Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Fenty: Not Down With OPM
OPM currently has a staff of over 300 that handles major capital projects, administers construction procurement for District agencies, and provides security and protection in public buildings. "It is only appropriate that the true scope and nature of the agency's undertakings be reflected in the agency name" said DRES Director Robin-Eve Jasper.
The mayor's office did not issue guidelines for how to verbalize the new name (pronounced "drezz" or spelled out as D-R-E-S?), but did state that the change would take effect August 1st.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Pentagon City Project Gets Restacked
The two parcels in question are held by Vornado, which would sell the remaining portion of Parcel 3 to Kettler for the realization of Metropolitan Park's next stages. Vornado previously sold the part of Parcel 3, where phases 1-3, stand to Kettler. When Metropolitan Park's design guidelines were set in 2004, it called for 3,212 residential units on Parcel 3. The Pentagon City Phased Development Site Plan shortchanged Kettler, allotting 2,282 residential units and 300 hotel units. Through a little bit of density reallocation magic, Kettler can now have it's 3,212 residential units (2,282 + 930 = 3,212). That leaves Vornado with 300 hotel rooms to use, or not, on Parcel 1D, assuming the Metropolitan uses all 930 allocated residential units remaining.
The first stage of the massive development is bounded by 12th, 15th, Eads, and South Fern Streets. The Gramercy, pictured above, is a luxury rental high-rise building from Phase 1.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Interview: Michael Darby on the Watergate Auction and Monument Realty
Labels: interview, Monument Realty, PB Capital Corp.
DCMud: Tell us what is happening with the Watergate and where does Monument Realty fit in?
MD: The foreclosure auction happened and there were no bidders except for the bank, who purchased the property. Going forward we... have already put in an offer to the bank. We believe they should accept [the offer]. Whether they do or not - I can’t control what other people do, but they should accept it because we have the ability to pay more than what the bidders bid at the auction yesterday.
DCMUD: How did you feel when the gavel fell yesterday? There must have been a sense of relief.
MD: When I realized there were no legitimate bidders, bidding on the property? Yes it was a relief. I’ve spent 6 years working on this project, going through some turmoil and some unfortunate and unusual situations. So to lose it with all the knowledge and all the work we’ve done on it would have been frustrating It certainly would have left a bad feeling with me, because I know I can finish it. I’ve grown very fond of the building and the potential building.
DCMUD: You said you put in an offer - did you have an opportunity for extensive conversations with the bank previously about your future with the project?
MD: We didn’t have many conversations because previously we were partnered with Lehman Brothers. Because of Lehman Brothers's financial situation, the bank wasn't able to work with the lender to do anything. I have, through another investor that I am working with, informed the bank that we have the ability to move forward with something. But they didn’t want to talk to anybody until after the foreclosure sale. So we had to wait for that to happen before we could come back to talk to them.
DCMUD: How does monument see the development of its other large projects? Projects like Half-Street, do you feel that everything that happened with the Watergate affects them?
MD: Each one is really independent of the next. Different projects suffer in different ways depending on the financial structure, depending on what type of product they are, depending on where they are in the development cycle or process.
The Watergate, since it had a third party lender, and the lender was not Lehman Brothers, there was the potential that Lehman and we could lose [the property] to the lender, should the term of the loan run out. We were not able to pay off the loan and that is what happened. So in that situation, [the] goal was to be ready to come in after that event and try to negotiate a purchase price for the lender with whomever would be the logical partner....
The ballpark deals: Lehman and our other partner McFarlane are very heavily invested and we don’t have any firm timing yet, except of course on the office building; that’s going though the normal construction process, we don’t look at that the same way. We aren’t so involved in that aspect as the management of that development project... So that’s just an ongoing project that we have to look at in terms of what’s happening in the market today to work out the best way of creating value going forward. We’re looking at every day, trying to work out what we can do to create value going forward. As far as any of our other assets, again it depends on what the status of them are, who the lenders are, what they’re willing to do, who our equity partners are, what they’re willing to do and then whether we have other source of capital to do the best deal we can do.
