RFQ Questions and Answers Mercer Island Commuter Parking & Town Center Mixed-Use Project update 10/4/2018 The following Qs and As include questions asked of the City by interested parties following the September 11, 2018 RFQ Pre-submission Conference and Tour #1. This list will be updated as new questions are received and answered up to the October 5, 2018, 4pm submittal deadline. QUESTIONS RECEIVED from 9/11 through 10/4/2018 Site Details 1. When does the City anticipate closing on the Tully s site? Is the Purchase and Sale Agreement available for review? The City is scheduled to close on the property in February 2019; however, the seller has the option to extend closing for an additional six months. Yes, the Purchase and Sale Agreement is available on the City s website (June 5, 2018 City Council meeting at Agenda Bill 5434). Site Details Explanation of A and B Areas 2. Explain A2 on the map A2 represents land that is owned by WSDOT and serves as an I-90 greenbelt. The City and WSDOT are discussing the terms by which the City may purchase this additional land for development below and above ground. 3. Can you Confirm that Parcel A1 (32.6K SF) is inclusive of the approximately 3.0K SF in A2? Should proposer assume A2 is available for development? What is process / timing of city control of this parcel? Area A1 (32,600 SF) includes Area A2. A2 represents land that is owned by WSDOT. The City and WSDOT are discussing the terms in which the City may purchase this additional land for development below and above ground. Timing of a potential acquisition is not yet known but respondents should consider this area as available for planning purposes. 4. Would the B areas be allowed to have a stairway or some other daylight vertical structure? All B Areas are identified for below ground development only; however, the City will explore with WSDOT (the owner of the property) about the possibility for pedestrian access on these sites. 1
5. Can areas B1 through B3 count towards the required open space? The City may count some of areas B1 and B3 towards the required public open space, depending on the design and integration into onsite public open space areas. It is unlikely that areas B1 and B3 will fully satisfy public open space requirements; these areas cannot be used for the private open space requirement. Site Details Environmental 6. Is Phase 2 of the environmental available? A Phase 2 is not available at this time. The City is currently working on a Phase 2 investigation and will share the results of this investigation with the selected development team. 7. Has the contamination migrated off-site? The City is currently working on a Phase 2 investigation and will share the results of this investigation with the selected development team. 8. Is the City paying for the remediation? How will the clean-up of the site be performed? Although the Phase 2 investigation is not completed, the City is aware that a gasoline station operated on the Tully s property for a very long time and caused contamination on the property. As the Phase 2 environmental site investigation is completed, the City will also engage in negotiations with the prior owner/operator known to have contaminated the site, BP/ARCO, in efforts to obtain recovery of site remediation costs. The likely scenario is that the contaminated soils will be removed as part of the development of the property. Site Details City Development Code 9. Which sides of the property do the daylight plane requirements affect? What are the street façade locations? Freeway? 80th? 27th? Sunset? The south and northwest sides of the property are affected by the daylight plane requirements in the Mercer Island Town Center Code (MICC 19.11.030). SE 27th Street and that portion of Sunset Highway where it intersects the property on the NW corner of the site are block frontages that require the upper level (daylight plane) setback. Daylight plane setbacks are not required from the north or east portions of the site. 10. Would the option of live/work units satisfy the commercial component of the mixed-use building? [Updated 9/27/18] No. The required commercial component needs to be retail, restaurant, or personal services (MICC 19.11.020(B)). See update below 2
The Town Center code does not require the provision of ground floor commercial use for this project. However, a ground floor commercial component is a desired component of the RFQ. In the context of addressing the RFQ, live/work units would not suffice to satisfy the commercial component; the commercial component should be retail, restaurant, or personal services. 11. Can required parking (i.e. non-commuter parking) be reduced for affordable units? Parking for residential units may be reduced (to less than 1 stall per unit) through a sitespecific parking analysis. For the purposes of responding to the RFQ, a summary of the highlevel basis for the anticipated reduction would be appropriate. The City will seek to ensure that the commuter parking will not become de facto residential parking. 12. What is process for the P to TC rezone? Can you provide a more detailed timeline of key milestones to get to Q4 2018 decision? Does the city want proposers to assume site will be developed as TC? The Planning Commission recommended on September 5 that the City Council rezone all of the land in parcels A1 and A2 and north of the former Tully s property from PI to TC. The City anticipates that the City Council will review this recommendation on October 2 and October 16, and approve the rezone on November 20. The City anticipates that proposers will assume all of the land within parcels A1 and A2 will be developed as TC. Site Details Utilities and Built Environment 13. Will there be a survey for the site? A survey will be completed and provided to the selected development team but none is available at this time. The City has provided approximate dimensions for each of the above and below ground areas available for development at http://www.mercergov.org/rfp.asp. 14. What utilities are under the site? Where are the utilities located? The City s GIS reflects the location and presence of water, stormwater, and sewer facilities on / near the site. WSDOT has indicated that CenturyLink telecommunications may also be present. Approximate mapped location of utilities are available on the City s GIS (see: RFQ Site Utilities PDF at http://www.mercergov.org/rfp.asp) 15. The WSDOT wall what s holding it? WSDOT has indicated that all of the retaining walls along the subject site are cantilever walls and no tiebacks are present. 16. Where do we ask fire department access questions? What is the fire hose length on the city s fire response vehicles? The City s Fire Marshal and Development Services department will be partnering to address Fire Department access questions. Site specific fire design requirements will be addressed once a partner has been selected. 3
