DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS FOR

A MIXED-USE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

IN COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND

by Adam J. Morman

Practicum Advisor: Mr. Coleman Rector

A practicum thesis submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Real Estate

Baltimore, Maryland May, 2012

© 2012 Adam Morman All Rights Reserved

Page | 1 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Page | 2 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

WEST CAMPUS COMMONS A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT COLLEGE PARK, MD – PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY

Presented by:

Page | 3 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Table of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 6 Investment Summary ...... 6 Borrowing Entity ...... 7 Joint Venture Structure ...... 8 Market Opportunity ...... 8 Financing Assumptions ...... 9 II. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ...... 10 Design Considerations ...... 10 Overall Building Concept ...... 11 Proposed Retail ...... 12 Proposed Hotel ...... 12 Proposed Multi-Family Residential ...... 13 Proposed On-Site Amenities ...... 14 Proposed Building Massing and Uses ...... 14 Comparative Development Master Plan Concept ...... 16 III. SITE AND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ...... 17 Property Overview ...... 17 Review of Zoning and Master Plan ...... 19 FAR Density Calculations ...... 21 Property Location and Vicinity ...... 21 Local Attractions and Activities ...... 22 Utility Analysis...... 22 Land Use ...... 24 Development Regulations ...... 24 Site Access ...... 28 Transportation ...... 28 Purple Line Metrorail and Station ...... 30 Parking...... 33 Environmental Impact ...... 34 IV. MARKET ANALYSIS ...... 34 Demographics ...... 34 Retail Outlook ...... 35

Page | 4 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Hotel Outlook ...... 37 Apartment Outlook ...... 38 Adjacent and Nearby Projects ...... 39 College Park Projects ...... 42 College Park Area Hotels ...... 42 College Park Area Apartments ...... 43 College Park Area Retail ...... 44 V. CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS ...... 45 Construction Schedule ...... 46 VI. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ...... 47 Revenue Projections ...... 47 Other Incomes ...... 47 Discounted Cash Flow Analysis ...... 48 VII. PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 51 Development Team ...... 51 VIII. DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 55 X. Bibliography ...... 56

Page | 5 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BlueJay Development is pleased to offer the following opportunity to acquire an ownership interest in West Campus Commons, a mixed-use project located to the southwest of and adjacent to the University of Maryland College Park. The intention is to assemble multiple parcels through the purchase from three separate land owners.

Investment Summary Investment Summary Project Name: 3625 Campus Drive Location: College Park, Maryland Market / Submarket: Washington DC / College Park 17,700 SF Retail 75,000 SF Hotel (145 Keys) Development: 209,000 SF Apartments ( 200 Units) 150,000 SF Parking Structure (477 Spaces) FAR (base zoning) 0.4 FAR FAR (Max. with Bonus) 3.5 FAR FAR (Proposed) 1.93 FAR Estimated Project Cost: $120,000,000 $84,000,000 Construction / Perm Loan $5,000,000 Sponsor Equity Capital Stack: $31,000,000 Equity Partner $120,000,000 Total Investment Project IRR at 11 year Reversion: 8.30%

Investment Highlights BlueJay Development will not close on Risk Mitigation any of the properies until all properties are under contract The property is located across the street Location from the University of Maryland, College Park campus. The planned Purple Line Metro and station is proposed to come within 1,000 Metro and Public Transit feet of the proposed development site. The site is also served by several bus routes.

Page | 6 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Economic Overview Overall Project Property Type Hotel Retail Multifamily Parking Garage Building Rooms / SF / Units 145 Rooms 17,700 SF 200 Units 477 Spaces Unit Cost $145,000 / Room $200.00 / SF $185,000 / Unit $40,000 / Space Total Cost $21,025,000 $3,540,000 $37,000,000 $19,080,000 Estimated Per Unit Revenue $50,000 / Room $35.00 / SF $35,000 / Unit $2,300 / Space Estimated Per Unit Expense $27,500 / Room $5.00 / SF $7,800 / Unit $1,500 / Space Estimated Per Unit NOI $22,500 / Room $30.00 / SF $27,200 / Unit $800 / Space Estimated NOI $3,262,500 $531,000 $5,440,000 $381,600 $9,615,100 Estimated Return on Cost 15.52% 15.00% 14.70% 2.00%

Estimated Cap Rates Estimated Stabilized Values 5.00% $ 65,250,000 $ 10,620,000 $ 108,800,000 5.50% $ 59,318,182 $ 9,654,545 $ 98,909,091 6.00% $ 54,375,000 $ 8,850,000 $ 90,666,667 6.50% $ 50,192,308 $ 8,169,231 $ 83,692,308 7.00% $ 46,607,143 $ 7,585,714 $ 77,714,286 7.50% $ 43,500,000 $ 7,080,000 $ 72,533,333 8.00% $ 40,781,250 $ 6,637,500 $ 68,000,000 8.50% $ 38,382,353 $ 6,247,059 $ 64,000,000 9.00% $ 36,250,000 $ 5,900,000 $ 60,444,444

Borrowing Entity

BlueJay Development (BJD) will be looking to create a Joint Venture with associates, friends and family of BlueJay Development. The joint venture, Campus-Mowatt, LP (“Fund”) will be formed as a limited partnership. The Fund will be the only member of a single purpose entity, Campus- Mowatt, LLC (“Campus-Mowatt”). Campus-Mowatt will borrow the funds to complete the project capital structure.

Campus-Mowatt will be formed in the state of Maryland, the principal jurisdiction of BlueJay Development’s operations. The key benefits of utilizing the LLC structure is to:

1. Limit personal liability of the members of the LLC 2. Allow flexibility of the management structure 3. Pass-through taxation to avoid double taxation

Page | 7 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Joint Venture Structure

General Partner Limited Partners BlueJay Development Equity Investors (85%) (15%)

Joint Venture Campus-Mowatt, LP

Single Asset Borrowing Entity Campus-Mowatt, LLC Market Opportunity

Currently there are two parcels for sale, which are known as Parcel 34 & 35, which are owned by The Cedars, LLC. BlueJay Development believes that developing only these two parcels which are basically land-locked, will not represent the highest and best use for this or the surrounding properties. This may be a reason for this parcel not being developed thus far. BlueJay Development is known for creative solutions to help enable new projects to take place. In order to maximize the development potential at this location, a unique assemblage will be required.

The University Methodist Church currently owns a portion of land between The Cedars parcels and Campus Drive. There are also two additional parcels which would be acquired and give access to Mowatt Lane. Given the close proximity to the University of Maryland and the future Metro Station, which will be located less than 0.25 miles from the proposed development site, this site if packaged appropriately will offer a significant development opportunity.

That fact that the neighboring parcel was recently rezoned from R-55 to M-X-T, there should be an equal opportunity to rezone this property to this same zone and maximize the possible returns. The Fund intends to raise $120,000,000 million in capital, of which $36,000,000 shall be equity investments and $84,000,000 shall be from senior secured debt. In turn, the Fund’s equity shall be shall be comprised of $5,000,000 cash equity and value creation from BlueJay Development. The remaining $31,000,000 will come from additional equity investors.

BlueJay Development is confident that upon rezoning to M-X-T, as well as obtaining the necessary approvals and entitlements, significant value will be created by achieving the site’s

Page | 8 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman highest and best use while conforming to the approved master plan for the area and general plan for Prince George’s County.

