Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
01
PROLOGUE
16
I. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
103
157
173
PROLOGUE
PROLOGUE
GERDING EDLEN VISION
Gerding Edlen exists to do one simple thing: create vibrant, inspiring and
sustainable places where people can live, work and learn. We believe that
people are increasingly interested in living more meaningful lives. We are,
too. Creating places that offer fresh air, foster creativity and incorporate art
and culture help us achieve this goal.
Gerding Edlen works collaboratively with the best and brightest partners
in architecture, engineering, construction, design and marketing,
ensuring that our projects create compelling spaces. We believe it is our
unique commitment to building community, incorporating leadingedge sustainability innovations, integrating art and culture, encouraging
transportation alternatives and connecting people and buildings to nature
that allows us to successfully optimize our clients financial objectives.
Our vision for the future reflects our belief that creating vibrant
communities and building livable and prosperous cities will be good for both
the people that live in those cities and the broader economic health of our
nation. Mark Edlen, CEO
For the Capitol Hill Properties redevelopment, Gerding Edlen is proud to
have assembled a team that is unequalled in its knowledge of the transit
station, the Capitol Hill community, and its cultural and built environment.
Our design team includes three distinct urban design and place-making
firms together, ensuring a diversity of design that reflects the Capitol Hill
communitys diverse population and well as its expectation that the buildings
and landscape will be best in class, reflecting the richness and diversity this
landmark site deserves.
PRINCIPLES OF PLACE
BUILD COMMUNITY
We spend a great deal of time learning about peoples needs and the
neighborhoods in which we build. We study modes of transportation,
demographics and municipal objectives, and immerse ourselves in the
physical, social and economic aspects of the community. We evaluate how
we can serve people who will live and work in our buildings as well as the
community at large.
CREATE INVITING SPACES
Well-designed public spaces invite people to gather and connect with each
other in meaningful ways. One of the most interesting facets of what we do
is engineering the transition between public and private spaces, and weve
created a rich toolbox to help make great spaces.
MINIMIZE CARBON FOOTPRINT AND ENERGY DEPENDENCE
To reduce the carbon footprint and energy dependence in all of our
buildings, we build with innovative water- and energy-conserving features:
rainwater harvesting, daylighting, solar panels, energy-efficient appliances and
more. We recycle the vast
majority of demolition and building materials, use recycled content (such as
rapidly reusable steel and concrete) and provide residents with eco-friendly
cleaning supplies, among other strategies.
raise b + c
PROLOGUE
DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Proposing on all four sites presents the unique responsibility of
simultaneously considering all sites together while leveraging their unique
attributes. Our team, led by a Master Developer and supported by three
design voices has established the following Design Principles that allow us to
achieve a unified vision while leveraging the diverse qualities of each site and
its program.
THE PLAZA
ay
dw
a
o
The success of the plaza is critical to the success of the project. Programming,
br
not only for the Farmers Market but other formal and informal activities,
ensures its daily vibrancy.
connect east/west
denn
The Plaza and its surrounding landscape will feel comfortable to individuals,
large crowds, or clusters of small groups.
e. j
While the Plaza acts as the home for the Farmers Market, it also reaches out
and engages the Denny Festival Street.
Spill over activity from adjacent uses enlivens the Plaza dance lessons or
exercise classes in the Community Center, children from the child care center
ay
adw
playing with their parents, dining at local restaurants.
bro
denn
East-west connections help break down the scale and mass of the buildings for
pedestrian use.
Locating both building entries and the childrens play area along the east-west
connections make these short cuts active and safe.
ay
adw
denn
bro
BUILDING FORM
Building forms convey a civic quality and highlight the important investment
Sound Transit has made in this transit oriented community.
Dynamic forms invite people into the buildings, the east-west pass-throughs,
and the Plaza.
north view
scale to context
th
10
denn
ave
PROLOGUE
C3
B5
B3
C2
B2
B1
C1
A3
A2
through
two-story
masssite
relates
to station
isometric
view
from entry
northwest
a2
a3
b1
b2
b3
A1
c1
c2
c3
A3
C1
B4
B3
B2
the Park
C3
Plaza
entrance
a3
b2
b3
opensPROPERTIES
plaza to park
b4 step-back
CAPITOL
HILL
REDEVELOPMENT
c1
PROLOGUE
LANDSCAPE AND GREEN
FACTOR
Thoughtful consideration of all the
sites holistically enables a coordinated
landscape approach, helping to
unify the site and contributes to the
activation and success of the public
spaces
Landscape reinforces connections
from each site to the transit station
entries and sensitively weaves the
new development into the broader
neighborhood context.
Successfully executed, the landscape
is a major contributing factor to how
sensitively the development increases
density, creates a successful mixed-use
environment while knitting into the
existing community
The proximity of the project to
Cal Anderson Park is embraced fully
and neighborhood connections are
strengthened through a robust and
durable urban landscape
Landscape has the unique
opportunity to support adjacent uses
while at the same time enhancing
the pedestrian realm by providing a
welcoming streetscape experience
In addition to the street and plaza
levels, the roofscape is being fully
utilized with green roof areas and
tenant amenity spaces, along with the
associated environmental benefits
Site A = Green Factor (GF) .393
Site B-North
GF .679
Site B-South
GF .691
Site C
GF .543
green roof
vegetated wall
landscape in food cultivation
landscape at grade
festival street
plaza
mid-block / plinth
entries / accents
sidewalks
bike parking
PROLOGUE
WAYFINDING AND LIGHTING
Site lighting is carefully integrated
with architectural and landscape
architectural elements to support a
cohesive nighttime environment
The overall lighting design strategy
provides a safe, secure, illuminated
environment that invites the public
into the dynamic space while
balanced with the needs of tenants
and permanent residents
Building massing is articulated
to help facilitate wayfinding in a
larger context by opening up the
apertures along the Plaza and Denny
Way enabling broader views to/from
Broadway and Cal Anderson Park
Weatherproof electrical receptacles
at the base of each tree on both sides
of Denny enable seasonal lighting on
the Festival Street
A combination of poles, in-grade
fixtures and catenary lights above the
Plaza help establish a pedestrian scale
to the space and contribute to the
dynamic festive atmosphere
Horizontal accent lighting
beneath seating elements and seating
steps is used to provide low-level
illumination of the ground plane,
enlivening the public realm, and
minimizing light spill beyond the site
10
lighting
wayfinding
11
13
SITE A
I. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
We create
vibrant,
sustainable and
inspiring places
where people can
live, work and
learn.
16
Gerding Edlens vision for the Sound Transit Capitol Hill Transit Oriented
Development sites creates a rich, pedestrian-oriented, interconnected and
engaging environment for a multitude of uses and users. In the development
program response that follows, Gerding Edlen has examined each site on
its own as required by the RFP, but our response to each individual site has
been informed by the other sites and potential synergies among the sites.
We envision an epicenter for transit, a place for shopping, dining, meeting,
connecting, living and learning, where the programming, look and feel of
the four new buildings will be distinct, yet connected. The project features a
rich mix of retail, community spaces and services, safe pedestrian movement
and bike mobility, inviting public gathering spaces, a diverse mix of housing
including rents at a wide range of income levels, all encompassed by highly
sustainable, high-quality design.
SITE A
Site A of the Capitol Hill Properties is the most outwardly visible of the four
parcels and as such, demands exceptional design and careful attention to the
interplay of the various program elements: housing, retail, and the public
plaza, as well as the buildings relationship to Broadway, Denny and the
Sound Transit station entry.
A 7 story, 85 foot tall building is planned for the Site A footprint. This
includes 3 levels of below grade parking, 2 levels of post-tensioned concrete
podium, and 5 stories of wood frame construction. The project includes
136 units of housing, with a mix of studios, 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom and
3-bedroom units. Residential amenities for the project include a shared
common room with a lounge and a kitchen that opens onto a shared amenity
deck. This common space will be programmed with activities to create and
enhance community within the building. It will also be available for residents
to lease for special events. Facing south, the deck takes advantage of excellent
CAPITOL HILL PROPERTIES REDEVELOPMENT
sun exposure and expansive views over Cal Anderson Park towards Mt.
Rainier, and includes a barbecue, a fire pit and plenty of outdoor seating
and gathering spaces for residents to enjoy. Other amenities include a fitness
center, a large bicycle room with repair station, and a pet wash and area
for pets to relieve themselves. Additionally, the roof includes an accessible
rooftop deck, and a large green roof feature.
The design and tenant mix of the ground floor retail at Site A is critical to
the success of the project. Approach to the retail faade design is carefully
described in the development program criteria to follow, but Gerding Edlen
is thrilled that we are working with a successful and respected Northwest
community grocer who would lease the retail space north of the pass through.
The grocer, which is typically open from 7am-11pm 7 days per week, will
provide an active retail presence on the critical Broadway frontage and also
provide the project with an anchor tenant, which will facilitate the ability to
lease the rest of the Site A retail to smaller, local established and new retailers.
The pass-through to the south of Site A North, is a wide, open, inviting
walkway that will draw pedestrians from Broadway into the retail and plaza
area. South of the pass-through is a retail Hub or Market Hall concept that
is flexible and accommodates a diverse and carefully curated mix of local and
regional retailers.
Our team, with a long history of work in the vicinity, has diligently
created a strong, linked relationship between the building, the plaza and
the surrounding streets. We are very excited that this project will include a
year-round Farmers Market and have worked to ensure that the plaza design
will accommodate the needs of the market while also remaining flexible for
other uses during non-market days. Gerding Edlen envisions the plaza as an
outdoor hub of activity and plans to hire a Plaza and Community Center
Coordinator to curate plaza events and activities throughout the year. From
art shows to dance performance to outdoor movies to pop up shopping and
other community-focused events, we envision a lively plaza that will serve
as the Capitol Hills living room. The Plaza brings together residents of the
new development, Capitol Hill and other neighborhood throughout the City,
as well as visitors to Seattle throughout the year.
SITE B-NORTH
Site B-North is also a mixed-use building, containing 86 units of affordable
housing. 50% of the units in Site B-North will be restricted to households
earning no more than 30% of AMI, and the remaining 50% of units will
be restricted to households at or below 60% AMI. The affordable housing
building includes high quality, durable finishes and several amenity spaces
including a common room with a kitchen, meeting space and computer lab;
a rooftop deck; common laundry facilities on each floor, and bicycle parking.
We anticipate that the Site B-North housing will be owned and operated by a
nonprofit housing organization, with Gerding Edlen owning the ground floor
commercial space and serving as the developer of the entire building.
B-North is a 7-story building, with one level of below grade parking, 2
levels of post-tensioned concrete podium, and 5 stories of wood frame
construction. On the ground floor of Site B-North, space is provided
specifically for a community center and for a daycare center. The community
center is a flexible space available to the Capitol Hill Community to hold and
attend neighborhood meetings and functions; to provide rentable space for
workshops, lectures, art exhibits, private celebrations, and community-based
functions. Additionally, the community center includes space that designed
and managed as a co-working space and available to rent by the day, week or
month.
CAPITOL HILL PROPERTIES REDEVELOPMENT
17
The community space will include a small catering kitchen allowing groups to
bring in their own food and beverages; and the space will be managed by the
Plaza and Community Center coordinator. The daycare center will be leased
and operated by a third party, Bright Horizons (see letter of interest in the
Appendix). Bright Horizons intends to serve 100-120 children between the
ages of 0-5 on the site, and they will work with the city or the YWCA with
the intent to make spaces available to low income families at reduced cost.
SITE B-SOUTH
Site B-South provides the southern anchor with a connection to the plaza and
also boasts the most direct access and views onto Cal Anderson Park. This
building, comprised of 100 units of apartment homes, is a 7-story building
with one level of below grade parking, 2 levels of post-tensioned concrete,
and 5 stories of wood frame construction. The ground level of the building
will encompass the pass-through; to the north of the pass-through the ground
level provides an open area that will be used by the B-North daycare for a
childrens outdoor play area during daycare hours and will be open to all other
residents and the public during hours the daycare is not in operation.
SITE C
Site C is a mixed-use building with ground level retail on the Broadway and
Denny frontages. Like Site A, the design and tenant mix for the ground
floor retail on Site C will be critical to the success of the project and will
activate street frontage on Broadway and Denny. The retail spaces in Site C
are designed to accommodate several small-to-mid sized retailers, providing
a complement to the large anchor grocer on Site A and to the Market Hall
concept on Site A-south.
Site C is also a 7-story building, with one level of below grade parking, 2
levels of post-tensioned concrete, and 5 stories of wood frame construction
above.
Across all of the sites, residential units will be thoughtfully laid out to
maximize the livability of the space and high quality finishes will be used
throughout. We engaged Red Propeller to complete an initial study and
survey of the sub-market (see the report from Red Propeller in the appendix)
and would expect to take a much deeper dive as part of the development
process to ensure that the design, finishes, amenities and brand are driven by
a deep understanding of our likely residents. Each building on the site will
have its own unique character, not only from an architectural standpoint but
from a branding standpoint. Gerding Edlen takes special pride in its ability
to produce a distinctive and market-sensitive look and feel for its projects.
Our projects are consistently viewed as highly differentiated in the market,
commanding strong demand and competitive leasing rates.
PARKING
While each site provides vehicular parking, Gerding Edlen used a blended
approach to the overall parking on the 4 sites. Site A contains the majority
of the parking in 3 below-grade parking levels, in order to meet residential
parking needs for both Site A and some for Site C, while containing
additional parking stalls that will be designated as short-term parking for
visitors and retail customers. The parking under B-North and B-South
will also meet the residential parking requirement on a blended basis. This
approach allows Gerding Edlen to provide parking in an efficient and
cost-effective manner, and could be deployed in the case of more than one
developer working on the site.
18
SITE A
SITE A
20
SITE A
A1.1 BROADWAY RETAIL WINDOW
CONTRIBUTION TO ACTIVATION OF THE
PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT
An innovative retail window approach balances
maximum transparency with visual and sensual
variety currently absent from the standard aluminum
storefront systems that have begun to dominate
recent Capitol Hill development. Color, profile,
warm materials, and hand-scaled detail add
richness and variety. Dynamic elements such as
pivoting doors allow for greater interaction between
customer and retailer, as well as seasonal variety in
the appearance of the building. Large expanses of
glass will be balanced with a finer level of detail,
allowing retailers to individually express their
brand. Unconventional material such as wood
framing and subtly colored glass -- will result in a
unique storefront design, contributing to a vibrant
pedestrian realm. The storefront palette transfers
to the ground plane as well, with complementary
paving and landscape design that marks this stretch
of Broadway as the beginning of a locally grounded
vibrant retail street.
The retail along Broadway is divided into two
sections, with the pass-through delineating the two.
North of the pass-through is a two-story, ground
floor experience the so-called first thirty feet. This
expression at the retail space north of the passthrough as different from the retail space south of
the pass-through and also steps up to the scale and
importance of the Sound Transit Station and the
100% corner at the intersection of Broadway and
John Street. Site A South, on the other hand, relies
on a twenty-foot high retail expression, to better
reflect the intimacy of its Market Hall concept,
where local retailers will be in 600 to 800 square
foot retail stalls in an open, bustling environment.
These smaller retail footprints have been consistently
requested by Captiol Hill retailers as the ideal
balance of size and affordability. The retail on both
A North and A South is accessible from the passthrough.
The programming of the retail south of the passthrough to be the Market Hall leverages its location
as the only part of the site that links Broadway,
Denny Way, and the Plaza. The ground floor retail
has the most transparent enclosure possible doors
and partitions that can be fully opened for direct
and unencumbered flow between Broadway, Denny,
and the Plaza. This extraordinary transparency and
permeability takes great advantage of the plinths
along Denny and the Plaza by allowing retailers to
display outdoors, as in traditional markets.
21
SITE A
A retail concept offering cooking classes such as Hip
Cooks
Local childrens clothing or toy store
Wine bar
In the past, Gerding Edlen has worked with retail
brokerage firms to successfully implement the following
strategy:
1. Tell the Story: Where else would you rather be? The
opportunity to locate in hip, growing, Capitol Hill
near a newly completed transit station is a tremendous
opportunity for a retailer looking for growth in an everexpanding market.
2. Analyze the current retail market/competitive analysis:
The selected retail broker and Gerding Edlen will do a
comprehensive analysis of the market to fully understand
the current retail environment and success stories in the
market; uncover local or regional retailers looking to
penetrate or expand throughout the market; population
demographics for Capitol Hill (who are your customers?);
transit ridership and pedestrian flow; and competitive
analysis.
3. Create a merchandising strategy: Analyze other markets
to seek out the best-of-the-best to recruit for the market
needs of the Capitol Hill property.
4. Marketing Campaign: Create marketing materials that
convey to prospective tenants the retail story of Capitol
Hill and how this particular site fits into the mix. The
proposed retail broker will conduct a large outreach
campaign by contacting specific retailers. We will create a
buzz in the industry via social media and public relations
opportunities. We also expect to spend time canvassing
the local market, display and market the project at select
regional ISCS events and the annual ISCS convention.
5. Evaluate prospects and conduct negotiations: Gerding
Edlen and the retail broker will evaluate prospects
to better understand their financial condition, retail
segment, operating history (if applicable) and business
plan. After a prospect is qualified, the retail broker leads
the negotiation process, including drafting letters of
intent, reviewing landlord and tenant construction work
and proposed design, drafting leases, assisting in lease
negotiations with Landlord and Tenant counsel.
