners
within that radius will receive a notice about the
reasoning.
So that's all I have. Um I'm here if you have any questions
thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Krider, any questions by committee members,
all them in Vasquez? Did you want to?
Uh, yes. Uh, thank you chairman. Uh, thank you so much. Uh,
Daniel and the team. Um, I want to thank
really the department of Planning and Development. Um, for
the amazing work, they've done, uh, as well as our
colleagues in city council that are a part of this. So, um,
I'll Matt Martin Alderman, Maria Haden myself. Uh, Alder
woman Silverstein who kind of began this whole conversation
about looking at Western and really reimagining it because
I think anywhere you're going to City of Chicago. If you're
on Western and you're just seeing auto shops, you're seeing
driveways, you're seeing things that, um, survey purpose,
but sometimes feel like relics. And so trying to identify a
way to reimagine those areas to create livable spaces to
create the kind of retail businesses that can be supported
by more density. Um, Western was pretty ideal. Uh, that
being said,
It was a process, it took a number of years to have these
conversations to have meetings with the different
stakeholders. The block clubs ought to get that buy in to
hear their take to make sure that what was being presented.
Is something that addressed concerns that they had and
spoke to some of their Vision. Um, so I'm extremely
excited. I think, you know, in a word like the 40th where
we try to create more affordability having something where
you're you're in effect upzoning the area. But also in
making sure the Aro is still a part of. It is crucial that
you're not losing that affordability. Um, I I appreciate
the mayor's, uh, push for cutting the tape. We're cutting a
whole lot of tape by upzoning this area. Like so when
whether you're a developer or you're the lawyer is looking
at this, it's 1 lesce zoning meeting. You have to go to
because we're saying Western is open for development for
business, for density, for housing.
In ways that I believe it should be. Um, so, you know, the
colleagues that I mentioned
This is going to be the first time, the city of Chicago
does something like this to an area. Uh, we know that with
the history of Chicago, more often than not large areas,
get down Zone because Alders of yester Year, want to
control every single thing that occurs in every single
square foot of their Ward. Ugh.
We're not planners, we're City Council Members. We want
people that know this stuff to do this stuff. We want to
facilitate the kind of growth that leads to growing a tax
base because we are going to need it to be able to pay for
all these Investments, all these services that people want
to see every day. And so, um,
I I not only invite I urge our colleagues that share
Western the same ones where we've had conversations about
bus Rapid Transit and looking at how we Urban plan all of
it to similarly, go to the same process. We actually have
um,
Advocates who've been doing this work. We've had people at
the Departments, we've had colleagues where we're reaching
out to other authors that share Western to say, this is a
way to approach it. That allows you to really plan ahead
and be proactive with what can happen and in a way that I
think moves our city forward. So, I want to thank uh
Danielle Crider, uh Tom Bolino, both city planners. Um and
really want to thank Katherine heard the supervising
planner who
I just don't know how someone dedicates that much time to
really create all this, if you would have been a part of
watching the process,
putting together all the slides putting together, guide
books to design it talking through all the different
stakeholders which have at times different opposing
viewpoints. Bringing us all together, talking in
development, to get something that isn't just a concept and
isn't just a, a thought. And, and actually, something that
we can actuate on is something that I can't think or enough
and I think the city is in will be in debt for the work
that she's done here. You know, I hear a lot from urban
planners with ideas. We get nervous as heck being city
council members, who have to then face The Neighbors when
we have to make those kind of changes. So to be able to be,
that thoughtful is something I want to make sure that she's
commended for as well as the rest of the team. So, I highly
urge this committee to support and anybody at all that
shares, western or any other neighborhood and just thinking
about something like this, hit me up, we're happy to help
and walk you through what it was like for us. Uh, I see all
benefit to it. So, thank you very much, Sharon. Thank you
all the Vasquez. I think I pointed out before this team
serves the whole North Side. So uh they're done on Western.
Right, we've got other things for them to do. Uh,
Exactly. Um, I also, uh, I do have Lucy and I, uh, from the
47th word to add.
Hello, thank you, chair.
I'm Lucy, and I have staffed to Alderman, Martin here to
speak on the upzoning to Western Avenue.
Alderman, Martin is pleased to support the rezoning of
Western to allow for increased density. Compared to today's
low density. Car Centric, zoning. These proactive changes
will support the community's priorities for land use and
development as identified in the Western Avenue Corridor
study.
Alderman. Martin is excited to join his colleagues, alder's
had an invasive and very thankful to the Department of
planning and development for spearheading this initiative.
Thank you.
Thank you very much. Any other questions, but committee
members, seeing none, all in the spot on those 2 pass, all
in favor. Say I
I, the eyes have it and the item is.
items actually I'm sorry uh I have to read them out
although this bottom makes a motion to pass on ordinances,
a 88894, a 88893 and a 88890. All in favor, say I, I'll
post say the eyes. Have it and an item will be reported
out. Thank you. Um, do I have a representative from the
46th or 33rd Wards here?
33. Is there a great? Um I'm going to go to that item. Uh
document number a 888902 in the 33rd Ward ordinance
referred 71724 common address is 4310 North kedzi change
requests B3, I'm sorry b23 neighborhood. Mixed juice
District to M11 limited Manufacturing.
Ract, uh, Patrick Murphy. We'll start with you.
Sure chairman Patrick Murphy with the Department of
planning. Uh this is simply a sunsetting of a former type 1
1 that has a 2-year expiration date. No permits were
pulled. So there is a passage in the municipal code that
allows for the sun setting of
Any type 1 that falls under this uh expiration.
Sounds good. We have Becky Rios from the 33rd Ward,
anything to add.
yeah, so I just want to also um,
Same, um, we do have a Community, Driven zoning process. So
we are open to and we are in communication with the current
property owner, um, and we are open to reviewing any new
proposals, um, to rezone the property. So we just, yeah,
All right, any questions by committee members, uh, seeing
none, all the women Ramirez, Moses do pass all in favor.
Say I, I post say nay and the chair of the eyes have it.
The item is passed. Um, we are going to come back to the
46th word item and we have the other woman or a rep here.
To discuss it top of page 5.
Um,
Document number 22500921 in the 49th. Ward ordinance.
Referred 7724 common address is 6411. North newgard,
Avenue. Change requests is an RS3 residential, single unit
detached house district to be 23 neighborhood. Mixed-use,
districts attorney is Dan Lowe, good afternoon, Mr.
Chairman uh, this is 6411
the north newgard 22509 type 1, I represent dermat Logan,
he's a contract purchaser, The Proposal RS3 to b23, he's
going to construct 4 dwelling units, 3, garage spaces, uh,
it's just under 1800 uh, feet from the loyal or red line.
So there's an administrative adjustment to allow for the
parking. Uh, the 4 units are duplex down front and rear
Simplex Simplex. Uh, we're a super grateful to Alderman.
Alderwoman Maria Haden for her support and she actually won
above and beyond, uh, clearly. Uh, because there was a
zoning lot issue. Um, potential zoning a lot issue with
this uh, property this parcel we have a letter of support
from the Alder woman.
Great. Uh, we do have the letter on file. I will say my
first non- dorm apartment was at 6608 North newgard. So I
know exactly where this is. This is the building is at
right next to the commercial use or the alley as well. Uh
yes just to the uh just to the South. Yeah. Got it. Got it,
got it. Any questions about committee members?
Seeing none all the khitan moves to pass all in favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay. The eyes have it, the item is passed.
Thank you. Uh next is item. Number 22511 dt11 in the 49th
Ward ordinance, referred 71724. Common address is 70157015.
North, Sharon Road, change requests, an rt4 residential 2,
flat townhouse and multi-unit District to be 23.
Neighborhood. Mixed-use District we have attorney. Tyler
manik
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My
name is Tyler manak. I'm an attorney with Shane bangs
Kenyan, Schwarz in the attorney for Adrian and Aimee.
Marcos who owned the property at 715 North Sheridan through
their LLC. Adrian and Amy would like to construct a 5-story
residential building, consisting of 20 dwelling units. The
property is currently zoned rt4 to effectuate this project.
The owner requires a zoning map Amendment from rt4 to a b23
as a Transit serve location. 10, indoor parking spaces,
will be provided
All Aro, unit, All 4, our units will be on site. Plus
another unit will be Adrian and Amy's resident. As part of
this application, the applicant includes variation
requests, the reduced the rear setback to zero to reduce
the loading space, requirement from 1 to zero and to reduce
the north um side setback to zero.
The project Falls within the lakefront protection ordinance.
So after um, after the city council process goes through,
have to present to plan commission. However, this project,
project, as part of that process has been reviewed and
approved by dpd mopd, C, do, cfd and storm water. The
applicant has worked closely with all their women had an an
Engaged in a public community meeting organized by the
older woman through the owner's, close work with the older
woman and her staff. The older woman has given her full
support to this project. I respectfully request this,
committee's favorable recommendation to rezone 7015 North
Sheridan to a b23 zoning district and I'd be happy to
answer any questions. Thank you. We do have a letter of
support from all the women had and on file, and any
questions by committee members, uh, seeing none. Uh, all
their laspada, moves due to pass all in favor. Say I, I I
post say, nay the chair. The eyes have it. The item is
passed. Uh, bottom of page 5 is document number 2251921.
And the 25th word ordinance.
referred 7724 common address is 2219 South, Oakley Avenue,
change request, RS3 residential, single unit detached house
district to rm5 residential multi-unit District.
Tyler manic. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and members of
the committee Tyler manic again on behalf of the owner and
applicant pilson Rentals. LLC for 2219 South Oakley 2219,
South Oakley is improved with 8, dwelling units.
Uh, when the applicant applied for building permits to
perform long overdue deferred Property Maintenance, after
purchasing this building, uh, it was determined that 2 of
the units at this building were non-conforming and the
owner needed a zoning map amendment to issue the bill to
get obtain the building permit and have it. Conforming
minimum lot area per unit.
As a result, the applicant worked closely with Alderman,
sichko Lopez his staff, and his zoning Advisory Board to
rezone this parcel to a conforming zoning District of rm5.
And the alderman has issued a letter of no objection
accordingly.
the zoning map Amendment application, includes the
following variation re relief to, to reduce the MLA per
unit from 400, to 390 to increase the floor area ratio from
2.0, to 2.01 to reduce the parking requirement from 4 of
the 3, to reduce the front setback to 9.73. And to reduce
both side bet side, setbacks to zero. All this relief
allows the applicant to preserve the building as it sits
today and protect its housing options.
In conclusion, I respectfully request this, committee's
recommendation to Res 2219 South Oakley from RS3 to rm5,
zoning district, and I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you. We do have a letter of support from Alderman
seicho, Lopez any questions by committee members?
Seeing none, all the women. Dow moves due pass all in
favor. Say I say nay to ensure the eyes have in the item is
passed. Thank you Mr. Manic.
Up next uh, document number 2251 and the 30th Ward
ordinance, referred 777224. Common address is 55555 West
Irving Park Road change request b11 neighborhood shopping,
district to see 211 motor vehicle related District. Uh, we
have Mr. Pikarski good, good afternoon. I am Tom, paresky
of the law from Gordon in Parsi. Representing the applicant
on this matter. But before you seeking an amendment of the
city of Chicago zoning map from the current b11 to that, of
a b c. Excuse me, c21 for the property, commonly known as
55555, West Irving Park Road, the subject is currently on
an unimproved and used for the storage of Auto vehicles.