Financing Assumptions

Financing Assumptions Construction Loan Permanent Loan Interest Rate Spread 250 bps Min DSCR 1.30x LIBOR 0.24% Max LTV 70% Interest Rate 2.74% Cap Rate 7.00% Term 36 mos Interest Rate 6.00% Extension Options Two 12 mo. Opts Amortization 30 Years Extension Fee 50 bps Closing Costs 2% Date of Refi 1/31/2018 Property NOI $ 9,200,000 Value $ 131,428,571 MAX LTV $ 92,000,000 Max DSCR $ 98,364,285 Max Loan $ 92,000,000 Debt Service $ 6,619,038

Sources and Uses Sources & Uses Sources

Upfront Equity 30% $ 35,405,400 Debt 70% $ 82,612,600 Total Sources $ 118,018,000

Uses Land and Closing Costs $ 19,965,000 Soft Costs $ 6,453,000 Hard Costs $ 91,600,000 Total Uses $ 118,018,000

Page | 9 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

II. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Design Considerations

The basis of this project is to utilize and Building Summary capitalize on the projected growth of the Floor Use Gross SF 1 Retail 10,000 University of Maryland, as well as the 1 Hotel 11,700 proposed Purple Line Metro station which Restaurant/Bar 2700 Pool/Fitness Center 3000 will be less than 1,000 feet away from the Business Center 500 Conference Rooms 2000 front door of this project. There is also the Management Offices 500 Lobby Area 800 neighboring project known as the Domain, Misc. Hotel Function 2200 which is slated to start construction this 1 Multi-Family Residential 13,000 Bicycle Storage 1000 year. The western portion of the University Leasing/Management Offices 1000 Fitness Center/Yoga Studio 2500 of Maryland campus is mostly undeveloped Movie Theater (Amenity) 1500 Game/Entertainment Room 1500 and as part of the long-term master plan for Common Kitchen/Lounge 1500 the campus, significant development will Business Center/Internet Café 500 Lobby Area 1000 occur along this portion of the campus. Model Units 2500 1st Floor Sub-total 34,700

Given the location of this property to 2 Hotel 15,000 2 Multi-Family Residential 42,000 campus and distance from the downtown 2nd Floor Sub-total 57,000 area, it is logical to propose a mixed-use 3 to 5 Hotel 43,500 3 to 5 Multi-Family Residential 126,000 project for this site. This project will be the 3rd through 5th Floor Sub-total 169,500 6 Hotel 12,500 closest mixed-use project to the proposed Rooms 7500 Purple Line Metro station on the west side Restaurant (Internal) 3500 Beer Garden (Outdoor) 1500 of campus. As such, the proposed project is 6 Multi-Family Residential 28,000 Residential Units 26000 proposed to include a mix of Retail Penthouse Amenity 2000 6th Floor Sub-total 40,500 (Restaurants & Small Shops), Hospitality All Floors Total 301,700 (Hotel), and Multi-Family Residential (Market Rate Apartments).

Page | 10 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Overall Building Concept

Phase 1 of this project will include a 5 to 6 story mixed-use building containing approximately 300,000 square feet of total building area. The design of the building should unite the historical relevance of the University of Maryland campus buildings, as well as include modern design treatments with lots of windows. Materials of the building façade will include clay brick, to match historical relevance of the campus and architectural periods. Also, a mix of metal and EIFS will also be proposed, in addition to tall windows.

There will be a two (2) level underground parking structure to accommodate the parking needs of this building, along with overflow parking of the adjacent United Methodist Church. An additional 73 short term parking spaces will be available at the ground level of the building. In addition to parking within the building, an additional 18 short term spaces will be proposed along the streets surrounding the building.

The ground level is proposed to have 20 foot tall ceilings, which will allow for creative use and design of the spaces. The remainder of the floors will be 10 foot ceilings, in part to make the units feel larger and feel more luxurious. The building will be built using a combination of a concrete platform above the 1st level, along with concrete and steel framing due to the size of the structure and proposed uses and amenities within this building. The building is proposed to be 6 stories tall on the side adjacent to the Domain project, with the height of the structure being 5 stories facing the existing United Methodist Church. The fifth floor of this building facing the church is proposed to be utilized as a public open space feature which spans the entire length of the building.

Page | 11 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Proposed Retail

Retail will be focused along the Campus Drive portion of the project and will contain approximately 13,000 square feet along this street level portion of the building. In addition to the retail at ground level, there is an opportunity for about 5,000 square feet of retail on the roof of the hotel.

Possible retail includes:  Tim Hortons (Coffee/Sandwich shop)  Sport Clips  Neighborhood Dry Cleaner  Ground Level Zentan Japanese Restaurant  Ground Level Upscale Sports Bar  Rooftop Restaurant and Lounge with  Outdoor Beer Garden

Proposed Hotel

The hotel be a boutique style and will have a split floor plate, with the lobby and common areas of the hotel located on the street level side of the building facing the existing church. This side of the building features a drop-off area suitable for buses, taxis, limousines, and vehicles to drop off visitors. The second through sixth floors of the hotel will be located above the retail shops located along Campus Drive.

The hotel will be geared towards the Kimpton Hotel chain and will feature approximately 135 hotel rooms. Typical hotel rooms will range in size from 300 to 500 square feet in size, with some suites up to 1000 square feet in size. The hotel will be pet friendly have a minimum of 20% of the rooms available for guests with pets. Pet owners will

Page | 12 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman have full and easy access to the rooftop public dog park, as well as assist owners with pet sitting/walking service providers.

Full list of hotel amenities include:

 Rooftop Dog Park  Fitness and Wellness Center  Restaurants  Indoor Pool  Coffee Shop  Exterior Courtyard Pool  Business Center  Courtyards and Tranquility Garden

Proposed Multi-Family Residential

Approximately 215 Multi-family housing units are proposed for this project and is projected to be market rate luxury apartments. These apartment homes will have much more to offer than just the location to Campus and the future Metro Station. With spacious studio, one bedroom, and two bedroom apartments, these luxury residences combine home, work, fitness, dining, and entertainment, walking distance from your front door. Work off the day's stress in our state-of-the-art fitness center, or beat the heat in our sparkling and relaxing pool. After working out or relaxing at the pool, retire to your apartment home, featuring a gourmet kitchen and inviting living space. All of the apartments will feature high ceilings, hardwood floors, granite countertops, stainless steel kitchen appliances, and in-home washer/dryers. The community also features a controlled access garage, with reserved parking available.

Full list of residential community amenities include:

 Rooftop Dog Park  Courtyards and Tranquility  Restaurants Garden  Coffee Shop  Common Area Penthouse  Business Center  Common Area Kitchen  Fitness and Wellness Center  Indoor Bicycle Storage  Exterior Courtyard Pool  Movie Theater  BBQ Grill and Patios  Game Room

Page | 13 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Proposed On-Site Amenities Private Amenities Floor Use Gross SF This project features an impressive list of amenities 1 Hotel Pool/Fitness Center 3000 available to hotel guests, residence homes, and the Conference Rooms 2000 neighboring community. The following charts show Business Center 500 1 Multi-Family Residential the rough breakdown of proposed amenities and Bicycle Storage 1000 Fitness Center/Yoga Studio 2500 whether the amenity is private or public. Movie Theater (Amenity) 1500 Game/Entertainment Room 1500 Common Kitchen/Lounge 1500 Business Center/Internet Café 500 Public Amenities Lobby Area 1000 Floor Use Gross SF 2 Hotel Hotel Green Roof / Courtyard 7500 1 Restaurant/Bar 3000 2 Multi-Family Residential 1 Conference Rooms 2000 Pool and Pool Decking 6500 Outdoor Plazas Green Roof / Courtyard 3000 1 Streetscape - Phase I Building 17000 1 Streetscape - Phase II Building 19000 6 Multi-Family Residential

1 Plaza - Phase II Building 9000 Penthouse Common Area 2000 6 Public Rooftop Dog Park 16000 Penthouse Outdoor Patio/BBQ 2000

Total Public Amenity 66000 Total Private Amenity 36000

Proposed Building Massing and Uses

The following images are shown to illustrate the general building massing and proposed building uses, as well as existing and proposed structures on adjacent properties. The images show both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildings of this project; however the focus of this project is currently Phase 1.

Page | 14 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

The various angles of these illustrations show different perspectives of the project as well as more detail regarding some of the proposed amenities.

Some of the main features and amenities of this project can be seen in the adjacent illustrations, and help demonstrate the list of the amenities proposed in this project.

The retail shops can be easily seen at the in this ground level view to the left, as well as the entrance to the hotel and the drop-off driveway at the side of the building.

Page | 15 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Comparative Development Master Plan Concept

As part of a design charrette performed in 2010 as part of the neighboring Domain development project, potential massing and master planning studies were performed by the developer, Design Collective, and other stakeholders in the area. As can be seen in the graphic, a church activity building is shown adjacent to the existing United Methodist Church and focused along Campus Drive.

A fundamental difference between this concept and the proposed West Campus Commons is the focus of significantly more density along Campus Drive with the West Campus Commons project. This concept below also significantly divides the properties with public roads in a manner which places significantly more density and residential units farther away from the existing main roads, campus edge and the potential Purple Line Metro Station along Campus Drive.

The West Campus Commons project will include a significantly higher density use for the properties and thus a higher and best use development, as compared to the previous design charrette concept.

Page | 16 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

III. SITE AND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

Property Overview

It is comprised of a combination of seven (7) parcels, currently owned by 3 separate land owners. This will require the outright purchase of five (5) complete parcels, and the purchase of portions of two (2) parcels. The breakdown of the existing and proposed property parcels are shown in the following charts and images. The ultimate assemblage of parcels will gross approximately 7.39 Acres and net approximately 5.94 Acres for the proposed development after proposed street right of ways are deducted. Four (4) of the properties contain an existing residence, which are all currently vacant. A large portion of the current church property is dedicated to parking. The current zoning for the properties is R-55 (One-Family Detached Residential).

