Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019

Guiding Principles
Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019
 GUIDING PRINCIPLES

• Maximize public benefit The overarching principle is to maximize the

greater public benefit, both on and off the Interbay Property in support of the
state interest, community goals, the local economy, and military readiness.

• Support the Washington National Guard Seamless and uninterrupted

operation of the Guard facility is the main precursory requirement upon which
any recommendations from the Committee will be dependent.

• Adopt an achievable vision The preferred vision for the Interbay Property
must be implementable and financially feasible within a schedule that
maintains military readiness.
 GUIDING PRINCIPLES

• Listen to the community and stakeholders, taking their concerns

into account as decisions are made The preferred reuse alternative for
the Interbay Property will be developed through effective public engagement
and will most closely align community, stakeholder, and government
interests.

• Leverage innovative partnerships The implementation strategy should

leverage public, private, and non-profit sector partnerships to maximize
available resources without compromising the preferred reuse alternative.

• Respond effectively to environmental constraints Recommendations

will include a transparent discussion of discovered environmental constraints
and how they will need to be addressed in any property transaction and
integrated with physical site development.
Site Constraints
Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019
 OVERVIEW

Purpose
• Identify opportunities and constraints from each discipline with a focus on
project constraints
• Provide preliminary findings to inform alternatives development

Discipline Area Specialists

Regulatory and Land Use Planning + Urban Design

Real Estate Market & Development Economics

Transportation

Environmental

Geotechnical

Infrastructure & Civil

Cultural Resources
THE INTERBAY PROPERTY CONTEXT

Key Characteristics
• Located in the Interbay
Neighborhood
• Two parcels totaling 25 acres
representing rare in-city large
acreage development site
• Currently houses Washington
National Guard
• Owned by State of
Washington
• Adjacent uses
West: BNSF and Port
South: Magnolia Bridge
East: Retail, work lofts,
vacant Port land
North: Storage, vacant
BNSF land, retail
 LAND USE & REGULATORY CONDITIONS

Purpose
• Evaluate the implications of current City policies and development
regulations on redevelopment of the Interbay Property

• Compare previous planning studies and analysis to recent changes

in surrounding land use
 LAND USE & REGULATORY CONDITIONS
Current Zone Designation
• Industrial General 2 zone (IG2 U/45)
• Maximum floor area ratio of 2.5
• A broad range of commercial uses are allowed, but with limits on floor area
• Building height limit of 45-feet only if building has commercial uses
• Residential uses are not allowed
• Project implication: Potential for zoning modification

Land Use and Neighborhood Planning

• Objective of regional MICs is to protect industrial land
• Interbay-Ship Canal is a “Strong demand/limited capacity” area
• Envision Interbay suggested mix of commercial and industrial uses for the
Property, but to also “continue to study and evaluate potential future uses”
• Project implication: Balance of planned land use and future neighborhood
investment

Environmental Design Considerations

• Liquification prone area
• Seattle Fault Tsunami risk
• Project implication: Design for resilience
 MARKET CONDITIONS

Purpose
• Evaluate real estate market conditions including property values and
demand for different potential uses including industrial, flex space,
commercial, and affordable and market rate housing.
• Inform alternatives development and evaluation using financial model
 PRELIMINARY LAND VALUE
Residential/Commercial

Triangulating
Land Value
Large Regional BINMIC
Industrial Industrial

Land SF Range $/SF Unit Range $/Unit

Residential/Commercial
BINMIC Area 12,000 sf to 44,400 sf $170 to $281 93 to 226 $31,000 to $35,500
Ballard/Queen Anne 10,000 sf to 44,500 sf $333 to $440 61 to 269 $33,800 to $94,000
Industrial
BINMIC Area 8,500 sf to 14,000 sf $65 to $105 -- --
Large Regional Industrial 12.7 acres to 21.9 acres $15 to $41 -- --
Notes: sf = square feet of land
ac = acres