17. Can you relocate the vegetation and artwork? Is the site subject to tree removal regulations? Yes - Within reason and subject to an approved design, vegetation and art work may be relocated. City Incentives 18. How much will ST contribute? What is the City s financial contribution? In addition to the land, the City will be contributing approximately $2 million from the Sound Transit Settlement Agreement Funds towards parking costs. 19. Can the City provide additional details or timeline on Priority Permitting? The City views this project as a community priority and as such will endeavor to expedite its regulatory process and anticipates committing to review timeframes as part of a binding agreement between the City and the selected development team to provide an added level of certainty and predictability. 20. Can you provide additional details of the support the City Council can provide? Does the city anticipate community support or resistance? RFQ respondents are encouraged to review the City s website (past agenda bills, Council video s, etc.) to gain an understanding of the importance and support for this project. Notwithstanding this recommendation, the City is of the belief that the community is very supportive of additional parking and a development that enhances the Town Center. General 21. Will this project be subject to prevailing wages? Will the project be subject to public open bid process? It is likely that prevailing wages will need to be provided on the public component of the commuter parking facility. The City is currently researching this matter and will respond further once a determination is made. 22. What will be the ownership structure for the project? The City contemplates owning/controlling the commuter parking spaces to be built by the selected development team, and the developer would own and operate the mixed-use development. 23. Is affordable housing required? Define affordability or workforce housing? To build a five-story building in Town Center, affordable housing is required. To comply with Town Center affordability requirements (MICC 19.11.040) and build a five-story building, the affordable housing must be either affordable at: A) 60% of median income for rental units; 4
or B) 90% of median income for ownership housing. The City works with A Regional Coalition Housing (ARCH) to establish specific rental / sale rates for affordable units. 24. Will proposals be given greater preference if more than 100 parking stalls are provided? Is shared parking allowed? RFQ respondents that are able to demonstrate the ability to build more commuter public parking will be given preference over other respondents that demonstrate the ability to deliver fewer commuter public parking spaces. Shared parking between commuter public parking spaces (outside of transit ridership hours Monday thru Friday) and other uses is anticipated. 25. Can more than the minimum required amount of affordable housing units be provided? Yes. 26. Can housing units be provided that are affordable to less than 60 percent of median income? Yes. 27. Is the list of preferences weighted? Individual preferences identified in the RFQ have not been assigned a specific weight; however, they are listed in order of importance. 28. I did not see a page limit for the RFQ response. Would you clarify if there are any page number restrictions aside from providing 5 paper copies and 1 electronic (PDF) copy. Correct, there is no page limit. 29. Is the City pursuing a street vacation for the portion of the Sunset Highway ROW that is included in the development area? Sunset Highway is located on former WSDOT property, which has been transferred to the City (the property is known as Parcel 12 ). The property is not right-of-way, though the GIS maps may show it as such for simplicity s sake; a street vacation will not be required for this development. 30. The RFQ makes clear that WSDOT is involved. What is their role in the development? Will they have any approval rights? WSDOT would be the seller or lessor of the land referenced, and the City would be the buyer or lessee. As noted in the RFQ, areas B1, B2, and B3 are for below ground parking only. The City s potential purchase of WSDOT area A2 is subject to FHWA concurrence. 5
31. The RFQ anticipates a connection to the LRT station. Since this is built over I-90, will there be any involvement by the Federal Highway Administration? There may be some coordination based on pedestrian and/or other non-motorized use connections between the anticipated mixed used development to include commuter parking and the LRT station. The City is working closely with WSDOT to clarify all legal requirements are met regarding acquisition and/or lease of WSDOT property. The type and extent of any surface improvements to WSDOT-owned areas B2 and B3 will affect the level of coordination with WSDOT and FHWA. If the greenbelt function can be maintained and no revenue generated, it is possible that only concurrence from WSDOT and FHWA would be necessary. The City s potential purchase of WSDOT area A2 is subject to FHWA concurrence. -- End of Q&A 10/4/2018 -- 6