MD: It’s Lehman, McFarlane and us. We dug the hole because it was cheaper to dig the hole while we were building the office building portion of the development with the thought that we would continue on at that point in time with the space available. At that point in time there was financing available-we were fine with financing. So when the world kind of stopped, the financing went away and obviously we had a hole in the ground. We managed to stabilize the hole, make sure it is at conditions satisfactory to the District of Columbia and obviously to us. At the right time we’ll begin construction again, with already having value from with what we’ve dug that ditch with. It’s stopped the project somewhat in midstream, [and] its a very visible space, which is a shame. But I’d rather stop it there rather than halfway up, or complete without any prospects of tenants. I’d rather be at this point in time than in the future. We own that property, free of debt, so we’ll sit on the property and wait for the right time to build the residential portion of the development. At that point in time, we will have created one part of the Half Street vision. And we can put in the retail that we expect to put in there and have whole bunch of great retail in line for the ball park.
In 1991 in the east end of DC we have the same situation where the Verizon Center is today, between there and 13th Street, and north of Pennsylvania Avenue was pretty much a no-man’s land and you look at it today, it’s hard to believe that there were people who wouldn’t walk in those areas at that time. It’s a vibrant area that is great and everybody loves being down there. That would be the same thing with the ball park area, it will just take time to do that based on where the market is and where the economy is.
DCMUD: How do you think your story and the story of the Watergate compares to others in the industry and other projects in this climate?
MD: I don’t know how other people have structured their financial situation with their investment partners. We always structure it in a way where we try to minimize our liability on any project in case this kind of thing happens. And we do that so that we can hold cash and be available to fight another day when things happen. To tell you honestly, this downturn is certainly has been a good thing, from the standpoint that there’s a lot of people who have lost a lot of value, however as a developer you know we can’t make money unless there are opportunities out there to create value. Where the market was prior to this downturn, was at a point where there wasn’t much value to be created. It got so heated up that I wasn’t interested in doing a lot of deals because you were betting on something that was basically false inflation. And I don’t think that’s a good way of doing business.
So that fact that the market has been affected, gives us opportunity to go out and buy if it’s at the right price, and develop properties based on the right value, the right construction costs and be able to make money again. And that’s where we started from in 1997 when we started the company and that’s where we’re back to that situation. And some ways, again its taking a little while to sort things out, [for] those opportunities to become available- and they will become available and that’s great for us. We’ve got a great team here and we’re ready to go moving forward and buy stuff and develop. It’s a good thing from that standpoint. It’s not a good thing from standpoint on the value we’ve lost of the deals we do have up and going but it is good for the future as well.
DCMUD: So you think there is definitely a future for Monument Realty in development?
MoCo Planning Board: The Results are In
Labels: Bethesda, Clarett Group, Rounds Vanduzer Architects, Shalom Baranes Architects
WMATA Buys 16-acre Ward 8 Site for Bus Depot
DC Village, an emergency shelter for families plagued by "persistent" problems such as pest infestation, was closed down as one of the Mayor's earliest acts in order to provide for "a better alternative" to homeless families; an accomplishment he had sought since his time on the DC Council.
"The project will not only bring much needed job opportunities East of the river, it will provide significant resources to off set [sic] our current budget gap" said Deputy Mayor Valerie Santos. The Metro authority will pay $6.45 million for the site, on which it plans to build a $90 million facility to house up to 114 buses serving the greater DC area, with the potential to expand service for up to 250 buses. WMATA has been negotiating the purchase since before the shelter's closure. The new garage will replace the bus depot on M Street, near the Nationals' ballpark, which Akridge and Monument Realty fought over in 2007 and 2008 and which ended in a draw, with the two developers splitting the land and razing the bus depot.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Capitol Hill School Developer Short List Narrows, Slightly
Labels: Capitol Hill, Eastern Market, Western Development
No word yet on why Western Development got the boot, nor why the elimination of one of the four remaining teams was significant. The Deputy Mayor's office issued a press release on Thursday inviting all developers (all except Western, that is) to submit "final" bids in "early August," stating that "the three proposals were the closest in line with the Capitol Hill community's preference...because they all called for a mix of neighborhood-serving retail, new housing and great public spaces." Presumably, Western failed to meet those needs. The Western team, led by local Ben Miller, who helped develop Chinatown and owns Georgetown Park, was recently heralded by the Citypaper for its concept of a nonprofit incubator which, unlike the other contestants, obviously failed to make the appropriate to-do about retail and housing around the Eastern Market site, leaving it well-funded but too fuzzy for local tastes.