• All sales are not impacted by MHA and do not have similar geotechnical issues
• Representative of finished lot sales with the exception of the large regional
industrial land sales
This analysis is not intended to be used as an estimation or prediction
of value of the Interbay Property, but merely to discuss data points that
Heartland will use in ongoing analysis.
DEVELOPMENT PIPELINE
An Evolving Interbay
• 458 multifamily units planned
• 90k sq ft of retail north of Armory
Way
• 2019-2023 pipeline shows ~800k
office sq ft planned with bulk of
space associated with Expedia
• 2 Self-storage projects recently
completed near site
• 100k industrial space on T-91
uplands
• 13k flex industrial building
completed near Fisherman’s
Terminal
Project implication
• Underscores land use evolution
 POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FEES

Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA)

• Requirement to develop affordable housing on-site or pay a fee into an
affordable housing fund
• Industrial zones are exempt from MHA
• If the site is rezoned to allow for residential and commercial uses MHA
requirements are likely
Impact Fees
• In March 2019 City Council will consider whether to amend the
Comprehensive Plan to potentially establish a transportation impact fee
program and other impact fees for parks, schools and/or fire
Project implication
A conservative analysis projects a range of Potential Land Value Impact
potential additional fees of the Interbay (Dollars per Land Square Foot)
Property if its zoning is modified Low Medium High
MHA
Residential $30 -- $53
Commercial $17 -- $32
Impact Fee
Residential $10 $21 $32
 TRANSPORTATION

Purpose
• Establish methodology for transportation analysis with agency
reviewers.
• Inventory existing and planned/programmed transportation
conditions.
• Transportation system needs.
• Opportunities and constraints.
TRANSPORTATION | NEAR-TERM
TRANSPORTATION | LONG-TERM
 TRANSPORTATION
Ballard project timeline

PLANNING DESIGN CONSTRUCTION START OF

SERVICE
2017–2022 2023–2026 2027–2035
2016 2035
Alternatives development Final route design Groundbreaking
Board identifies preferred Final station designs Construction updates
alternative* and mitigation
Procure and commission
Draft Environmental station and public art Safety education
Impact Statement
*The Sound Transit Obtain land use and Testing and pre-operations
Board identifies Final Environmental construction permits
preferred alternatives Impact Statement
Property acquisition/
and other alternatives
Board selects project Relocation
to study. to be built
Federal Record of
Decision

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Key Upcoming Dates

SAG Meeting #13 April 17 Level 3 recommendations

ELG Meeting #8 April 26 Level 3 recommendations

Sound Transit Board Identify preferred alternative

May 9
System Expansion Committee (and other EIS alternatives)
Sound Transit Board Identify preferred alternative
May 23
Full Board (and other EIS alternatives)
 TRANSPORTATION
Current Ballard Project Alignments Under Review

Interbay/Ballard Level 3 alternatives

 TRANSPORTATION
Magnolia Bridge Replacement Alternatives
Unfunded but options include:
• Alt 1: Extending an Armory Bridge
across BNSF and extending Alaskan
Way
• Alt 2: Expanding existing Dravus
crossing
• Alt 3: Replacing the Magnolia Bridge
 ENVIRONMENTAL

Purpose
• Identify potential environmental concerns at the Interbay Property
ENVIRONMENTAL
Identified Data Gaps
1. Former Navy
laundry facility
2. Underground
Storage Tank
(UST)
3. Historical oil-
water separators
4. Wash/lube rack
5. Vehicle and
equipment
storage area
6. Transformers
7. Groundwater
gradient
determination.
 GEOTECHNICAL

Purpose
• Summarize existing soil and groundwater conditions at the
Interbay Property
• Evaluate how conditions may affect future development of the site
 GEOTECHNICAL
Geologic Subsurface Sequence on Site

• The depth to groundwater at the site is estimated to range from about 3 to 10

feet below existing site grade.

• The dredge fills and marine deposits are susceptible to liquefaction and not
suitable for shallow foundation support.
 GEOTECHNICAL
Impacts of Ground Conditions on Development

Seismic Hazards – Liquefaction

• During an earthquake the dredge fills and marine deposits may liquify resulting in wide-
spread settlement of the ground surface and anything supported on it or beneath it.