23
SITE A
Pass-through
The north and south frontages of the pass-through reflect the different
concepts of A North and A South in their retail and facade treatments
A1.11 SIGNAGE CONCEPTS AND LIGHTING SOLUTIONS INTEGRATION WITH FACADE
Site A North:
Signage occurs within a designated zone of the faade to aid in clarity
composition, and way-finding
Maximum and minimum signage dimensions are prescribed
Retailers are encouraged to have signage suggestive of their business
Materials are of high quality (wood, metal, or glass, for example)
Signs are only illuminated from the outside or from high quality, evenlydistributed, integral illumination such as neon or LED
The sidewalk will be illuminated by integrated canopy lighting
For the Market Hall, signage is aggregated into an iconic totem to reflect
the shared nature of the retail environment and assist with wayfinding
Pass-through
The north and south frontages of the passthrough reflect the different
concepts of A North and A South in their access to retail and facade treatment
24
A1.11
A1.9
A1.8
A1.10
A1.12
SITE A NORTH
A1.9
A1.12
A1.10
SITE A SOUTH
25
SITE A
A1.13
A1.14
A1.15
A1.16
A1.17
A1.19
A1.20
27
SITE A
A1.17
A1.18
A1.19
A1.20
29
SITE A
A2.2 Inlays
30
31
SITE A
32
Market Stall
PLAZA PLAN
FROM BERGER
AERIAL PERSPECTIVE MARKET STALL LAYOUT
33
SITE A
34
A2.14
A2.15
A2.16
35
SITE A
A2.17 Tining
36
A2.17
A2.18
A2.19
A2.18
A2.17
A2.19
37
SITE A
A2.21Accented Paving
38
A2.21
A2.20
39
SITE A
NARRATIVE & VISUAL DEPICTION OF THE PEDESTRIAN PASSTHROUGH BETWEEN BROADWAY & THE PUBLIC
PLAZA INCLUDING:
A2.23 CONCEPTS FOR PROVIDING PEDESTRIAN INTEREST OR
ACTIVATION OF THE PASSAGE FACADES
The pass-through is open air, and open to the public
The residential and parking lobby is accessed through the pass-through,
ensuring 24/7 activity
A strong programmatic draw such as outdoor dining anchors the space
where the passage overlaps with the Plaza at the northwest corner
The lobby entrance to the residential is off the passageway to ensure
pedestrian use
The retail on both the north and south side of the passageway is accessible
through the passageway
The passageway opens greatly -- about 16 feet -- on its eastern edge along
the Plaza, at an angle that relates to the Plinth
A2.22 Retail
Sidewalk
40
A2.22 Pass-Through
41
SITE A
The soffits are the most visible portion of the faade as viewed by pedestrians
The soffit material is wood, to match similar soffit treatments on the main
building facades and the passageway
42
A2.23
A2.30
A2.30
A2.31
43
SITE A
A2.38 ACCENTS
Wood panels add variety and interest to the window openings
Sliding wood panels provide solar control and a dynamic element
A2.39 ACCENTS
A2.36 Eyes-on-the-Street
44
A2.41
A2.38
A2.42
A2.36
A2.37
A2.40
45
SITE A
A2.47 IRRIGATION
Plantings are fully irrigated and the system incorporates high efficiency irrigation
equipment operated by an automatic controller
In small planting areas around the building subsurface drip tubing, operating
at 92.5% efficiency.The tubing is installed in a grid pattern at a depth of 4
inches. Subsurface tubing or drip tape provides precise application of water at low
precipitation rates and is easier to maintain than single emission drip components
Larger planting areas are irrigated with nozzles which operate at a minimum 70%
efficiency
Trees are irrigated with high efficiency root zone watering systems
The rain sensor will shut the system down automatically if effective rainfall exceeds
the set limit on the gauge.
Reduction in water consumption for the landscape is a cumulative effect based on
46
A2.44
A2.49
A2.48
A2.50
47
SITE A
An approximately 1,200 SF vegetated wall is provided along the south and east sides
of the Sound Transit Central Vent Shaft building/structure
The vegetated wall is a vine screen
49
SITE A
SITE A BASELINE
EXTERNAL
LIGHTS
SITE A BASELINE
PLUG LOADS
LIGHTS
DOMEST
HOT WTR
REFRIGERATION
SPACE HEATING
VENT FANS
PUMPS
SPACE COOLING
SITE A TARGET
SITE A TARGET
LIGHTS
PLUG LOADS
SPACE HEATING
SPACE COOLING
PUMPS
SAVINGS
VENT FANS
REFRIGERATION
DOMEST HOT WTR
EXTERNAL LIGHTS
50
A3.8 APPLICATION OF SITE & BUILDING ENERGY SAVING BEYOND CITY INCENTIVES
The following energy efficiency measures are being considered to achieve the Architecture 2030 Goals.
Daylighting: Daylight dimming in common areas, and residential units designed to maximize natural light and encourage
limited artificial light use
Low power density lighting design: Target 20% less than energy code prescriptive allowance
High performance windows: the project will use double and/or triple-paned windows to reduce heating load and the size of
heating equipment required. The high performance windows will reduce cooling requirements as well
High performance walls: the project will use walls that exceed code-minimum insulation levels to further reduce heating load
and energy use
Reduced Infiltration: The project will target an air leakage rate of about 40% more stringent than Seattle Code
Heat Recovery: The project will use centralized heat recovery ventilators to pre-heat and cool ventilation air
Demand controlled ventilation for common areas: The ground floor zones will employ demand controlled ventilation to control
ventilation rates based on occupancy and use requirements
Plug load reductions: Energy Star appliances and individual unit metering will reduce plug load energy use
Low flow hot water fixtures: Low flow fixtures will be employed to reduce water heating energy and water use
Heat pump water heating: An option to provide each unit an individual heat pump water heater will be explored
Decentralized heat pump water heaters use less than 50% of the energy of a traditional water heater and could provide an
additional benefit of space cooling
Optimized fan flow: Pre-calibrated pressure independent air balancing valves will be employed to reduce fan energy and heating
requirements by maintaining constant exhaust air flow in the residential units
Refrigeration heat recovery: Recovering the heat rejected by the grocery tenants refrigeration system to preheat domestic hot
water will reduce domestic water heating energy demands
Enhanced Refrigeration: The grocery tenant may be encouraged to employ energy savings refrigeration technology with LED
lights and occupancy sensors
Renewables: To meet the 2030 goals, renewable energy will likely be required: A 200 kW PV array is anticipated to be provided
to meet the remaining energy production requirements for Architecture 2030
Site A
80.0
70.0
kbtu/sf/yr
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
51
PARKING APPROACH
SITE A
52
SITE B NORTH
AMENITY AREAS
SITE
B-NORTH
BN1.1 Grasses
A1.1 Caption
54
AMENITY AREAS
BN1.3 TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF LANDSCAPE MATERIAL
The ground floor contains both the Community Center and Day Care uses
The areas are primarily paved or have rubber mats so that children can
play in those areas and Community Center users can easily use the space for
outdoor meetings, with tables, chair, and marker boards
A larger play area with play equipment is provided adjacent to the passthrough on Site B South, and with a wood chip ground cover
BN1.4 TECHNIQUES FOR IRRIGATION
All new planting areas are fully irrigated using a combination of high
efficiency pop-up spray heads and drip irrigation operated by an automatic
controller
The irrigation system utilizes equipment types and models desired by onsite
maintenance staff
BN1.3
BN1.5
55
AMENITY AREAS
SITE
B-NORTH
BN1.7
BN1.6
56
AMENITY AREAS
57
AMENITY AREAS
SITE
B-NORTH
BN1.11 Modulation
The bays do not project beyond the eight foot setback, providing
maximum space for the tree canopy and to keep the building plane set back
from the residential zone
The bays are 12 feet wide on average, and are defined by a 10 foot wide by 3
foot deep recess
Balconies typically occur within the recess, and project 3 feet beyond it, for
a total depth of 6 feet
The combination of the above strategies provide great modulation and
granularity along the Plaza and the 10th Avenue, which is across the street for
single family homes
BN1.10 MATERIALS, PATTERNS AND DETAILS OF RAILING
The railings are painted, with most rails being less than 1 x and
arrayed in a predominantly vertical pattern to better blend in with the
massing of the building and mitigate the buildings size
All railings are powder-coated, painted steel
BN1.11 RELATIONSHIP TO INTERIOR FLOOR PLAN
The bays are demised to the greatest extent possible to express individual
units, allowing residents to easily identify their individual homes and
promoting a sense of community and ownership
The ground floor uses have direct access to the outdoors
The ground floor terrace is slightly raised above grade and is continuous
along 10th Avenue, allowing for a continuous accessible stoop
58
BN1.9
BN1.10
BN1.12
BN1.12
BN1.11
59
AMENITY AREAS
SITE
B-NORTH
BN Green roof
60
AMENITY AREAS
BN2.2
BN2.3
BN2.1
61
SUSTAINABILITY
SITE
B-NORTH
SITES
BASELINE
SITES
B&CB&C
BASELINE
EXTERNAL
LIGHTS
TASK
LIGHTS
LIGHTS
PLUG LOADS
DOMEST HOT
WTR
VENT FANS
SPACE HEATING
SITES
TARGET
SITES
B&C B&C
TARGET
LIGHTS
PLUG LOADS
SPACE
HEATING
SAVINGS
PUMPS
DOMEST HOT
WTR
Community Solar: This program offers Seattle City Light subscribers with
the opportunity to invest in and receive the financial benefits of photovoltaic
arrays that are maintained by Seattle City Light and located on buildings in
Capitol Hill
SPACE
COOLING
VENT FANS
EXTERNAL LIGHTS
Pollinator Pathway: A built project that exists just south of Cal Anderson
Park and merges landscape, human systems, design thinking, with innovative
research and creative work that is now being developed into a national
certification program. Cal Anderson Park directly connects the expansive
landscape shown on our rooftops and site perimeter with the nearby 11th
Avenue expansion of the Pathway
Shared Parking: District parking is a system under which parking can be
leased across buildings. With this system, a daytime office worker and a local
resident who parks at night can share one space rather than taking up two.
The EcoDistrict is exploring a comprehensive sharing system that uses smart
phones and new garage technologies to track and share information
BN2.4 EVERGREEN STANDARD OR HIGHER - LEED GOLD OR
PLATINUM
This project will satisfy the sustainability requirements set forth in the
Evergreen Sustainable Development Standards (ESDS). While 50 is the
minimum requirement for new construction projects under the ESDS
program, our project anticipates attaining more than 100 points
Preference is to develop all sites and strive to meet the energy reduction
requirements of the Architecture 2030 Challenge. The project will strive to
meet the energy reduction requirements of the Architecture 2030 Challenge.
The Architecture 2030 Challenge specifies that any building constructed
62
SUSTAINABILITY
between 2015 and 2020 must perform 70% better than the existing building
stock in its region. After 2020, the requirement increase to 80%, after 2025
to 90%, and after 2030 to net-zero. On-site renewable energy is allowed to
account for up to 20% of the required savings. The program is voluntary, but
widely accepted as an appropriate target to put the building industry on track
to meet worldwide carbon dioxide reduction goals. In addition to carbon
reduction, the lower energy use reduces building operational cost, reduces
infrastructure requirements, future proofs the building against rapid utility
price increases, and in some cases, adds resiliency to the design in the case of
prolonged power failure.
BN2.5 ON-SITE TREATMENT AND/OR USE OF SITE B-NORTH
STORMWATER RUNOFF
Stormwater runoff generated over the tunnel is intercepted and prevented
from infiltrating down to the tunnel
Stormwater runoff generated from the green roof is captured and conveyed
to the public storm drain in 10th Avenue East
Stormwater runoff generated from non-green roof is captured and stored
in an on-site cistern before being treated and reused for flush fixtures and
irrigation
Stormwater runoff generated from surface areas is captured and conveyed
to the public storm drain in 10th Avenue East
BN2.6 APPLICATION OF SITE AND BUILDING ENERGY SAVINGS
BEYOND CITY INCENTIVES
The average multifamily residential building in Seattle uses about 53
kBTU/sf/year in energy. This metric is referred to the buildings Energy
Use Intensity, or EUI, and represents to total annual energy use of a
building divided by its floor area. It is comparable to a buildings gas-mileage
rating, expect that a smaller value is better. The 70% reduction required by
Architecture 2030 results in an energy-use target for the new buildings of
about 15 kBTU/sf/year. Of this, up to about 10 kBTU/sf/yr is allowed as onsite renewable energy. This results in a maximum allowable energy use before
renewables of 25 kBTU/sf/yr.
The following energy efficiency measures are being considered to achieve the
Architecture 2030 Goal:
Daylighting: Daylight dimming in common areas, and residential units
designed to maximize natural light and encourage limited artificial light use
Low power density lighting design: Target 20% less than energy code
prescriptive allowance
High performance windows: the project will consider double and triplepaned windows to reduce heating load and the size of heating equipment
required. The high performance windows reduce cooling requirements as well
High performance walls: the project will consider walls that exceed codeminimum insulation levels to further reduce heating load and energy use
Reduced Infiltration: The project will target on air leakage rate of about
40% more stringent than Seattle Code No Cooling: Apartments do not
have air conditioning, but will be kept comfortable with ceiling fans and sun
shading
CAPITOL HILL PROPERTIES REDEVELOPMENT
63
SUSTAINABILILTY
SITE
B-NORTH
Sites B & C
60.0
kbtu/sf/yr
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
PARKING
PARKING APPROACH
For the affordable housing building, we are providing a parking ratio of
0.25:1, or 22 spaces. In the teams experience with affordable housing,
especially for a project that is serving a large percentage of lower income
residents (30% or below), we find that car ownership is relatively low.
The parking garage underneath Site B-North is proposed as a shared
garage between both B-North and B-South, and as such, the excess
spaces under B-North are attributed to B-South, which has a parking
ratio of 0.5:1 and requires 50 residential spaces. The total number of
parking spaces in the Site B garage is 76 spaces. 22 spaces are occupied
by B-North, 50 by B-South, and the remaining 4 spaces are designated as
visitor parking for either building.
BN3.1 RESIDENTIAL STALL COUNT BELOW DA REQUIREMENT
OF .7 STALL/UNIT
The proposed parking ratio for Site B-North is 0.25:1
BN3.2 UNBUNDLED RESIDENTIAL STALLS IN EXCESS OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
100% of the residential parking stalls on Site B North are unbundled,
meaning that residents wanting a parking space will pay rent for the
parking space separate and above the rent paid for their unit.
COMMUNITY CENTER
SITE
B-NORTH
COMMUNITY CENTER
operating income from the center will only need to cover operating expenses.
Gerding Edlen is not expecting or projecting to generate any operating
revenue from the Community Center in excess of expenses to operate the
facility.
67
68
SITE B SOUTH
SITE B SOUTH
BS1.1 Grasses
All new planting areas are fully irrigated using a combination of high
efficiency pop-up spray heads and drip irrigation operated by an automatic
controller
The irrigation system utilizes equipment types and models desired by onsite
maintenance staff.
BS1.3 Groundcover
70
BS1.5
BS1.9
BS1.15
BS1.13
BS1.1
BS1.11
BS1.5
BS1.6
BS1.9
BS1.15
CAPITOL HILL PROPERTIES REDEVELOPMENT
71
SITE B SOUTH
72
73
SITE B SOUTH
74
BS1.5
BS1.17
BS1.16
BS1.17
BS1.18
BS1.19
75
SITE B SOUTH
76
77
SITE B SOUTH
78
TASK
LIGHTS
LIGHTS
PLUG LOADS
DOMEST HOT
WTR
VENT FANS
SPACE HEATING
PUMPS
SPACE COOLING
SITES B&CTARGET
TARGET
SITE B-SOUTH
LIGHTS
PLUG LOADS
SPACE
HEATING
SAVINGS
SPACE
COOLING
PUMPS
DOMEST HOT
WTR
VENT FANS
EXTERNAL LIGHTS
79
SITE B SOUTH
BS2.6 APPLICATION OF SITE AND BUILDING ENERGY SAVINGS BEYOND CITY INCENTIVES
The average multifamily residential building in Seattle uses about 53 kBTU/sf/year in energy. This metric is referred
to as the buildings Energy Use Intensity, or EUI, and represents the total annual energy use of a building divided
by its floor area. It is comparable to a buildings gas-mileage rating, except that a smaller value is better. The 70%
reduction required by Architecture 2030 results in an energy-use target for the new buildings of about 15 kBTU/sf/
year. Of this, up to about 10 kBTU/sf/yr is allowed as on-site renewable energy. This results in a maximum allowable
energy use before renewables of 25 kBTU/sf/yr.
The following energy efficiency measures would be considered to achieve the Architecture 2030 Goals:
Daylighting: Daylight dimming in common areas, and residential units designed to maximize natural light and
encourage limited artificial light use.
Low power density lighting design: Target 20% less than energy code prescriptive allowance.
High performance windows: the project will use double and/or triple-paned windows to reduce heating load and the
size of heating equipment required. The high performance windows will reduce cooling requirements as well.