The applicant seeks to improve the site with a new car wash.
We have reviewed our plans with Alderman cruise. We have
also had multiple uh, uh, Community meetings where we
presented our our um, proposal to the part Portage. Park
Chamber of Commerce.
The project has received both the support of aldermen
cruise and the community. Therefore, we we ask the
committee to vote the recommendation of passage of the
application to the full City Council.
Thank you. We do have a letter of support from all other
women, Crews. Any questions by committee members, uh,
saying none. All the person Fuentes moves to pass all in
favor. Say, I, I say nay, make sure the eyes have it and
item, it will be reported out. Uh, next up. This document
number 2250000 on the 19th. Ward ordinance referred 7724.
Common address is 102100 Southwestern.
10200 Southwest, so north side, I'm sorry guys. Change
requests b11 neighborhood shopping district to c21 motor.
Vehicle related District. Uh, Tom pichkari again. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee and I am Tom
pichkari of the law from Gordon and pichkari representing
the applicant where before you seeking an amendment of the
city of Chicago zoning, uh, map from the current b11 to
that of a c21 for the property, commonly known as 1020000
South Western Avenue, the site has traditionally been used
as a motor vehicle repair shop in the past, the site.
Had been down zoned and the use became legally
non-conforming.
A previous owner discontinued his business license which
resulted in the loss of the legally non-conforming status.
The applicant seeks to reestablish this, this historical
use and therefore needs needs these zoning Amendment.
We reviewed our plans with Alderman OSHA and presented The
Proposal during his community review process.
The project has received both the support of aldermen show,
OSHA, and the community, which has been indicated by by a
letter previously forward to the chairman
Therefore, we ask the committee to vote its recommendation
of passage of the application to the full City Council.
Thank you. Uh, Mr. Poorski, we do have a letter of support
from all the men, OSHA any questions by committee members
seeing none, other than princess moves do pass all in
favor. Say, I, I, I, I I
Bottom Page 6 is active whenever 22498 and the 11th. Ward
ordinance, referred 71724, common address is 3428, South,
lituanica Avenue, change requests RS3 residential, single
unit detached house district to rt4 residential 2, flat
townhouse and multi-unit District. Uh, we have again Tom
marske. Thank you, Mr. Chairman 1, last time I am Tom,
paresky of the law firm of Gordon in paresky representing
the applicants on this matter where, before you seeking an
amendment to the city of Chicago zoning may have from the
current RS3. Do that of an rt4?
for, for the property commonly known as 3428 South Lithuania
Avenue
the site is improved with a 2 and 1 Story, 3, unit
Residential Building the applicants, use the rear unit as
their residence which is the 1st portion of the building.
The applicants would like to construct a second floor.
Addition to make the rare equal to the front front
dimensions of the building.
The building will remain 3 units. The request is to permit
the increase floor area.
We have reviewed our plans with Alderman Lee and presented
the proposal to the community. The project has received the
support of both Alderman, Lee and the community as
evidenced by a letter previously. Forward to the chairman,
Therefore, we ask the committee to vote its recommendation
of passage of the application to the full City Council.
Thank you. We do have a letter of support from all their
women lie. Any questions by committee members, all the
women doll. Moves, do pass all in favor. Say, I, I, and I
post say, nay. Make sure the eyes have the item is passed.
Thank you for Carsey top of page 7 uh document number 22504
in the 48th. Ward ordinance, referred 71724. Common address
is 6320. North Broadway. Change requests is a b31 community
shopping district to see 211 motor vehicle related.
Districts, John fitchie, welcome good afternoon, Mr.
Chairman I'd hope to be still be saying good morning but
good afternoon Mr. Chairman Miss. Um as you said this is
only change for the property at 6320 North Broadway.
Away from a b31 to a c21 let me first clarify. I apologize.
John fritchie for the record on behalf of the applicant,
uh, the rezoning is sought solely for use purposes. As an
initial step toward filing. A special use application to
establish a social uh use uh social Equity uh dispensary at
the location. We've been working for months now, with the
aldermen and her community organization, we have their
support for this uh, resoning. I believe that at a minimum,
they had emailed your office. I don't know if they had
followed up in addition to that as well.
Yeah we do have the letter of support from all the women in
Mana hopen. North. Yes on file. Um,
Any questions by committee members?
Uh, all what makes the motion? I just want to say, this is
about a half a block, south from oil University, Chicago,
and they are not a landlord at all. No, they are not. As a
matter of fact, they just, uh, purchased the adjoining
property. They are aware of, uh, this application. That's
where I was, when I lived on Neward, okay. Paying
All right, all the person moves to pass all in favor. Say I
I opposed say nay. Maybe try the eyes have it and item is
passed. Uh next up is document, number 22503 and the 444th
board ordinance referred 7724. Common address is 3201
through. 09 North Holston Street. Change request to b31
community shopping district to C12 neighborhood, commercial
District, Mr. Richie, thank you again. John Fitch you on
behalf of the applicant Oliver entertainment. Uh, we've had
lengthy conversations with the alderman who was very
difficult to deal with, on
On this project. But but that aside um Alderman is you're
aware. This is an existing uh property that consists of a
well-known restaurant and a couple other establishments.
There's a vacant space there that they are seeking to put a
new restaurant in. No additions are planned for the
building. Uh, we've heard no objections when the notice
letters went out and I respectfully ask for your support.
Thank you. Uh you do have my support. This is uh the
intersection of Belmont Hallstead sort of an anomaly that
wasn't already zoned, C. Like the rest of Paul said is and
it's rounded on 4 sides, by city streets and CTA turn
around. So, uh, any uh, questions by committee members
seeing none all in uh, cson was due pass on in favor. Say I
any opposed say. Nay going to share the ice. Have it item
is passed. Thank you. Chairman all kidding aside. Thank you
for your work out with us on this. We appreciate it. Much
appreciated. Look forward to the new business.
All right, top of page 8 is document number 22528 dt1 in
the 47th. Ward ordinance was referred 71724. Common address
is 3710 through 3714. North Ashland Avenue, change
requests. C12 neighborhood commercial District to B25
neighborhood, mixed use District. Uh, we have attorney
kurin, O'Hara.
Do I uh have an attorney on this 1?
3710 North Ashland.
Arena know. All right we will pass it and come back. Uh
document number 225151 and the 46 word ordinance, referred
71724. Common address is 936 through 942 West Leland
Avenue, change request is an rt4 residential 2, flat
townhouse and multi-unit District to be 23 neighborhood,
mixed juice District, I have attorney Andrew Scott.
Who's a much stronger? Fill in today. Good to see you.
We're endorsing. See you as well. Proceed.
Good afternoon chairman Lawson and members of the committee
on zoning landmarks and building standards for the record.
My name is Aaron dorsy of the law, firm of dika mcet and we
represent the applicant, Wesley Leland Avenue LLC and its
application to rezone the property located at 9:36 to 9:42
Wesley, Lynn Avenue.
Uh, We've also submitted a substitute narrative in plans
and would ask for the committee to accept those
substitutes.
We do, uh, all the woman Ramirez, moves to accept the
substitute and narrative and plans for the type 1
application. All in favor. Say I, I post say, nay in the
chair, the eyes have it? Substitute narrative and plans are
before us. Thank you.
the applicant intends to resolve the property from rt4 to
b23, uh, in order to redevelop the currently vacant
property into a 32 unit Residential Building, uh, which
will have 6 affordable units located on site as part of the
map Amendment application, the applicant is requesting
certain variations in the front side and rear yards and a
variation in the loading requirements and administrative
adjustment to reduce the parking spaces in a Transit serve
location.
Uh, the applicant has had meetings with the community and
the Uptown Chamber of Commerce. And we've sent out the
required notice to surrounding property owners and have not
received any opposition to the application.
We've also worked with alderwoman Clay regarding this
project which led to an increase in the affordable number
of affordable units located on site.
And we have also received a letter of support from
alderwoman clay, which I believe should be on file.
Um, we do have a letter of support from all the women,
clay, and she has just rejoined. The, the meeting. I'd like
to add anything on this 1.
Oh I'm so excited to see this part of my work. Be
redeveloped you all. It's been vacant for over a decade.
Um, it is on a beautiful historic block um that has my alma
mater, uplift Community, High School, just a few hundred
feet away.
We actually had a great conversation with the developer
because obviously affordability has become a grave issue in
the 46 Ward, and they were very Cooperative with wanting
um, to add more affordable units on site. So I'm very
ecstatic that we were able to have um, a great work in
relationship that includes having affordable units on site
in this particular part of our war. So, really looking
forward to this project.
Uh, thank you all the woman clay. Um, I uh, know this area
well, and I'm happy to see the investment there. I Know It.
Uh, it's taken some time. But, uh, any questions by
committee members seeing none. All the women dial moves due
pass on with the substitute narrative and plans, all in
favor. Say I, I post say the eyes have it item is passed.
We go back real quick to page 4.
Uh all the Mac amendment in the 46th Ward. Uh, document
number a 8899 and the 46 award ordinance, referred 61224.
Common address is 41116 North Clark Street change. Request
is an RS3 residential. Single unit detached house district
to be 31 Community, shopping district. All their women,
Angela clay. Yeah. So this particular, uh, partial used to
be a 711 in my neck of the woods and it has been sitting
vacant. Um, Prime real estate you all in a part that has
Clark Street. Um, it also is close to Blaine Elementary.
Uh, the development that is going up here is called access
contemporary music where they will be teaching, folks, as
young as 4 to 104. How to play classical music. Um, it
comes with on-site parking that. They are also going to be
renting out for extra funds um and then we also passed a
liquor moratorium so that they are able to serve alcohol.
During shows. Um, I'm really excited about this. We worked
with the nearby community organizations and Chambers to
make sure that we got this right made. Sure that we um, had
full commitment that we will be dropping this like a
moratorium in another year, because it is solely for this
parcel, but I'm super excited to see this redeveloped, with
a, um, organization who's really committed to helping the
community in nearby neighbors. So would love your support.
Great. Uh, thank you. Uh, so much. All the women clay. I
know we, uh, uh, we had a speaker on that. And the letter
is in the packet as well. Um, any questions by committee
members
Seeing none all the person from Wednesday moves to pass all
in favor. Say I
all post, say the eyes have and the item is passed. Thank
you.
All right, we're turning back to the order. We're at the
bottom of page, 8, uh, document number 22513. Uh in the
word ordinance, referred 71724. Common address is 614
through 16 West, Addison Street, change requests, b31
Community shopping district to be 22 neighborhood,
mixed-use districts. Uh we have attorney Lisa darte and
Thank you, chairman Lawson uh for the record, Lisa darte
here with point of different strategies.
I am here representing.
Property appearance LTD we are here. Um regarding the
property at 61614 through 6016. West Addison Street. It's
currently zoned as a b31 community shopping district. We're
asking that the, uh, zoning be changed to a B2 -2, mixed
use District to legalize and existing lower level. Second
dwelling unit, which would result in a total of 2 dwelling
units, within the existing 2-level building, um, letters
went out. We've received no opposition and I believe a
letter of support from Alderman's basado has been
submitted. Uh, we do have a lot of support from all the
events this bocho for this crazy 2-unit building. Um, any
questions by committee members seeing none, all the women
clay moves due pass all in favor. Say, I
I post say nay the payment, share the eyes have it and the
item is passed.