The development of multi-family residential and retail in the R-55 Zone is not currently allowed by the Prince George’s County Zoning Ordinance. To allow the use by right of the zone, a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone the property will be required. A rezoning to R-10 would allow multi-family # Property Owner Property Address Parcel Tax Account Size Zone 1 University Methodist Church 3621 Campus Drive 33 2411577 4.52 Ac. R55 2 University Methodist Church 3621 Campus Drive C 2411593 0.85 Ac. R55 3 Cedars, LLC 3623 Campus Drive 34 2424737 1.87 Ac. R55 4 Cedars, LLC 3625 Campus Drive 35 2424729 1.24 Ac. R55 5 University Methodist Church 3701 Campus Drive D-1 4001913 0.08 Ac. R55 6 University Methodist Church 3701 Campus Drive D-1 4000956 0.93 Ac. R55 7 Axt Ridgely W JR & Mary L 7618 Mowatt Lane 42 2287043 1.18 Ac. R55 8 Axt Ridgely W JR & Mary L 7620 Mowatt Lane 41 2340404 0.46 Ac. R55 Total Acreage 11.12 Ac. residential development. A rezoning to M-X-T would allow # Parcel Tax Account Size Zone 1 33 2411577 1.82 Ac. MXT a combination of multi-family residential, office, retail, hotel 2 C 2411593 0.00 Ac. MXT as a mixed use transit oriented development. R-10 zoning 3 34 2424737 0.24 Ac. MXT 4 35 2424729 1.24 Ac. MXT would allow a maximum of 48 units per acre, while M-X-T 5 D-1 4001913 0.08 Ac. MXT zoning would allow between 0.4 to 8.0 FAR. Rezoning the 6 D-1 4000956 0.93 Ac. MXT 7 42 2287043 1.18 Ac. MXT properties to M-X-T is the preferred method to allow the 8 41 2340404 0.46 Ac. MXT broadest diversity of the development. The proposed Total Acreage 5.94 Ac.

Page | 17 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman development name The Domain located on the adjacent parcel was recently rezoned from R-55 to M- X-T zoning. The proposed Mosaic at Turtle Creek located to the south was recently rezoned from R-55 to R-10 zoning. Both properties are in the process of being annexed into the City of College Park.

The model of this assemblage is to acquire the land which fronts along Campus Drive from the University Methodist Church. This portion of the area will be better served by a higher density development, as well to play utilize the proposed Purple Line Metro on Campus Drive. Currently, the 3.11 Acres owned by Cedars, LLC is listed for sale. To convince the Church to sell the land adjacent to Campus Drive, it was important that they receive fair market value for the land and to give them portions of the Cedars, LLC parcel 34. They also required assurances that additional parking would be available for their use to supplement their future needs.

This scenario ultimately allows the Church to receive the most possible value for their property because the highest and best use is proposed on the portion of their property to be purchased. An additional factor important to the church is the ability to build a future activity building adjacent to the existing church building. By giving the church a portion of Parcel 34, their property then become a North-South alignment and will enable the activity building to be constructed on a portion of the site

Page | 18 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman which would have been less suited for higher density development. In the end, the Church’s future property will only 1.85 Acres smaller than their current holdings, and will receive enough money to construct their desired activity building.

Another factor of the development is the purchase of Parcels 41 and 42. This portion of the site will be part a future phase. The size of these two parcels is 1.64 Acres and will be used as part of the overall FAR calculations for the entire site. This property owner has been reluctant to sell and has been holding out for the highest possible payout. It is evident that the proposed development would garnish the highest possible value for their property. Given the fact that we did not need to utilize their property for our project or for access, there was not any significant leverage that could be held over our head in this deal. The take it or leave it deal we offered would be the highest they could likely receive both in the short and long term.

Another future opportunity could involve the existing Maryland Hillel site and incorporate a new Maryland Hillel facility within the new development. This site contains approximately 0.9 acres (39,204 sf) of land and is currently owned by Bnai Brith Hillel Building Corp Univ. of MD. The existing building is approximately 15,000 square feet in size.

Review of Zoning and Master Plan

Current Zoning: R-55 (One Family Detached Residential) Proposed Zoning: M-X-T (Mixed Use Transportation Oriented)

The property is located in an area covered by the 1989 Approved Master Plan for Langley Park-College Park-Greenbelt and Vicinity, as well as the 2002 Prince George’s County approved General Plan. Largely due to the date of the approved master plan, over twenty years ago, higher density development was not foreseen in this area. The proposed development does not implement the land use recommendations of the 1989 master plan, which envisioned medium-suburban land uses with a density between 3.6 and 5.7 dwelling units per acre. Additionally, this property is not within an existing corridor or node and, therefore, it will not encourage more intense housing and economic development in centers and corridors.

Page | 19 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

The proposed development is consistent with the 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan vision for medium- to high-density neighborhoods in the Developed Tier. The development plan is compact. The recreational, commercial, and residential uses on the site will be complemented by the variety of activities and institutional uses on the University of Maryland campus, and in the College Park area.

As noted earlier, to develop the site as desired, a Zoning Map Amendment will be required to re-zone the property to M-X-T. This is a legislative process requiring a public hearing and approval by a majority of the County Council. Initially, the amendment is presented to the Prince George’s County Planning Department. The amendment is then referred to the other county agencies including Historic Preservation Committee and to nearby municipalities and adjoining property owners. The Planning Department will issue a technical staff report which will include their recommendation. A planning Board date is set approximately at least 30 days after the staff report is issued. Once the Planning Board has heard the case, a public hearing is scheduled.

The zoning Hearing Examiner will file a written decision based upon this hearing. The District Council will then make a final decision at least 30 days, but not less than 120 days after the Zoning Hearing Examiner’s decision. There will not be a separate process to amend the Master Plan due to this zoning amendment. Overall, the process takes an average of about eight to ten months. Traffic mitigation and road improvements maybe be discussed at this stage and conditions may be added to the zoning approval to provide road improvements. The actual road improvements will not need to be installed until the construction phase of the project is reached.

Page | 20 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

FAR Density Calculations

The development plan proposes a Bonus FAR Calculations Bonus Area Calculation total FAR of 1.93, including Phase I & Net Lot Area 258746 SF II. The maximum allowable FAR is Base Gross FAR 0.4 FAR 258746 SF 103498 SF Proposed Floor Area 500000 SF estimated at 3.5, based on Bonus Residential Bonus 1 FAR 258746 SF 258746 SF Density Incentives. The FAR is Rooftop Activities Bonus 8 FAR 16000 SF 128000 SF Streetscape Bonus 6 FAR 36000 SF 216000 SF calculated as the gross floor area Plaza Bonus 8 FAR 25000 SF 200000 SF Allowable Gross Floor Area 906244 SF (GFA) of the development proposal, Maximum Allowable 3.50 FAR not inclusive of the parking garage, Amount Proposed 1.93 FAR divided by the net site area. *Includes Calculations for Phase II Development

Without the use of the optional method of development -- 0.40 FAR is the maximum allowable; and with the use of the optional method of development -- 8.00 FAR is the maximum allowable.

Property Location and Vicinity

The subject site is located on the Prince George’s County Tax Map 33. The property is located outside the limits of the City of College Park in unincorporated Prince George’s County and is adjacent to the University of Maryland campus. The daytime population of the University of Maryland is roughly 46,300 includes 35,000 students, 9,800 employees and 1,500 visitors. Located in the city of College Park (population 25,000), and is five miles from Washington, D.C., and 25 miles from Baltimore.

The area is highly accessible, with Interstates 95 and 495 (the Capital Beltway) two miles away and three major roads directly serving the campus. The College Park/University of Maryland Metro station is less than a mile from the University and is served by Shuttle UM.

The site is more specifically located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Campus Drive and Mowatt Lane. The site is located north of the approved Mosaic at Turtle Creek project (DSP-08001). This project is approved for 300 multifamily dwellings. The property to the immediate east is the approved Domain project (DSP-09031). This project is approved for 256 multifamily dwelling units and 10,000 SF of retail space with a proposed FAR of approximate 2.50. An additional property to the east

Page | 21 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman is an existing PEPCO substation. The properties to the west and south are zoned R-55, with an existing church located to the west of the property.