High performance walls: the project will use walls that exceed code-minimum insulation levels to further reduce
heating load and energy use.
Reduced Infiltration: The project will target on air leakage rate of about 40% more stringent than Seattle Code.
Heat Recovery: The project will use centralized heat recovery ventilators to pre-heat and cool ventilation air.
No Cooling: Apartments will not have air conditioning, but will be kept comfortable with ceiling fans and sun
shading.
Demand controlled ventilation for common areas: The ground floor zones will employ demand controlled
ventilation to control ventilation rates based on occupancy and use requirements.
Plug load reductions: Energy Star appliances and individual unit metering will reduce plug load energy use.
Low flow hot water fixtures: Low flow fixtures will be employed to reduce water heating energy and water use.
Heat pump water heating: An option to provide each unit an individual heat pump water heater will be explored.
Decentralized heat pump water heaters use less than 50% of the energy of a traditional water heater and could provide
an additional benefit of space cooling.
Optimized fan flow: Pre-calibrated pressure independent air balancing valves will be employed to reduce fan energy
and heating requirements by maintaining constant exhaust air flow in the residential units.
Renewables: To meet the 2030 goals, renewable energy will likely be required. The 10 kBtu/sf/yr limit that the
Architecture 2030 challenge allows is anticipated to be sufficient to meet the challenge requirements. This corresponds
to about a 700 kW PV array. Photovoltaics will be evaluated to determine if it is feasible to provide the required
capacity on site to meet the Architecture 2030 challenge.
SITE B-SOUTH ENERGY SAVINGS
Sites B & C
60.0
kbtu/sf/yr
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
80
PARKING APPROACH
NARRATIVE FOR PARKING APPROACH
BS3.1 RESIDENTIAL STALL COUNT BELOW DA REQUIREMENT OF .7
STALL/UNIT
Gerding Edlen has built numerous urban residential units over the past 15
years, many located in close proximity to transit and in neighborhoods that
present a variety of transit options (walking, biking, streetcar or light rail,
bus, car share). In our long experience, we have learned that while there are
many residents who choose to forego car ownership, there will always be those
who do own cars and we need to provide parking options. It is expected that
a number of the residents of the Capitol Hill properties will own cars, but
will not use them on a daily basis, but rather take them out for shopping or
excursions on a semi-regular basis only.
The monthly rental for parking stalls will not be bundled with the rent for the
units.
81
SITE C
RETAIL APPROACH
SITE C
84
RETAIL APPROACH
C1.2 DENNY WAY RETAIL WINDOW CONTRIBUTION TO
ACTIVATION OF THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT
The retail for Site C will actively engage the Denny Festival street. Paired with
the Market Hall (Site A South), this creates a curated retail environment,
balancing the small scale retail of Site A with mid-sized, local businesses for
Site C. Similar to the Market Hall, the retail on Site C actively engages the
sidewalk by providing a consistent retail level along the Denny frontage.
A plinth with stepped sidewalks on the street navigates between the retail
and the slope of the street. The plinth allows vendors of many sizes to lease
space, as they are not encumbered by a stepped slab, while a level plinth also
supports a range of outdoor retail opportunities. On Farmers Market days, the
stepped sidewalk accommodates additional Market stalls.
85
RETAIL APPROACH
SITE C
86
RETAIL APPROACH
C1.6 USE OF RETAIL ARCHITECT
The proposed grocer has engaged LRS Architects to help them design the
interior of their space at Site A. LRS is a large, well-established firm that has
deep experience working with retail tenants. LRS will be involved from the
early planning stages to help shape the storefront orientation, look and feel for
the anchor tenant on Site A, in close collaboration with the building architect.
We expect to take a similar approach on the A-South and Site C retail, where
we expect to do early pre-leasing on all retail to facilitate collaboration early
in the design process of the core and shell with a tenants selected architect.
In this way, we are able to develop a diverse and interesting mix of storefront
experiences and create an authentic neighborhood feel and scale to the retail
spaces. In the event that the Market Hall tenants do not wish to retain their
own architect, our design team has experience in creating boutique retail
spaces and will work with individual retailers on the design.
87
RETAIL APPROACH
SITE C
88
RETAIL APPROACH
C1.14
C1.16
C1.17
C1.15
C1.18
C1.12
C1.8
C1.13
C1.10
C1.11
C1.9
CAPITOL HILL PROPERTIES REDEVELOPMENT
89
RETAIL APPROACH
SITE C
90
RETAIL APPROACH
91
RETAIL APPROACH
SITE C
92
RETAIL APPROACH
C2.0 NARRATIVE AND VISUAL DEPICTION OF THE STATION
ENTRANCE SETBACK ALONG BROADWAY
Since the station entrance will be a bustling zone of activity, wrapping a
portion of the Broadway retail activity around the north face of Site C will
help to maximize visibility/exposure to the ebb and flow of transit commuters
and activate the station setback area.
Bicycle parking is provided periodically between the blocks of planting.
C2.1 TYPE, COLORS, PATTERNS, AND LOCATIONS OF PAVEMENT
MATERIALS
Pedestrian paving at Broadway will be a highly durable and easily
maintained surface enabling a range of activities.
The majority of the space will be scored and cast-in-place concrete with
joints running perpendicular to the path of travel.
Tighter spaced scoring and surface texturing (tining) is proposed adjacent
to seating areas to provide a finer grain and higher level of detail where
pedestrians are most likely to be sitting and seeing a higher level of finish.
93
AMENITY APPROACH
SITE C
C2.9
C2.10
C2.11
C2.1
C2.5
C2.7
C2.4
C2.4
C2.9
C2.12
C2.10
C2.8
C2.1
C2.2
94
2.11
AMENITY APPROACH
sun and seasonal interest.
C2.4 NARRATIVE AND VISUAL DEPICTION OF THE FACADE SETBACK
ALONG DENNY WAY
The facade setback on Denny Way facilitates the activities of the Farmers
Market and street festivals. On those less active days, the additional sidewalk
width will support more passive activities. Fixed seating elements and terraced
areas will be created on the slope of Denny Way, making a place for groups
and individuals to pause and take part in the sidewalk activity.
C2.5 CONCEPTS TO RECONCILE THE GRADE CHANGE BETWEEN
THE RETAIL FLOOR ELEVATION AND DENNY WAY (SLOPING FROM
BROADWAY TO NAGLE PLACE)
C2.5 Seatwalls
The goal in the layout of the retail space at Site C is flexibility. The floor slab
along Denny Way is located at the lowest elevation of the adjacent sidewalk,
again to allow flexibility for the division of the space into smaller tenants. For
larger tenants the floor will be brought to the desired elevation with overframing.
Planting beds will be used to mitigate grade transitions and will be
constructed of weathered plate steel.
Seatwalls/retaining walls will also be used to mitigate grade transitions and
will be constructed of cast-in-place concrete and wood.
C2.6 TYPE, COLORS, PATTERNS, AND LOCATIONS OF PAVEMENT
MATERIALS
95
AMENITY APPROACH
SITE C
96
97
SITE C
98
99
SITE C
SITE C BASELINE
VENT FANS
SPACE HEATING
PUMPS
SPACE COOLING
SITES
B&C TARGET
SITE
C TARGET
LIGHTS
PLUG LOADS
SPACE
HEATING
SAVINGS
SPACE
COOLING
PUMPS
DOMEST HOT
WTR
PLUG LOADS
DOMEST HOT
WTR
EXTERNAL LIGHTS
100
TASK
LIGHTS
VENT FANS
Sites B & C
60.0
kbtu/sf/yr
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
101
PARKING APPROACH
SITE C
FUNDING PLAN:
SITE B-NORTH
Gerding Edlen has assumed for purposes of this RFP response that Site B-North will assemble a competitive 9% LIHTC application to the Washington State Housing Finance Commission and receive an award. Rent levels have been set in order to be
competitive, and it is anticipated that Gerding Edlen would partner with a non-profit affordable housing organization to ultimately own and operate the building and to meet the additional requirements for set-asides and services required for a 9% LIHTC
financed project.
Bank of America has provided a letter of interest in providing the LIHTC equity, and a construction and permanent loan on the
project. (See Appendix) Gerding Edlen has worked with Bank of America on numerous transactions and has a strong relationship
with the Bank.
It is assumed that the remaining gap financing would be provided by the Seattle Office of Housing in the form of a deferred payment loan to the project.
Site B-North Community Center
Gerding Edlen has committed to building a community center of approximately 1300 square feet as part of the B-North project.
The cost to construct the center will come from the capital budgets of Site A, Site B-South and Site C.
Site B-North Daycare
Gerding Edlen is proposing to construction a daycare center adjacent to and affiliated with the community center on Site
B-North. The daycare center will provide childcare to residents in all of the buildings and we expect to work with the operator
and the city of Seattle to secure a percentage of spaces in the daycare to be reserved for low income families. Remaining spots will
be available to the general public. The daycare will be financed with a construction and permanent loan, and will also require
some equity. It is anticipated that the funder providing debt and equity for one or more of the other sites will also provide debt
and equity for the daycare.
The project could also be looked at as a 4% LIHTC project with tax exempt bond financing. In that case, the gap required
from the Seattle Office of Housing would increase, and it is likely that we would have less 30% rents.
C. Provide details of any loan guarantees that any party may be providing.
Gerding Edlen has a long history of working with lenders on construction loans. Typical loans are non-recourse and include completion guarantees and bad boy carve-outs.
D. If partnering with separate capital providers, detail each participants percentage of ownership. If necessary, include
an organizational chart and supporting materials that indicate clearly the relationship of the operating organization to the
Developer.
126
4. It is Sound Transits intention that the development of all of its Capitol Hill Station properties
will be completed simultaneously. Describe how you propose to achieve this objective, in terms of
financing.
Based on our estimated initial proformas, the total project cost for Sites A, B South and C is approximately $124
million (the project cost for Site B North is not included since the affordable housing project will have a distinct
capital stack). Gerding Edlen has financed single projects as large as $425 million so the development and capitalization of the 3-parcel $124M project is well within the firms capability. In the past decade, Gerding Edlen has financed
11 projects with individual total project cost of over $100 million. Some of these were capitalized with institutional
equity partners, some were funded with our Green Cities equity fund and some have been funded via joint ventures
between our Green Cities equity fund and institutional investors. Our approach would be to ask for proposals from
lenders and investors for both an option for one lender and one investor to finance the entire project as well as an
option to finance sites individually, in order to determine which scenario provides the most advantageous terms.
5. Given the cyclical nature of real estate markets, describe the financial strategies you employ to
weather market corrections.
Gerding Edlen mitigates the cyclical nature of our business though diversification of markets (we are currently active
in Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago and Boston) and product types (mixed-use multifamily rental, for-sale and office, as well as build-to-suit projects for for-profit and non-profit clients). In addition, our
revenue is derived from a variety of sources: investment management, asset management, development and property
management, so that we are not dependent on any one source of revenue. Finally, substantially all of our projects are
income-producing commercial properties that are conservatively leveraged so that in down economic cycles the properties are still able to sufficiently cash flow to meet debt service requirements.
6. Provide detailed examples of the Proposer
s experience financing projects of similar nature and
magnitude
BREWERY BLOCKS DETAILED FINANCING CONFIDENTIAL
PORTLAND, OR
154
PORTLAND, OR
155
PROJECT APPROACH
A number of the identified weaknesses and deficiencies identified by Sound Transit were addressed in The Financial Capability
and Project Financials section, above. The remaining items are addressed below.
FIRM EXPERIENCE, CAPACITY Did not identify a lot of affordable housing experience. Did not provide contact info
AND HISTORY for Thomas Christopherson.
RESPONSE: 1.
Both Project Lead Jill Sherman and Development Project Manager Sarah Zahn
have an extensive background in financing and constructing affordable housing.
A more complete list of affordable housing project experience is listed below.
2.
RESPONSE: While Jill Sherman will be project lead and primary day-to-day contact on this
project, Kelly Saito, who is the President of Gerding Edlen, will play an active role
in project oversight and vision, bringing his significant experience in multi-block
development requiring a high level of coordination. He will attend critical meetings,
be engaged up front with negotiations with Sound Transit, and be involved in the
overall project conception, financing and planning. Kelly has been with Gerding
Edlen since its inception and was the principal in charge of Gerding Edlens three
large multi-block projects, including the Brewery Blocks and the South Waterfront in
Portland and the South Park project in Los Angeles. In addition, Gerding Edlen has a
team of seasoned professionals in market research, branding and marketing, financing, property management and construction that will be engaged in the project from
start to finish. This team is responsible for all of the urban, mixed-use residential
ground-up development that has occurred since 2010 under Gerding Edlen
s two
equity funds; a total of 11 projects, 1,485 units and $650 million of development in
Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Boston and Chicago.
FINANCIAL CAPACITY The financial information provided did not speak to their experience in financing low
income housing projects
RESPONSE: 1.
2.
The first four comments to Financial Capacity are included in item #1 of the
Financial Capacity and Project Financials section, above.
Both Project Lead Jill Sherman and Development Project Manager Sarah Zahn
have an extensive background in financing and constructing affordable housing.
A more complete list of affordable housing project experience is listed below.
PROJECT SCHEDULE Schedule is limited, very abbreviated, lacked detail. Should be broken down into
DELIVERY CAPABILITY greater detail. Does not identify when occupancy may occur.
RESPONSE: We have included a detailed project schedule in this RFP as part of the project approach response (item #7).
158
PROJECT APPROACH
SARAH ZAHN SELECT AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXPERIENCE
PROJECT NAME: 1st & Arthur
LOCATION: Portland ,OR
NUMBER OF UNITS: 39
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST: $7.7M
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project, which is being developed in partnership with Portland-based nonprofit
Central City Concern, will provide 39 units of affordable housing. 20% of the units
will be reserved for individuals with a serious mental illness. The remaining units will
be targeted to individuals earning 60% and below of area median income. Has a
goal of LEED for HOMES platinum rating.
FINANCING DESCRIPTION: 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Tax Exempt Bonds, CDBG funds from the City
of Portland, a grant from the State Department of Addiction and Mental Health, and
a small permanent loan.
FINANCING DESCRIPTION: 9% Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Tax Increment Financing from the City of Portland, permanent loan.
families coming from homelessness. The project receives a grant from the State
of Oregon to provide service-enriched housing for the homeless families. The
remainder of units are reserved for families earning 30-50% of AMI. The project
also includes a ground floor service center that houses 6 social service agencies
providing services to low income individuals and families in the community.
FINANCING DESCRIPTION: 9% Low Income Housing Tax Credits, HOME and CDBG from the city of Gresham,
New Markets Tax Credits, capital campaign permanent debt
159
PROJECT APPROACH
envelope, roof and windows. Interior improvements included new paint, carpet and
appliances. 100% of the units at the property have project-based section 8 vouchers
and are reserved for families earning 30% or less of AMI.
FINANCING DESCRIPTION: Refinanced project with a HUD-guaranteed 221d4 loan; HOME funds from the city of
Gresham
AMI and below, and a separate inpatient drug and alcohol treatment facility treating
women and their children. Achieved LEED for homes Platinum rating.
FINANCING DESCRIPTION: 9% LIHTC, project-based section 8 vouchers, tax increment financing from the city of
Portland, New Markets Tax Credits, capital campaign.
FINANCING DESCRIPTION: 9% Low Income Housing Tax Credits, tax increment financing from the city of Portland, project-based Section 8, taxable bonds and new markets tax credits
160
PROJECT APPROACH
2. IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH
Fully describe your implementation approach for each site your firm is proposing on. Describe how your solution addresses the General Guidelines for Design Review (Attachment D).
The Gerding Edlen team is committed to maintaining a smooth and efficient relationship with Sound Transit throughout the
design and construction process. Team member Hewitt is also the architect for the Capitol Hill station, and has familiarity with
both the station design and responsible individuals at Sound Transit.
In the schedule included with this proposal, we have outlined a review process with Sound Transit which identifies three key
reviews by Sound Transit. We suggest that prior to starting the first review the design team meet with the appropriate parties at
Sound Transit to look at the review process holistically, discuss potential risks, and confirm the review schedule for each site.
The first proposed review will be of the Early Design Guidance drawings set. This set will capture the conceptual design of all
of the parcels, and will describe the design intent for all of the buildings and surrounding public spaces. We propose that the
Sound Transit review set at this point will include some extra effort to define the potential points of intersection with the Capitol
Hill Station.
The second Sound Transit review will coincide with drawings prepared for the MUP submittal. This set will be reflective of
further definition of the proposed building elements and systems. It will incorporate any comments received from the Design
Review Board at the Early Design Guidance Meeting as well as comments received from Sound Transit after their initial review.
Our third scheduled review will be of the Building Permit set. This set will define all building elements, materials, critical dimensions, code compliance elements, and interfaces with Sound Transits property.
We understand that Sound Transit may request additional reviews of specific elements along the way, and the team will incorporate those reviews into our project schedule as they become known. We foresee in particular that there may be a confirmation
review of our final Construction Set prior to starting construction activities. This would be an opportunity to include construction sequencing and logistic issues in the review process.
*Note: responses to questions #3-11 have been provided to us by Howard S Wright, the General Contractor for Gerding Edlens
team, with some additional input from the design team and from the developer.