The school was closed in 2007, in part to free up funds for the DCPS headquaters. Responses to the District’s request for final offers will be due in early August and a selection could be made as soon as the end of August.
How to Hide a Six-Story Office Building in Dupont
Labels: Creaser O'Brien Architects, Dupont Circle
Is it possible to hide a six-story office building on an historic street in Dupont? Two Queen Anne style rowhomes in Dupont are one step closer to having a six-story structure built behind them. Today the Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) consented to plans presented by Creaser O'Brien Architects with the caveat that the building must not be visible when standing in front of a building across the street. If something goes wrong - HPRB will demand a top floor hair cut. Eek.
The two Dupont rowhomes, 1820 and 1822 Jefferson Place NW, have long been in use as office space and are currently connected internally. The planned addition is designed to appear as a unique structure behind the two existing structures. Among the concerns raised in the HPRB staff report was the 26 feet the new structure will rise above the roofs of the original structures, the other is the proposed removal of the original brownstone stair in favor of a retractable stair with a lift in order to provide accessibility.
First, the height issue. The HPRB has a standard by which additions are allowed in historic structures if the structure is subordinate to the original structure or, in some urban areas, if the structure is separate from or behind the existing structure and can be hidden from view. One such exception was granted on the same street in 2005, and the staff report applied these same standards to the proposed project at 1820-1822 Jefferson. The architects altered the planned height as measured from the curb from 67 feet to 65 feet inches. The board passed the recommendation to adopt the staff report with the caveat that the architects do more to refine the design aspects of the planned new build, which was described as minimalist and too modest.
When the HPRB refers to an element slated for removal as a "character-defining feature," you've got problems. Proposed removal of the brownstone front stairs faced competing priorities of accessibility and historic preservation. Board members were unwilling to accept the proposed plan to remove the original stairs and decided to defer the decision until other accessible options could be found. Namely, the potential of having a lift at another location onsite that had been previously altered and therefore would not have a historic effect.
Finally, the board passed a plan to require the group to perform renovation work on the existing historic buildings, feeling this was a fair request given the "monumentality" of the proposed structure. Whoa, six-stories; NYC is rotfl at that one. Proposed renovations include installing a more historically accurate replacement door and providing more green space in the public area in front, in keeping with the appearance of the neighborhood.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
A New View in Bethesda's Woodmont Triangle?
Labels: Bethesda, Morrison Architects, new condos, Woodmont Triangle
Bethesda Safeway Reinvention, Running Out of Monikers
Labels: Bethesda, Capital Crescent Trail, Rounds Vanduzer Architects, safeway, supermarkets
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Watergate Auction Sees No Bids, PB Capital Holds Property
Labels: auction, Monument Realty, PB Capital Corp., Watergate
Ten bidders, including hotel chains and developers both US-based and international, registered, having demonstrated their $1.1 million deposit. However, the $25 million opening bid apparently was more than they were willing to bite off. Several developers remain interested in the property, including Monument, which may ultimately work with PB Capital to buy the property back and continue their plan to develop a hotel with some areas zoned for residential use.
Bethesda's 4900 Fairmont Seeks More Delays
The would-be 16-story residential project would have replaced the eateries on the corner, including Indian restaurant Haandi, with 118 units of housing at the corner of Fairmont and Norfolk Avenues. With approval of the application likely, developer 4900 Fairmont, LLC has until January of 2011 to file a site plan with the county. The project was initially approved in December of 2007; the extension request will be formally heard at the county board's July 30th meeting.