Local Attractions and Activities

University of Maryland Campus (0.2 miles) Goddard Space Flight Center (6.0 miles)

Capital One Field at Byrd Stadium (0.4 miles) Baltimore Inner Harbor (25 miles) Comcast Center Basketball Arena (1.2 miles) Annapolis, MD (30 miles) FedEx Field [Redskins Stadium] (10 miles) Annapolis Naval Academy (30 miles) College Park Airport (4.0 miles) Fort Meade (20 miles) BWI Airport (25 miles) Arundel Mills Mall and Casino (20 miles) UMD Metro Station (3 miles) National Harbor (18 miles) Proposed Purple Line Metro (0.15 miles) University of Maryland Golf Course (0.5 miles) Washington, DC (5.0 miles) Rock Creek Public Golf Course (4.7 miles) The Pentagon (13 miles) Cross Creek Golf Club (5.6 miles)

Utility Analysis

Stormwater Management – Stormwater Management facilities required for the subject property will be reviewed and approved by Prince George’s County DPW under the current Maryland Department of the Environment regulations. These regulations require that the proposed development address water quality and quantity control, as well as groundwater recharge. A stormwater Management Concept Plan will need to be developed and submitted in conjunction with the developed plans. Typically, the county prefers that the stormwater management requirements are addressed on-site, through a reduction in impervious areas, and surface infiltration (if the soils percolate) for quality control, dry ponds for quantity control, and infiltration for recharge. These methods, while the least expensive as far as construction costs, typically require more developable land than can be afforded by the project. As such, on parcels such as this, usually as much infiltration as can be achieved for recharge and water quality are designed. This is supplemented with added water quality storage upstream of water quality structures such as Stormfilters or infiltration devices. Quantity control can be addressed through underground storage through pipe storage or vaults.

Page | 22 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

The increased runoff from the proposed development will need to be managed such that the existing outfalls are not surcharged. The county will require an analysis of the receiving watercourses or storm drain systems. Additional storage and control may be required if this analysis indicates that the receiving system is not adequate.

The adjacent property south of the site is Buddington Property. The storm drain system for Buddington was designed with the anticipation that it would collect the runoff from the Cedars site at its western corner, and convey it to the existing Northwest Branch tributary stream at the southern edge of the Buddington site. The proposed storm drain for the property will be able to outfall into Buddington’s previously designed storm drain system. Due to the proposed development of the site, the offsite Buddington storm drain system will need to be upsized to convey the proposed runoff.

Water and Sewer – The WSSC is responsible for the review and approval of the private “On-Site” water and sewer system. The water and sewer extension will be a private system as this extension will only be serving this property. Typically, the water meter for this type of extension will be outside in a vault adjacent to the public right of way. The review will be performed by WSSC’s “Regulatory Services” group and typically averages 16 to 20 weeks from first submission to release of permits. The review fee for this type of system is calculated based on a flat fee of $2,700 plus $2.20 per linear length of water and sewer. In addition to the “on-Site”, a “Service Connection Permit” will be required. This permit will cover the extension of the public service connection from the mains in the public right of way or within a WSSC easement to private property. There is a $1,500 fee for the service connection for WSSC’s inspection services.

Furthermore, a “System Development Charge” (SDC) will be required to be paid prior to plumbing permit being issued. The project fees are as follows:

 Residential – 2,036 per unit, 6,600 for Pool  Hotel – 1,137 per room, 6,600 for Pool, Misc. 15,000 estimate  Retail – $10,000 estimate Sewer Main

A sewer outfall would be proposed North towards Campus Drive. This connection will likely require an on-site pumping station to lift the sewer to the public system in Campus Drive.

Page | 23 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Water Main

An existing 16-ince public water line is located in Campus Drive, to the north of the subject property. A private 8” water connection will likely be proposed to connect to this line.

Electric, Phone, Cable, and Gas

Currently, the site is located near the PEPCO substation, making electric service readily available. It is assumed that phone and cable service will also be readily available. Gas service will need to be further investigated as to whether it is readily available nearby.

Land Use

The subject property will be developed as a Mixed Use Development, with multi-family residential, a boutique hotel, ground floor retail, rooftop restaurant, and a rooftop public dog park. All parking will be within and below the building.

Development Regulations

In order to obtain a building permit, a Preliminary Plan of Subdivision and Detailed Site Plan will need to be prepared. The Prince George’s County Planning Department administers these processes with approval by the Planning Board. A Planning Board Hearing will occur after each phase has been reviewed. Typically, the Planning Board is scheduled between 70-150 days after the plan has been accepted for review by the County.

Typically, the Preliminary Plan of Subdivision can be handled concurrently over a period of 4 to 6 months, but may take as long as a year. The Preliminary Plan sets the approved use and density, transportation and access requirements, right-of-way requirements and lot configuration. A traffic study will be required at this time. The Detailed Site Plan will further define the grading, layout and circulation patterns, detailing the site amenities and open space and addressing landscaping, architectural issues and other forestry requirements. A pre-submittal meeting with Planning Department staff prior to filing these plans as an opportunity to address potential issues before committing to final plans.

Page | 24 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

It is my understanding that there is currently a process in place that allows for the Preliminary Plan process to be foregone by submitting a Re-subdivision Plat combining the properties. This process is considered a loophole and may be closed soon. We will push to submit this Re-subdivision Plat as soon as possible to save 4 to 12 months of approval time and move straight to the Detailed Site Plan.

The Planning Board is very interested in assuring that the adjoining properties and municipalities are comfortable with the proposed development. Reaching out to the University and the City of College Park prior to the Planning Board hearing will help this process move more smoothly.

The property will be subject to County impact fees at the time of Preliminary Plan or Detailed Site Plan. The impact fee required for development at this site for schools is $7870 per dwelling unit. At the current time, properties in this area of the site have been within the response time required for Fire and Rescue Services. This response time is ten minutes for emergencies and twenty minutes for non- emergencies. If the property is within this response time, then they will not be subject to any fees for Fire and Rescue Services. If for some reason, the property is found to be outside this response time, the fee required is $3780 per dwelling unit.

The Planning Board approves the Record Plat. This process follows the Detailed Site Plan stage. Clearing and grading can begin on the site prior to Record Plat approval if a Rough Grading Sediment Control Plan is approved. However, in order to obtain the final Grading permit, the Record Plat must be approved and recorded.

The District Council could (but does not have to) call the project up following the Planning Board Hearing at any stage of the process. This process time varies from as short as one to three months, but could take up to 9 months. The resolution for the Preliminary Plan or Detailed Site Plan from M-NCPPC will not be issued until the District Council has not called up the project or if they do call it up, until they have their hearing on the project and issues their conditions of approval.

If the property is annexed into the City of College Park, this process will remain the same. The City of College Park will have a hearing to make the decision whether to approve the plan. While it is always important to try to gain an approval and support from the City of College Park, the County has recently approved two separate projects which did not receive approval by the City of College Park. These

Page | 25 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman projects were located within the limits of the City of College Park and the projects names are the Maryland Book Exchange redevelopment project and the Cafritz property.

Other review agencies provide comment at all levels of the review process and perform their own plan reviews of all engineering plans following Site Plan approval. The following is a list of the primary agencies that will be involved in the review and approval process of your development and the final engineering plans and the typical review times:

Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission (M-NCPPC)

Development Review Division – This division is responsible for reviewing and coordinating the approval process for the Preliminary Plan, Detailed Site Plan and Record Plat. The Division also reviews the construction site plans for conformance during the Building Permit process. Approval of Preliminary Plan can take 4 to 6 months and Site Plan approval and signature will require 3 to 4 months. Approval and recordation of the Record Plat typically takes 14 to 16 weeks depending on any outstanding conditions involved in the final engineering process.

Transportation Planning Division – This division is responsible for reviewing and commenting on development plans with respect to overall transportation master plan issues. At the Preliminary Plan stage, this division is responsible for determining traffic mitigation requirements for compliance with the adequate public facilities ordinance based on their review of the project’s traffic impact analysis. Their review time is included within the time allotted above for the Development Review Division.

Environmental Planning Division – This Division is responsible for the Tree Conservation Plan and the posting of a bond required prior to grading permit. They are also responsible for reviewing and approving the Natural Resource Inventory Plan (NRI) and Forest Stand Delineation Plan (FSD). They make the final determination on any primary management areas (PMA) and the total developable land allowed for development.