Constructing in dense urban environments takes a special mindset; specifically a mindset of awareness, flexibility, thoroughness
and communication. This is the mindset our team brings to the Capitol Hill Transit Oriented Development. The site logistics
plan below thoughtfully places barricades, wayfinding signage, and access points around the work site(s) and station entrances,
platforms and plazas in such a way to promote good mobility for both construction operations and sound transit patrons while
also keeping one safe and secure from the other. We understand that this is our first pass at a plan and we have dedicated personnel and resources to be dynamic and change and update the plan as conditions change.
Our approach to construction worker parking is multi-pronged. First we try to reduce construction worker vehicle trips to the
jobsite by encouraging use of mass transit options and /or encouraging ride sharing. We encourage our workers through the
following measures:
We will provide ORCA cards to our workers who choose to use transit.
We will assist with parking costs for employees who carpool together to the jobsite.
Additionally, on many of our urban projects we seek offsite parking options on vacant lots, at churches who typically have heavy
parking needs only on weekends, and in partnership with other institutions with available parking, and provide bussing or passes to use transit to and from these locations and the project site.
161
PROJECT APPROACH
SITE LOGISTICS GRAPHIC
The single biggest risk facing Sound Transit for the Capitol Hill TOD is engaging a team that is unqualified, unwilling, and/or
unable to identify the risks facing this development. Rest assured we are well- qualified and excited to roll up our sleeves with
you to identify the risks and, more importantly, the measures we will take to mitigate the risks throughout the development.
Below is an example of the risk register tool we use and constantly update with you manage all the elements of risk facing the
project.
162
PROJECT APPROACH
ID
D RISK
RISK TO
MITIGATION MEASURES
Public
Ensure the hoisting plan for buildings A and B have not hoisting operations at this location no loads are swung over this
location.
Deploycatchment netsat the north west side of the structure while under construction at Building A.
(note our logistics plan is deploying a covered walkway at this area)
Public
Damage to guideway
tunnel due to building
construction shoring
operations.
Sound
Transit
Interruption of Sound
Transit service due
construction team
caused utility outage.
Sound
Transit
As-builtall existing utilities, both overhead and underground. Utilize in-field surveys, laser scanning, video documenting of buried storm/sewer, etc.
Create a model of as-built information for incorporation with
our teams model to ensure no conflicts.
Deploy electronic swing and load limiting devices on our
cranes to ensure loads stay clear of power lines.
Deploy GPS monitors on excavation equipment and pre-program to provide warning when in proximity of buried utilities.
Disruption of Sound
Public, Sound
Transit patrons access
Transit
to train platforms due to
construction deliveries,
etc.
Provide intuitive wayfinding and directional signage to reduce confusion and fear.
Design construction loading zones well away from patron
access areas.
Provide safe, intuitive construction barricades leading patrons
to appropriate areas to access transit.
Delay to construction
Development
activities due to multiple Teams
developers lack of
coordination.
163
PROJECT APPROACH
5. COORDINATION PLAN
Provide a coordination plan for working with developers of all sites. Firms that propose on multiple sites should address
this item from the possible scenarios where they are awarded multiple sites or are not awarded multiple sites. Include
in your description your proposed approach to addressing disputes, mitigation and resolution among multiple develop
developers that may be building at the same time.
Communication is the key to our hub coordination plan for the Capitol Hill TOD. Howard S Wright recently completed
projects in both South Lake Union and Capitol Hill where our team, in order to deliver the project successfully, had to communicate with other development teams, link light rail, the South Lake Union Trolley, Seattle Public Utilities and Seattle City
Light. On these previous projects, all of these entities were performing projects at the same time within the same locale.
For the Capitol Hill TOD we would utilize some of the same strategies we successfully used at other similar projects, including:
Share and coordinate each others site logistics plans and be willing to make modifications to our plan to accommodate the
needs of adjacent developers.
Be prepared for and flexible enough to modify plans when necessary if it benefits the greater objective of the whole
development.
Leadership from each team should agree to meet weekly to discuss plan changes, upcoming work activities, and identify
upcoming opportunities where resource sharing may be possible.
Distribute weekly construction advisory updates detailing the following weeks major schedule activities including major
deliveries.
Push communication down to the boots-on-the-ground level to facilitate hour-by-hour coordination.
Put tower crane operators in contact with one-another for coordination of boom swings, trolley and load line locations.
Walk each others projects at regular intervals to gain perspective of neighboring site difficulties and challenges and provide
feedback and support as appropriate.
Communicate each projects Emergency Action Plan with amongst the various teams and develop a comprehensive all-site
action plan in the case of an incident affecting all sites.
Our neighborhood engagement strategy will span not only the constructon period but will also occur throughout the design
process. We will proactively communicate our progress with the neighborhood and provide a forum for feedback.
Outward communication with the neighborhood throughout the design periodwill be primarily through the Capitol Hill Seattle (CHS) blog with whom we have a close relationship. We will ask CHS to post regular updates, including schedule updates,
announcements of any public meetings or forums, and in-progress renderings of the building design. These same updates will be
posted on a project website that the team will establish, along with contact information for the developer, architect and contractor so neighbors can reach out easily with any questions. We will provide opportunities for the public to provide feedback
through social media as well in person. We will monitor the public comments and do our best to address any comments and
concerns as they arise.
At key points during the design process, we will host public meetings for the general public to learn about our proposed development, provide input and ask questions. We have found this to be the most effective way of understanding the community
concerns so that we can best address them early in our design process, and be better prepared for public Design Review Meetings. By identifying issues early on past projects, we have been able to work with any objections to proactively address alternatives and solutions.
CONSTRUCTION PERIOD:
Surprised neighbors do not make happy neighbors! Similar to the hub of our plan above, communication is the key. We engage our neighbors in multiple ways including:
Hosted neighborhood town hall meetings to update neighbors and give them a chance to speak with us face to face.
Distribution of weekly construction advisories whereby we describe upcoming work activities and major deliveries, street
and sidewalk closures and detours, expected hours of operation as well as any possible excessive noise, vibration or planned
utility outages.
Use of social media to distribute notifications.
164
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
165
TaskName
NoticeofIntenttoAward
PSA/leasenegotiations
SoundTransitBoardApprovalofPSA/lease
NoticetoProceed
DesignDocuments
ConceptDesign/ConfirmProgram
SchematicDesign(allparcels)
PreparecombinedEDGpackageallparcel
CompleteSchematicDesign
SubmitSDpackageforcostest.
DesignDevelopment(allparcels)
PrepareMUPdocumentsforeachparcel
CompleteDDdocuments
QCReview
SubmitDDpackageforcostest.
ConstructionDocuments
PrepareShoringPermitDocumentsfor
eachparcel
PrepareBuildingPermitSetforeachparcel
PrepareGMPBidSettoincludeallparcels
QCReview
GMPBidSetIssued100%CD
CompleteForConstructionSet
Duration
0days
60days
6days
0days
345days
Start
Fri12/19/14
Fri12/19/14
Fri3/13/15
Fri3/20/15
Mon3/23/15
6wks
Mon3/23/15
70days
Mon5/4/15
8wks
Mon5/4/15
6wks
Mon6/29/15
0days
Fri8/7/15
85days Mon8/10/15
8wks
Mon8/10/15
8wks
Mon10/5/15
1wk Mon11/30/15
0days
Fri12/4/15
165days Mon11/30/15
8wks Mon12/21/15
Finish
Predecessors
Fri12/19/14
Thu3/12/15 1
Fri3/20/15 2
Fri3/20/15 3
Fri7/15/16
Fri5/1/15 4
Fri8/7/15
Fri6/26/15 6
Fri8/7/15 8
Fri8/7/15 9
Fri12/4/15
Fri10/2/15 26
Fri11/27/15 12
Fri12/4/15 13
Fri12/4/15 14
Fri7/15/16
Fri2/12/16 15FS+2wks
17wks
6wks
3wks
0wks
7wks
Mon11/30/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon5/9/16
Fri5/27/16
Mon5/30/16
MasterUsePermit/DesignReview
SubmitEDGPackets
EDGMeeting
SubmitMUPDocuments(combined
submittal,separatepermitnumbersforeach
DPDZoning&LandUseReviewofMUP
SubmitDRBRecommendationPackets
DRBRecommendationMeeting
UpdateMUPtoincorporateDRBcomment
SubmitMUPCorrections
DPDreview
MUPPublication
AppealPeriod
RoutingandFinal
MUPIssued
245days
0days
0days
0wks
Fri6/26/15
Fri6/26/15
Fri8/7/15
Fri10/2/15
Fri6/3/16
Fri6/26/15 8
Fri8/7/15 25FS+6wks
Fri10/2/15 12
16wks
0days
0days
2wks
2wks
6wks
1wk
2wks
2wks
0days
Mon10/5/15
Fri1/22/16
Fri2/19/16
Mon2/22/16
Mon3/7/16
Mon3/21/16
Mon5/2/16
Mon5/9/16
Mon5/23/16
Fri6/3/16
Fri1/22/16 27
Fri1/22/16 28
Fri2/19/16 29FS+4wks
Fri3/4/16 30
Fri3/18/16 31
Fri4/29/16 32
Fri5/6/16 33
Fri5/20/16 34
Fri6/3/16 35
Fri6/3/16 36
ShoringPermit
110days
0days
100days
0wks
100days
0days
20wks
0wks
Fri2/12/16
Fri2/12/16
Mon2/15/16
Fri7/15/16
Fri3/25/16
Fri3/25/16
Mon3/28/16
Fri8/12/16
Fri7/15/16
Fri2/12/16 17
Fri7/1/16 40
Fri7/15/16 41FS+2wks
Fri8/12/16
Fri3/25/16 18
Fri8/12/16 44
Fri8/12/16 45
294days
6wks
0days
10wks
0days
6wks
20wks
0days
4wks
12wks
210days
Mon5/4/15
Mon5/4/15
Fri6/12/15
Mon6/15/15
Tue8/25/15
Wed8/26/15
Wed10/7/15
Thu2/25/16
Fri2/26/16
Fri3/25/16
Mon6/29/15
Thu6/16/16
Fri6/12/15 6
Fri6/12/15 49
Fri8/21/15 50
Tue8/25/15 51FS+2days
Tue10/6/15 52
Tue2/23/16 53
Thu2/25/16 54FS+2days
Thu3/24/16 55
Thu6/16/16 56
Fri4/15/16
AgencyMUP/DesignReview
AgencyBuildingPermits
ShoringPermitIntake
DPDReview
IssueShoringPermit
BuildingPermit
BuildingPermitIntake
DPDReview
IssueBuildingPermit
AgencyStreetUsePermit
StreetUsePermit
DevelopPreliminarySDOTPlans
Submit30%SIP
SDOTReviewPeriod
30%SIPDesignGuidanceMeeting
Prepare60%SIP
SDOTReviewPeriod
60%DesignGuidanceMeeting
60%SIPApproval
FinalSIPApproval
SoundTransitReview
SoundTransitInitialReview(EDGpackage)
SoundTransitMUPReview
SoundTransitBuildingPermitReview
3wks
3wks
3wks
627days
Mon6/29/15
Mon10/5/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon8/10/15
SDCostEstimate
DDCostEstimate
BuildingPermitCostVerification
GMPBid
NegotiateContract
ConstructionStart
ConstructionDuration
4wks
4wks
4wks
4wks
3wks
0days
374days
Mon8/10/15
Mon11/30/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon5/30/16
Mon6/27/16
Fri7/22/16
Thu7/28/16
GeneralContractor
Sep'14Oct'14 Nov'14Dec'14Jan'15 Feb'1 Mar'15Apr'15May'1 Jun'15 Jul'15 Aug'15Sep'15Oct'15 Nov'15Dec'15Jan'16 Feb'16Mar'16Apr'16May'1 Jun'16 Jul'16 Aug'16Sep'16Oct'16 Nov'16Dec'16Jan'17 Feb'1 Mar'17Apr'17May'1 Jun'17 Jul'17 Aug'17Sep'17Oct'17 Nov'17Dec'17Jan'18 Feb'1 M
12/19
NoticeofIntenttoAward
PSA/leasenegotiations
3/12
SoundTransitBoardApprovalofPSA/lease
3/20
3/20
NoticetoProceed
DesignDocuments
ConceptDesign/ConfirmProgram
5/1
PreparecombinedEDGpackageallparcels
6/26
CompleteSchematicDesign
8/7
PrepareMUPdocumentsforeachparcel
10/2
CompleteDDdocuments
11/27
QCReview
12/4
12/4
SubmitDDpackageforcostest.
PrepareShoringPermitDocumentsforeachparcel
Fri9/4/15 9
Fri12/25/15 13
Fri4/22/16 18
Fri6/24/16 21
Fri7/15/16 66
Fri7/22/16 67FS+1wk,37
Tue1/2/18 68FS+3days
2/12
PrepareBuildingPermitSetforeachparcel
3/25
PrepareGMPBidSettoincludeallparcels
5/6
QCReview
5/27
5/27
GMPBidSetIssued100%CD
CompleteForConstructionSet
7/15
Fri3/25/16 13
Fri5/6/16 18
Fri5/27/16 19
Fri5/27/16 20
Fri7/15/16 21
Fri7/17/15 8
Fri10/23/15 12
Fri4/15/16 18
Tue1/2/18
8/7
SubmitSDpackageforcostest.
MasterUsePermit/DesignReview
6/26
SubmitEDGPackets
8/7
EDGMeeting
10/2
SubmitMUPDocuments(combinedsubmittal,separatepermitnumbersforeachparcel)
DPDZoning&LandUseReviewofMUP
1/22
SubmitDRBRecommendationPackets
2/19
DRBRecommendationMeeting
UpdateMUPtoincorporateDRBcomment
3/4
SubmitMUPCorrections
3/18
DPDreview
4/29
MUPPublication
5/6
AppealPeriod
5/20
RoutingandFinal
6/3
6/3
MUPIssued
1/22
ShoringPermit
2/12
7/1
ShoringPermitIntake
7/15
DPDReview
IssueShoringPermit
BuildingPermit
3/25
DPDReview
BuildingPermitIntake
8/12
StreetUsePermit
DevelopPreliminarySDOTPlans
6/12
SDOTReviewPeriod
8/12
IssueBuildingPermit
6/12
Submit30%SIP
8/21
8/25
30%SIPDesignGuidanceMeeting
Prepare60%SIP
10/6
SDOTReviewPeriod
2/23
2/25
60%DesignGuidanceMeeting
60%SIPApproval
3/24
FinalSIPApproval
6/16
SoundTransitReview
SoundTransitInitialReview(EDGpackage)
7/17
SoundTransitMUPReview
10/23
SoundTransitBuildingPermitReview
4/15
GeneralContractor
SDCostEstimate
9/4
DDCostEstimate
12/25
BuildingPermitCostVerification
4/22
GMPBid
6/24
NegotiateContract
7/15
7/22
ConstructionStart
ConstructionDuration
1/2
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
166
TaskName
NoticeofIntenttoAward
PSA/leasenegotiations
SoundTransitBoardApprovalofPSA/lease
NoticetoProceed
DesignDocuments
ConceptDesign/ConfirmProgram
SchematicDesign(allparcels)
PreparecombinedEDGpackageallparcel
CompleteSchematicDesign
SubmitSDpackageforcostest.
DesignDevelopment(allparcels)
PrepareMUPdocumentsforeachparcel
CompleteDDdocuments
QCReview
SubmitDDpackageforcostest.