Bethesda real estate development news
Monday, July 20, 2009
Watergate Auction Tomorrow: Who Wouldn't Want a Building Adjacent to a Piece of History?
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Industry Insight: Jeff Miller
JM: We are investors in multi-family properties - both value add and ground-up development opportunities. Transactions in that market, however, are sparse. Sellers of property still expect that it’s worth what it was in 2006 during the condo conversion and development boom. Today’s economic and underwriting conditions have eroded values considerably since then, but sellers are having a hard time shaking that historic context. DCMud: Can you detail some of your past firms and projects?
JM: I was with JBG from 2000 to 2005 and with Lowe Enterprises for about a year and a half. Then I joined Trammel Crow from October of 2007 to October of 2008. When I started with JBG they were just starting to focus on residential development in the urban core. They identified six vacant sites, and I'm stressing vacant because there was no displacement of residents required to provide this very significant addition to the housing stock. There were two in the West End/Foggy Bottom, and then 1210 Mass, 13th and N, 9th and E which is now a condo called the Artisan, and a site at 6th and G called the Cosmopolitan. They were all expected to be rental apartments but today only two remains rental – the rest went condo. Many of those deals were done in joint venture with Equity Residential.
DCMud: What's your prediction for how residential development is going to shake out in DC?
JM: On the financing side, many of the larger construction lenders are out of the residential business. Some of the local banks will actually look at these deals, but they’re just not penciling right now because cap rates have risen, rents are flat, and risk capital is demanding higher returns. The condominium development market is dead, so it’s only rental properties that we’re looking at, particularly stabilized buildings in need of repositioning and renovation. We have offers being considered on those kinds of buildings, but, to date, we’ve not closed on anything. We’re looking at areas where there is already a well established and well understood market – partially because the art of financing is the storytelling that goes along with it, these neighborhoods include Columbia Heights, 14th Street, U Street, and as far east as 9th Street by Howard University. These are areas that, when the market was growing, you could see residential migration in that direction. Now that the market’s flat, it’s probably where development is going to continue once things improve.
It’s helpful to note that DC has a lot of unusual characteristics - the entitlement process, layered on top of the historic review process, layered on top of a tenants’ rights process. I think having sense of all these elements and knowing the players helps in specializing in the DC market.
DCMud: As a developer, what is your greatest frustration of building within DC's rules?
JM: Mandatory inclusionary zoning is legislation that requires, in many newly constructed buildings, that a portion of the units to be affordable. The City gives the developer some additional density to offset the additional cost for this requirement, but the affordable housing they’re asking for is not really workforce housing. It’s housing for folks at the lower end of the income spectrum and the rents are accordingly low. But sometimes giving a builder more density is not always a plus because he might have to change to a more expensive construction type, and because the city has certain height restrictions, sometimes the envelope in which you’re building can’t actually take more density. Given the huge economic burden of the affordable housing and at the legislated income levels, the extra density rarely provides a dollar for dollar offset for the requirement.
DCMud: But some would say it is worth the trade-off.
JM: Affordable housing is going to be an important goal for any urban municipality. But it needs to be balanced against the unintended consequences. The total number of affordable units the legislation might actually produce is tiny when compared to the existing affordable housing stock in the city. But the impediment to production of market rate housing, due to the legislation’s material impact to a project’s economics, means fewer income tax-paying, urban consumers that DC so desperately needs to remain vital.
Everyone thinks that developers are making money hand over fist and we’re not. We’re making risk-adjusted returns for the capital invested with us, and right now, we can’t even make those returns because of the current economic conditions. That means it’s going to take that much longer for the urban renewal to continue. We’ve done a pretty good job as a real estate business community – on the commercial, retail and residential sides – in taking areas of the city that were underutilized, and without displacing anyone, bringing jobs and residents to these neighborhoods. The Mount Vernon Triangle is just one example.
