ClarendonlMontrose TIF Development Meeting
Clarendon Field House June 7, 2011 7pm






Order of Meeting
Introduction -Alderman James Cappleman (1Omins) Background on Project -Alderman James Cappleman (Itlmins) Sedgwick Presentation of Development -Jay Feeley (20 mins) Neighborhood Representatives -Jannis Tiffin, John Wyman, Tim Harris (20 mins) Question and Answer Session -Alderman James Cappleman (30 mins) Explanation of the Vote, Results and Follow-Up -Alderman James Cappleman (Smins)

General Information:
• • Everyone must check-in first. If you want to vote, you need to show photo ID that you live within the voting boundaries. If your photo ID does not show that you live within the voting boundaries, you must present another indication that you CURRENTLY live within the ward boundaries. This could be a utility bill or lease. Those that are able to vote, will vote by secret ballot that will be counted after the meeting. Results of vote and next steps for development will be announced this week. All questions must have been submitted previously by email or be submitted by index card Anyone making disruptions and not acting in a respectful manner will be asked to leave.

• • • •

Contact Information:
Alderman James Cappleman james@iames46.org, 773-878-4646 Tressa Feher, Chief of Staff tressa@james46.org, 773-878-4646

To: Residents of the 46th Ward Community and members of the Clarendon Park Neighborhood Association On May 27, 2011, an unfortunate mailing to members of the Clarendon Park Neighbors Association was circulated by opponents of our planned project at Montrose and Clarendon that was misleading and inaccurate. There has been a regrettable amount of misinformation spread by a small group of individuals who oppose our project. While we respect opinions that diverge from our own, we believe it is important that those opinions be formed on the basis of actual facts. We want 46th Ward residents to have all the facts so that each may make an informed decision as to their support or opposition to the proposed development. For ease of purpose in addressing the fallacious allegations contained in the mailing, we take it point-bypoint below: From the mailing: The proposed developer and the property owners of the old Maryville site are forcing our new Alderman to call the flawed development proposal for a vote at the City Council by the end of June (less than 6 weeks into his first term). Otherwise they are threatening to not allow any development on the lot for 10-15 years. Sedgwick Response: The Alderman is not being forced to do anything. Alderman Cappleman will make his own decisions based on what he believes are in the best interests of the ward. We have presented our project to him in the same spirit of honesty and transparency as we have the 46th Ward community prior to Alderman Cappleman's election. Alderman Cappleman inherited this project, which has been in front of'the community for over 2 years. We have a Purchase Contract with the seller that is set to expire. After 2 years of planning and community engagement, if this project is going to move forward it must move forward now. From the mailing: This $350 MILLION dollar project "...Would be the biggest Northside development in decades" (Crain's). Sedgwick Response: We believe this is a positive statement that shows we are investing significantly into the future success of the community. Our project will bring new development and new residents to the community. It will provide jobs, new retail, new sales tax benefits, more dollars into the community and is forecast to improve property values in the community. It will bring $6,000,000 that will be invested into Clarendon Park to improve facilities and programs that will help deter crime and provide a much need facelift to a great lakefront location. From the mailing: Their pressure tactics cannot be allowed to force the approval of a bad development plan that has not had a thorough vetting of financials, TIF qualifications, floorplans, or community need. Their ultimatum is a ruse and a sham. Sedgwick Response: In addition to being in front of the community for over 2 years, our project was officially submitted to the City of Chicago more than a year ago for review and approval of all the financials, TIF qualifications, building plans and elevations and all other aspects of the project. We have also engaged in a community process that has helped shape the project though countless meeting with individuals, small groups and larger open community meetings. We encourage residents to visit our website at www.coIDlectingclaredonpark.com to review the results of the exhaustive public process we have conducted over the last 24 months. From the mailing:

CPNA and the neighborhood support a quality development at this location. After spending 2 years negotiating with Sedgwick Development, we found out they had lied to us about several key features of the development based upon their official plan submission to the City. Sedgwick Response: The first part of the planning process requires developers to submit a plan to The City of Chicago for review. We submitted our development plan in January 2010. Once submitted the development plan is public record so anyone is welcome toreview the plan. The development plan that was submitted is not a final plan and will evolve based on input from the City and Community. Based on feedback received from both the City and Community the development plan evolves, is updated and eventually resubmitted. Unfortunately, this process has opened a window of opportunity for some to exploit the changes made to the development, brandishing the development team "liars" for following standard protocol and making changes to the original development plan. Here is an example: Our original development plan stated that we would provide 125 parking spaces to the community "for a minimal fee". We felt this was a community benefit which we sought to implement because we are buying the lot on the north side of Agatite that the community uses for parking. After we submitted the original development plan, several discussions took place with members of the community, where we agreed to provide the overnight parking for FREE. Subsequent to our verbal agreement we have since submitted formal documentation to support this benefit. Unfortunately, because our original plan simply evolved, we were branded by a small group of people as liars. There are other examples, however we encourage you to visit our website at www.connectingclarendonpark.com or ask us directly. From the mailing: Their artists renderings were drawn way out of scale, to mask the 85' high concrete base (reminiscent of bad 80's architecture), they promised low-rise condos along Agatite Avenue, and instead submitted a proposal showing an 80' plus tall parking garage. Sedgwick Response: The original drawings were hand drawn and presented early in the process. At that time, we were still working on the retail plan and parking counts (the total number of parking spaces that would be provided and the location of the parking). As the plan evolved and certain members of the community demanded more parking (above code requirements) we accommodated the request and the base of the building got taller. As we achieved consensus on the parking and the other items identified as significant, our elevations were updated and we engaged in developing new renderings. All ofthis information has been public and the density, heights of buildings and other aspects of the project have been updated and made available for review. In 2010 we posted our website www.connectingclarendonpark.com to provide the community with the opportunity to download the information for themselves. The "promise" was in fact a change to the plan from the original plan early in the process and well over a year ago. We had originally planned (not promised) on 36 residential units along a small portion of the western elevation on Agatite. Our grocer retailer required additional square footage to operate their store and we removed those residential units. Since we implemented this change, we have lowered the height from the original residential plan and designed a facade that blends in with the Agatite streetscape. This information is fully available on our website at www.connectingclarendonpark.com where you can see for yourself the current plan and the setbacks we created along Agatite. We are proud of the architecture. We have had many people compliment us on it and yes, we have had some who were not as impressed. It is, of course, subjective in nature and there isn't a piece of architecture that exists that is universally loved or immune from criticism. However, we did go to great lengths to develop our architecture to balance contemporary design elements (tall ceilings floor-to-floor) big windows and glass, etc.) with traditional Chicago architecture that would fit well into the community. From the mailing: They also proposed a TIF subsidy of $50 million dollars with no "Clawback provision" which would give the money back to the City if they did not build everything they proposed.

Sedgwick Response: This statement is factually inaccurate. The TIF assistance we have applied for is commonly known as a "pay as you go TIF". In order for us to realize the benefits of the TIP, we are required to perform on a phase-by-phase basis and create the tax revenue. For example: the first phase includes approximately 120,000 square feet of retail with a grocer and health club. In order for us to realize the benefit of the TIF for that phase, we must first capitalize the development ourselves, build the retail, and only when it is complete do we get TIF support. Therefore we only get TIF support if we build and complete each phase of the development. Also, the only real-estate tax that goes into our TIP is from the phases we build. There are no other residents or businesses in our TIF. From the mailing: They are also trying to subvert the City'S affordable housing set-aside program, among many other things. Sedgwick Response: To the contrary, we are complying with the City's requirements as this project and any other project is required to do. In our case we are required by City Ordinance to provide 20% of the residential units as affordable or pay a fee into an affordable housing fund. From the Mailing: Bottom Line- Their plan is flawed, their architecture is weak, and their track record is not good (either with the community or within the industry). We need you to come out and voice your support for your neighbors, and make sure our new era in Uptown is not begun with a bad decision leading to bad development. Alderman Cappleman must hear from us that Uptown deserves great architecture, and solid developers. This neighborhood has more large developable parcels than any other on the north lake front, and developers have been trying for 30 years to build here. When these bad developers have folded up shop, our new Alderman can begin the process of finding quality developers to bring quality development to Uptown. There is no reason to rush this unless you are trying to hide something. Please come out to the meeting on June 7th. Sedgwick Response We are proud of our track record and we agree that Alderman Cappleman should hear from the community. We are prepared to make a substantial investment into the community today. We want 46th Ward residents to be as excited about our project as we are--and we believe you will be once you have the facts. Hopefully, this correspondence has helped you to separate fact from fiction and make an informed decision about a project that will improve the quality of life for our community. We look forward to seeing you at the next community meeting on June House. Sincerely, The Sedgwick Properties Development Team

ih at the

Clarendon Park Field