ConstructionDocuments
PrepareShoringPermitDocumentsfor
eachparcel
PrepareBuildingPermitSetforeachparcel
PrepareGMPBidSettoincludeallparcels
QCReview
GMPBidSetIssued100%CD
CompleteForConstructionSet
Duration
0days
60days
6days
0days
345days
Fri12/19/14
Fri12/19/14
Fri3/13/15
Fri3/20/15
Mon3/23/15
6wks
Mon3/23/15
70days
Mon5/4/15
8wks
Mon5/4/15
6wks
Mon6/29/15
0days
Fri8/7/15
85days Mon8/10/15
8wks
Mon8/10/15
8wks
Mon10/5/15
1wk Mon11/30/15
0days
Fri12/4/15
165days Mon11/30/15
8wks Mon12/21/15
Finish
Predecessors
Fri12/19/14
Thu3/12/15 1
Fri3/20/15 2
Fri3/20/15 3
Fri7/15/16
Fri5/1/15 4
Fri8/7/15
Fri6/26/15 6
Fri8/7/15 8
Fri8/7/15 9
Fri12/4/15
Fri10/2/15 26
Fri11/27/15 12
Fri12/4/15 13
Fri12/4/15 14
Fri7/15/16
Fri2/12/16 15FS+2wks
17wks
6wks
3wks
0wks
7wks
Mon11/30/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon5/9/16
Fri5/27/16
Mon5/30/16
MasterUsePermit/DesignReview
SubmitEDGPackets
EDGMeeting
SubmitMUPDocuments(combined
submittal,separatepermitnumbersforeach
DPDZoning&LandUseReviewofMUP
SubmitDRBRecommendationPackets
DRBRecommendationMeeting
UpdateMUPtoincorporateDRBcomment
SubmitMUPCorrections
DPDreview
MUPPublication
AppealPeriod
RoutingandFinal
MUPIssued
245days
0days
0days
0wks
Fri6/26/15
Fri6/26/15
Fri8/7/15
Fri10/2/15
Fri6/3/16
Fri6/26/15 8
Fri8/7/15 25FS+6wks
Fri10/2/15 12
16wks
0days
0days
2wks
2wks
6wks
1wk
2wks
2wks
0days
Mon10/5/15
Fri1/22/16
Fri2/19/16
Mon2/22/16
Mon3/7/16
Mon3/21/16
Mon5/2/16
Mon5/9/16
Mon5/23/16
Fri6/3/16
Fri1/22/16 27
Fri1/22/16 28
Fri2/19/16 29FS+4wks
Fri3/4/16 30
Fri3/18/16 31
Fri4/29/16 32
Fri5/6/16 33
Fri5/20/16 34
Fri6/3/16 35
Fri6/3/16 36
ShoringPermit
110days
0days
100days
0wks
100days
0days
20wks
0wks
Fri2/12/16
Fri2/12/16
Mon2/15/16
Fri7/15/16
Fri3/25/16
Fri3/25/16
Mon3/28/16
Fri8/12/16
Fri7/15/16
Fri2/12/16 17
Fri7/1/16 40
Fri7/15/16 41FS+2wks
Fri8/12/16
Fri3/25/16 18
Fri8/12/16 44
Fri8/12/16 45
294days
6wks
0days
10wks
0days
6wks
20wks
0days
4wks
12wks
155days
Mon5/4/15
Mon5/4/15
Fri6/12/15
Mon6/15/15
Tue8/25/15
Wed8/26/15
Wed10/7/15
Thu2/25/16
Fri2/26/16
Fri3/25/16
Fri9/11/15
Thu6/16/16
Fri6/12/15 6
Fri6/12/15 49
Fri8/21/15 50
Tue8/25/15 51FS+2days
Tue10/6/15 52
Tue2/23/16 53
Thu2/25/16 54FS+2days
Thu3/24/16 55
Thu6/16/16 56
Fri4/15/16
FinancingApplicationtoOfficeofHousing
OfficeofHousingAwardAnnouncement
PreapprovalDeadlinefo9%LIHTCApplication
9%LIHTCapplicationtoWSHFC
LIHTCAwardAnnouncement
0days
0days
0days
0days
0days
210days
Fri9/11/15
Fri12/4/15
Tue11/24/15
Fri1/22/16
Fri4/15/16
Mon6/29/15
SoundTransitInitialReview(EDGpackage)
SoundTransitMUPReview
SoundTransitBuildingPermitReview
3wks
3wks
3wks
591days
Mon6/29/15
Mon10/5/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon8/10/15
SDCostEstimate
DDCostEstimate
BuildingPermitCostVerification
GMPBid
NegotiateContract
ConstructionStart
ConstructionDuration
4wks
4wks
4wks
4wks
3wks
0days
338days
Mon8/10/15
Mon11/30/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon5/30/16
Mon6/27/16
Fri7/22/16
Thu7/28/16
AgencyMUP/DesignReview
AgencyBuildingPermits
ShoringPermitIntake
DPDReview
IssueShoringPermit
BuildingPermit
BuildingPermitIntake
DPDReview
IssueBuildingPermit
AgencyStreetUsePermit
StreetUsePermit
DevelopPreliminarySDOTPlans
Submit30%SIP
SDOTReviewPeriod
30%SIPDesignGuidanceMeeting
Prepare60%SIP
SDOTReviewPeriod
60%DesignGuidanceMeeting
60%SIPApproval
FinalSIPApproval
Financing
SoundTransitReview
GeneralContractor
Sep'14 Oct'14 Nov'14 Dec'14 Jan'15 Feb'15 Mar'15 Apr'15 May'15 Jun'15 Jul'15
12/19
NoticeofIntenttoAward
PSA/leasenegotiations
3/12
SoundTransitBoardApprovalofPSA/lease
3/20
3/20
NoticetoProceed
DesignDocuments
ConceptDesign/ConfirmProgram
Fri7/17/15 8
Fri10/23/15 12
Fri4/15/16 18
Mon11/13/17
Fri9/4/15 9
Fri12/25/15 13
Fri4/22/16 18
Fri6/24/16 21
Fri7/15/16 72
Fri7/22/16 73FS+1wk,37
Mon11/13/17 74FS+3days
Aug'16 Sep'16 Oct'16 Nov'16 Dec'16 Jan'17 Feb'17 Mar'17 Apr'17 May'17 Jun'17 Jul'17
5/1
PreparecombinedEDGpackageallparcels
6/26
CompleteSchematicDesign
8/7
8/7
SubmitSDpackageforcostest.
PrepareMUPdocumentsforeachparcel
10/2
CompleteDDdocuments
11/27
QCReview
12/4
12/4
SubmitDDpackageforcostest.
PrepareShoringPermitDocumentsforeachparcel
2/12
PrepareBuildingPermitSetforeachparcel
3/25
PrepareGMPBidSettoincludeallparcels
5/6
QCReview
5/27
5/27
GMPBidSetIssued100%CD
CompleteForConstructionSet
7/15
Fri3/25/16 13
Fri5/6/16 18
Fri5/27/16 19
Fri5/27/16 20
Fri7/15/16 21
Fri9/11/15
Fri12/4/15
Tue11/24/15
Fri1/22/16
Fri4/15/16
Fri4/15/16
Aug'15 Sep'15 Oct'15 Nov'15 Dec'15 Jan'16 Feb'16 Mar'16 Apr'16 May'16 Jun'16 Jul'16
MasterUsePermit/DesignReview
6/26
SubmitEDGPackets
8/7
EDGMeeting
10/2
SubmitMUPDocuments(combinedsubmittal,separatepermitnumbersforeachparcel)
DPDZoning&LandUseReviewofMUP
1/22
SubmitDRBRecommendationPackets
2/19
DRBRecommendationMeeting
UpdateMUPtoincorporateDRBcomment
3/4
SubmitMUPCorrections
3/18
DPDreview
4/29
MUPPublication
5/6
AppealPeriod
5/20
RoutingandFinal
6/3
6/3
MUPIssued
1/22
ShoringPermit
2/12
7/1
ShoringPermitIntake
DPDReview
7/15
IssueShoringPermit
BuildingPermit
3/25
DPDReview
BuildingPermitIntake
8/12
StreetUsePermit
DevelopPreliminarySDOTPlans
6/12
SDOTReviewPeriod
8/12
IssueBuildingPermit
6/12
Submit30%SIP
8/21
8/25
30%SIPDesignGuidanceMeeting
Prepare60%SIP
10/6
SDOTReviewPeriod
2/23
2/25
60%DesignGuidanceMeeting
60%SIPApproval
3/24
FinalSIPApproval
6/16
Financing
9/11
FinancingApplicationtoOfficeofHousing
12/4
OfficeofHousingAwardAnnouncement
11/24
PreapprovalDeadlinefo9%LIHTCApplication
1/22
9%LIHTCapplicationtoWSHFC
4/15
LIHTCAwardAnnouncement
SoundTransitReview
SoundTransitInitialReview(EDGpackage)
7/17
SoundTransitMUPReview
10/23
SoundTransitBuildingPermitReview
4/15
GeneralContractor
SDCostEstimate
9/4
DDCostEstimate
12/25
BuildingPermitCostVerification
4/22
GMPBid
6/24
NegotiateContract
7/15
7/22
ConstructionStart
ConstructionDuration
11/13
SCHEDULE
SITE B-SOUTH
167
TaskName
NoticeofIntenttoAward
PSA/leasenegotiations
SoundTransitBoardApprovalofPSA/lease
NoticetoProceed
DesignDocuments
ConceptDesign/ConfirmProgram
SchematicDesign(allparcels)
PreparecombinedEDGpackageallparcel
CompleteSchematicDesign
SubmitSDpackageforcostest.
DesignDevelopment(allparcels)
PrepareMUPdocumentsforeachparcel
CompleteDDdocuments
QCReview
SubmitDDpackageforcostest.
ConstructionDocuments
PrepareShoringPermitDocumentsfor
eachparcel
PrepareBuildingPermitSetforeachparcel
PrepareGMPBidSettoincludeallparcels
QCReview
GMPBidSetIssued100%CD
CompleteForConstructionSet
Duration
0days
60days
6days
0days
345days
Start
Fri12/19/14
Fri12/19/14
Fri3/13/15
Fri3/20/15
Mon3/23/15
6wks
Mon3/23/15
70days
Mon5/4/15
8wks
Mon5/4/15
6wks
Mon6/29/15
0days
Fri8/7/15
85days Mon8/10/15
8wks
Mon8/10/15
8wks
Mon10/5/15
1wk Mon11/30/15
0days
Fri12/4/15
165days Mon11/30/15
8wks Mon12/21/15
Finish
Predecessors
Fri12/19/14
Thu3/12/15 1
Fri3/20/15 2
Fri3/20/15 3
Fri7/15/16
Fri5/1/15 4
Fri8/7/15
Fri6/26/15 6
Fri8/7/15 8
Fri8/7/15 9
Fri12/4/15
Fri10/2/15 26
Fri11/27/15 12
Fri12/4/15 13
Fri12/4/15 14
Fri7/15/16
Fri2/12/16 15FS+2wks
17wks
6wks
3wks
0wks
7wks
Mon11/30/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon5/9/16
Fri5/27/16
Mon5/30/16
MasterUsePermit/DesignReview
SubmitEDGPackets
EDGMeeting
SubmitMUPDocuments(combined
submittal,separatepermitnumbersforeach
DPDZoning&LandUseReviewofMUP
SubmitDRBRecommendationPackets
DRBRecommendationMeeting
UpdateMUPtoincorporateDRBcomment
SubmitMUPCorrections
DPDreview
MUPPublication
AppealPeriod
RoutingandFinal
MUPIssued
245days
0days
0days
0wks
Fri6/26/15
Fri6/26/15
Fri8/7/15
Fri10/2/15
Fri6/3/16
Fri6/26/15 8
Fri8/7/15 25FS+6wks
Fri10/2/15 12
16wks
0days
0days
2wks
2wks
6wks
1wk
2wks
2wks
0days
Mon10/5/15
Fri1/22/16
Fri2/19/16
Mon2/22/16
Mon3/7/16
Mon3/21/16
Mon5/2/16
Mon5/9/16
Mon5/23/16
Fri6/3/16
Fri1/22/16 27
Fri1/22/16 28
Fri2/19/16 29FS+4wks
Fri3/4/16 30
Fri3/18/16 31
Fri4/29/16 32
Fri5/6/16 33
Fri5/20/16 34
Fri6/3/16 35
Fri6/3/16 36
ShoringPermit
110days
0days
100days
0wks
100days
0days
20wks
0wks
Fri2/12/16
Fri2/12/16
Mon2/15/16
Fri7/15/16
Fri3/25/16
Fri3/25/16
Mon3/28/16
Fri8/12/16
Fri7/15/16
Fri2/12/16 17
Fri7/1/16 40
Fri7/15/16 41FS+2wks
Fri8/12/16
Fri3/25/16 18
Fri8/12/16 44
Fri8/12/16 45
294days
6wks
0days
10wks
0days
6wks
20wks
0days
4wks
12wks
210days
Mon5/4/15
Mon5/4/15
Fri6/12/15
Mon6/15/15
Tue8/25/15
Wed8/26/15
Wed10/7/15
Thu2/25/16
Fri2/26/16
Fri3/25/16
Mon6/29/15
Thu6/16/16
Fri6/12/15 6
Fri6/12/15 49
Fri8/21/15 50
Tue8/25/15 51FS+2days
Tue10/6/15 52
Tue2/23/16 53
Thu2/25/16 54FS+2days
Thu3/24/16 55
Thu6/16/16 56
Fri4/15/16
AgencyMUP/DesignReview
AgencyBuildingPermits
ShoringPermitIntake
DPDReview
IssueShoringPermit
BuildingPermit
BuildingPermitIntake
DPDReview
IssueBuildingPermit
AgencyStreetUsePermit
StreetUsePermit
DevelopPreliminarySDOTPlans
Submit30%SIP
SDOTReviewPeriod
30%SIPDesignGuidanceMeeting
Prepare60%SIP
SDOTReviewPeriod
60%DesignGuidanceMeeting
60%SIPApproval
FinalSIPApproval
SoundTransitReview
3wks
3wks
3wks
599days
Mon6/29/15
Mon10/5/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon8/10/15
Fri7/17/15 8
Fri10/23/15 12
Fri4/15/16 18
Thu11/23/17
SDCostEstimate
DDCostEstimate
BuildingPermitCostVerification
GMPBid
NegotiateContract
ConstructionStart
ConstructionDuration
4wks
4wks
4wks
4wks
3wks
0days
336days
Mon8/10/15
Mon11/30/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon5/30/16
Mon6/27/16
Thu8/11/16
Thu8/11/16
Fri9/4/15 9
Fri12/25/15 13
Fri4/22/16 18
Fri6/24/16 21
Fri7/15/16 66
Thu8/11/16
Thu11/23/17 68
GeneralContractor
Sep'14Oct'14 Nov'14Dec'14 Jan'15 Feb'15Mar'15Apr'15 May'15Jun'15 Jul'15 Aug'15Sep'15Oct'15 Nov'15Dec'15 Jan'16 Feb'16Mar'16Apr'16May'16Jun'16 Jul'16 Aug'16Sep'16Oct'16 Nov'16Dec'16 Jan'17 Feb'17Mar'17Apr'17May'17Jun'17 Jul'17 Aug'17Sep'17Oct'17 Nov'17Dec'17 Jan'18 Feb'18M
12/19
NoticeofIntenttoAward
PSA/leasenegotiations
3/12
SoundTransitBoardApprovalofPSA/lease
3/20
3/20
NoticetoProceed
DesignDocuments
ConceptDesign/ConfirmProgram
5/1
PreparecombinedEDGpackageallparcels
6/26
CompleteSchematicDesign
8/7
8/7
SubmitSDpackageforcostest.
PrepareMUPdocumentsforeachparcel
10/2
CompleteDDdocuments
11/27
QCReview
12/4
12/4
SubmitDDpackageforcostest.
PrepareShoringPermitDocumentsforeachparcel
2/12
PrepareBuildingPermitSetforeachparcel
3/25
PrepareGMPBidSettoincludeallparcels
5/6
QCReview
5/27
5/27
GMPBidSetIssued100%CD
CompleteForConstructionSet
7/15
Fri3/25/16 13
Fri5/6/16 18
Fri5/27/16 19
Fri5/27/16 20
Fri7/15/16 21
SoundTransitInitialReview(EDGpackage)
SoundTransitMUPReview
SoundTransitBuildingPermitReview
MasterUsePermit/DesignReview
6/26
SubmitEDGPackets
8/7
EDGMeeting
10/2
SubmitMUPDocuments(combinedsubmittal,separatepermitnumbersforeachparcel)
DPDZoning&LandUseReviewofMUP
1/22
SubmitDRBRecommendationPackets
2/19
DRBRecommendationMeeting
UpdateMUPtoincorporateDRBcomment
3/4
SubmitMUPCorrections
3/18
DPDreview
4/29
MUPPublication
5/6
AppealPeriod
5/20
RoutingandFinal
6/3
6/3
MUPIssued
1/22
ShoringPermit
2/12
7/1
ShoringPermitIntake
7/15
DPDReview
IssueShoringPermit
BuildingPermit
3/25
DPDReview
BuildingPermitIntake
8/12
StreetUsePermit
DevelopPreliminarySDOTPlans
6/12
SDOTReviewPeriod
8/12
IssueBuildingPermit
6/12
Submit30%SIP
8/21
8/25
30%SIPDesignGuidanceMeeting
Prepare60%SIP
10/6
SDOTReviewPeriod
2/23
2/25
60%DesignGuidanceMeeting
60%SIPApproval
3/24
FinalSIPApproval
6/16
SoundTransitReview
SoundTransitInitialReview(EDGpackage)
7/17
SoundTransitMUPReview
10/23
SoundTransitBuildingPermitReview
4/15
GeneralContractor
SDCostEstimate
9/4
DDCostEstimate
12/25
BuildingPermitCostVerification
4/22
GMPBid
6/24
NegotiateContract
7/15
8/11
ConstructionStart
ConstructionDuration
11/23
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
168
TaskName
NoticeofIntenttoAward
PSA/leasenegotiations
SoundTransitBoardApprovalofPSA/lease
NoticetoProceed
DesignDocuments
ConceptDesign/ConfirmProgram
SchematicDesign(allparcels)
PreparecombinedEDGpackageallparcel
CompleteSchematicDesign
SubmitSDpackageforcostest.
DesignDevelopment(allparcels)
PrepareMUPdocumentsforeachparcel
CompleteDDdocuments
QCReview
SubmitDDpackageforcostest.