Parks and Recreation Division – This group will review the plan and administer the mandatory dedication of parkland provision of section 24-124 of the Prince George’s County Subdivision Regulations. Typically, for a project of this density, they will require dedication of 15% of the lot area

Page | 26 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman for parkland. They may also allow payment of a fee in lieu of this dedication, which is typically calculated to be 5% of the current fair market value of the land from the State Tax Assessor’s records. On occasion, they may require construction of facilities on nearby parks in lieu of this fee.

Prince George’s County Department of Fire and Rescue

The County Fire Department will review the plan and comment on fire access and general water supply to the site. Their review time is included within the time allotted above for the Development Review Division

Prince George’s County Department of Public Works (DPW&T)

This department is responsible for reviewing and approving Grading Plans, Storm Water Management Concepts, Construction Plans and Floodplain Studies. Review and approval times vary, but can take as long as 14 to 16 weeks, concurrent with the record plat, and are required for release of grading and building permits.

Prince George’s County Soil Conservation District (SCD)

In conjunction with the County DPW&T, this agency is responsible for a joint review of storm water management surface facilities. In addition, the SCD reviews and approves sediment control plans

Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) – Development Services

This group is responsible for reviewing and approving the “On-Site” water and sewer system and will determine conditions for provision of service into the development. This group will take the lead in reviewing and approving the water and sewer construction plans. WSSC reviews typically take approximately 16 weeks from submission to approval.

WSSC – Permits Processing Section

This Section of the WSSC will handle the connection and plumbing permits for the project. Payment of the SDC fees will be handled through this section. Once all outstanding conditions have been satisfied, allow two weeks for WSSC permit processing.

Page | 27 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Site Access

Standing alone, the Cedars, Inc. parcels are subsequently landlocked. This portion of the site’s current vehicle access is from the north through the University Methodist Church property. An important part of the acquisition of the portion of the Church’s property along Campus Drive is to gain street frontage and access. Ideally, access and street frontage will be obtained along both Campus Drive and Mowatt Lane. The Master Plan recommends an average right of way of 80 to 120 feet for Campus Drive. Furthermore, the extension of the “Purple Line” Metro will be along this portion of Campus Drive. Street frontage improvements such as lighting and hardscape will likely be required.

Transportation

The project site is served by several existing and proposed methods of transportation. The site is located along Campus Drive and Mowatt Lane. These two roads allow for vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation along the western edge of the University of Maryland campus. These two roads are also along several public transportation routes served by Shuttle UM, Metrobus, and a future Purple Line Metro Station.

Shuttle UM Shuttle-UM is a student-run transit system supported by student fees. The mission of Shuttle-UM is to provide safe and dependable transportation to University of Maryland students, faculty, and staff, and to foster learning and involvement for student success. Shuttle-UM provides commuter, security, paratransit and charter service. With a fleet of over 60 vehicles, including hybrids and clean diesel models, Shuttle-UM provides transit service on and around the University of Maryland Campus to more than 2.6 million riders a year. Shuttle-UM also provides convenient access to local points of interest including shopping centers, grocery stores, libraries, and post offices. Metrobus & Metrorail The Washington area is served by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, which operates the region's subway system, Metrorail as well as Metrobus. The bus and rail systems serve both Washington and the immediate closest counties.

Page | 28 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Metrobuses serving campus:

The C2, C8, J4, and F6 Metrobuses provide service to the University of Maryland campus. Schedules are available at the Stamp Student Union information bay at the main entrance of the Union, and in Off-Campus Student Life, 0110 Stamp Student Union.

Metrorail stations served by Shuttle-UM:

Shuttle-UM serves the green line at College Park, West Hyattsville, and PG Plaza, and the red line at Silver Spring. Shuttle-UM will also serve the future Purple Line Metrorail.

Commuter Trains MARC Train is one of several transportation services offered by the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA). Along with the MARC, take advantage of additional services by the MTA such as the local buses, Metro Subway, and Light Rail. There are three specific lines of the MARC: the Camden line, with service from downtown Baltimore to Washington, D.C.; the Penn Line, with service from Perryville, MD (Cecil County) to Baltimore and Washington, D.C.; and the Brunswick Line, with service from Martinsburg, WV and Frederick, MD. to Washington, D.C. MARC's Camden Line stops in College Park at the Metro station providing campus access for those living along the Baltimore-Washington corridor. For those as far north as Perryville, MARC's Penn Line serves the New Carrollton Metro station where you can catch Shuttle-UM to campus. MARC's Brunswick Line runs between Martinsburg, West Virginia and Union Station where you can take Metrorail to College Park and from there the Shuttle-UM to campus.

Local Bus Systems The Bus offers bus service between local Prince George's County communities and nearby Metrorail stations including Addison Road, Capitol Heights, and West Hyattsville. Montgomery County Ride- On provides bus service throughout Montgomery County and connects with Shuttle-UM routes at the Silver Spring Metrorail station. Connect-A-Ride Route G Laurel/College Park provides service between the Laurel Mall and the College Park Metrorail station as well as stopping on campus at Campus and Regents Drives.

Page | 29 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Destination Distances from Project Site University of Maryland Campus 100 feet UMD Smith Business School 0.15 miles Purple Line Metro Station 0.15 miles University Boulevard (193) 0.3 miles Adelphi Road 0.3 miles Baltimore Avenue (Route 1) 0.7 miles Downtown College Park 0.7 miles Football Stadium 0.4 miles Beltway (I-495/95) 3.3 miles District of Columbia boundary 3.5 miles Purple Line Metrorail and Station

The Purple Line Metrorail is proposed to have a Metrorail station called UMD West Campus Station, which will be located less than 1,000 feet away from our proposed project. The project is currently in the Preliminary Engineering phase, with Final Engineering and Design expected to be completed by 2015. Construction is projected to begin in 2015 and likely take 3 to 5 years to complete construction.

SITE

Page | 30 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

The Purple Line Metrorail project would provide a direct connection between the Metrorail Red, Green, and Orange Lines that radiate into suburban Maryland from Washington, D.C. It would also provide an east-west public transportation link between Montgomery County and Prince George’s County. The Inner Purple Line is a proposed light-rail line which would circle and connect the region's core communities near the Capital Beltway, linking the spokes of Metrorail. The first phase of the Inner Purple Line is from Bethesda to New Carrolton, with stops including Silver Spring, Takoma Park, Langley Park, University of Maryland and Riverdale. Another important connection would tie Alexandria with National Harbor, Oxon Hill and Branch Avenue in Prince Georges County.

It offers a fast and high quality public transit alternative for suburb-to-suburb commuters. So it would take cars off local roads and the Beltway, reduce traffic and help curb greenhouse gas emissions. Even conservative estimates for Purple Line ridership demonstrate strong demand for the line. The Purple Line would also connect to MARC, AMTRAK, and local bus services.

Transit-oriented development near new Purple Line rail stations would also promote the revitalization of inner-suburban neighborhoods. By focusing development in inner-Beltway communities through a connected network of high quality transit stations, we can anchor our older communities, enhance property values, and bring new housing and business opportunities to underserved parts of the

Page | 31 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman region. A high quality light rail line will foster job growth in Silver Spring and Prince Georges County, connect workers to jobs in Bethesda and the Red Line Corridor and reduce traffic.

Benefits of the Purple Line (as outlined by Maryland Transit Administration)

Montgomery and Prince George's counties are changing, with steadily growing numbers of residents and jobs. Creating the Purple Line, an east-west public transportation link between Montgomery and Prince George's counties, will address the growing congestion on the roads by providing an alternative to driving and providing more options to the large number of people in the area who already rely on transit.

The Purple Line will create a more efficient transportation system by:

 Providing more reliable and rapid east-west travel  Improving the overall dependability of the transportation system within the study area  Providing easier access to the Metro lines and other transportation services The Purple Line will encourage economic development by:

 Connecting people to jobs  Supporting the revitalization that many areas are experiencing/planning  Complementing the over $400 million in renovations and new construction that are being invested in Silver Spring  Connecting major economic centers and key activity areas

Page | 32 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Goals of the Purple Line (as outlined by Maryland Transit Administration)

 Provide better, faster transit service in the corridor  Make it easier to get to Metrorail, commuter rail, and local bus services  Serve people who rely on transit  Minimize and mitigate impacts to the natural and human environment in the corridor  Provide a safe and attractive transit service that fits in with the local community character  Ensure that the overall benefits of the transit way justify the cost of building and operating it  Support local, regional and state policies and adopted Master Plans  Increase the potential for Transit Oriented Development where planned at existing and identified stations in the corridor  Make it easier to get to existing and planned shopping and business areas in the corridor

Parking

The base parking requirement for multi-family dwellings is based on Parking Garage Breakdown the number of bedrooms as well as the proximity to a metro station. Level Spaces G 73 This project is within a proposed Metro Station area and will benefit P1 200 P2 200 from a reduced parking requirement. Similar projects have seen a Total Spaces 473 reduction of up to 30% from the required parking requirements. While we will pursue all of the possible reductions as possible, as part of our agreement with the United Methodist Church, we will be providing additional parking spaces on our site that can accommodate the neighboring church and its associated events and functions.