Uh moving on to the top of page 9 document number is 22512
and the 22nd Ward ordinance referred 7724 common address is
2611 South Lawndale Avenue. Change request, b32 Community
shopping district to be 22 neighborhood. Mixed juice
District once again this is Duarte. Thank you. And um Mr.
Chair. I'd also like to acknowledge we've got zoning
consultants and Gerald Garcia sitting to my right. Welcome
Here we are. Seeking a zoning Amendment from a b32 community
shopping district to a P2 neighborhood. Mixed-use District
to allow for the conversion of a vacant office space on the
ground floor into a second dwelling unit. Again, for a
total of 2 dwelling units within an existing 2-story
building. We have issued letters of notice. We received no
opposition. And I understand that Alderman, Rodriguez has
expressed his support for this amendment to the chair. Yes,
we do have a letter of support from Allan Rodrigues. Any
questions by committee members seeing none? All the women
do pass all in favor. Say, I, I all oppose nay, the opinion
of the chair of the eyes. Have it item is passed. Thank you
very much. Uh middle of page, 9 is document number 22323
and the third word. The ordinance, referred 1 24/24. Common
address is 4301 through 44 or 53, South Federal 4300 to
4452. South Dearborn 4301, the 44th 53. South
Dearborn 4330 to 4452. South State Street. Change request
is plan development 11:35 as amended to plan development
11:35 as amended. Uh, we have attorney Steve Freeland, and
our friends from the cha
Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman uh, my name is Steve
Freeland with Applegate and Thorn Thompson here with me
today. All the way at the end is a representative of the
applicant cha it's Whitney Houston is here. Also, this is
this matter and the next matter that you're going to hear
uh relate to the latest Redevelopment of the Robert Taylor
homes, which is owned by cha um my clients Branch or
Michaels and well the branch heart development company and
Michael's development have been joint venture partners with
the chah for a number of years on several, prior
developments, in Robert Taylor homes and this is 1 of them.
The also with me is our architect, uh, Matthew mcraine. Um,
The matter before you is simply and I don't know if you've
got our slides but it doesn't it. I can, I can explain this
um, there it the the existing plan development 11:35 when
it was passed. Um, 45th Street did not exist is exist, if
you go to the next slide,
um, and basically, there was a Miss measurement of 10 feet
so that the South Boundary of this plan development, which
was intended to be 45th Street, went 10 feet to far, so
it's actually within the next matter you're going to hear.
So the purpose of this amendment was simply to correct that
change and make 45th Street. The southern boundary.
of the plan development, which it has always been
Uh, with with that, we certainly would take any questions.
And uh um
Great. Uh, Allah Mandell is going to move, uh, actually I'm
sorry, the item was heard and passed by Chicago. Plan
commission. Yes, thank you. All the woman D makes a motion
to incorporate all records in findings from that hearing
all in favor. Say I any opposed nay. Can you show the eyes
have it? Records are Incorporated all the mandle further
makes a motion to, uh,
Approve. This measure all in favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay. The eyes have it. This is passed as
revised. Thank you.
Thank you. We'll go to the next item. Then a document
number 22105 in the Third. Ward ordinance. Referred 31523
have an address is 45500 through 45556 South State Street.
1 through 21 West 45th Street change, request rt4
residential 2, flat townhouse multi-unit District, to be 23
neighborhood, mixed use districts and then to plan
development Mr. Freeland. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman
again, Steve Freedman with Applegate on, and for Thompson
here, on the applicant of the Chicago Housing Authority
again with me uh Whitney Houston and also the developers of
the project represented by uh Andrea keaney from Michael's
development and Matthew mccraine from uh, lbba Architects.
This is, you can probably go to the next slide. This uh,
maybe even the next
Just to give you a sense, this is a Redevelopment of the
next block of the old, Robert Taylor homes. Um, what is
before you is a 3 Area, 3 sub area proposed development,
the first sub area sub area. A proposes 52 units of housing
over. 80% of those will be affordable. It'll be 21.
Um, building with 40 units and a walk-up building 3 story
walk up with 12 units, we did appear before the Chicago
plan Commission on August 15th. And as you did with the
prior matter, we would request that you incorporate the
record and findings of the plan commission. Alvin Hopkins,
makes a motion to incorporate all records and findings from
that hearing all in favor. Say I I I I say nay and share
the eyes have it. The records are Incorporated and I think
you can see there are a few images.
that are being shown right now, this is the 4 building and
then the next image is the 3 story walk up, uh, um,
building. Um, if it, uh, if it switches again, this area is
currently vacant land, and, um, this is the next phase of
Redevelopment of Robert Taylor. We certainly uh appreciate
all the assistance that Alderman Dal gave to this project
and I know she's here she can speak on it. Um to the extent
that uh you have any questions of our Witnesses. We're
happy to take them.
Thank you. Uh, all the women down anything to add
Yes this uh project uh we've worked on for a long time.
It's been through a community process residents of
existing. Um Community have also uh reviewed this proposal.
Um I'm pleased that we have a lot of participation from MBE
participation from MBE African-American companies both on
the architecture side. I know, uh, Landon bone Baker is,
uh, here as well, um, engage civil, which is The Local
Company in the ward, ugh resident of the ward and, uh, GMA
Construction to do the work. Um, so I would ask the
committee to, uh, favorably, uh, move on this. Thank you.
Thank you all of them, clay. All of them, clay moves, uh,
do pass. Um, all in favor, say I
I I I sorry.
I just wanted to thank the Chicago Housing Authority, and
the Department of Housing and, uh, Bren Shaw Michaels for
their work on this as well.
Thorne.
Thompson.
Barn, you know.
Great, thank. Thank you. Anything else? Nope, great. All
the woman claimed moves to pass all in favor. Say I, I all
post say nay. Make sure the eyes have it and it's passed as
revised. Thank you very much.
Copy page chat is document number 22492 in the Sixth. Ward
ordinance. Referred 771724, common address is 631 West,
81st Street and 650 West. 83rd Street change requests M32,
heavily industry district and Industrial plan development
N. Number 1443 to M32, heavy industry, district and M32,
heavy industry, District, 2, industrial, industrial plant,
development 1443. As of it amended, excuse me,
Uh, we have attorney Meg. George at our M. Matthew Elite is
here today.
Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman and, uh, good afternoon members
of the committee, uh, for the record. My name is Matthew
Ally with the law firm of ackermant LLP with offices
located at 71 South Wacker Drive, which represents the
applicant for this matter. Green era, educational NFP. Uh,
earlier today, I did have Erica Allen the president of
Greener educational NFP with me regrettably. She did have
to leave for another meeting but she does send her regards
um as a preliminary matter this application was considered
and recommended for approval at the August 15th. 2024
meeting of the Chicago plan commission and we request that
the transcript from that hearing be incorporated into the
record for today's proceeding all the way when clay makes a
motion to incorporate all records and findings from that
hearing all in favor. Say I I I any opposed say, nay chair.
The eyes, have it? Records are Incorporated. Thank you
chair as a brief summary of this project in 2019. The
Chicago city council approved industrial plan development,
1443 to facilitate green Air's proposal to construct the
new Anarchist or facility visitor.
Center Urban agricultural area and community area. The Anor
digestor is now partially operational and given that
approximately half of the food waste, being brought to the
campus is in liquid form. The campus now needs to expand to
accommodate additional detention capacity, which is
required in order to obtain city and state permits to allow
for the full operational capacity of the Digest.
Green era. Now seeks to expand its campus to the north to
Encompass an additional approximately, 190 square, 190,000
square feet or approximately 4.4 Acres of sight area. It's
it is, it is uh, this additional PD Site Area that requires
this proposed amendment to the PD.
No new buildings or structures are being proposed. Uh,
green are is proposed PD expansion, has the support of
local Alderman, William Hall, who has provided a letter of
support for this application. Finally, we appreciate this
committee's consideration and request your support of this
proposal. We are available for any questions. You may have
thank you very much. We do have uh uh the letter of support
support from all. Um, I would like you to send me a link to
an Anor. I will learn a little bit more about that. That
sounds interesting. Any questions about community members
seeing none, all this HR Lopez moves to pass. Uh, we we
incorporated the records, we did. Yes. Uh, all in favor say
I I I any opposed say nay any share of the ice have it. Um,
it's passed as revised. Thank you, thank you, Mr. Charlie.
Next up, is document number 22506921 in the 27th, Ward
ordinance, referred 7724. Common address is 595 to I'm
495 to 499. North Milwaukee Avenue. Change request M23
M23 Light Industry District to dx3 downtown, mixed juice.
District we have Katie janky, Dale.
Thank you. Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee for the record. My name is Katie janky Dale from
the law. Firm of dla Piper. We represent the applicant in
this matter, which is RV Ventures. LLC with an affiliate of
bokeh group the sites and existing restaurant located at
495 North Milwaukee. That's known as the Pearl Club, the
requested change is a technical amendment to establish a
dx3. Downtown mixed use District that would allow for the
issuance of a PPA for a certain limited uh live music
performances.
We've worked very closely with the local neighborhood
group, neighbors of River West and Alderman, brunette on
this request. And as a result, we entered into a binding
plan of operation with the local neighborhood group that
would, um, go into effect with the license issuance. Um,
there also is a substitute ordinance which would allow for
the ordinance to be made effective a month early. So we can
enhance the prospects of having limited entertainment in
connection with the forthcoming holiday season. We request
that the uh, committee accept that substitute other
Hopkins, makes a motion to accept the substitute ordinance
all in favor. Say I I I all post say, nay the eyes have it
substitute is before us. Thank you. That concludes Our
Testimony but I'm available for any questions. Thank you,
got it. So we got to get open by the holidays, right?
That's any questions about committee members, seeing none.
All the claim moves do pass all in favor. Say I
I I'll post the name item is passed as substituted, thank
you.
Uh next up document number 22476 the 27th, Ward ordinance,
referred 61224 common address 1140 West Erie change.
Request residential business plan development number 1480
to residential business plan, development number 1480, uh,
once again, Katie janky Dale. Thank you, again, for the
record Kitty Jinky Dale from De Piper. We represent 1140
West area LLC, which is an affiliate of the bond companies
as a preliminary matter. This application was considered
and recommended for approval at the July 18th plan
commission. Hearing we would request that the transcript
from that hearing be incorporated into the record.
Uh, Alderman Hopkins makes a motion to a corporate all
hearings and findings from the plan commission, hearing all
in favor. Say I
Please hear the eyes have it in accordance with
Incorporated. Thank you again. This is a relatively
technical Amendment to the existing plan development. The
site is located, um, in the West Town neighborhood bounded
by Ogden met and Erie. Uh, there's no changes to the
building proposed. We are simply seeking to amend the PD to
allow for additional uses in the immediate case for dog.
Groomer tenant in the building on the ground floor, um, the
buildings already be constructed and as I said, no,
physical changes are proposed again. This is it. Uh, we met
with the neighbors of river River West on this request, as
well as Alderman Bernette. Um, and with that I'm available
for available for any questions. Thank you again.
We do have a lot of support from all the run out. I don't
think he joined us on the zoom. Um, any questions about
committee members seeing none, all the women claim. Moes do
pass, all in favor. Say, I all post say nay to the chair,
the eyes have it and the record it is passed as revised.
Thank you, Katie.