ConstructionDocuments
PrepareShoringPermitDocumentsfor
eachparcel
PrepareBuildingPermitSetforeachparcel
PrepareGMPBidSettoincludeallparcels
QCReview
GMPBidSetIssued100%CD
CompleteForConstructionSet
Duration
0days
60days
6days
0days
345days
Start
Fri12/19/14
Fri12/19/14
Fri3/13/15
Fri3/20/15
Mon3/23/15
6wks
Mon3/23/15
70days
Mon5/4/15
8wks
Mon5/4/15
6wks
Mon6/29/15
0days
Fri8/7/15
85days Mon8/10/15
8wks
Mon8/10/15
8wks
Mon10/5/15
1wk Mon11/30/15
0days
Fri12/4/15
165days Mon11/30/15
8wks Mon12/21/15
Finish
Predecessors
Fri12/19/14
Thu3/12/15 1
Fri3/20/15 2
Fri3/20/15 3
Fri7/15/16
Fri5/1/15 4
Fri8/7/15
Fri6/26/15 6
Fri8/7/15 8
Fri8/7/15 9
Fri12/4/15
Fri10/2/15 26
Fri11/27/15 12
Fri12/4/15 13
Fri12/4/15 14
Fri7/15/16
Fri2/12/16 15FS+2wks
17wks
6wks
3wks
0wks
7wks
Mon11/30/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon5/9/16
Fri5/27/16
Mon5/30/16
MasterUsePermit/DesignReview
SubmitEDGPackets
EDGMeeting
SubmitMUPDocuments(combined
submittal,separatepermitnumbersforeach
DPDZoning&LandUseReviewofMUP
SubmitDRBRecommendationPackets
DRBRecommendationMeeting
UpdateMUPtoincorporateDRBcomment
SubmitMUPCorrections
DPDreview
MUPPublication
AppealPeriod
RoutingandFinal
MUPIssued
245days
0days
0days
0wks
Fri6/26/15
Fri6/26/15
Fri8/7/15
Fri10/2/15
Fri6/3/16
Fri6/26/15 8
Fri8/7/15 25FS+6wks
Fri10/2/15 12
16wks
0days
0days
2wks
2wks
6wks
1wk
2wks
2wks
0days
Mon10/5/15
Fri1/22/16
Fri2/19/16
Mon2/22/16
Mon3/7/16
Mon3/21/16
Mon5/2/16
Mon5/9/16
Mon5/23/16
Fri6/3/16
Fri1/22/16 27
Fri1/22/16 28
Fri2/19/16 29FS+4wks
Fri3/4/16 30
Fri3/18/16 31
Fri4/29/16 32
Fri5/6/16 33
Fri5/20/16 34
Fri6/3/16 35
Fri6/3/16 36
ShoringPermit
110days
0days
100days
0wks
100days
0days
20wks
0wks
Fri2/12/16
Fri2/12/16
Mon2/15/16
Fri7/15/16
Fri3/25/16
Fri3/25/16
Mon3/28/16
Fri8/12/16
Fri7/15/16
Fri2/12/16 17
Fri7/1/16 40
Fri7/15/16 41FS+2wks
Fri8/12/16
Fri3/25/16 18
Fri8/12/16 44
Fri8/12/16 45
294days
6wks
0days
10wks
0days
6wks
20wks
0days
4wks
12wks
210days
Mon5/4/15
Mon5/4/15
Fri6/12/15
Mon6/15/15
Tue8/25/15
Wed8/26/15
Wed10/7/15
Thu2/25/16
Fri2/26/16
Fri3/25/16
Mon6/29/15
Thu6/16/16
Fri6/12/15 6
Fri6/12/15 49
Fri8/21/15 50
Tue8/25/15 51FS+2days
Tue10/6/15 52
Tue2/23/16 53
Thu2/25/16 54FS+2days
Thu3/24/16 55
Thu6/16/16 56
Fri4/15/16
SoundTransitInitialReview(EDGpackage)
SoundTransitMUPReview
SoundTransitBuildingPermitReview
3wks
3wks
3wks
534days
Mon6/29/15
Mon10/5/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon8/10/15
Fri7/17/15 8
Fri10/23/15 12
Fri4/15/16 18
Thu8/24/17
SDCostEstimate
DDCostEstimate
BuildingPermitCostVerification
GMPBid
NegotiateContract
ConstructionStart
ConstructionDuration
4wks
4wks
4wks
4wks
3wks
0days
281days
Mon8/10/15
Mon11/30/15
Mon3/28/16
Mon5/30/16
Mon6/27/16
Fri7/22/16
Thu7/28/16
AgencyMUP/DesignReview
AgencyBuildingPermits
ShoringPermitIntake
DPDReview
IssueShoringPermit
BuildingPermit
BuildingPermitIntake
DPDReview
IssueBuildingPermit
AgencyStreetUsePermit
StreetUsePermit
DevelopPreliminarySDOTPlans
Submit30%SIP
SDOTReviewPeriod
30%SIPDesignGuidanceMeeting
Prepare60%SIP
SDOTReviewPeriod
60%DesignGuidanceMeeting
60%SIPApproval
FinalSIPApproval
SoundTransitReview
GeneralContractor
Sep'14Oct'14 Nov'14Dec'14Jan'15 Feb'1 Mar'15Apr'15May'1 Jun'15 Jul'15 Aug'15Sep'15Oct'15 Nov'15Dec'15Jan'16 Feb'16Mar'16Apr'16May'1 Jun'16 Jul'16 Aug'16Sep'16Oct'16 Nov'16Dec'16Jan'17 Feb'1 Mar'17Apr'17May'1 Jun'17 Jul'17 Aug'17Sep'17Oct'17 Nov'17Dec'17Jan'18 Feb'1 M
12/19
NoticeofIntenttoAward
PSA/leasenegotiations
3/12
SoundTransitBoardApprovalofPSA/lease
3/20
3/20
NoticetoProceed
DesignDocuments
ConceptDesign/ConfirmProgram
5/1
PreparecombinedEDGpackageallparcels
6/26
CompleteSchematicDesign
8/7
PrepareMUPdocumentsforeachparcel
10/2
CompleteDDdocuments
11/27
QCReview
12/4
12/4
SubmitDDpackageforcostest.
PrepareShoringPermitDocumentsforeachparcel
2/12
PrepareBuildingPermitSetforeachparcel
3/25
PrepareGMPBidSettoincludeallparcels
5/6
QCReview
5/27
5/27
GMPBidSetIssued100%CD
CompleteForConstructionSet
7/15
Fri3/25/16 13
Fri5/6/16 18
Fri5/27/16 19
Fri5/27/16 20
Fri7/15/16 21
Fri9/4/15 9
Fri12/25/15 13
Fri4/22/16 18
Fri6/24/16 21
Fri7/15/16 66
Fri7/22/16 67FS+1wk,37
Thu8/24/17 68FS+3days
8/7
SubmitSDpackageforcostest.
MasterUsePermit/DesignReview
6/26
SubmitEDGPackets
8/7
EDGMeeting
10/2
SubmitMUPDocuments(combinedsubmittal,separatepermitnumbersforeachparcel)
DPDZoning&LandUseReviewofMUP
1/22
SubmitDRBRecommendationPackets
2/19
DRBRecommendationMeeting
UpdateMUPtoincorporateDRBcomment
3/4
SubmitMUPCorrections
3/18
DPDreview
4/29
MUPPublication
5/6
AppealPeriod
5/20
RoutingandFinal
6/3
6/3
MUPIssued
1/22
ShoringPermit
2/12
7/1
ShoringPermitIntake
7/15
DPDReview
IssueShoringPermit
BuildingPermit
3/25
DPDReview
BuildingPermitIntake
8/12
StreetUsePermit
DevelopPreliminarySDOTPlans
6/12
SDOTReviewPeriod
8/12
IssueBuildingPermit
6/12
Submit30%SIP
8/21
8/25
30%SIPDesignGuidanceMeeting
Prepare60%SIP
10/6
SDOTReviewPeriod
2/23
2/25
60%DesignGuidanceMeeting
60%SIPApproval
3/24
FinalSIPApproval
6/16
SoundTransitReview
SoundTransitInitialReview(EDGpackage)
7/17
SoundTransitMUPReview
10/23
SoundTransitBuildingPermitReview
4/15
GeneralContractor
SDCostEstimate
9/4
DDCostEstimate
12/25
BuildingPermitCostVerification
4/22
GMPBid
6/24
NegotiateContract
7/15
7/22
ConstructionStart
ConstructionDuration
8/24
PROJECT APPROACH
8. INCIDENT DOCUMENTATION
Describe how you document incidents occurring on your project sites.
On all Howard S Wright projects we document with a formal review and investigation all incidents, from near-miss all the
way up through serious incidents. Our protocol helps us analyze many issues surrounding incidents on our sites, including root
cause.
1. Our onsite team fills out a near miss/high-potential of injury or property damage report in the event an incident occurred or
nearly occurred whereby somebody may have been seriously injured or if there was a potential for property damage.
This near-miss / hi-po report is reviewed with the entire team to facilitate lessons learned.
The report is forward to our regional safety director and if the severity of the near miss is warranted, further investigation
may be requested/required at that time.
2. Our onsite team fills out an initial incident alert and distributes it to team and up our internal chain of command for any
recordable injury. This form is meant to capture basic details about the incident and quickly communicate facts about the incident up our internal chain of command within 24 hours of the incident occurring.
3. Our onsite team follows up the initial incident alert will a full internal investigation report and utilizing our HFACS (Human Factors Analysis and Classification System) to help identify where breakdowns in protocol contributed to the incident.
9. COMMUNICATION PLAN
Describe how you plan to communicate to Sound Transit about significant incidents that may occur on your project
site(s).
We would establish a phone-tree and an email-tree chain of communication protocol whereby appropriate Sound Transit personnel would be notified of incidents according to the tree. The tree would identify the escalation level and timing for communication.
This includes receipt and adjustment of third party claims tendered to you by Sound Transit.
Our plan for handling claims submitted by third parties is very similar to the procedure outlined above for handling and communicating incidents. When a third party claim is received, our first notification is to our internal risk management director
who oversees and manages all of our insurance and surety programs. From that point, depending on the nature of the claim, we
contact Sound Transit and advise them, in a similar fashion to our phone-tree and/or email-tree methodology described above,
to describe our strategy for managing the claim to closure.
169
PROJECT APPROACH
We employ a dedicated risk management team with years of experience of administering complex construction insurance and
surety programs. Our ability to respond to any request with respect to our insurance program is no more than a phone call
away.
In addition to responses to the questions above, Gerding Edlen also requested that our structural engineer, MKA, review the
Capitol Hill Station TOD Report for the University Link Light Rail, Link Contract U240 report and provide some additional
commentary and feedback about how structural design will interface with the Sound Transit station boxes and tunnels. The
feedback below was generated by MKA.
SITE A
The team has read the Capitol Hill Station TOD Report for the University Link Light Rail, Link Contract U240, dated
November 19, 2013 and we understand there are design considerations for development adjacent to the tunnel and station
structures. The Tunnel Easement Envelope will not be encroached upon by either temporary or permanent structure as part of
the development without written approval by Sound Transit.
The developments new deep foundations will be drilled NOT driven piles. They will keep the clear distance from the tunnel
easement envelope in order not to disturb the structure and/or waterproofing for the tunnels.
For the entire site A, the additional surcharge loading from the development will be kept less than 250 psf. This will be
accomplished by substituting geofoam blocks for soil mass in critical areas and/or lightweight concrete for landscape site structures
to remain underneath this surcharge limit.
Any possible development that may need to occur over the tunnel will bridge over the tunnel envelope such that it doesnt
impose any surcharge loading in excess of those provided or any gravity or seismic loading from the adjacent foundations to
support the development. In addition, the waterproofing on top of the station box will not be disturbed. Temporary and
construction loads will also be considered for possible construction of the bridge as well.
Along the south face of the north station entry there are shallow foundations. The development will provide any required
underpinning in this area to support the structure and prevent material loss.
Coordination of the De-tensioned tiebacks at this site will be provided to ensure no damage to the adjacent tunnels structure or
waterproofing system.
SITE B-NORTH
The team has read the Capitol Hill Station TOD Report for the University Link Light Rail, Link Contract U240, dated
November 19, 2013 and we understand there are design considerations for development adjacent to the tunnel and station
structures. The Tunnel Easement Envelope will not be encroached upon by either temporary or permanent structure as part
of the development without written approval by Sound Transit.
The developments new deep foundations will be drilled NOT driven piles. They will keep the clear distance from the
tunnel easement envelope in order not to disturb the structure and/or waterproofing for the tunnels.
For the entire site B, the additional surcharge loading from the development will be kept less than 250 psf. This will be
accomplished by substituting geofoam blocks for soil mass in critical areas and/or lightweight concrete for landscape site
structures to remain underneath this surcharge limit.
Coordination of the De-tensioned tiebacks at this site will be provided to ensure no damage to the adjacent tunnels structure or
waterproofing system.
The prescribed excavation methods to protect waterproofing at the backside of the existing shoring wall will be followed.
170
PROJECT APPROACH
SITE B-SOUTH
The team has read the Capitol Hill Station TOD Report for the University Link Light Rail, Link Contract U240, dated
November 19, 2013 and we understand there are design considerations for development adjacent to the tunnel and station
structures. The Tunnel Easement Envelope will not be encroached upon by either temporary or permanent structure as part
of the development without written approval by Sound Transit.
The developments new deep foundations will be drilled NOT driven piles. They will keep the clear distance from the tunnel
easement envelope in order not to disturb the structure and/or waterproofing for the tunnels.
For the entire site B, the additional surcharge loading from the development will be kept less than 250 psf. This will be
accomplished by substituting geofoam blocks for soil mass in critical areas and/or lightweight concrete for landscape site
structures to remain underneath this surcharge limit.
Coordination of the De-tensioned tiebacks at this site will be provided to ensure no damage to the adjacent tunnels
structure or waterproofing system.
The prescribed excavation methods to protect waterproofing at the backside of the existing shoring wall will be followed.
SITE C
The team has read the Capitol Hill Station TOD Report for the University Link Light Rail, Link Contract U240, dated
November 19, 2013 and we understand there are design considerations for development adjacent to the tunnel and station
structures. The Tunnel Easement Envelope will not be encroached upon by either temporary or permanent structure as part
of the development without written approval by Sound Transit.
The developments new deep foundations will be drilled NOT driven piles. They will keep the clear distance from the tunnel
easement envelope in order not to disturb the structure and/or waterproofing for the tunnels.
For the entire site C, the additional surcharge loading from the development will be kept less than 250 psf. This will be
accomplished by substituting geofoam blocks for soil mass in critical areas and/or lightweight concrete for landscape site
structures to remain underneath this surcharge limit.
Coordination of the De-tensioned tiebacks at this site will be provided to ensure no damage to the adjacent tunnels
structure or waterproofing system.
The prescribed excavation methods to protect waterproofing at the backside of the existing shoring wall will be followed.
Along the northwest face of the south station entry there are shallow foundations. The development will provide any
required underpinning in this area to support the structure and prevent material loss.
The pedestrian tunnel lid requirements will be followed. The steel soldier piles have a limit of 20 kips factored for new
gravity loads if required for the development. 18-inch separation between grade beams and tunnel will be provided if needed
in close proximity to pedestrian tunnel for development.
Twin transit bored tunnels occur in the southeast portion of the site. The ST memo 3.1.1.1 will be followed for any
development adjacent to these tunnels.
171
TRANSACTION STRUCTURE
The below terms are applicable to proposed ground leases for sites A, B-South and C. We are not proposing a ground lease for Site
B-North.
a. Term of Lease
Lessee may propose any term up to a maximum of 75 years (including all extensions). Lessee may propose an initial term
followed by a specified number of lease extension terms.
174
TRANSACTION STRUCTURE
b. Nature of Lease
The ground lease will be an absolute net lease, with rent due free and clear of all charges and deductions. The lessee will
be responsible for paying all utilities, insurance, leasehold excise tax, maintenance and repairs.
Acknowledged.
c. Site Conditions
Lessee agrees to accept the property in its present state and condition, as-is, with all faults. Sound Transit will make information about the site
s physical and environmental conditions available for review and make the property available for a
reasonable inspection period.
Acknowledged.
The ground lease will be subject to a reservation by Sound Transit of a permanent, exclusive and irrevocable covenant,
restriction and/or easement for the operation and maintenance of Sound Transit facilities, including rights of access to its
facilities.
Sound Transit to provide advance notice of any activity that may impact Lessee tenants and to perform all operation and maintenance so as to minimize impact to surrounding development.
e. Commencement
The lease will commence upon issuance of building permit. In the event Lessee has not begun construction within one (1)
year from the issuance of building permits by the City, the lease will terminate and lessee will forfeit its security deposit.
Acknowledged.
f. Rent
Lessee should propose a rent schedule that includes the following components:
The ground lease will require a minimum base rent based on fair market value (FMV) of the property. Rent must be
prepaid or paid in advance on a monthly basis.
Base rent to be 3% of fair market value as determined by appraisal. A land lease will require higher initial returns to the
investor due to: the increase in cap rate associated with a ground lease transaction; difficulty in financing, and; most importantly, the declining value of the property the closer to lease termination.
Lessee may propose a different base rent during construction of the project.
Acknowledged.
Periodic adjustment of base rent. Re-appraisal will establish FMV of the property and fair market rent.
Acknowledged, subject to a cap on any increase so that investors do not face excessive uncertainty.
g. Security Deposit
The ground lease will require a security deposit due upon commencement equal to one (1) year of base rent.