Parking Requirements Use Regulation Units Required Spaces Proposed Spaces Hotel 1 Space per 2 Guest Rooms 70 Guest Rooms 35 70 1 Space per 150 SF for First 3,000 SF 3000 20 20 Retail 1 Space per 200 SF Above 3,000 SF 15000 75 75 100 One Bedroom 133 133 Multi-Family 1.33 Spaces per Unit + 0.33 per a Bedroom above 1 45 Two Bedroom 75 75 20 Three Bedroom 40 40 Public Dog Park Arbitrary, to be finalized at time of DSP 16,000 SF TBD 20 On Street Parking N/A N/A N/A 18 378 451

Page | 33 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Parking will be provided by utilizing 73 parking spaces at ground level, which shall be utilized for retail parking, short-term handicap parking, short term hotel or residential guest parking. There shall be a limit of one (1) hour parking in this area. Additional parking shall be provided on two underground parking levels. Each parking level shall provide approximately 200 parking spaces, for a total of 400 underground parking spaces. Based on the proposed building uses, roughly 400 parking spaces will be required.

As part of the proposed project, it was negotiated with the United Methodist Church that overflow parking for the church would be provided within the project’s parking structure. As such, approximately 50 parking spaces will be available for this purpose.

Environmental Impact

A Phase 1 environmental study will be performed, but it is not anticipated that a Phase 2 environmental study will be required.

Prior to the submission of the Preliminary Plan, a Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) must be submitted and approved by the Environmental Planning Section of M-NCPPC. This plan requires an inventory of the significant environmental features on the site. A Preliminary Plan of subdivision subjects the properties to forestry legislation requiring forest conservation at a rate of 20% or creation at a rate of 15% of the total site area for these properties. It costs about $10,000 for an acre of forest planting currently, but the greater cost can come from acquisition of an offsite parcel to place in conservation easement, if required.

IV. MARKET ANALYSIS

Demographics

The College Park area is made up of a significant amount of college students, as part of the total population in the area. The population of College Park was 30,413 at the 2010 census. This is an increase of 20% from the 24,657 people from the 2000 census. The top employers in the City of College Park are:

Page | 34 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

University of Maryland, College Park 13,082 Average Daily Traffic Volume University of Maryland University College 2,790 Baltimore Ave. 30000-40000 National Archives and Records Administration 900 University Avenue 30000-40000 Food and Drug Administration 775 Prince George's County Traffic Volume Map 2011 Annual Average Daily Traffic IKEA 300 Prepared by the Maryland DOT, Published 3/19/2012 American Center for Physics 200 Demographics Radius HH Income Population 1 mile 71,889 19727 3 mile 66016 181948 5 mile 73111 461596

Retail Outlook

Based on reports, it appears transaction volume is on an upward trajectory for the most desirable assets. As of third quarter 2011, consumer expectations remained bleak due to the uncertainty in unemployment levels and global instability. Households appear to have postponed major purchases over the past couple years with a wait- and-see approach, but once the economy begins moving forward, there may be a sudden surge of purchasing activity. The 2012 outlook for the retail property sector may continue trends similar to that of 2011; however, the positive improvements in 2012 may occur at a slower rate than in 2011.

Page | 35 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

The average cost price per square foot is approximately $150,000 with the average cap rates between 7.5% to 8.0%.

Per Delta Associates Report (Associates, Delta, 2012), they expect future retail development to focus on a mixed-use format involving office or residential within a walkable urban area or close to public transit. Overall, people want to drive less and shop for goods close to where they reside.

As a result, the successful investor and developer is:

1. Selectively accumulating assets at below replacement cost while prices and interest rates are lower. 2. Acquiring debt or recapitalizing assets. 3. Repositioning underperforming assets, especially with a mixed-use, outdoor format. 4. Investing in existing assets to enhance operational performance via better leasing and/or reduced cost. 5. Developing new projects for delivery in the 2013/2014 period in select submarkets with good supply/demand fundamentals.

Since market conditions will start to transition during 2013 for retail, we recommend developers:  Continue site assembly during 2012.  Start construction by late-2012.  Deliver product by late-2013/early 2014 when the market starts to shift toward the landlord’s favor.

Page | 36 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Hotel Outlook

Over the past year, there has been a significant reduction in mortgage rates providing investment leverage to lodging deals that are able to navigate the lending prerequisites. Debt is potentially available to lodging investors, however, recourse guarantees are staggering lending approvals and providing a more limited buyer pool.

The lodging sector has continued to generate positive results, so as we move through 2012, very little change is expected. The firming leisure and corporate traveler base provided by wage increases and increased corporate profits will also help the sector.

The current deals are averaging around $175,000 per unit with an overall volume between $15-$20 billion. The cap rates are hovering around 9% to 9.5%, but starting to trend down slightly.

Page | 37 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Apartment Outlook

The overall outlook for the apartment sector may be affected, especially with affordability, as rental prices continue to rise and for-sale unit’s prices continue to fall. There still appears to be a strong trend away from homeownership, which has helped accelerate demand for apartments. According to BLS, it is estimated that 75% of employment gains have been in the 20-34 year old age group, which is a key renter demographic. Based on the aforementioned factors, apartments may be well-poised to possibly experience another strong year in 2012.

The average price per rental unit is averaging approximately $100,000 per unit with an overall volume of deals around $15 billion. The cap rates are averaging between 6.5% to 7.0% per deal.

Locally, the Washington Apartment Market brought record setting construction in response to the apartment market. 2012 and 2013 will likely see a return to a more competitive market due to subdued absorption in the Washington metro area, coupled with the delivery of a large slate of projects. Over the past year, over 14,000 units have broken ground and over 11,000 new units are expected to break ground over the next year. Class A absorption of approximately 4,000 units is nearly 30% off the region’s long-term average, easing as job growth moderates in the region.

The development pipeline is currently at a level of just under 34,000 units, with is slightly lower than the 34,449 units at year-end 2001, which may signal the start of a cyclical decline. (Report, Delta Associates Washington/Baltimore Condominium Market, 2012).

Page | 38 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Compared to the condominium market, there are currently 3,565 unsold new condominium units that are actively marketing in the Washington metro area. As a result, there is now 1.6 years’ worth of inventory of product on the market at current rates of sales velocity in the metro area. Currently, parts of the District, Prince George’s County, and Fairfax County & the City of Falls Church have the lowest inventory-to-sales ratios in the metro area. In Baltimore, there are 1,199 unsold units currently marketing in the metro area, or 3.4 years of inventory. (Delta Associates, 2012)

Adjacent and Nearby Projects

Domain at College Park

The property was purchased for $2.75 million. The detailed Site Plan for Domain was approved with conditions on February 24, 2011. The mixed-use residential development will have 225 multi-family units, 10,000 square feet of retail space, and a 380 parking space garage. The Hanover Company is the developer and general contractor and UDR, a Denver based REIT, is their joint venture partner. Construction is expected to begin in April 2012. The first units are expected to be ready to movie-in by July 2013 and all units completed by July 2014.

Page | 39 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Mosaic at Turtle Creek

This project proposes multi-family residential housing that will include 300 luxury condominium units, which as of a conversation with the developer on 4/26/2012; the project is being converted to a rental community. The Detailed Site Plan was approved on October 30, 2008, with conditions. The developers of this project subsequently applied for a departure to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 700 to 335, which was approved on March 24, 2011. This project is targeting visiting professors, University staff, corporate partners of the university, alumni, and empty nesters who wish to enjoy and contribute to university life. An expected start date is not known, but could begin construction at any time upon securing financing. Further discussions with the developer revealed the animosity towards the county and lack of interest in financing deals within Prince George’s County.

Knox Box Area Development The project is located adjacent to the University of Maryland at College Park campus in the area currently known as Knox Box. It would be comprised of 4 uniquely shaped buildings, containing 900 student apartments, a 190 room hotel and conference center, 21,000 sf of retail space and 250 underground parking spaces. The dynamic composition of the buildings creates a series of exterior spaces for the student community and is carefully integrated into the existing pedestrian patterns on the College Park Campus.