All right top of page 11 uh document number 22317 in the
second. Ward ordinance referred 121323. Common address is
749 through 757 West North Avenue 1551 through 1577 North
Holston Street 1555 through 1569 North Clybourn Avenue and
732 to 754 West Weed, Street, change requests, this
plan development number 834 to be 35 and then to a
a residential business plan development. We have attorney
Paul Shadel. Good morning, Mr. Or afternoon. Mr. Chairman
members of the committee, uh, I'm Paul Shadel with the law
firm of dla, Piper in Chicago and along with my partner,
Mariah degrow. I represent the applicant in this matter,
LPC Chicago LLC and um, our client to developer, Paul and
Paolo. Also is here. If you have any questions, uh, the
application was considered during the July 18th meeting of
the plan commission, and recommended for approval, and we'd
request that the transcript,
From that hearing be incorporated into the record, all the
commutes and makes a motion to a corporate all records and
findings from that hearing all in favor. Say I I I opposed
say nay making sure the eyes have and the records are
Incorporated. Please continue the. The site is located at
1565, North Clybourn at the intersection of North and
holstead streets or North Avenue in Hallet Street. Uh the
site is very well served by transit uh directly across the
street from a redline stop and adjacent to a number of bus
lines. It's currently part of a uh retail project that
includes uh
uh, uh, Design Within Reach, For example and other
retailers and a freestanding
Parking garage. The proposed building would go on the site
of what is a shuttered Bank of America. Um, the applicant,
as you noted Mr. Chair seeks. An amendment to the PD to
allow this new building, which would have 37 stories and
contain 396, dwelling units, along with ground floor.
Retail happy to answer any other questions and would
respectfully request your approval.
Great, thank you. Um we do have Alderman Hopkins would want
to add anything on this.
Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, I'm in full support of
this proposal. We've engaged in an extensive Community
review, process along with, uh, uh, extensive interaction
with the development team made some significant
improvements. As you can see the design of the structure,
it's a relatively attractive high-rise design. Uh, it will
blend in nice with the neighborhood. Um, it will be, I will
acknowledge, uh, taller than anything in the immediate
surrounding area. Um, but nevertheless we tried to go with
a
Enter profile. Um, that will blend in nicely with the
community. Uh, it is a to, uh, since it is located next to
the ltop. Um, it's keeping the existing parking structure
which is fortunate in a program like this, you, you know,
typically you'd have to build new parking in this case, we
don't, there's existing parking, um, which makes it
possible, uh, to fold this right into the existing
conditions. Uh, furthermore we do have a situation there
where, uh, pedestrians, um, are actively Crossing this
interception, because you've got the, uh, Red Line station
right there. So, we're looking to make some pedestrian
improvements and some traffic flow improvements. You also
have a Starbucks and an, um, and an Apple store right
there. So, uh, it's a recipe for illegal parking. You have
Lane restrictions by people parking their constantly. Um,
trying to get into either, uh, the Apple store or the
Starbucks or dropping someone off at the L station. So we
asked the developer to provide a traffic study uh, with
recommendations for how to
Address that uh that traffic study was submitted. And uh it
did include specific recommendations for how we can um
enhance the city's existing pilot program for illegal
travel Lane restrictions when you have people parking and
blocking traffic uh and a important Corridor like Clybourn
which is adjacent to this site. Um, it it really causes a
great deal of congestion and that is something that
enforcement must be part of the solution and this new
automated enforcement p.
Pilot program that the city is implementing. I have high
hopes for I think it's going to make a difference and this
will be an ideal test laboratory to show the before and
after picture and how this enhanced enforcement program can
stop illegal street obstruction uh and and uh help the
traffic flow continued to move in an important 3-way
Corridor. Like this, where you've got Clybourn, you've got
North, and you've got Holsted. So this is 1 of those uh,
areas where increased density will actually help alleviate
traffic congestion rather than caused it. Um, if all the
pieces of the, this puzzle are allowed to be assembled
properly, as we think, they are. So ugh. I'm very
supportive of this program. I think it's an excellent
addition uh to the neighborhood. And uh we look forward to
your support. Thank you.
Thank you. Uh Alderman, Hopkins. I I know the area. Well
and I think we're all happy to see pedestrian and traffic
improvements, right? You know, as things have gotten built,
I don't know that it's ever been taken in a comprehensive
way so uh definitely appreciate you doing that. Um,
And also, we all want to see what Auto enforcement looks
like. Uh, so, uh, hopefully it's very successful. Uh, any
other questions by committee members, seeing none all the
computes and moves to pass all in favor? Say I I all oppose
say nay item is passed as revised. Thank you, thank you.
Um going to the bottom of page 11, its document number 22328
in the 45th. Ward ordinance, referred 12424. Common address
is 3955. North Kilpatrick 3865, North Milwaukee Avenue. The
change request is an RS3 residential, single unit detached
house district to be 33 Community shopping district and
then to a residential business plan development. Now we
have attorney Sarah Barnes
Good afternoon. Um, Vice chair and esteemed members of the
committee Who Remain. I always tell my clients to hope for
an anti-climatic.
Final hearing. So I I guess we got what we hoped for um I
am super happy to finally be here today in front of you all
though. Um on behalf of the applicant and property owner
gw6 Corners LLC. Um we appeared before the Chicago plan
commission for this project and we're approved by the same
on March 21st 2024.
Subsequent there to a revised PD application and other
supplemental materials, incorporating and memorializing
commitments. From that plan commission, hearing were tender
to the Department of planning and development and to
Alderman Gardiner. Um, we do ask that the transcripts of
all such proceedings in the corresponding documentation,
please be entered into an adopted into the
The record here today.
Thank you all the Ramirez. Rosa makes a motion to
incorporate all records and findings from that hearing all
in favor. Say I I I'll post say I have it. The records are
Incorporated. Thank you so much. Um, the property in
question, the subject property is the old people's gas site
at the heart of the Portage Park in Irving Park
neighborhoods. After over 3 years of very active
engagement, collaboration with the old Irving Park in
Portage Park communities. We are super happy to bring to
the esteemed committee a proposal for the reactivation of
this enduringly, vacant site with a new mixed use
development complex, the programming for the new proposed
development, which has almost unanimous support from the
most immediately, impacted and interested members of the
community as heard, um, during public comments calls for
the construction of 4 single story commercial buildings.
Um along the Kilpatrick and Irving Park frontages. Um such
commercial buildings, will contain the visible tenant
spaces for restaurants, Hospitality Ventures and other
local businesses. Intended to serve the residents of the
immediate area. These commercial tenants will share 125
vehicular, parking spaces, which will be available for
their employees and patrons in a new landscape surface.
Parking lot with direct access off of Irving Park and
Kilpatrick Avenue news.
The programming for the development also calls for the
construction of a 5-story residential building. That will
generally comprise the South half of the site.
With Frontage on Kilpatrick Avenue in Milwaukee Avenue,
such Residential Building will feature a total of 346
dwelling units, including 69 affordable units, consisting
of a diverse mix of unit types with an array of amended
amenities and communal spaces intended, for the exclusive
use of the residential tenants of the complex.
Off street, parking for 205, Vehicles will be provided
within the core of the new residential building along with
bicycle storage and Electric.
Um, vehicle charging stations and 27 additional surface
parking spaces. Behind the building, that will be reserved
for visitors.
Um, as alluded to in my summary, the development team
started, this journey with Alderman Gardner, back in the
summer of 2021.
Um, and we have been keeping up our Communications and
going back and forth to the drawing table with members of
the Portage Park neighborhood. Association Old Irving Park
Association and Portage Park Chamber of Commerce for the
last 3 years coming up with the program for this.
For the reactivation of this site. Um,
towards those same ends just real quickly because these
were the changes that were um implemented. As a result of
the plan commission hearing, um as a result of the
collaborative Journey, with all the various stakeholders.
Um, the city's Department, including the city's Department
of planning and the Department of Housing, as well as
Alderman Gardner, we are pleased to note some important
important commitments that the developer has made towards
the success and longevity of the project.
As originally proposed and generally accepted, um, by the
elderman and Community liaison, the applicant had committed
to provide. At least, 15% of the total number of housing
units as affordable.
And on site while contributing over 2.6 million dollars
into the cities affordable housing opportunity fund which
was to go for funding of additional new affordable projects
throughout the 45th work.
At the plan commission, hearing. However, we heard echoed
desires from both the Commissioners and interested
citizens.
Um that it was referred to have all 20% of the Aro units
placed on site as such and in consideration of such
purposeful interests and needs the applicant committed on
the record to revise the subject plan development.
Applicant to provide all 20% or 69 Aro units on site. This
commitment has been reflected in the revised plan
developments.
Statements and corresponding Aro, housing, profile form.
That are a part of the record. In addition, there are 2 an
inconsideration of the city's inclusionary goals. The
applicant has also renewed his commitment as acknowledged
in the accompanying, documentation to actively solicit,
from an offer preference to wbe MBE and union labor
organizations. So that 100% of the construction contracts
for this project will go to such organizations and to to
residents of the cities of the 45th. Ward
Sub commitment was further. Memorialized in a project,
labor agreement cooperatively executed by the applicant and
developer Mr. Gold sitting next to me and the Chicago and
Cook County, building and construction trade Council, as
further acknowledged by the officers of 21, local labor
organizations, each of whom also signed the agreement. It
is anticipated that over 100 million dollars in
construction. Contracts will be granted as a part of this
project, yielding upwards of 750 new construction jobs.
Um,
As indicated during my introduction. The project project
with these commitments was approved by the Chicago plan
commission at their public hearing pursuant to a positive
recommendation from the Department of planning. We also
have letters of support from at least 3 Community
organizations representing the Portage Park in Irving Park
neighborhood communities, as well as the corroborated
testimony from the members who spoke here today. And 2,
since Alderman Gardner is off, exercising his other duties
tending to another Committee hearing. Um, he has provided a
letter of support that should be on record with the
committee with all of this. The applicant very respectfully
and humbly seeks the consideration and approval of this
esteemed committee. Thank you, Miss Barnes. We do have a
letter of support from Alderman Gardner. I know this has
been uh,
Work in progress. Uh, any questions by committee members
seeing none? All the cereal Lopez moves, do pass all in
favor. Say I I opposed the eyes have it. It's passed as
revised. Thanks so much. Thank you. Best of luck.
All right top of page 12 is document number 225007 in the
12th. Ward ordinance referred 7724 common address is 3800.
South Kedzie Avenue. Change request is b31 community
shopping district to be 32 Community shopping district and
we have Rolando acasta. How are you Mr? Chairman, good to
see you. Good afternoon, Rolando acasta here on the
applicant the subject properties on the southwest corner of
38th and South Kedzie Avenue. It is improved with a
Marshall 2-story partial, 1 story building. The uh, there is
is 1 dwelling unit on the upper floors, uh, the applicant
wishes to split that unit into 2 units, that is triggered.
The requirement for the rezoning so that we can reduce the
MLA for the property. The ground floor of the property is
currently a commercial space, it will remain a commercial
space but it'll be divided into 4 smaller spaces, so they
can be rented to small businesses in the neighborhood. This
went through an extensive Community process under the
opacity of aldermen. Alder Ramirez. She had believed has
submitted a letter of support for this matter. We are happy
to answer any questions. You may have.