Below-Grade Structures
• Groundwater at the Interbay Site exists at a relatively shallow depth below existing site
grades. Excavations that extend more than about 2 to 3 feet below the groundwater table
will require specialized construction dewatering.

Historic Landfill Environmentally Critical Area

• The northern, roughly 1/3 of the site is within a 1,000 feet of a methane producing,
abandoned landfill. Methane barriers or appropriate ventilation may be required.

Stormwater Infiltration
• Due to the relatively high groundwater table and the presence of loose fill soils (dredge
fills), stormwater infiltration will likely not be feasible at this site.

Project implications
• Development economics stressed due to extraordinary costs and time requirements
 INFRASTRUCTURE

Purpose
• To understand the current infrastructure conditions to identify
potential deficiencies in systems to support future development.
 INFRASTRUCTURE

• Utility easements run along the

eastern and western edge of
the site
• Most significant development
risk is stormwater
management. Specifically
addressing stormwater quality
which may incur additional
costs to development.
Project implications:
• Existing utility corridors impact
future development and
stormwater management is
challenged by hydrogeologic
conditions on site.
 CULTURAL RESOURCES

Purpose
• Identify previously recorded or unrecorded cultural resources in proximity to
the Interbay Property with the goal of preventing cultural resources
disruption.

Study to date
• Conducted a search of site files recorded at Washington Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP).
• Background research did not identify any previously recorded archaeological
or historic sites within the project
• Two unrecorded historic resources are within the site: the FMS and Armory
buildings.
OPPORTUNITIES & CONSTRAINTS
QUESTIONS
Alternatives Evaluation
-Proposed Methodology
Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019
 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION: OVERVIEW
Interbay Property Alternatives Evaluation Criteria Color Key
Substantially Addresses
--FUNCTION BEFORE FORM-- Somewhat Addresses

Does Not Address

Alternatives 4
Comment Alternative 1 ...Alternatives 2-5... Alternative 6
Criteria 6
Key Reference Points of Consideration
Project Economic Feasibility
Gross Land Value $115mm $0
Relocation Costs $95mm $95mm
State/Federal Need $95mm
Development Considerations
Design
Infrastructure
Transportation
Financial Facility
Market Feasibly
GeoTechical
Environmental
Military Readiness
Does it provide adequate resources for the
Financial Feasibility
relocation?

Is it realistic?

Community Goals
Does it provide affordable housing on or
Affordable housing
off Site over MHA requirements
Sense of community Does it provide a community destination?
place (Gathering places inside and out)
Does it negatively impact local traffic
Traffic
movement?
Does it integrate with planned
Multi-mobility
trasnportation investments
Environmental Does it address existing environmental
Response conditions and integrate cleanup
Economic Development
Enhances the local Does it enhance the local economy?
economy (jobs, taxes, etc)
 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION: BIG PICTURE

AC • Review Evaluation Criteria Model

Meeting 4 • Identify Preliminary Development Alternative concepts

AC • Define and finalize

Meeting 5 development alternatives
Develop
detailed
programs

AC • Evaluate alternatives
• Select a preferred
Meeting 6 alternative
Analyze
Alternatives
 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION: APPROACH
Interbay Property Alternatives Evaluation Criteria Color Key
Substantially Addresses
--FUNCTION BEFORE FORM-- Somewhat Addresses

Does Not Address

Alternatives 4
Comment Alternative 1 ...Alternatives 2-5... Alternative 6
Criteria 6
Key Reference Points of Consideration
Project Economic Feasibility
Gross Land Value $115mm $0
Relocation Costs $95mm $95mm
State/Federal Need $95mm
Development Considerations Information to be filled out by
Design
Infrastructure Project Team to inform evaluation
Transportation
Financial Facility -work done between AC #5 and AC #6-
Market Feasibly
GeoTechical
Environmental
Military Readiness
Does it provide adequate resources for the
Financial Feasibility
relocation?