Page | 40 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

The project is made up of approximately 45 separate lots zoned M-U-I. Upon researching this project further, it appears that the developer is Janet Firth, but the properties are listed under three separate

Limited Liability Companies, all owned by Ms. Firth. These entities are Vivere III LLC, Knox Box Realty LLC, and Knox Village Partners LLC. It appears this was done so that it wouldn’t appear that one person was assembling these properties. There remain three (3) properties which lie within the proposed project area, but the developer doesn’t yet control them. This project is in the conceptual phase and has not filed plans or have an immediate desire to develop the project.

Cafritz Property at Riverdale Park The project is proposed as a mixed-use community that will be built in phases. The first phase proposes a Whole Foods Grocery store, over 100,000 square feet of retail and restaurants, and 22,000 square feet of office space. The second phase proposes 995 residential units and a 120- room hotel. While this project is not located in College Park, it is located in Riverdale, which is less than 2 miles from our site. This site will be within ½ mile of three metro stations with access to three separate metro lines and the MARC train.

Page | 41 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

College Park Projects

Over the course of the past several years, College Park has been an area of significant growth. Most of the projects that are under construction or being planned are centered around multi-family housing. Of the multi-family housing units, the majority have been focused around student housing. A simplified chart showing all recent projects is below. A detailed breakdown of College Park Area Projects is in the Appendix. Of the projects that are proposed and/or approved, several may not have a definite path to construction.

Residential Student Beds Office Retail Hotel Proposed 3,385 2,588 473,800 287,760 461 Approved 300 293 0 0 0 Construction 585 1,920 0 439,080 50 Complete 1,739 4,439 39,000 187,400 237 6,009 9,240 512,800 914,240 748 *In some cases, the Student Bed count may duplicate Residential units.

College Park Area Hotels Within College Park, there are currently eleven (11) existing hotels/motels that are in operation, with one (1) hotel currently under construction and nearing completion.

The majority of all existing hotels are focused along the Route 1 (Baltimore Avenue) corridor. There is currently only one (1) hotel located adjacent to the west side of the University of Maryland Campus, which is the Marriott Inn and Conference Center.

Page | 42 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

College Park Area Apartments

Multi-family residential units are a major portion of the College Park landscape. It’s not possible to show all multi-family buildings within the local area. There are combinations of buildings dedicated solely to student housing. Some of these buildings are very old and outdated, while there are several new student housing projects that have recently been built on-campus and nearby off-campus along the Route 1 corridor. There is also still a significant portion of the student population that is still living in single family homes which are rented by dead-beat landlords. Based on recent market studies, a definite need for additional student housing still exists. Development of multi-family housing focusing on student housing had skyrocketed over the past 5 years; however, construction has slowed recently as absorption of these units has also slowed.

There has also been a desire of developers to build multi-family housing directed towards professionals, professors, graduate students, and empty nesters looking to contribute to the university atmosphere. With the future Purple Line Metro line proposed to pass through College Park, there certainly may be an opportunity to capitalize on a portion of the population wishing to live near the University of Maryland campus, yet still have access to the Washington, DC and Baltimore Metro areas.

Page | 43 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

College Park Area Retail

The core of walkable retail within College Park is located within the downtown area. While it is important to have a vibrant downtown retail area, it is not always convenient for residents and/or students on the UMD campus to drive or walk to the downtown area, partly due to safety concerns downtown. Other concerns include a need to drive, but a lack of convenient parking.

With the majority of the College Park population coming from housing located within the UMD campus and/or directly adjacent to the campus, it makes sense for portion of retail to be located along the west side of the campus. There is a significant portion of the population that will be closer to retail on the west side of campus than that located downtown.

It should also be noted that there is a significant amount of retail located along the Route 1 corridor between University Blvd (193) and the Capital Beltway (495). This retail is more convenient to commuters; however, vehicular and pedestrian access is limited in both directions along Route 1.

Page | 44 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

V. CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS

Development Costs Soft Costs Total Cost Misc. Land Acquisition Accounting $ 10,000 Land $ 19,465,000 Attorney $ 100,000 Closing Costs $ 500,000 Survey $ 30,000 Sub-total $ 19,965,000 Appraisal $ 6,000 Legal Bond Review $ 3,000 Hard Costs Title Work $ 6,000 Demolition and Removal $ 50,000 Letters of Credit/Sureties $ 30,000 Parking Garage Construction $ 17,200,000 Building Construction $ 70,000,000 Architecture & Engineering Tenant Improvements $ 500,000 Shell Building Design $ 750,000 Street Construction $ 950,000 Interior Design $ 250,000 Streetscape Improvements $ 200,000 Geotech / 3rd Party Testing $ 70,000 Stormwater Management $ 300,000 Civil Engineering $ 250,000 Contingency Costs $ 2,400,000 LEED Consultant $ 45,000 Total Hard Costs $ 91,600,000 As Built Civil Engineering $ 25,000 As Built Architecture $ 25,000 Insurance Title Insurance $ 35,000 Builders Risk $ 50,000

Taxes Real Estate Tax $ 1,300,000

Permits & Fees Site Permits $ 50,000 Utility Fees $ 600,000 Impact Fees $ 1,574,000 Lender Inpections $ 69,000 Miscellaneous Leasing Commissions $ 75,000 Soft Cost Contingency $ 500,000 Deferred Developer Fee $ 500,000 Marketing $ 100,000 Total Soft Costs $ 6,453,000

Total Development Costs $ 118,018,000

Page | 45 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Construction Schedule

Page | 46 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

VI. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

Revenue Projections

Hotel - Revenue Projections Average Per Unit Monthly Gross Yearly Gross Estimated Per Unit Per Unit Per Unit Unit Type Rate Occupancy Units Income Revenue NOI Revenue Expense NOI Small $ 109.00 50% 40 $ 66,308.33 $ 795,700.00 $ 358,065.00 $ 19,892.50 $ 10,940.88 $ 8,951.63 Medium $ 119.00 50% 70 $ 126,685.42 $ 1,520,225.00 $ 684,101.25 $ 21,717.50 $ 11,944.63 $ 9,772.88 Large $ 139.00 45% 25 $ 47,564.06 $ 570,768.75 $ 256,845.94 $ 22,830.75 $ 12,556.91 $ 10,273.84 Suite $ 169.00 40% 10 $ 20,561.67 $ 246,740.00 $ 111,033.00 $ 24,674.00 $ 13,570.70 $ 11,103.30 $ 134.00 46% 145 $ 261,119.48 $ 3,133,433.75 $ 1,410,045.19 $ 22,278.69 $ 12,253.28 $ 10,025.41 Apartments Revenue Projections

Building Rent Rent Rent Per Unit Expenses Per NOI Per Unit Unit Beds Bath SF Cost Cost/SF Units Per Month Per Year Per Year Unit Per Year Per Year

A 1 1 850 $ 2,040.00 2.4 120 $ 244,800 $ 2,937,600 $ 24,480 $ 7,344 $ 17,136 B 2 2 1,000 $ 2,500.00 2.5 80 $ 200,000 $ 2,400,000 $ 30,000 $ 8,400 $ 21,600 C 3 2 1,150 $ 2,990.00 2.6 16 $ 47,840 $ 574,080 $ 35,880 $ 8,970 $ 26,910 216 $ 492,640 $ 5,911,680 $ 27,369 $ 7,931 $ 19,897

Retail Revenue Projections Unit Tenant Type SF Rent / SF Annual Rent Monthly Rent Term Escalation Reimbursements TI's LC's First Floor Restaurant A Restaurant 3,700 $ 35.00 $ 129,500 $ 10,791.67 10 2% NNN $ 30.00 6% Restaurant B Restaurant 2,500 $ 35.00 $ 87,500 $ 7,291.67 15 2% NNN $ 25.00 6% Retail 1 Retail 2,500 $ 30.00 $ 75,000 $ 6,250.00 7 3% NNN $ 20.00 6% Retail 2 Retail 2,000 $ 30.00 $ 60,000 $ 5,000.00 5 3% NNN $ 20.00 6% Retail 3 Retail 2,000 $ 25.00 $ 50,000 $ 4,166.67 5 3% NNN $ 20.00 6% Roof Level Restaurant C Restaurant 3,500 $ 35.00 $ 122,500 $ 10,208.33 10 2% NNN $ 35.00 6% Restaurant C Patio Restaurant 1,500 $ 10.00 $ 15,000 $ 1,250.00 10 2% NNN $ 10.00 6% TOTAL 17,700 $ 28.57 $ 539,500 $ 78,366