Uh thank you. We do have a letter of support from all the
women Rivera's um she was sticking it out. But uh I think
she has left us for the moment. Any questions by committee
members seeing none all the person fences and was due pass
all in favor? Say I I I I the eyes have it. I mean item
will be reported out. Thank you middle of page. 12 is
document number 22505 in the 37th. Ward ordinance referred
7724. Common address is 3843, West Sheeran Street change
request RS3 residential, single unit detached house
district to rm4.5 residential multi-unit District. We have
attorney markup yet. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of
the committee, my name is Mark kupc. I'm the attorney for
the applicant, excuse me, the street address 3843 West here
on Street in the 37th. Ward subject property is a vacant
lot. Plan is to build a
New building, a new 3-unit residential building on this site
site in an area that could use some new development. Um,
applicant has met with Alderman mitts to explain the
project and to ask for her support.
Excuse me. Thank you. Would you have a lot of support from
Allan Mets? Any questions by committee members saying? None
other franchise moves, do pass all in favor. Say I all
post. Say no. The eyes have it item is passed. Thank you.
All right. Next up to this document number 22526 of the
28th Ward ordinance referred 7724.
common address is 739 through 41, South California, Avenue
change requests, b32 Community shopping district, to B22
neighborhood, mexus District once again mark copc. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman members of the committee my name is Mark
kupc. I'm the attorney for the applicant. This is affecting
the property 73941, South California, Avenue in the 28th,
Ward subject property. It's a double lot, and it's improved
with an old mixed use building. With 2 commercial units on
the ground floor. Those 2 units are vacant. They've been
vacant for a while. Owners have been not able to rent them,
so he's seeking the zoning change, so he could take those 2
units on the ground floor, convert them to residential
units.
And uh he had met with Alderman Ervin to explain the project
and asked for Alderman Irvin's support.
Um, I believe we have that letter, but just forward it to
us. Uh, just in case I know he was, I thought he sent it
directly because he was, he was unavailable last week.
Uh, Nicole with weigh in on, on this item on California, I
know.
Great. I know he was he popped in earlier, right?
Any other uh, questions by committee members saying none
all the situ Lopez moves to pass all in favor. Say I I I'll
post the name. You share the eyes have it item is pass.
Thank you, thank you.
Um top of page 13 is document. Number 22521. D21 and the
26th. Ward ordinance referred 7724. Common address is 3939
through 41 West, Dickens Avenue.
Change request, M11 limited manufacturing, District to rt4
residential 2, flat townhouse and multi-unit District. I'm
going to take a motion
To defer all other. Uh, quences most makes a motion to
defer, the previously, read item all in favor. Say, I, I, I
post say, Nay please share the eyes have it. The item is
deferred.
Same thing on the next 1, document number 2251621, and the
fourth. Ward ordinance referred 7724. Common address is
45508 South Cottage, Grove Avenue change, request b11
neighborhood shopping district, to be 23 neighborhood,
mixed use districts, all the Ramirez. Rosa makes a motion
to defer, the previously, read item on basis. Say, I, I
The eyes have it. The item is deferred.
bottom of page 13 is document number 225
25521, and the 26. Ward ordinance, referred 71724, the
common address is 1810. North Richmond Avenue. Change
request RS3, residential, single unit detached house
district to RM. 4.5 residential multi-unit, District, we
have Attorney Fred Augustine. Good afternoon, chairman
member of the committee for the record. Fred Augustine. I'm
an attorney with the law office. San banks at 221 Northwest
South Street. I'm here on behalf of the applicant Maria.
Primo applicant is the owner of the property at 1810 North
Richmond. The property is currently improved with a
residential 2 flat. We would like to amend the current
zoning from the current RS3, District to an rm4.5 District.
The reason for this change chairman is we're keeping the 2
flat. Um, the applicant would like to incorporate
additional square footage on the second floor in the Attic.
Um, so that's the reason for the change. We have worked
with Alderman alderwoman Fuentes in our office on this
matter. I believe she's in support. I know she's present
here today. I also have a letter of support from her.
Her office as well.
Thank you. We do have the letter of support. All the person
Fuentes anything you want to add.
All zoning matters that appear before this committee. Go
through my community-driven zoning process. Uh, I submitted
the letter of support and I'm support in support of the
zoning. Change a motion to pass right all the Fuentes moves
to pass all in favor. Say I I any opposed say nay. Make
sure the eyes have it item is passed.
uh, moving on the top of 14 document number,
22529 that's 21. 333rd Ward ordinance, referred 77724
common address is 3316 through 18 West Montrose Avenue
change request b31 Community shopping district and be 23
neighborhood, mixed use districts. Um we have once again
Friday. Augustine again, chairman for the record. Friday
Gustin, I'm here on behalf of the applicant Montrose State,
LLC. The applicant owns the property at 3316 to 18. West
Montrose property is currently vacant the applicant plans
to redevelop the property with a new 4-story mixed use
building can containing commercial space at grade. 25 units
above as well as a street parking for 17 cars. Uh, we did
submit substitute narrative and plans, I would like that
incorporated into the record. All this Lopez moves to
accept the substitute narrative and plans for the type 1
application. All in favor. Say, I, I, I post say, nay the
chair, the eyes have it and the substitute narrative and
plans are accepted.
And then chairman, of course, as you stated, we are seeking
to Res the property from the current b31 Community shopping
district to a b23 neighborhood mixed use District. Um,
since this is type 1 application, we're also seeking relief
to increase the parking, reduce the rear setback, as well
as wave the loading birth. Uh, we have worked with
alderwoman Rodriguez and her office on this matter. We had
an extensive Community process, all earned support. I do
have a letter of support from the office as well.
Thank you. We do have a lot of support from all the women
Rodriguez, Sanchez. Any questions on this item seeing none
all the mayor's roster moves to pass as revised.
all in favor, say I
I have it and it's passed with the substitute narrative and
plans.
Document number 2251721 and the 11th. Ward ordinance
referred 7724. Common address is 2340 through 44, Southwest
Wentworth Avenue, change requests C13, neighborhood
commercial District, the C15 neighborhood commercial
District, right? Augustine? Again chairman, uh, for the
record for Augustine. I'm here in the after the applicant.
Woo, Tran Chinatown LLC applicant owns a property at 2340
to 44. South Wentworth property is currently improved with
a 3 story mixed use building.
The original plan was to develop the property with a new
5-star mixed use. Building containing commercial space, a
grade and 4 dwelling units above, uh,
that was initial that was our plan when you originally
filed the application since then we have re-evaluated the
project. Um we decided to add units so we amended our plans
to reflect a 6-story. Mixed-use, building containing
commercial space from the first and first through fourth
floors as well as 8 dwelling units on the 5th and 6th
as we did submit an amended application, then include a
include a notice as well as substitute narrative and plans.
that incorporated into the record. Yes. All the franchise
franchise moves to accept the substitute narrative and
plans for the type 1 application on beavers. Say I I any
opposed say name, ensure the eyes have it substitute narrow
and plans are before us. And as you stated, we are seeking
rezone the property from a C13 District to a C15. Um, it's
for a 6 story mixed use building. Again first through
fourth floors, will contain commercial spaces and the fifth
and sixth floor will paid 8 units. This is a type 1
application. We're also seeking relief for the parking
Building height, loading um pedestrian street f.
R. And then rear setback, we have worked with Alderman
woman Lee and her office on this matter. We had a community
meeting Oliver in support. I do have a copy of a letter of
support from the Alder Roman's office, if you need it.
Thank you. We do have the letter of support from all the
women lie. Any questions by committee members, seeing none.
All the women dial moves due pass as the substitute
narrative and plans all in favor say I. All right? Any
opposed say. Nay. The eyes have it, substitute narrative
plans are approved.
Um, do bottom of page. 14 is document number 2251921 in the
first word ordinance. Referred 71724. Common address is
1235 through 37. North Ashland Avenue. Change request B. 23
neighborhood. Mix use District to be 23 neighborhood. Mixed
use District Fred Augustine. Again, chairman for the
record, Fred Augustine on behalf of the applicant, no
Properties. LLC, the applicant is the contract purchaser of
the property at 12:35 to 37 North Ashland. It's currently
improved with a 1 and 2 story commercial buildings, as well
as a 3-story mixed use building, uh, just for clarification
of history. Back in June 2023. This committee approved, a
type 1. Rezoning from a b32, to a b23 uh district. For a
similar type of project. It was a 5-story mixed use.
Building containing commercial space at grade 16 units
above as well as 4 off-road parking spaces that project
never proceeded.
The applicant is proposing, a similar project. However,
it is a different design and different architect. Uh, we
we are here back before the committee on a, uh, type 1,
zoning change. So with that, we are seeking to resolve the
property from the current b23 District to a b23 district,
this will allow again to for a new 5-year mixed, use
building containing commercial space at grade 16 units
above as well as
10 off street parking spaces, uh, type 1 application. We
are also seeking relief for the off street. Parking
requirement, as well as reducing the rear setback. Uh, we
have worked with Alderman laspada in his office on this
matter. Uh, I believe you should have a letter of support
from Alderman laspada. Thank you, Fred. We do have a letter
of support from Alderman laspada. On this, any questions by
committee members, seeing none Alderman, CEO Lopez moves
due pass? All in favor. Say I
Posture of the eyes have it and the item is passed.
Finally uh document number will finally for Fred, so I
don't get excited. Um, document number 225271 in the first
word ordinance, referred 7724. Common address is 1257
through 1301. North Ashland Avenue. Change request b23
neighborhood. Mixed use District to b23 Neighborhood mixed
District, once again Fred Augustine again. Uh, chairman for
the record, Friday, Gustin on behalf of the applicant Noah
Properties. LLC, the applicant is the contract purchaser of
the property at 1257 to 131, North Ashland
This situation is very similar to the 1. I just explained um
um, committee approved, the type 1, rezoning back in March
of 2023 from a b32 district to a b23 district for a mixed
use building with commercial space at grade 24 units above
and 10 off street, parking spaces. Again, that project
never proceeded. Applicant is taking over the property and
his design is different from what was previously approved.
However, a similar type of density and project, uh, with
that. We are seeking a zoning from the current b23 District
to a to the b23 district as well. Um, and I believe we have
substitute narrative and plans on this, uh, we do Alderman
Ramirez. Russ the most to accept the substitute nerve plans
plans for the type 1 application. All in favor. Say I, all
any opposed say, nay, the chair, the eyes have it?
Substitute narrative and plans are accepted again. The
change is for our 5 story, mixed use, building containing
commercial space at grade 24 units above as well as 10 off
street parking space.
Cases. It's part of the type 1 application. We're also
seeking relief for the O Street Parking, as well, as the
rear setback. Uh, we have worked with Alderman laspata and
his office on this matter. Again, I believe you should have
a letter of support. We do have a letter of support from
all the members bottom. All the francese makes a motion do
pass uh, with a substitute narrative and plans, all in
favor. Say I
I post say the eyes. Have it. And the item is passed. Thank
you. Thank you Mr. Augustine.
All right. Uh, middle of 15 is document number 2249621 in
the 30th. Ward ordinance, referred 771724, common address
is 3520 through 35222. North Pulaski Road. Change request
is b31 community shopping district to be 23 neighborhood,
mixed use districts. Uh, we have Agnes plea
To present.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman members of the committee my
name is Agnes. Ple, I'm an attorney with law. Firm of Jaffe
in Berlin located at 111 West, Chicago, uh, West,
Washington, Chicago. And I represent, applicant in this
case. Uh, Ted kava company in the proposed, rezoning from
existing, b31 Community shopping, district to a b23
neighborhood mixed used, uh, district and very simply
subject property currently improved with the commercial
building, which due to its functional obsolescence, and
lack of demand for commercial units, and that stretch of
Pulaski has been vacant for many years. So, the applicant
proposes to demolish, this building and redevelop,
Veloped with a new 3, story, residential building with uh, 8
8 dwelling units and 6 onsite parking spaces. Uh, we need
that zoning change in order to comply with the MLA and D
density, and, and F are requirements of the zoning code.