175
TRANSACTION STRUCTURE
The lease will need to include a long notice and cure period (i.e., six months) for the lender to cure a default by the borrower/lessee. Additionally, the interest rate on loans will most likely be higher in a ground lease scenario and required additional guarantees from the borrower/lessee because lender is not in first position. This has been factored into the proposed rent.
j. Ownership of Improvements
Improvements will revert to Sound Transit at the expiration or earlier termination of the ground lease.
Acknowledged.
k. Insurance
The lessee will be required to maintain insurance typical for the project for the duration of the lease term, in amounts and
with limits determined appropriate by Sound Transit and with carriers acceptable to Sound Transit. Sound Transit must be
named as additional insured.
Acknowledged.
l. Guaranty
Sound Transit may require a third party to guarantee some or all of the obligations of the lessee, including but not limited
to construction obligations. The form of the guaranty may be a letter of credit issued by a bank in an amount and on terms
acceptable to Sound Transit and/or a guaranty from a parent entity or person determined by Sound Transit to have sufficient capital or liquidity to ensure payment.
Respectfully, the security will be the non-subordinated position with all the equity in the development.
m. Good Faith Negotiations
The terms and conditions described above will be conformed to a lease between the proposer and Sound Transit. The
parties will enter into good faith negotiations to finalize a ground lease agreement within 180 days. The ground lease is
subject to review and approval by the Sound Transit Board of Directors and FTA.
Acknowledged.
176
V. APPENDIX
A. HEWITT RESUME AND QUALIFICATIONS
B. HOWARD S. WRIGHT RESUME AND QUALIFICATIONS
C. HOUSING TOOLS
D. FARMER
S MARKET LETTER OF INTEREST
E. BRIGHT HORIZONS LETTER OF INTEREST
F. OUTSMART CO-WORKING SOLUTIONS BUSINESS PLAN
G. SITE PLANS
H. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
I. LENDER AND INVESTOR LETTERS OF INTEREST
J. RED PROPELLER MARKET SNAPSHOT REPORT
FIRM RESUME
HEWITT
The foundation
of our practice is
a focus on projects
essential to
vibrant civic life.
HEWITT will support the Gerding Edlen team in the development of the
Capitol Hill TOD while working with Schemata Workshop on master planning
efforts and design of Sites B-South and C. They are known for working with
clients to create places that elevate the urban environment and enrich the everyday
life of citizens. With 10 active projects in Capitol Hill, they brings a depth and
breadth of experience to the project with a superior understanding of the unique
qualities inherent with the site, neighborhood and project type.
The success of HEWITTs TOD and multifamily projects is thoughtful design
and determination to deliver. These projects work when they are contextually
relevant and create a unique place where inhabitants can take advantage of the
vibrancy and amenities of the neighborhood. HEWITTs projects typically
combine a wide variety of programs (residential, retail/restaurant, office/
commercial, institutional, industrial and hotels) to create authentic community
and city assets. High quality market-rate housing should meet the goals of Sound
Transit and the community, while offering appropriately sized units to support an
active and urban lifestyle, maximizing space with an efficient floor plan.
For 39 years, they have delivered innovative design, technical expertise and
responsible management skills to a diverse portfolio of residential, commercial,
civic/institutional, and transit-related projects. The firms structure is based on
a collaborative team approach. Guided by six principals, HEWITT has strong
leadership with direct principal involvement.
DATE ESTABLISHED
HEWITT was founded in 1975.
FORMER NAMES
Hewitt Architects, Inc does business as HEWITT. Former names include Hewitt/Daly Architects, P.S.; Hewitt/Daly/Isley,
P.S.; Hewitt Isley, P.S.; and Hewitt Partners, Inc.
CAPITOLHILLPROPERTIESREDEVELOPMENT
DAVID HEWITT
Founding Principal, HEWITT
David will serve as Principal-in-Charge/Design Lead on Sites B-South
and C and is personally responsible for the performance of the design team and
directly accountable to the client. He regularly participates in the public outreach
efforts, presenting at community meetings and other public events. He will lead
the design effort for HEWITT and will be continuously involved in the project
through completion. He has designed transit-oriented developments including
the Village at Overlake Station (2002), the first affordable TOD in the nation;
Redmond TOD (2008); ten capitol hill mixed-use projects (ongoing); and
affordable, low-income housing communities such as Lake City Court (2012),
Seattle Housing Authoritys greenest project to date.
PAUL SHEMA
Senior Principal, HEWITT
Paul serve as the managing principal and will lead sustainable design efforts.
He has 20 years of experience with HEWITT working directly with David
to ensure the design intent is carried through to construction. He applies his
analytical and fiscal agility to resolve complex budget and schedule issues and
serves as a steady advocate on behalf of his clients navigating them through
regulatory and contractual matters. His work includes mixed-use residential
projects in Capitol Hill, Rubix (2015), Cue (2015), Hollywood Lofts (2015) and
Lexicon (2015); a three building mixed-use complex in Green Lake (2014); and
mixed-use residential highrises, Alto (2012) and Dimension by Alta (2014).
RENE FRESQUEZ
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
DAVID HEWITT
EXCELSIOR
OWNER Madison Development Group
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Principal in Charge
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM Adaptive reuse of two character structures and new mixed-use development
SIZE 260,000 gsf
LOCATION Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA
STATUS in Construction Documents 2015
VERVE
OWNER Paragon
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Principal in Charge
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM 12-story mixed-use, urban development, LEED certified
SIZE 131,350 gsf
LOCATION Belltown, Seattle, WA
STATUS Completed 2014
RUBIX
OWNER Greg Stein
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Principal in Charge
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM mixed-use, urban development
SIZE 63,500 gsf
LOCATION Captiol Hill, Seattle, wA
STATUS in Construction 2015
CAPITOLHILLPROPERTIESREDEVELOPMENT
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
PAUL SHEMA
CUE
OWNER O&S Partners
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Managing Principal
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM new 6-story mixed-use urban development
SIZE 85,000 gsf
LOCATION Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA
STATUS in Construction 2015
HOLLYWOOD LOFTS
OWNER Ron Amundson
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Managing Principal
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM mixed-use, urban development
SIZE 24,621 gsf
LOCATION Captiol Hill, Seattle, WA
STATUS in Construction 2015
LEXICON
OWNER Ron Amundson
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Managing Principal
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM residential urban development
SIZE 57,422 gsf
LOCATION Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA
STATUS Complete October/November 2014
ALTO
OWNER Mack Urban
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Managing Principal
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM 17-story LEED Silver mixed use building
SIZE 134,000 gsf
LOCATION Belltown, Seattle, WA
STATUS Completed 2012
RAINIER STATION
OWNER Sound Transit
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL role
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture
PROGRAM at-grade light rail station
LOCATION Seattle, WA
STATUS in Design Development 2023
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
RENE FRESQUEZ
CUE
OWNER O&S Partners
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Architectural Staff
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM new 6-story mixed-use urban development
SIZE 85,000 gsf
LOCATION Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA
STATUS in Construction 2015
LEXICON
OWNER Ron Amundson
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Architectural Staff
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture and Landscape Architecture
PROGRAM residential urban development
SIZE 57,422 gsf
LOCATION Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA
STATUS Complete October/November 2014
NORTHGATE STATION
OWNER Sound Transit
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Architectural Staff
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM Architecture
PROGRAM elevated light rail station
LOCATION Northgate, Seattle, WA
STATUS in Construction Documents 2020
CAPITOLHILLPROPERTIESREDEVELOPMENT
DIMENSION BY ALTA
BELLTOWN, SEATTLE, WA
HEWITT
RESUME
DAVID HEWITT, FAIA
Biography
Davids commitment to the region is demonstrated in the many places and spaces hes designed
that celebrate the public and private realm and help create vibrant communities. Bringing his
perspective as a passionate architect and citizen, David focuses on communicating the key issues
and opportunities involved with project alternatives. He remains tuned to the clients goals and
values as he responds with insight and creativity to each set of circumstances. His leadership
skills, consensus-building approach, and design acumen serve a range of public and private clients.
He is known for designing transformative Seattle projects including: The Olympic Block in
Pioneer Square, the first new development in the historic district; Bell Harbor and the Port
Headquarters Building reinvigorated the waterfront and help position it for its next phase
following the removal of the viaduct; Belltown Court was the first full block development in
Belltown, beginning the urbanization of that neighborhood; and finally the Sound Transit Light
Rail system with stations at the Airport and Tukwila, Capitol Hill, Roosevelt, and Northgate
neighborhoods. Light rail is reshaping the face of this region.
Education
Affiliations +
Recognition
Licensure
Selected Experience
CAPITOLHILLPROPERTIESREDEVELOPMENT
RESUME
PAUL SHEMA, AIA, LEED AP
10
Biography
Pauls passion lies in making our cities better through thoughtful and sustainable architecture.
He enjoys exploring new ways for buildings to consume less energy and resources, improving
the environment to promote healthy living and more livable communities. Taking a holistic view
of the design and construction process, Paul applies his analytical and fiscal agility to resolve
complex budget and schedule issues. He serves as a steady advocate on behalf of his clients
navigating them through regulatory and contractual matters. As an architect and urban designer,
his experience includes the planning and design of both new and renovated transit facilities,
mixed-use/residential developments, and institutional projects. Pauls work has an urban focus to
provide density and improve mobility.
Education
Affiliations
Licensure
Selected Experience
RESUME
RENE FRESQUEZ
Biography
Rene has seven years of architectural experience working on residential, mixed-use, student
housing and transit projects. He is a collaborative team member providing skilled and creative
3D modeling that helps his clients visualize what their completed projects will look like. He is
involved in projects from inception to completion carrying designs from development through
building occupancy.
Education
Selected Experience
CAPITOLHILLPROPERTIESREDEVELOPMENT
11
FIRM RESUME
HOWARD S WRIGHT
We have extensive
and current
experience working
on numerous urban
sites in downtown
seattle. Through
our close working
relationships with the
jurisdictional agencies,
we successfully
plan and manage
complex, tight, and
challenging site issues
on a regular basis.
2
OUR HISTORY
With over 129 years in business, Howard S. Wright offers a rich history as a
quality builder in the west, combined with the geographic reach, greater services,
and diverse thinking of our larger parent company, Balfour Beatty Construction.
Our office has been located in Seattle for the past 75 years and our proposed
team has the knowledge of the local community, the relationships with the local
subcontractor market, and the experience working together to ensure project
success.
FORWARD THINKING
We build landmark projects, long-term relationships, and have a solid
organizational structure that supports division offices in four states. We are
continuously strengthening our in-house resources to address new challenges and
opportunities. Whether it be safety practices, construction means and methods,
or integrated processes and technologies; we are constantly searching out new and
better ways to stay ahead of the industry.
SEATTLE PRESENCE
With only a few of the many achievements listed in this proposal, the wealth of
our accomplishments is an invaluable treasure house of lessons learned. With more
than 50 ground-up projects located between the Elliott Bay waterfront and the
U-district, our accumulated knowledge of this city is unmatched.
The very individuals who are in local leadership positions in our company today,
cut their teeth on major developments in the local region. The core project team
is a highly experienced and motivated group that has their roots and livelihoods
intricately woven with the Seattle experience.
Howard S Wrights Seattle office is located at 415 1st Avenue North, Suite 400, Seattle, WA 98109
Balfour Beatty Construction Headquarters is located at 3100 McKinnon St., Seventh Floor, Dallas, TX 75201
DATE ESTABLISHED
Founded in 1885.
Howard S. Wright provides comprehensive preconstruction and construction services in a range of delivery methods from
design-build to integrated project delivery. Howard S. Wrights works for a range of clients in both public and private sectors
including mixed-use, residential, office building, hospitality, retail, education, civic, healthcare, justice, aviation and mission
critical.
PROPERTIES IN CONSTRUCTION
1007 Stewart Office | Seattle, WA | 21-story, 348,000 sf Class A office building over a 7-level below grade parking
garage | 2016
Spring District Block | Bellevue, WA| Two 11 story, Class A office buildings, each approx. 220,000 sf with associated
parking | 2014
Cornish College of the Arts Student Housing | Seattle, WA | 18 stories, 120,000 sf, and 224 residential units | 2015
1101 2nd Avenue | Seattle, WA | Core and Shell | 2014
Wells Fargo Tacoma Main 17th Floor Build-out | Tacoma, WA | tenant improvements | 2014
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
SELECT PROJECTS
TEAM MEMBER
Howard S. Wright
PROJECT
Barclay Broadway
LOCATION
Seattle, WA
VALUE
$20,138,599
FIRM ROLE
General Contractor
OWNER
Gerding Edlen
1477 NW Everett
Portland, OR 97209
502-299-6000
OWNER CONTACT
Kelly Saito
Gerding Edlen
1477 NW Everett
Portland, OR 97209
502-299-6000
SIZE
139,709 sf
STATUS
Completed 2012
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
SELECT PROJECTS
TEAM MEMBER
Howard S. Wright
PROJECT
Pine + Minor
LOCATION
Seattle, WA
VALUE
$18,355,445
FIRM ROLE
General Contractor
OWNER
Gerding Edlen
1477 NW Everett
Portland, OR 97209
502-299-6000
OWNER CONTACT
Kelly Saito
Gerding Edlen
1477 NW Everett
Portland, OR 97209
502-299-6000
SIZE
89,800 sf
STATUS
Completed 2013
Pine + Minor is a 7-story above grade, 1-story below grade mixed-use building
with a cast-in-place podium and five levels of wood framing above. This is an
urban mixed-use project on a very tight site, with 120 residential units above street
level retail and amenity space.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
SELECT PROJECTS
TEAM MEMBER
Howard S. Wright
PROJECT
Rollin Street Flats
LOCATION
Seattle, WA
VALUE
$74,300,000
FIRM ROLE
General Contractor
OWNER
Vulcan Real Estate
505 5th Ave South #900
Seattle, WA
206.342.2000
OWNER CONTACT
Andrew Clapham
(formerly with Vulcan)
Clapham & Associates
206.409.1420
SIZE
423,000 sf
STATUS
Completed 2009
TEAM MEMBER
Howard S. Wright
PROJECT
4th & Denny
LOCATION
Seattle, WA
VALUE
$31,286,000
FIRM ROLE
General Contractor
OWNER
Columbia Pacific Advisors
1910 Fairview Avenue East, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98109
206.876.3678
OWNER CONTACT
Columbia Pacific Advisors
Bill Hardt
Phone: 206.876.3678
Email: billh@col-pac.com
SIZE
199,791 sf
STATUS
Completed 2014
4th & Denny is a 13-story above grade, 4-story below grade, mixed-use cast-inplace concrete structure in the South Lake Union / Denny Triangle neighborhood
of Seattle. The project includes retail, rooftop amenity space, and a common area
terrace on level 7. The projects structure is made up of posttensioned concrete
with a window wall facade. With the projects footprint at 13,600 sf, the 14,000 sf
project site is extremely tight.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
SELECT PROJECTS
TEAM MEMBER
Howard S. Wright
PROJECT
Streetcar Lofts
LOCATION
Portland, OR
VALUE
$20,000,000
FIRM ROLE
General Contractor
SIZE
210,000 sf
STATUS
Completed 2001
Situated on an entire block in Portlands Pearl District, this 10,000 sf cast-inplace concrete structure features loft-style finishes with exposed concrete to give
the condominiums an industrial feel. The exterior skin incorporates board formed
concrete, thinshell panels and expansive gridded windows with individual balcony
doors. The condominium floors have a sound barrier membrane with a 2.5 scored
concrete topping slab. Loft dwellers in the building also experience: a lush, outdoor
courtyard, as well as 50,000 sf of commercial space and a private parking garage.
RESUME
Biography
Pauls 18 years of technical experience and fun working style bring a solid leadership structure to
the team that will be Howard S. Wrights thread of continuity from day one until well after the
building is occupied. One of Pauls main focuses will be to create that environment of teamwork,
whereby each person at the table has an equal voice. Pauls leadership ensures smart and efficient
delivery.
Education
Affiliations
DBIA
Selected Experience
BARCLAY BROADWAY
OWNER Gerding Edlen, Green Cities Fund I, LP
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Principal in charge
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM General Contractor| Cost not disclosed
PROGRAM 118-unit, mixed-use LEED Platinum apartment with retail
SIZE 132,000 sf
LOCATION Seattle, WA
STATUS Completed 2012
RESUME
Biography
Curtis is more than a numbers guy. He is a preconstruction leader with an instinct for efficient
design and planning. He brings on-the-spot guidance for immediate decisions in meetings.
No waiting and no round numbers accuracy and conviction based on 31 years of hands-on
experience including over 4 million sf of mixed use and office space and 1.2 million sf of parking.
Curtis is involved in all of our major projects, and has led the estimating/preconstruction teams
on some of the areas most complex structures. He brings an unparalleled ability to budget the
anticipated final cost based on conceptual/program documents, and provides budget control.
Curtis excels at preconstruction, value engineering and constructability review services, all of
which optimize construction budgets.
Education
Selected Experience
PINE+MINOR
OWNER Gerding Edlen, Green Cities Fund I, LP
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL Preconstruction Director
SERVICE PROVIDED BY FIRM General Contractor| Cost not disclosed
PROGRAM 8-story LEED Platinum mixed use/office/retail apartment building
SIZE 133,709 sf
LOCATION Seattle, WA
STATUS Completed 2012
10
C. HOUSING TOOLS
11
75
37
13
136 Units
29 MFTE Units
102144 nrsf
127,545
Total Units
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Actual
0%
NA
0%
#DIV/0!