DCMud: Speaking of the Mount Vernon Triangle, you serve on the board of the area's Community Improvement District. You've worked on some prominent projects in the neighborhood, but what is the CID up to these days and what is the outlook for the MVT?
JM: CityVista is the biggest one that one I’ve worked on – 650 units, 100,000 square feet of retail with a 55,000 square foot Safeway in it. The Safeway is doing very well and, as Chairman of the Mount Vernon Triangle CID…I follow closely what’s going on there. The CID has played a crucial role in helping bring additional services and attention to this area that only a few years back was mostly a series of parking lots. The CID is focused now on providing safety and beautification services to the area, and with the help of several grants we’ve been able to upgrade the landscaping in the Triangle. As more development delivers in the Triangle, the CID will be able to provide a growing set of services.
I was involved in the development of a building for JBG called 555 Mass and, when I moved to Lowe Enterprises, I went to work right around the corner on CityVista, so I’ve been involved with the neigborhood’s revitalization for nearly ten years. CityVista has done remarkably well considering the climate we’re in right now. I understand that the lease up of the rental apartments has been brisk. The condos sold well out of the box in 2006 and then hit the headwinds, but, even so, it’s been the fastest selling project in DC.
DCMud: Of all the three jurisdictions included under the umbrella of the “the metro area,” which one do you think holds the most promise as the market begins to rebound?
JM: I really like Arlington. I can’t think of another well-established and semi-urban place that is as open-minded and thoughtful while also understanding the economic drivers of our business. They’re pro-growth and smart growth. The way they’ve been able to create density around every Metro stop is something that DC hasn’t really gotten its arms around yet. In Arlington, it’s a well-understood entitlement process and you know you’re going to have a guaranteed market…Anything along that Metro line is golden.
But, the District is good because there is no entitlement process if you are building according to the existing zoning. If you have no historic issues to deal with, you can essentially apply for a permit and start building. You don’t have anyone telling you what exterior stone to pick and commenting on architectural details like rooflines and window styles, as is the case in the remaining surrounding jurisdictions. Quality buildings begin with quality design by architects, not community activists, city planners, and elected officials. DCMud: With the market shutting down, there are a lot of developers that are no longer affiliated with a large firm. What's it like going out on your own, and what would you recommend to others? JM: I think our business is in a transition...when I first got into real estate in the early 90’s the majority of the players were smaller, entrepreneurial groups capitalized with third party joint venture partners. It transitioned to fund-based and institutional capital closer in form to investment bank or private equity funds. That transition sucked some of the excitement and entrepreneurial benefit from the development process that drew so many of us to the business in the first place and replaced it with hyper-reporting, organizational charts, and group-think decision-making. Speaking for myself only, I wanted to return to the very basics of our business – identifying opportunities, selling the dream to investors, executing a plan, and harvesting returns. To the extent I am pursuing that goal I feel extremely gratified, but as I said earlier, this is a tough market to start any kind of venture.
Washington DC commercial real estate news
Friday, July 17, 2009
Marriott Opens Hotel in Chevy Chase
Labels: chevy chase, hotel, Marriott, Wisconsin Avenue
The new Marriott Courtyard is designed to meet the Gold LEED standard set by the U.S. Green Building Council, using low-VOC materials, solar-powered trash compactor, a reflective roof, and HVAC systems that don't use ozone-depleting refrigerants. Very cool. In addition, "100 percent of its energy" will be provided from wind power through the use of renewable energy credits by purchasing energy through an alternative provider, which in turn sources energy from an assortment of wind farms. Michael Ward, VP of Development at Grosvenor, said the hoteliers expect the alternative energy to cost the hotel an estimated $6,000 per year in increased charges.
Designed as one of Marriott's "refreshing business" concepts, the hotel replaces the traditional check-in desk with "welcome podiums" (an inn-convenience?) and business-oriented lobby. The hotel was purchased in 2004 by Grosvenor Americas, managed by Bethesda-based Hospitality Partners, and operated by the Courtyard, a sub-brand of Marriott.