And with this type 1, rezoning, this is a type 1 rezoning,
and we are proceeding on the originally filed plans, but we
are also asking for optional relief, uh, for administrative
adjustment to increase the parking spaces from 4 required,
to 6 proposed, just to balance the market demands against
the uh, requirements of that new ordinance for TSL
locations. And the proposed building was mindfully designed
just to make sure that it fits seamlessly within the
existing streetscape. And each story will contain 2 large
family units. A friendly units with 3 bedrooms and 3 beds
and the applicant um uh promise to provide 1 um um
Voluntary a unit on site as well. We have worked very
closely with almond Cruise her staff and the 30th World
Community advisory committee to present this project and
the type 1 plans that you see today are the final result of
that collaboration. The project was well received and, uh,
supported by the community, we have a lot of support from
older women cruise. I don't know if she's still on, um,
virtually. Uh, but we are, I don't see her on. Uh, we might
have lost her but uh, we do have the letter of support from
all the women Crews, any questions by Committee Member
Person. None of them Ramirez. Rosa rules to pass all in
favor. Say I I post say, nay, the eyes have it item is
passed. Thank you.
Bottom of 15 is document number 22495 dt1.
Excuse me. Yes, she won the fourth. Ward ordinance referred
71724, common addresses, 4524, through 28 South Cottage,
Grove Avenue change. Request b11 neighborhood shopping,
district to see 13 commercial
Neighborhood District. Once again we have Agnes blackout
once again. Um, for the record, my name is Agnes plea and I
represent, deira Ethiopian restaurant LLC. I have with me
Chef, uh,
Rita. And this is a very exciting project. Uh, this is a
type 1 application and the her team worked very diligently
to make up the final plans. We did hit some interior uh,
changes as well as the outdoor seating changes. So we did
file substitute plans recently with Department of planning
so we are asking to proceed on those substitute plans.
Otherwise move to accept the substitute narrative and plans
for the type 1 application on in favor. Say I I I, I post
say nay and the chair that I has have it and the substitute
narrative and plans are accepted. Thank you sir. Uh, very
briefly subject property currently improved with an
existing 3 story. Old building the applicant, proposes to
rehab the existing building adaptively reuse to establish a
restaurant on the ground floor with some, uh, wine making.
Production and wholesale approximately 8,500 square feet of
commercial space and we are proposing to establish, 14
dwelling units, on the upper floors. 3 of those, uh, units
on site will be our units, parity ordinance, and the
proposed rehab also involves uh building for 3. 4 story
addition for the elevator enclosure and stairway enclosure
in order to comply and bring the building into compliance
with the current standards of building and fire code. Um,
we also propose, uh, 1 story and close seasonal, seating
area to the side of the building. So we do need that zoning
zoning change in order to comply with the f, r and density
requirements of the zoning code. Uh, the property has never
had any parking again. We're talking about adaptive reuse
of an older building. So, we are asking for optional
uh, to allow parking reduction for Transit serve location.
This is a TSL location. So we're asking to eliminate
Any required parking to zero again. Since this is redaptive
adaptive reuse never had any parking. We believe that this
proposed adjustment aligns with the zoning ordinance
intent. Another optional relief that we're asking is to
reduce the rear setback. This is an existing building.
Usually there are no rear setbacks for for such buildings
however because we are building that addition, for the
elevators, we are asking to reduce that 30 food rear
setback to zero.
And we have worked very closely with Albert Robinson and his
team. Uh, we had a community meeting on July 11th, which
very well attended again the applicant uh Chef Rita. She's
She's been in the business of of restaurant and Cuisine for
over 17 years and she currently owns and operates 2
successful wonderful restaurants where she shares with us.
The lights of Ethiopian cuisine and we are hoping to
establish this third location at the subject property. So
hopefully you do have uh support letter from almond
Robinson. I do have an extra copy. I do. I do have a letter
from Alder and Robinson. However, we have no food from Chef
Rita. Oh shoot. So I'm I'm gonna work our on top. It's
worth the hours gone. No, I was gonna ask, you have a
restaurant and brought on Broadway in uptown as well.
Alright, where's your third location?
The time out market and this will be our third location.
Where's the timeout market? And Fulton Market? Okay, great.
Why you've been in? Uptown? In a very long time, 17 years,
okay, you're pretty young lady for for to be there so long,
and I know it's had got a great reputation. All the women
clay was here before. I don't think there's any questions
by committee members so all their Fuentes moves to pass
with the substitute narrative and plans, all in favor, say
I I all oppose the eyes have it. Best of luck to you, but
thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you, members of the
committee. Wine is also acceptable.
You're making your own though, huh.
Anyway. Ah okay, all right. Good good. All right best of
luck to you. Yes, thank you. All right, top of page 16 is
document number 22514 in the 14th. Ward ordinance referred
71724. Common address is 6010 through 6020. South Kedzie
Avenue, change requests.
B31 Community shopping district to C11 neighborhood
commercial District. Um, I have a attorney at cuss
thank you, Mr. Chairman good afternoon, Mr. Chairman
members of the committee for the record. My name is Ed C,
an attorney with the Taft law firm located at 1111 East
Wacker in Chicago. Uh, joining me this afternoon to my
right is Mr. Jose Ortiz, which is the applicant. He's also
the owner of the subject property, uh, we are seeking a
zoning change from b31 to the C1 D3 in order to allow Mr.
Ortiz to establish an additional Service, uh, neighborhood
service in the building. Uh the building is a commercial
building 1 story. Uh he operates his neighborhood heating
cooling business there. Uh there were 3, garage bays in the
front, the building is set back from the street and you
would like to add a boutique Hand Car, Wash and detailing
service for the neighborhood. There will only be 1 car at a
time, entering the building. Um, very small operation but
we need to see 1 in order for him to do that, there will be
no new construction of any kind to Simply the addition of
the use. Uh we're happy to answer any questions and we
kindly ask for a favorable.
Of recommendation. Thank you. We do have uh support from all
the woman. Gutierrez any questions seeing none? All the
Ramirez. Rosa moves to pass on various AI. All right, I'll
post na. You can share the eyes, have it? Item passes.
Thank you very much.
Middle of the page is document number 225021 in the First
Ward ordinance. Referred 71724, common address is 2838 to
2840 West Shakespeare Avenue, in 2148 to 2150. North Mozart
Street change, request is an RS3 residential, single unit
detached house district to be 23 neighborhood, mixed use
District, we have attorney Liz Butler, thank you Mr.
Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Liz
Butler. I'm a partner with the law firm of tapped, stenius
and Hollister located at 111 East Wacker Drive in Chicago.
And I represent the applicant in this matter, 2148 n Mozart
LLC. I'm joined today by Eric Weber, who's the principal of
the applicant who is also the property owner. Uh, the
applicant is requesting a rezoning of the subject property
located, um, at 2838, to 2840, West Shakespeare Avenue, and
21482150, North Mozart uh from the RS3 residential single
Unit district to the b23 neighborhood mixed-use District in
order to increase the unit count at the property from 8 to
12 units within the 2. Existing non-conforming multifamily
residential buildings at the property. The site is bounded
by public Ally to the north. Uh North Mozart Street, on the
east west Shakespeare on the south and an existing
multi-unit residential building on the west.
the property consists of um approximately 6,717 square feet
of sight area and it's improved with, as I said 2
approximately 100 year old uh 2-story multi-unit
residential buildings that are vacant.
The applicant is proposing to renovate. The building
Interiors um and limited elements of the building exteriors
in order to upgrade these, um, aging and substandard
residential buildings uh, to um convert underutilized
storage space in the ground level, or the basement of each
building from Storage to dwelling units. 2, dwelling units
are proposed to be added to each building. For a total of
12 dwelling units at the property, the uh, building
envelopes will remain unchanged.
Um, the change request to the b23 is necessary to bring, um,
the existing use the existing f are the proposed unit count
into Conformity with zoning, and will allow the applicant
to undertake the proposed Renovations um, including uh, the
modest increase in residential density, the repair and uh,
construction of existing exterior. Porches, uh, the
Porches. Uh, the property has no parking spaces. It's in a
Transit served location um and a Transit serves location.
Parking reduction is requested as part of this type 1.
12 bicycle parking spaces will be added to the buildings as
part of the project. The applicant discussed this proposal,
with Alderman, laspata and participated in the First Ward.
Ugh, development review process, including presenting at a
community meeting earlier this summer. And we understand
that Alderman laspata, um, provided, uh, either a letter or
some signal of his support for the requested change. Um, we
uh, thank the committee for its consideration of this
request and we respectfully request, your favorable
recommendation where available to answer any questions that
you might have great. Thank you so much, Miss Butler. Um,
any questions by committee members, we do have a letter of
support from Alderman laspada. Um, seeing none all the
fences moves, do pass all in favor. Say I I and they post
say nay, did you show the eyes have it best of luck with
the project. I have a staff member on this block so we'll
be in touch Eric if there's any funny business. All right,
good luck. Um, bottom of 16 is document number 2242021 in
the 39th word, ordinance, referred 47.
1924. Common address is 4801 West Peterson, Avenue 5950
North Caldwell Avenue.
Change request is b33 community shopping district to be 35
Community shopping district. Uh, we have
Or the team from Taft Braden, Lord.
Who's our lead?
Representatives and chairs over here, but that's all right.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman
And members of the committee. My name is Brayden Lord, I'm
an associate with the law firm of tafs titinius and
Hollister LLP. And I along with my colleagues, Graham,
gradia, Graham Grady, and Sylvia micas represent the
applicant and property owner for this matter. Claremont
Enterprises, Inc, Mr. Chairman is a preliminary matter. Uh,
we submitted a substitute type, 1 narrative, and substitute
plans to staff in advance of today's meeting, and we
request that the, uh, committee adopt The Substitute
narrative and plans, all the women down to accept the
substitute narrative and plans for the type 1 application,
all in favor. Say I I I all oppose. Say, the eyes have it.
Substitute nerve and plans are accepted. Thank you. I'm
joined today by 3, members of the development team. Carlos
Perez, who is the director of develop of, of development
for the applicant,
Tim Bennett who is the project architect and principal of
Timothy Bennett Architects PC.
And George Kell. Who is our project land? Use planner and
the president of ocrant kisl Associates.
The applicant is requesting a type 1, zoning map Amendment
with variations for the subject property. Located at 4801
West Peterson Avenue and 5550 North Caldwell Avenue, from
the b33 community shopping district, to the b35 community
shopping district to allow the construction of a ground
floor. Addition to the existing office building at the
property, which will measure approximately 17 feet, 8
inches in height and contain approximately 8,200 square
feet of commercial space, along with improvements to the
existing parking lot and building entrance area which will
contain 151 automobile parking spaces and 5 bicycle parking
spaces.
The subject property is in a regular kite-shaped site. Uh
bounded by West Peterson Avenue to the north North Cicero
Avenue to the east Caldwell Avenue, and the Cook County
forest, preserve to the South and the Eden's Expressway to
the to the West.
