Reprinted from the ForestPark NewsGroup: forestparkca@yahoogroups.com, March 11, 2008

Jeremy,

I am still on the FPCA email list, so I have read with interest the emails regarding the Winn project.

Here are my thoughts, based on the Armoury-Quadrangle Civic Associations's involvement with Winn.
I understand completely the objections and suspicion raised by a project for affordable housing. In the downtown, we have struggled because of our
extremely high density of low-income housing. I believe we have the highest density in the city. Chestnut and Harrison Towers (and more on Chestnut Street),
Byers Street, Temple and High Streets, School Street, and Pearl and Spring Streets are all primarily Section 8.

Needless to say, when Winn came to us seeking approval for an affordable housing project (including Section 8) at the former Ashford Place Condominiums
(before that, the Stonehaven), we were very apprehensive and rejected the idea until we could have further discussion with Winn. I have to say that Winn
expended a great deal of time and energy listening to our concerns. Ultimately, we reached agreement with them for 55 and older housing, with Section 8
allowed. If the desired number of 55 and over residents was not reached, Winn had the right to have the building become all affordable housing (with Section 8).
In fact, we ended up with a 55 and over project, with tenants needing to prove a lower level of income and Section 8 vouchers allowed. It is, in fact,
affordable housing, but with an emphasis on 55 and older.

It is pretty clear the the city needs affordable housing. The problem is not with affordable housing itself, however, but with crummy landlords and
management companies.

Let me also say that when the building was condominiums (Ashford Place), we had significant problems related to crime and drug use. Many owners rented
their condos to very undesirable tenants. The police were there all the time. So, despite our wish that the building could be a condominium project under
Winn, we knew that such an option might not necessarily be any better than Ashford was, given the economy and real estate market. Instead, we emphasized
the importance of good screening, security, lighting, appearance, etc. I cannot say enough in support of the Winn team. They did everything possible to
ensure that our concerns were aptly met. They installed security cameras, excellent lighting, did a wonderful job of renovation, made the place very
attractive inside and out, and have screened applicants extremely well. Any problems that surfaced were quickly taken care of. Winn's building (now called
Museum Park) no longer boasts a lengthy record of police calls, and it is very well managed. The property has done much to stabilize part of Chestnut Street.
Winn has also participated in civic association business and has been supportive of neighborhood issues. When they asked for permission to demolish the
old garage at the corner of Chestnut and Harrison, they added that they would create a ground-level parking lot that would have a masonry wall and upper
fencing that was reflected the architecture of the original structure. We approved their plan, and a beautiful lot now graces that corner.

We have been so happy with Winn's commitment to their project that we also forwarded support to the South End Civic Association after Winn had approached
the South End group to restore and manage the brownstone rowhouses along Central Street as an affordable housing project. That project has been very
successful and looks beautiful.

I think the FPCA would be very pleased with a project by the Winn group. There are lots of developers out there, but this is a good one.

I am not writing this on behalf of the civic association, by the way, as we have not been asked to do so. I am simply giving you some of my own thoughts
about working with Winn.

Carol Costa