NA
Studio
Baseline Affordability
Points*
Other Unit Types
Years 21 - 35
0
0
0
0
Requirement/Point Description
Score
Bonus units must make up at least 8% of the total units.FALSE
Bonus units must be income restricted for 13+ years FALSE
See point value table below.
0.0
See point value table below.
#DIV/0!
See point value table below.
0.0
Total Bonus Score: FALSE
Score
TRUE
TRUE
TRUE
171.2
3.0
174.2
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
(*Input project details into grey cells)
Requirement/Point Description
Must contain at least 132 residential units.
Must meet MFTE Requirements.
Residential NRSF must be 80% to 85% of Res GSF.
See point value table below.
See point value table below.
Total Baseline Score
0
0
0
0
Point Value by
Baseline Unit Mix Points Unit Type
Other Unit Types
0 points per unit
Studio
0.2 points per unit
One Bedroom
0.4 points per unit
Two Bedroom
2 points per unit
Three(Plus) Bedroom
5 points per unit
Actual
136 Units
NA
80% CommArea
NA
NA
472
655
867
1,210
Unit Type
Other Unit Types
Studio
One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Three(Plus) Bedroom
Total Bonus Units
Requirement/Point Definition
Meets Unit Density Requirement
Meets MFTE Requirements
Meets Common Area Requirement
Baseline Unit Mix Points
Baseline Affordability Points
Unit Type
Other Unit Types
Studio
One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Three(+) Bedroom
Total Units
Total MFTE Units
Total Res Net Rentable SF
Total Res Gross SF
Total
Bonus Units
0
0
0
0
0
0
Average Unit
Size (NRSF)
1) Enter the number of units by unit type into the 'Total Units' column. Studios must contain at least 350 net rentable square fee, and
include open one-bedroom units. Units with three or more bedrooms should be entered in as 'Three(+) Bedroom' units. Units that do not fit
into a defined category should be entered in as 'Other Unit Types'. See tables below for requirement and bonus point descriptions.
2) Enter the average net rentable square footage by unit type into the 'Average Unit Size' column. Per the MFTE program, live-work units
are treated as commercial space, therefore should not be included in a project's residential unit count, or square footage calculations.
3) Enter the number of income restricted units by unit type and Area Median Income (AMI ) level into the 'Number of Baseline Units by Type
& AMI Restriction' columns. Cells with dashed outlines indicate that particular unit type's MFTE AMI requirement. Affordability Points are not
awarded for income restricting units below 50% AMI, therefore units restricted below 50% AMI should be entered as 50% Units.
4) Enter the amount of residential Gross Square Footage (GSF) into the 'Total Residential GSF' cell (outlined in thick black).
5) For additional clarification please refer to the narrative included in the RFP.
11
75
37
13
136 Units
29 MFTE Units
102144 nrsf
127,545
Total Units
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
Actual
0%
NA
0%
#DIV/0!
NA
Studio
Baseline Affordability
Points*
Other Unit Types
Years 21 - 35
0
0
0
0
Requirement/Point Description
Score
Bonus units must make up at least 8% of the total units.FALSE
Bonus units must be income restricted for 13+ years FALSE
See point value table below.
0.0
See point value table below.
#DIV/0!
See point value table below.
0.0
Total Bonus Score: FALSE
Score
TRUE
TRUE
TRUE
171.2
135.0
306.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
(*Input project details into grey cells)
Requirement/Point Description
Must contain at least 132 residential units.
Must meet MFTE Requirements.
Residential NRSF must be 80% to 85% of Res GSF.
See point value table below.
See point value table below.
Total Baseline Score
0
0
0
0
Point Value by
Baseline Unit Mix Points Unit Type
Other Unit Types
0 points per unit
Studio
0.2 points per unit
One Bedroom
0.4 points per unit
Two Bedroom
2 points per unit
Three(Plus) Bedroom
5 points per unit
Actual
136 Units
NA
80% CommArea
NA
NA
472
655
867
1,210
Unit Type
Other Unit Types
Studio
One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Three(Plus) Bedroom
Total Bonus Units
Requirement/Point Definition
Meets Unit Density Requirement
Meets MFTE Requirements
Meets Common Area Requirement
Baseline Unit Mix Points
Baseline Affordability Points
Unit Type
Other Unit Types
Studio
One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Three(+) Bedroom
Total Units
Total MFTE Units
Total Res Net Rentable SF
Total Res Gross SF
Total
Bonus Units
0
0
0
0
0
0
Average Unit
Size (NRSF)
1) Enter the number of units by unit type into the 'Total Units' column. Studios must contain at least 350 net rentable square fee, and
include open one-bedroom units. Units with three or more bedrooms should be entered in as 'Three(+) Bedroom' units. Units that do not fit
into a defined category should be entered in as 'Other Unit Types'. See tables below for requirement and bonus point descriptions.
2) Enter the average net rentable square footage by unit type into the 'Average Unit Size' column. Per the MFTE program, live-work units
are treated as commercial space, therefore should not be included in a project's residential unit count, or square footage calculations.
3) Enter the number of income restricted units by unit type and Area Median Income (AMI ) level into the 'Number of Baseline Units by Type
& AMI Restriction' columns. Cells with dashed outlines indicate that particular unit type's MFTE AMI requirement. Affordability Points are not
awarded for income restricting units below 50% AMI, therefore units restricted below 50% AMI should be entered as 50% Units.
4) Enter the amount of residential Gross Square Footage (GSF) into the 'Total Residential GSF' cell (outlined in thick black).
5) For additional clarification please refer to the narrative included in the RFP.
Unit Type
Studio
One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Three(+) Bedroom
Total Units
Total Res Net Rent SF
Total Res Gross SF
Total Units
17
45
18
6
86 Units
57498 nrsf
71,604
Development Cost
Cost Per Unit
$19,803,757
$230,276
$ Amount
$14,749,955
$0
$3,003,358
$4,528,961
Total Sources
Cost of Land
Capitalized Reserves
Total Dev. Cost (TDC)
$22,282,274
$2,328,517
$150,000
$19,803,757
Actual
86 Units
80.2% CommArea
$230,276
23%
23%
4.2%
NA
Point Value by
Unit Type
0.2 points per unit
0.4 points per unit
2 points per unit
5 points per unit
Requirement/Point Description
Must contain at least 86 residential units.
Residential NRSF must be 80% to 85% of Res GSF.
Per WHSF/TDC per unit limits Avg. cost per unit must be less than
$240,462
OH subsidy must be less than or equal to 40% of the total development cost.
Two points are awarded for each percentage (1%) of OH subsidy below 40%.
One point awarded for each percentage (1%) below total allowed dev. Cost.
See point value table below.
Total Baseline Score
Score
TRUE
TRUE
TRUE
TRUE
17
4
87
109
D. FARMER
S MARKET LETTER OF
INTEREST
E. BRIGHT HORIZON
S LETTER OF
INTEREST
Debbie Brown
Vice President, Regional Development
Bright Horizons Childrens Centers, LLC
Email: dbrown@brighthorizons.com
Phone: 425-576-5333
WW
F. OUTSMART CO-WORKING
SOLUTIONS BUSINESS PLAN
Seattle LGBTQ Community Development and OutSmart Office Solutions have teamed up to create
OutSmart Co-working. OutSmart Co-working provides the power of place, offering non-profits and local
individuals with entrepreneurial spirit to come together in a space that fosters collaboration, innovation,
and community.
What is co-working?
If you've ever joined someone at a local coffee shop to get some work done over a latte, you have coworked. If you ever parked yourself at a friend's kitchen counter while you hammered out a killer
business plan, you have co-worked. If you've ever met up at a local dive that offers free Wi-Fi and
exchange ideas and dreams with the person sitting next to you, you've co-worked.
Co-working is about not working alone. As social creatures, our productivity and general well-being are
improved when we are around others even if we are not working on the same thing.
OutSmart Co-working
OutSmart Co-working is not just about membership options, the office hours, or the comfort of your
chair. It is about being with like-minded people in an environment where entrepreneurship is fostered,
where casual conversation in the kitchen leads to a perfect collaboration on the latest mobile app, or
neighborhood opportunity, and where working in solitude is replaced with community.
OutSmart Co-working is open to everyone and is proudly characterized by the local community and
culture of Seattles Capitol Hill neighborhood.
Pricing
Drop-in: Monday through Friday, 9 AM to 6 PM
Come in during regular business hours and pick a spot at the flex desk to get some work done. You can
drop in for the day or save some extra money by getting a 5 or 10 visit punch card.
Flex desk: $25 per day, ($10 per day for students).
WW
G. FLOOR PLANS
2b
2b
1b
1b
2b
2b
1b
1b
2b
1b
3b
1b
1b
3b
2b
1b
Building A, floor 7
not to scale
2b
1b
1b
2b
1b
2b
1b
1b
1b
3b
1b
1b
1b
2b
1b
1b
2b
1b
2b
1b
1b
3b
Building A, floor 5
not to scale
2b
1b
1b
1b
2b
2b
2b
1b
1b
1b
2b
3b
1b
2b
2b
1b
1b
1b
2b
1b
1b
Building A, floor 2
Pass-through
not to scale
Retail (A South)
Building A, floor 1
not to scale
Retail (A North)
2b
3b
2b
2b
1b
1b
1b
1b
2b
A
1b
1b
1b
1b
1b
1b
1b
3b
2b
2b
1b
1b
1b
1b
1b
Child Care
Comm
Cntr
not to scale
1b
2b
3b
1b
1b
3b
1b
1b
1b
A
2b
1b
1b
1b
1b
1b
2b
1b
UP
2b
3b
1b 1b S
2b 1b
1b
A
1b
1b
1b
1b S
1b
1b
2b
2b
3b
2b
1b
1b
Pass-through
not to scale
Outside
Play
A
Area
2b
2b
1b
2b
1b
1b
1b
1b
2b
2b
3b
Building C, floor 7
2b
2b
1b
1b
1b
2b
1b
2b
3b
2b
1b
1b
1b
Building C, floor 3
Retail
A
2b
1b
1b
Building C, floor 1M
H. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Bank of America
Community Development Banking Group
WA1-501-17-19
800 5th Avenue, 17th Floor
Seattle, WA 98104
Please note that this letter does not represent a binding offer or commitment by the Bank for the
proposed financing, nor does it define the terms and conditions of a commitment, but is an indication of
our interest in considering this project. Issuance of a commitment by the Bank is subject to full
underwriting and approval of the request under the Banks internal approval process.
If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to give me a call at (206) 358-7617.
Sincerely,
Jan Laskey
Senior Vice President
Community Development Banking Northwest
Bank of America Merrill Lynch
Bank of America, N.A.
jan.k.laskey@baml.com
In the past 3 years, Capitol Hill has experienced a tremendous amount of growth and change. This
growth and change has been fueled by the employment strength in the region and the influx of new
employees from around the country and globe. Unlike many downtown Seattle neighborhoods, Capitol
Hill has been a destination choice for residents moving into the city, specifically seeking out the most
exciting, most vibrant neighborhood in Seattle. Residents choose Capitol Hill for its vibrant nightlife
scene, myriad of top-tier dining options, walkability, proximity to downtown and major area
employment hubs, and eclectic vibe of the neighborhood. That majority of new development has been
primarily focused at the north and south ends of Broadway and in the Pike Pine Triangle/Corridor, with
less development in the zone immediately surrounding the new light rail station.
Theres a distinct difference between the new guard and the old guard of Capitol Hill. Capitol Hill
has traditionally seen a very diverse resident population ranging from the bartenders and service
workers employed on the hill to the retirees who have lived on Capitol Hill for decades. As well, Capitol
Hill has historically been the center of Seattles gay scene and continues to be a destination for the LGBT
community young and old.
Gentrification has set in in a big way on Capitol Hill, changing the face of the neighborhood from a
significantly counter-culture experience to a new upscale, trendy destination. Today Capitol Hill is a top
destination for Seattleites seeking top-notch dining venues led by Seattles top chefs as well as the
vibrant nightlife scene.
As a Seattle neighborhood, Capitol Hill is unique in so far as it truly embodies an urban neighborhood
where multi-million dollar single family homes mix with apartment buildings, retail, parks, services, and
now a major transportation hub.
Local characters/artists/service people in the lower-cost older stock apartments. This audience
segment represents the grit and character of the neighborhood who make Capitol Hill unique among
Seattle neighborhoods. They are slashers meaning that they are not defined by a single title or label
but rather have a diverse range of identities. i.e. part-time stylist at Rudys/painter/yoga instructor
A portion of this audience segment is starting to leave the hill as they become priced out of
housing options and as the community becomes more mainstream. They are heading to less
established neighborhoods such as Georgetown, Columbia City, and Beacon Hill.
New blood filling the last generation (2004-2008) of apartment (and condo) stock as well as those
moving into the plethora of new developments that started delivering in 2012.
For this fast growing group of residents, there are some consistent demographic and psychographic
trends that are fairly consistent among most new multi-family developments:
Demographics:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Tech
Retail
Finance/Legal/Professional Services
Medical doctors, nurses, medical supply
Education
Self
Student this is a rapidly growing segment of the Capitol Hill population, especially
international students (Chinese) coming to Seattle Central Community College, Seattle
University, and the University of Washington this is a well-funded audience segment
Employers:
o Amazon
o Microsoft
o Nordstrom
o Boeing
o Zillow
o Starbucks
o Swedish
o UW/SPU/SCCC
Increasingly international
o East Indian
o Asian (Chinese)
o European
Pet owners and lovers (buildings see upwards of 50% pet ownership, primarily dogs)
Car owners (may not use for daily transportation to work but used on weekends for outdoor
activities and pursuits)
Psychographics:
Note that a good portion of this audience segment will choose to stay in Capitol Hill (if they can given the
right product choices) as they age and mature through new life cycles. See below regarding future target
audience opportunities.
Whos living in Capitol Hill condominium projects today?
The last wave of development (in 2006-2008) brought several new condominium projects to Capitol Hill.
These projects were mostly concentrated at the north end of Broadway and in the Pike Pine
Triangle/Corridor and led the charge for the complete transformation of those sub-neighborhoods of
Capitol Hill. The most notable of those condominium projects include:
Condominium Residents/Buyers:
People seeking a roommate living option, both for financial and social benefit limited 2bedroom product and preferred configurations to accommodate roommates (i.e. equally
proportioned bedroom suites)
Young families with small children, wishing to remain in an urban setting to raise their kids
requiring more space and amenities conducive to raising a young child
4
Entrepreneurs and people who work from home and need more space for a home office
Maturing gay audience looking for something higher end and sophisticated in key Capitol Hill
locations that allow them access to the restaurant and shops they frequent, but not in the mix
of the younger 20 year-olds who are active in the club/bar scene (product and location needs)
Service personnel who cant afford todays market rate rents
Those who are seeking unique spaces with unique character to reflect their personal style (i.e.
lofts) and who reject the vanilla options being created today
Singles and couples looking for private outdoor space without the burden of a single family
home
What audience groups may be future targets for both rental and for-sale housing in Capitol Hill?
In considering the audience segments that are not being served today on Capitol Hill and looking
forward at the transportation options that will change the accessibility of the neighborhood, Red
Propeller believes the following audience groups may be future targets for both rental and for-sale
housing in Capitol Hill. In general we believe that buyers and renters share most commonalities but may
just be in varying life stages and financial capacity:
Todays new blood resident looking to grow in the neighborhood as they enter their next life
stages
Current residents of South Lake Union who have landed in apartments near work but as they get
acquainted with Seattle living will seek more dynamic and character neighborhoods
New young families with small children with an urban sensibility who desire an in-city home to
raise their child/children
New couples (evolving from the local single audience) who now have combined income
budgets and will be seeking a more adult living option
o Some may be split commuters where one works in-city and the other commutes to
eastside or north/south employment hubs taking advantage of new transit options
Downsizers coming out of single family homes both inside and outside the area, seeking an
urban living experience, both full and part-time. This audience will have a high expectation for
quality and space needs that live more like small homes with living, dining, and ample kitchen
spaces.
Mature gay singles and couples, choosing to buy in a more adult living experience that continues
to afford them the access to the local amenities that they cherish but without putting them in
the center of the club scene.
More UW employees and students, given the accessibility that the light rail will provide
Buyers who currently leave Capitol Hill to purchase real estate in other neighborhoods due to
the current scarcity of desirable inventory in the area
Following the RFP process, Red Propeller recommends developing a more targeted positioning strategy
for each development parcel with a specific target audience segment definition.
5
Rental Units:
Larger units (true 1-bedrooms, 2-bedrooms, and 3-bedrooms) that can accommodate young
families with a small child/children, multi-generational families, and/or roommates
Character product type i.e. lofts
Affordable units that can accommodate roommates and appeal to the slasher audience
defined above (mix of unit types studio, 1, 2, and 3 bedrooms)
Condominiums:
Condo buyers are unlikely to buy sub 600 sf. Todays market is not like the 2006 market and
buyers expectations have increased significantly and they are looking to get something better
than they can get when renting, which of course has been impacted by the uptick in finish and
quality level of todays market rate apartments.
Consideration: some people will have an aversion to dealing with an HOA, so buildings will need
to well-managed and able to operate in a relatively stress-free manner.