The property contains approximately 7100087 square feet of
sight area and is improved within existing surface parking
lot and a 6-story office building that includes open are
ground floor parking below.
The change request to the b35, district is necessary to
permit, the construction of the proposed Edition and the
increase in landscaping, in the existing parking area and
adjacent Parkways the proposed uh Edition will partially
replace the open air surface parking lot beneath the office
building. Providing a modest edition of commercial and
retail space. That is consistent with the
Mixed-use, character of the surrounding area.
As authorized by the recent recently, modified type 1,
zoning map Amendment procedures. The applicant is seeking
landscape variations to allow alternative Landscaping
treatments, including variations to reduce the required
number of Parkway trees from 37 to 12.
Uh, to Grant variations for hardship, waivers from the
ornamental fencing and Landscape. Setback requirements,
along Caldwell Avenue
To reduce the required perimeter. Screening screening along
North Cicero, Avenue from 7 feet to 5 and a half feet to
reduce the required interior. Landscaping from 4, 400075
square feet to 1,769 square feet to reduce the required
number of, of interior trees from 32, to 8, to reduce the
number of interior, landscaped islands with trees for every
15 parking stalls. And to waive the minimum area, minimum
Dimension and tree requirements, for interior, landscaped
Islands, the applicant will provide a substantial
additional and alternative Landscaping in the form of an
extra wide landscape buffer along Cicero Avenue with the
continuous hedge and 13 new trees. That buffer will measure
between 10.8 feet and 8 feet wide and across the project as
a whole. The applicant will provide a 40 new trees and
approximately 6,447 square feet of new landscaped area.
The landscape relief is necessary uh due to First the
atypical shape and dimensions of the property including
it's a regular kite shape. The substandard width of its
west side and its narrow Southeast corner and second, the
limiting adjacent conditions affecting the property
including a budding public rights of way on 3 sides with
relatively narrow or non-existent public sidewalks.
without the requested variations the applicant could not
develop new retail units with sufficient interior space to
attract tenants nor provide enough on-site parking to
support the building's uh retail and office users.
The applicant met with and presented. Its plans to Alderman
Nugent's team the Seguin Ash Community Association and
numerous Neighbors. In addition Alderman, Nugent hosted a
virtual meeting with residents and the applicant about the
project on August 26th 2024 at which the applicant address,
all questions in comments from attending neighbors. The
applicant received several letters of support from
neighboring residents and letters of non-objection from the
Alderman. And so again, Ash Community Association which
were forwarded to the committee in advance of this hearing
Uh, now Carlos at this time, uh I invite you to provide a
brief statement and support of the application.
Thank you, Braden. Uh, before I begin, I would like to
personally thank Alderman nent her office and the city's
zoning and Landscaping staff for their help and guidance
throughout the application process.
As for a little background Imperial realy company is a
family-owned business.
Which have owned managed developed and most importantly
improved property in the city and the neighborhood of
tseganesh for more than 60 years. Now, I like to add. I'm
also a resident of the beautiful community of tseganesh,
um, which is, uh, something that I uh very proud of
The site is directly across the street from our offices. So
it's very near and dear to us and the community. We're
excited to enclose the first floor. Open are parking in
order to establish a new retail, Frontage along Peterson
and Cicero Avenue.
In addition, the new Landscaping along these streets. And
in the parking, lot will serve as a great enhancement to
the community. Thank you in advance for your support and
consideration.
And thank you Carlos as well as thank you, Mr. Chairman and
members of the committee uh we respectfully request. Your
favorable recommendation and our team is available to
answer any questions. Thank you. Any questions from
committee committee members, seeing none all the Fuentes
moves due pass, uh, with the substitute narrative and
plans, all in favor. Say, I, I, I, I
Hearing uh, depending on the chair, the eyes have it. The
substitute in order of plants is passed. Thank you, Paul.
Over to the top of page 17, document number is 22475 in the
20th. Ward ordinance, referred 61224. Common address is 345
through 79 East. 60th Street, 6000 through 650. South Dr.
Martin Luther King Junior drive and 60001 through 60049,
South calat Avenue. Change. Request is an rm5 residential
multi-unit District to institutional plan development, with
underlying Community b31 District. We have attorney Sylvia
micas.
Good afternoon chairman Lawson and members of the
committee. My name is Sylvia micas. I'm an attorney with
the law firm of Taft, stenius in Hollister. I along with my
co-consul, Graham Grady and Braden lot Lord,
Uh, represent the applicant Sunshine Community Development
Corporation in Sunshine Gospel Ministries. At this time, I
request that the record of the plan Commission
Um, dated uh, on August 15th 2024 that that hearing be
entered into the record of this committee.
All makes a motion to incorporate all records and findings
from that hearing. Uh, all in favor, say I I I'll post say
nay and share the eyes have it, the records are
Incorporated.
Also present with me today are Kimberly Sally, treasurer of
sunshine Community Development, Corporation and executive
director of Sunshine Gospel Ministries.
Our project architect Monica. Chhatta with Civic projects,
architecture.
And also the Kim Morris with, uh, back here with Chicago
neighborhood initiatives. Uh, first we would like to thank
and acknowledge alderwoman Janette Taylor, Tyra Owens and
the 20th W staff for their guidance and assistance
throughout this process, we'd also like to thank the staff
of the Department of Planning and Development, as well as
the staff of sedat and other agencies who have all
contributed to this project.
Uh, the subject property.
Which is owned by the city of Chicago, consists of a
nettside area of 180352 square feet and is currently vacant
and unimproved. It is bounded by South Dr. Martin Luther
King Drive on the East South calat Avenue on the west East
60th Street on the North and
East 61st Street on the south. The subject property is
currently zoned. Within an rm5 residential multi-unit
District.
Sunshine Community Development Corporation, plans to
acquire and develop the vacant city-owned property with the
proposed Sunshine Community Center.
Sunshine Community Development, Corporation will operate
the community center in tandem with Sunshine Gospel
Ministries. Programming programming curriculum.
the uh,
the sunshine Community Center campus will include a new
3-story building containing 7705050 square feet, which will
operate as the community center. And, and as you can see,
the main entrance to the community center is located on
South Dr. Martin Luther King Drive, the proposed Community
Center will include a fitness center gymnasium, Cafe
meeting rooms and pop-up retail in the first floor.
Programming.
Rooms for media and Technology youth Lounge. Jim viewing
deck on the second floor and administrative offices and
office rental space for future Tenney on the third floor.
The campus will also.
The campus will also include outdoor multi-purpose,
athletic, facilities consisting of 20,000 square feet.
And a total of 90 on-site parking spaces.
Can you advance to slide 6? It's the right of way
adjustment plan.
if not, its
Okay. Um,
The campus will also include a 16 to 25 foot wide. North
south public alley which actually is being uh vacated in
order to maintain a private interior access drive for safe
and secure pedestrian travel within the uh community site
Community Center site.
um, I also, um, would like to point out that, at this time,
it's important to note the significant community outreach,
that Kimberly Sally and her team have conducted over the
last few years. Such efforts include Outreach to area
residents Community pastors and groups including, but not
limited to the Washington Park Chamber of Commerce,
Washington Park, Fieldhouse, Washington Park District
advisory Council and also the Deans and administrators of
diet, high school and Washington CICS.
This resulted in securing letters of support from the
southeast Chicago commission Grand Crossing Park District,
in Woodland Chamber of Commerce. Furthermore, completion of
alderwoman, Janette, Taylor's economic development. Team
process.
And a majority vote in favor of sunshine Community. Center
development was secured on December 22nd 2023.
I will now turn the presentation over to Kimberly Sally,
who will give a brief overview of the demographically
comprehensive, programming, community. And economic
benefits. Sunshine Community Center will provide
Thank you so much for your time. Um this is a Dream
Deferred for Sunshine Gospel Ministries. We've been around
for 1119 years. We've served in under resourced
communities, we started off on the near North Side, in the
Cabrini Green area and when public housing shut down, we
moved into the Woodland area. We've been there about 20
years part of our Legacy is having a place-based approach.
So, we spend a lot of time in community hearing from
residents about what the needs are and 2014. They asked us
for a community center. We did a feasibility study and
things did not align 3 years ago. We had a conversation
with then State Rep, Lamont Robinson. Now Alderman
Robinson, Who U mentioned to us that there is a line item
in the state budget for a community center. So again, we
started our feasibility study, we had started having
conversations with alderwoman, Janette Taylor and her team,
she recommended sites that we looked
look at we looked at 5 and we did a SWOT analysis and we
landed on the southwest corner of 60th and King Drive. And
so this Center will be demographically comprehensive. And
this has come from hearing from the community. All of the
programming that will happen. Some of it. We do now and a
vast majority of it will be scaling up into this new
facility where we'll be able to meet the needs of seniors
which is a missing demographic in our community. We
currently, um, we don't have a heating Center or cooling
center for our seniors right now. CTA buses come out in the
summer to provide cooling opportunities for seniors. So,
um, we look at our first floor rate, considered our health
and wellness floor and Recreation. We're excited our sister
sister organization, Sunshine Enterprises trains and equips
entrepreneurs. And so these multipurpose spaces on the
first floor will provide pop-up retail for them so they can
test out their goods and services without having to have a
brick and mortar on the second floor is where we'll do a
lot of training of them during the day and then in the
evening, we'll continue.
Our after school programming, we have a violence
Intervention Program, housing, Equity, initiative that we
run. And then we also do um, some familyhood programming,
where we trained, um, and support parents, um, and provide
curriculum for them, family field trips and things like
that. And so, we're very much looking forward to, um, the
opportunity, um, for this community center to speak into
needs of the community, um, in our community. There's some
things that are not there for young people to do. There are
3 schools within walking distance.
Of where we currently are and it accounts for about 1400,
young people. And so, right now we serve about 200 families
a year. And we serve about 125 youth weekly, and so this is
a really great need, um, for our community to provide, um,
Arts. As it relates to visual, um, Visual and Graphics
recording studio, Etc. I can go on and on the community
also spoke and said, why can't we have some of the things
we used to have the gym will be um able to be used as a
skating rink as well as other multi-purpose. Um functions.
functions. The community said, we want a restaurant in our
Community. We don't want to have to go to High Park and so
it will be anchored by a cafe. Um, the center will also be
um um, economically impactful in our community um as it
relates to providing about 150 full-time temporary jobs, to
the tune of about 3.7 million dollars in um income tax
revenue along with providing um more job opportunities will
pretty much double our staff.
Um, as well as the uh, retail taxes that will come from the
cafe and the popups, um, that will have as well. And so
we're excited about this. Like I said, it is a Dream
Deferred and um, we're happy to be at this point in the
process and we thank you for your time.
Thank you Kimberly in order to proceed forward with this
exciting project. The applicant is Seeking a zoning change
from the existing rm5 District to an Institutional plan
development, with an underlying b31 District. Um, we have a
letter of support from alderwoman Taylor that we submitted
to the committee.
And uh we respectfully request, your favorable
recommendation. I'm favor of this project and are available
for questions. Thank you very much. Would you have the
letter of support from all the women Taylor?