Is it realistic?

Community Goals
Does it provide affordable housing on or
Affordable housing
off Site over MHA requirements
Sense of community Does it provide a community destination? To be evaluated by Advisory
place (Gathering places inside and out)
Does it negatively impact local traffic
Committee with Project Team
Traffic
movement?
Does it integrate with planned
during AC #6
Multi-mobility
trasnportation investments
Environmental Does it address existing environmental
Response conditions and integrate cleanup
Economic Development
Enhances the local Does it enhance the local economy?
economy (jobs, taxes, etc)
 Financial Facility
ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION: CRITERIA DISCUSSION
Market Feasibly
GeoTechical
Environmental
Military Readiness
Does it provide adequate resources for the
Financial Feasibility
relocation?

Is it realistic?

Community Goals
roperty Alternatives
Affordable housing
Evaluation
Does it provide Criteria
affordable housing on or
Color Key
Substantially Addresses
N BEFORE FORM-- off Site over MHA requirements
Somewhat Addresses
Sense of community Does it provide a community destination?
place (Gathering places inside and out) Does Not Address

Does it negatively impact local traffic

Traffic
omment Alternative 1 ...Alternatives 2-5... Alterna
movement?
onsideration Does it integrate with planned
ity Multi-mobility
trasnportation investments
$115mm $0
Environmental Does it address
$95mm existing environmental $95mm
Response conditions and integrate cleanup $95mm
ons
Economic Development
Enhances the local Does it enhance the local economy?
economy (jobs, taxes, etc)
--BREAK--
Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019
Concept Development
-Relevant Projects
Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019
Expedia’s new campus

Clustering parking facilities along rail to buffer interior uses from rail impacts
Expedia’s new campus

Parking Structure

Clustering parking facilities along rail to buffer interior uses from rail impacts
Expedia’s new campus

Clustering parking facilities along rail to buffer interior uses from rail impacts
The Waterfront – Vancouver • WA

Urban development adjacent to heavy rail, integration of street grid & public amenities
The Waterfront – Vancouver • WA

Urban development adjacent to heavy rail, integration of street grid & public amenities
Denver River North

Significant urban development along active rail lines/yards

Denver River North

Significant urban development along active rail lines/yards

Denver River North

Significant urban development along active rail lines/yards

Yesler Terrace Redevelopment

Building scale and design, pedestrian connections and community amenities

Yesler Terrace Redevelopment

Building scale and design, pedestrian connections and community amenities

Concept Development
-Building Type Precedents
Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019
OFFICE
Office – 6 stories
Office – 5 stories
Office – 3 stories
RESIDENTIAL
Residential – 4 stories
Residential – 5 stories
Residential mixed-use – 5 stories
Residential mixed-use – 6 stories
Residential mixed-use – 6 stories
Residential mixed-use – 6-stories
Mixed-use with big box & residential
RETAIL
Big box retail
General retail
General retail/outlet mall
Festival retail
INDUSTRIAL
Industrial/incubator building
Industrial/incubator building
Industrial/incubator building
Industrial/incubator building
INSTITUTIONAL
High school / vocational
High school / vocational
Higher education
Higher education / Research and development
Research and development
Medical / Research and development
PARKING GARAGE
Parking garage
Parking garage
Parking garage
Parking garage with retail
Parking garage with residential above and behind
PUBLIC REALM
Parking garage
Concepts Development
-Facilitated Discussion
Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019
CONCEPTS DEVELOPMENT

INTERACTIVE
DISCUSSION
Communications & Outreach
-Update

Advisory Committee Meeting #4 | March 13, 2019

COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

We are engaging a wide range of stakeholder,

including:

Community Industrial Businesses

Partner Agencies
Leaders & Groups

Elected Officials Tribes General Public

COMPLETED AND ONGOING* ACTIVITIES

• Research Interviews • Project Website Updates*

• Business Owner Outreach* • Email Updates*
• Community and • Social Media Updates*
Stakeholder Meetings*