The original hotel was built in 1970; the new Marriott comes online at a propitious moment, with the opening of Wisconsin Place, a large mixed-use project, now beginning to open for business.
Chevy Chase real estate development news
District Opens West End to Development
Columbia Pike to Secede from VDOT in Arlington Plan
The progress Arlington is looking for is the new streetcar line (streetcars are the new blog...everyone's got one). Barbara Favola, the County Board Chairman, said taking control, "will make it easier for Arlington to ensure the transformation of Columbia Pike from a suburban highway to an urban, pedestrian focused and transit-oriented main street." The county will pay for maintenance and other expenses ranging from $180,000 to $450,000. A small price to pay for a progressive County, tired of review processes and applying for design exceptions from VDOT, which often led to project delays. Over the past 10 years, the County has spent about $12 million on capital projects along the Pike with another $9.5m slotted for the future.
Joan Morris, VDOT Public Affairs representative for Northern Virginia, told DCMud that "this was a first" but that the County's plan had been in the works for a while and VDOT had been kept abreast throughout. The project ultimately has to get approval from the Commonwealth Transportation Board, a 17-member board appointed by the governor to oversee VDOT. The board meets monthly and the Columbia Pike issue should go before it in the fall, either October or November, and barring unforeseen complications, the exchange should take place in January.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
District Seeks West End Development
Park Place Opens atop Georgia Avenue Metro
Labels: Canyon-Johnson, Donatelli, Georgia Avenue, Petworth
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
DC Passes Convention Center Hotel Bill
Labels: Convention Center, Downtown DC, hotel, Marriott, Quadrangle Development
Smart-Bike: DDOT's Transportation Plan
At a recent Zoning Commission hearing for the (much sought) Marriott convention center hotel, as the quid for the hotel's exceptions to zoning regulations, DC's Department of Transportation (DDOT) asked the developer to install a Smartbike station with a pretty $70,000 price tag. When you're already dropping $500 million on a project, one might reason $70,000 is but a speed bump on the road to development. But Conference Center Associates I, LLC, the developers, proffered alternative proposals, i.e. trees and green space, considering the lack of bicycle lanes and the unlikelihood that future occupants would opt for pedals over cars. Only one commissioner pressed the group about Smartbikes, but it raised the question of how Smartbikes fit into the larger development plan, and whether Smartbikes were now an integrated part of the District's transportation plan.
But according to DDOT Transportation Planner, Jim Sebastian, there is no written DDOT policy on Smartbikes, which came onto the scene in DC in 2008 and now has 10 locations throughout the city and over 120 bikes. Rather, Smartbikes are now just another negotiating chip the city can use to meet "transportation goals inherent in the PUD process." Similarly, DDOT requested Zipcars, which the developer agreed to. These improvements come in exchange for exceptions to sundry zoning regulations.
When DCMud raised the developer's concerns about the lack of bicycle lanes and demand in the project area, Sebastian's response was that the building projects often take years to complete and that by that time there might be more access and demand in the area. In the past 7 years, DDOT has added 37 miles of bike lanes and that's only going to increase. Maybe so, but how does DDOT determine which project would be good locations for new Smartbike stations? According to Sebastian, DDOT reviews several criteria including: population density, employment density,retail density, proximity to public transportation, bike-to-work statistics, and proximity to existing Smartbike stations.
What about that $70,000 pricetag? Sebastian was uncertain of the actual cost of individual stations (including installation and maintenance), largely because DDOT funded the first 10 stations through an advertising deal with ClearChannel, which built the new bus shelters, maintains them and uses them for ads. The ad revenue (or at least an undisclosed percentage of it) initially paid for 10 stations in the downtown area. ClearChannel runs the Smartbikes under the direction of DDOT. While DDOT continues to negotiate with ClearChannel over 90 potential additional bike locations throughout the city, they are also trying to place some of the cost on developers. Uncertain of the exact number, Sebastian estimated that DDOT has mulled adding the stations at a dozen or so projects, but only a few have made it as far as the Zoning Commission. Lots of carrots and sticks going around these days.