I appreciate your enthusiasm at the end of a very long
meeting there yet. Uh, it does not go unnoticed. And so,
uh, when you said de demographically diverse you meant it,
you're doing a little bit of everything here for all, all
the people that call call the area home. And so, um, the
other question maybe I have is is is the city committed,
any resources or financing, uh, for any of the work that's
happening. There we are waiting to hear. So we do have um a
a well, we have a a line item from Senator Maddie Hunter,
um, and then we're waiting to see if we, um, get the
universal financing, um, Grant the economic development,
right? Well, best of luck with that. Uh, I think the other
questions from committee members, seeing none, all have
been Ramirez, Rosa moves due pass. Um,
All in favor say I I I I sure the eyes have it item is
passed best of luck to you. Thank you so much. Thank you.
All right, the bottom of 17 is document number 22375 in the
34th. Ward ordinance refer to 32024 Common. Address is 100
through 1024 West Jackson, Boulevard, 230 to 238 South
Morgan Street, and 1015 to 1027. West Adams, Street change,
request is residential, business plan development 1562 and
D. S-3 downtown Service District to dx5. Downtown mixed-use
district. Then to residential business plan development
1562 as amended, we have attorney Michael esgar.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
Michael Edgar from the law, firm of acasta, Edgar on behalf
of the applicant 1016, West Jackson, LLC and a
preliminarily. This matter was considered an approved at
the July 18th plan commission hearing. And I would
respectfully request that that record be incorporated into
these proceedings. Yes. All refugees makes the motion and
Drew incorporate, all records and findings from that
hearing today. All in favor. Say I, I, I post say nay to
ensure the eyes have it. The records are Incorporated.
Thank you very much. Additionally, there was a Minor
scrivener's error in the ordinance and so we did uh,
introduce a subset of an ordinance that I wanted to. Make
sure it was also included in today's
So, that is incorporated when we incorporate the records
from plan commission. So we're good to go. Perfect. Uh,
this is an amendment. Uh, last year was approved. Uh, PD
with a uh 290 foot tall uh high-rise with 370 units. The
The purpose of the amendment. To the PD was to increase the
boundary area and include a a grosser on the ground floor.
As a result, there were 10 additional units added and there
were, um, uh, also, uh, reduction in height.
Down to 275 feet with uh 76 affordable units on the
property uh included in the project. Uh we worked closely
closely with the 34th Ward zoning process and uh, have
good, uh, went through that process and have a support
letter from the West Central Association. Uh, this image
here, uh, was the final efforts with the Alderman's office
uh, to confirm the transparency of the retail storefront
and a glass for the store. And and the applicant was
committed to, to making sure that we, uh, did that
transparent and a transparent way the glass and uh,
activation of the street front, um, want to thank the
Alderman's office and I think Steve of lonzo's here. Uh, if
there's any questions we're available,
Thank you, Mr. Edgar, uh, Mr. Valenciano from the 34th Ward.
Um, Steve valenciano, uh, development coordinator for, uh,
Alderman Conway. Um, like Michael said, this was previously
approved. Uh, just before the change in Ward boundaries in
March of 2023. Um, we the alderman supports the application
thinks that there's some big improvements. Um, the height
of the building came down. The the addition of a midsize G
here is is really, uh, needed. And um, also uh, in in, in
expanding the site area, and including that ger, they've
now more than doubled the, uh, rooftop, uh, amenity space.
So there's a need for, uh, outdoor recreation space in our
Ward. So, this is the alderman does support this
application.
Great. Sounds like a good plan. Any questions by committee
members, seeing none all the Ramirez, rezamos do pass on in
favor. Say I, I, I and the post nay, the chair of the eyes
have it and the past as revised. Thank you. Thank you. Got
a couple more here. Yes, top of 18 is document number 22401
in the 27th. Ward ordinance, referred 41724, common
addresses, 11:32 through 11:40, West Randolph 1, 146,
through 82. North May Street 1133, through 57 Westlake
Street and 1 169 through 83, North Forest, Avenue change,
request is residential business. Plan development. 1512 to
residential business plan,
Plan developments, 1512. Michael asgar is the attorney.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Michael esgar for the
record, uh, from the law firm of acasta esgar on behalf of
the applicant Fulton grounds owner LLC, uh, this was
previously approved,
And you can see in the image up on the screen, there's
actually PD 1512, uh, to be amended is on the left or north
side of that image and I will address that in that, the
following in the next, uh, Hearing in the next matter
should be. Do you want to hear them together or separate?
Um, whatever you I'll go ahead and read I'm the interest of
time. Okay, um, we'll hear them both together. The second
is document number 2240000 in the 27th board ordinance with
referred 41724. Common address is 2011309. North Racine
Avenue, 1132, the 56 West Lake Street. 2000, through 08,
North May Street, change request residential business, plan
development. 1512 to residential business plan development,
1512, as amended continue, excellent. Thank you very much,
Mr. Chairman, so on the left or north side of the image,
we're looking at here is PD 1512, which was a technical
amendment to reduce the boundary area to exclude, the area
to the South, uh, which is a new PD.
Site. So uh, for what we're calling 2011 Racine, which is
the area to the left, uh, that PD amendment is strictly to
reduce the boundary error. There is no other changes to the
previously approved.
On that matter. On the new matter, we have amended the PD
uh include uh 667. Uh apartment units and you can see here
the architecture and also to incorporate a ground floor uh
commercial user that would be also a ger and there will be
in this project. The new project, uh 133 affordable units
on site. We went through the 27th award Community review
process and have a letter of support, from the West Central
Association as well. I, I know that, um, Alderman Bernett
is not here with us but I believe he's, uh, got a letter of
support in, with the committee.
Uh, would you have a lot of support from vice mayor
Bernett, any questions from committee members, seeing none
all our Fuentes moves, do pass all in favor. Say I, I I'm
sorry. All the for instance was due pass for items number
22401 and 2240000.
All in favor, say I I make sure the eyes have it both items
pass. Thank you very much. Thanks everyone.
All right.
You guys don't hang out a lot, do you?
Um, top of page 19.
Document number 22530 dt1 on the 27th. Ward ordinance,
referred 71724. Common address is 341 through. 355. North
Kedzie Avenue.
3148 through 58. West Carroll Avenue change. Request is b32
community shopping, district and M12. Limited manufacturing
business park district to see 22 motor vehicle related.
Commercial district, and we have attorney Rolando acasta,
good afternoon Rolando aosta here on behalf of the
applicant for the record. I'm taller than Michael. Uh, the
this matter before you is, uh, to change the zoning. The
property is currently used as an art gallery and artists
work and sales, space and a venue. Space the uh, applicant
is purchasing a a additional property to the north south of
the train tracks, from the city of Chicago wishes to expand
the use into that area because the property the proposed
use uh, doesn't fit in the current zoning in the property,
has split zoning as well as a need to allow for outdoor.
Use because part of the art gallery will be expanded end of
any space into the outdoors, uh, necessity.
This resoning, we've gone through a community review
process. This has been uh a welcome addition to the
community I believe we are also as part of the type 1
resoning seeking a reduction in the required parking from
38 parking spaces to 8 spaces which are the amount that fit
on site, uh, and I believe you have a letter of support
from aldermen on the record.
We do have a letter of support from all the and Bernett.
Um, any questions by committee members, seeing none all the
Ramirez. Rosa moves to pass all in favor, say I, I opposed
say, nay, the eyes have it, the item is passed.
Thank you.
All right, so 1 final item on the agenda for the day. Uh,
this is our first Downton cannabis business establishment
application, being heard in committee as opposed to zba so
bear with me. Make sure I'm saying everything correctly. If
needed my understanding is the applicant has met all the
criteria previously to determine by the department and uh,
State Municipal law. Document number is 2251821 in the 28th
Ward ordinance referred 71721. I'm sorry, 24.
Come and address is 622 to 624 West Roosevelt Road. Change
request is a DS3 downtown Service, District to DS3 downtown
Service District. Uh, we have again attorney, Rolando
aosta,
Once again, Mr. Chairman Rolando acasta here on behalf of
the applicant here with me is Misha Joy, Pike, uh, dressing
the white coat. Uh, she is a representative of the
applicant and Chris Atkinson who is a consultant on the
project who has experience in the operation of a
dispensaries. Uh, this proposal before you involves an
existing building, you can see on the map that's located in
a commercial area uh Roosevelt Road to which South to its
North is an ally that Ally is a large Banos. Uh to the West
is a uh is basically the Dan Ryan Expressway. It is a
Transit serve location based on the Roosevelt Road uh bus
line.
The property was previously the subject of a special use
that was awarded by the zoning approved by the zoning board
of appeals for a cannabis dispensary on the ground floor.
It identical location to that which is proposed today
because the use was not established within a year that
special use expired, we have to re-establish, the proposed
use and currently under the new Amendment to the zoning
ordinance. It requires a type 1. Rezoning, that is why we
are here before you today, we held the required community
meeting, um, and nobody attended, nobody attended before.
So we've now had 2 with no attendance, uh, mainly because
this is a strictly commercial area. Uh, and the it's using
an existing building, the dispensary would operate every
day of the week, from 10 to 10 to 8:00 p.m.
With the exception of Sunday, when it would be from 10, a.m.
to 6:00 p.m. it would meet all of the state requirements in
terms of safety uh in having all the doors be alarmed and
locked, there'll be on-site security during the hours of
operation. Uh, they will be scheduling and and overseeing
the delivery of product through the back of the property
where there is a loading dock, that Services, the building,
the special will be located on the ground floor of this
building and in the basement of the building. Um, with
that, we are happy to answer any questions that we have
talked to Alderman. Ervin.
Uh, as we did once before.
And I believe he has indicated his support to the
committee.
Yes, we do have, uh, the support from Alderman, Ervin. Um,
I want to maybe just make a point of this, 1-year rule. I
think a lot of us who have had dispensaries, uh, have had
to make big changes because of the 1 year rule. So if you
would write a letter that we could sign on to, for our
friends in Springfield, that would, that would be helpful.
Well, the 1, you're well, the 1 year rule that I was
referring to is actually the special use life. That's a
city of Chicago rule, but then the state also has, you have
to establish with it, the the State of the State of
Illinois, when it issued to The Dispensary licenses has
deadlines on them and some of them expired. The first batch
of licenses expired. Actually, I believe mid July, July
17th and I believe all you were writing the letters for was
for an extension of that to the state. I mean it's very
hard to, you know, to do. You know if you have any kind of
build out or to build new certainly to do something in the
Years.
Very hard to do. Well, particularly so from the state
perspective, because, you know, if you get the conditional
license, you do have to find a location, get your financing
together, get the construction documents to do that in 1
year is virtually impossible. Well, and you have to spend
some money on property, right? You put it, you know, a lot
of things fall through, you know, you've got to, and not,
not every piece of property works either. So I I think
flexibility is, is going to be key, which is what we're
starting with here. I guess in this hearing, do you have
any questions by other committee members on this new
downtown canvas application? Seeing none all the person
Fuentes most do pass, all in favor say I I any opposed say,
nay in the chair the eyes have it item in pass. Thank you,
best of luck to you best of luck. You're being no further
business before the oh I'm sorry 1. Last call. We've got 1
item here.
Uh, in the 47th word, the attorney was kurin, O'Hara. I
don't think anyone has been added to the room in the last
hour. Uh, so that's document number uh 2252821 in the 47th
47th Ward. Common address is 3710, uh, 3714 North Ashland
Avenue that all their Ramirez. Rosa makes a motion, uh, to
defer all in favor. Say I I I I have it. Uh, there being no
no further business before the body, all their person
Fuentes moves to, to adjourn all in favor. Say, I, I, I,
and I post
Oh, depending of the chair of the eyes. Have it. We are a
jerk.