Other Incomes

Garage Assumptions Garage Rates Garage Expenses Per SF Hourly $ 2.00 Allocated RE Taxes 12% Daily $ 7.00 Total Garage OpEx 20% of EGI Monthly (Net$ of Taxes) 125.00 Replacement Reserves $0.05 / SF

Garage Allocation Garage Revenues Garage Vacancy 16% 77 spaces GPR Hourly $ 576,576 Hourly 25% $ 144,144 21% 100 spaces GPR Daily $ 62,400 Daily 30% $ 18,720 21% 100 spaces GPR Monthly $ 150,000 Monthly 30% $ 45,000 42% 200 spaces GPR Monthly $ 300,000 Monthly 30% $ 90,000 477 spaces $ 1,088,976 $ 297,864

Page | 47 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Intentionally Blank

Page | 48 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

West Campus Commons College Park, MD Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) 1 2 3 Income 2015 2016 2017 Retail $ 619,500 $ 638,085 $ 657,228 Hotel $ 3,189,750 $ 3,285,443 $ 3,384,006 Apartments $ 5,599,110 $ 5,767,083 $ 5,940,096 Garage $ 319,500 $ 329,085 $ 338,958 Misc. Income $ 100,000 $ 103,000 $ 106,090 Potential Gross Income $ 9,408,360 $ 9,690,611 $ 9,981,329 Downtime $ - $ - $ - Rent Abatement $ 2,799,555 $ 1,922,361 $ 990,016 Sub Total $ 6,608,805 $ 7,768,250 $ 8,991,313

Reimbursements Taxes $ 1,264,760 $ 1,302,703 $ 1,341,784 Insurance $ 90,340 $ 93,050 $ 95,842 CAM $ 1,016,325 $ 1,046,815 $ 1,078,219 Total Reimbursements $ 2,371,425 $ 2,442,568 $ 2,515,845

Sub-Total $ 8,980,230 $ 10,210,817 $ 11,507,158

Credit Loss Allowance $ 179,605 $ 204,216 $ 230,143 Effective Gross Revenue $ 8,800,625 $ 10,006,601 $ 11,277,015

Expenses Taxes $ 1,264,760 $ 1,302,703 $ 1,341,784 Insurance $ 90,340 $ 93,050 $ 95,842 CAM $ 1,016,325 $ 1,046,815 $ 1,078,219 Mgmt Fee $ 352,025 $ 400,264 $ 451,081 Legal/Admin. $ 158,095 $ 162,838 $ 167,723 Reserves $ 112,925 $ 112,925 $ 112,925 Total Expenses $ 2,994,470 $ 3,118,595 $ 3,247,573

Leasing Commissions $ 564,502 $ 453,333.28 $ 399,253.16 Capital Improvements $ 530,000 Tenant Improvement Costs $ 750,000 Discounted Cash Flow Analysis Subtotal $ 1,844,501.60 $ 453,333.28 $ 399,253.16

Net Operating Income $ 4,141,258 $ 6,638,890 $ 7,860,331 Annual Debt Service $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538

Cash Flow After Debt Service $ (2,065,280) $ 432,351 $ 1,653,793

Cash Flow Diagram (For Reversion) 12 24 Period 0 2015 2016 Annual Cash Flows ($36,971,376) $ 4,141,258 $ 6,638,890 Reversion Cost of Sale Cash Flows before Financing ($36,971,376) $4,141,258 $6,638,890 Debt Service $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 Cash Flow After Debt Service ($36,971,376) ($2,065,280) $432,351 Equity Cash on Cash Return -5.59% 1.17% Value $123,237,921 a IRR 8.29% DSCR 1.07

Allocation of IRR 2015 Opp CF 2016 Opp CF 2017 Opp CF Cash Flows $ 4,141,258 $ 6,638,890 $ 7,860,331 PV of Cash Flow $ 3,861,313 $ 5,771,661 $ 6,371,607 Sum of Discounted Cash Flows % of IRR per Discounted Cash Flow 3.13% 4.68% 5.17%

PV Reversion Return of Value 73.75% d = b / a

2015 - 2025 DCF Return on Value 53.62% e = c / a

Return ON/OF Investment Period 0 2015 2016 Cash Flow ($36,971,376) $ (2,065,280) $ 432,351 Equity Balance ($39,036,656) ($38,604,305) ON ON Page | 49 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

West Campus Commons College Park, MD Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 $ 676,944 $ 697,253 $ 718,170 $ 739,715 $ 761,907 $ 784,764 $ 808,307 $ 832,556 $ 3,485,526 $ 3,590,092 $ 3,697,794 $ 3,808,728 $ 3,922,990 $ 4,040,680 $ 4,161,900 $ 4,286,757 $ 6,118,299 $ 6,301,848 $ 6,490,903 $ 6,685,630 $ 6,886,199 $ 7,092,785 $ 7,305,569 $ 7,524,736 $ 349,126 $ 359,600 $ 370,388 $ 381,500 $ 392,945 $ 404,733 $ 416,875 $ 429,381 $ 109,273 $ 112,551 $ 115,927 $ 119,405 $ 122,987 $ 126,677 $ 130,477 $ 134,392 $ 10,280,769 $ 10,589,192 $ 10,906,868 $ 11,234,074 $ 11,571,096 $ 11,918,229 $ 12,275,776 $ 12,644,049 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 10,280,769 $ 10,589,192 $ 10,906,868 $ 11,234,074 $ 11,571,096 $ 11,918,229 $ 12,275,776 $ 12,644,049

$ 1,382,037 $ 1,423,499 $ 1,466,203 $ 1,510,190 $ 1,555,495 $ 1,602,160 $ 1,650,225 $ 1,699,732 $ 98,717 $ 101,678 $ 104,729 $ 107,871 $ 111,107 $ 114,440 $ 117,873 $ 121,409 $ 1,110,566 $ 1,143,883 $ 1,178,199 $ 1,213,545 $ 1,249,952 $ 1,287,450 $ 1,326,074 $ 1,365,856 $ 2,591,320 $ 2,669,060 $ 2,749,132 $ 2,831,605 $ 2,916,554 $ 3,004,050 $ 3,094,172 $ 3,186,997

$ 12,872,089 $ 13,258,252 $ 13,655,999 $ 14,065,679 $ 14,487,650 $ 14,922,279 $ 15,369,948 $ 15,831,046

$ 257,442 $ 265,165 $ 273,120 $ 281,314 $ 289,753 $ 298,446 $ 307,399 $ 316,621

$ 12,614,647 $ 12,993,087 $ 13,382,879 $ 13,784,366 $ 14,197,897 $ 14,623,834 $ 15,062,549 $ 15,514,425

$ 1,382,037 $ 1,423,499 $ 1,466,203 $ 1,510,190 $ 1,555,495 $ 1,602,160 $ 1,650,225 $ 1,699,732 $ 98,717 $ 101,678 $ 104,729 $ 107,871 $ 111,107 $ 114,440 $ 117,873 $ 121,409 $ 1,110,566 $ 1,143,883 $ 1,178,199 $ 1,213,545 $ 1,249,952 $ 1,287,450 $ 1,326,074 $ 1,365,856 $ 504,586 $ 519,723 $ 535,315 $ 551,375 $ 567,916 $ 584,953 $ 602,502 $ 620,577 $ 172,755 $ 177,937 $ 183,275 $ 188,774 $ 194,437 $ 200,270 $ 206,278 $ 212,466 $ 112,925 $ 112,925 $ 112,925 $ 112,925 $ 112,925 $ 112,925 $ 112,925 $ 112,925 $ 3,381,586 $ 3,479,646 $ 3,580,647 $ 3,684,679 $ 3,791,831 $ 3,902,199 $ 4,015,877 $ 4,132,965

$ 343,278.33 $ 317,675.76 $ 327,206.03 $ 337,022.22 $ 347,132.88 $ 357,546.87 $ 368,273.27 $ 379,321.47

$ - $ 343,278 $ 317,675.76 $ 327,206.03 $ 337,022.22 $ 347,132.88 $ 357,546.87 $ 368,273.27 $ 379,321.47

$ 9,147,225 $ 9,460,931 $ 9,748,146 $ 10,043,978 $ 10,348,685 $ 10,662,534 $ 10,985,797 $ 11,318,759

$ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538

$ 2,940,687 $ 3,254,392 $ 3,541,608 $ 3,837,440 $ 4,142,147 $ 4,455,995 $ 4,779,259 $ 5,112,221

Cash Flow Diagram (For Reversion) 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 $ 7,860,331 $ 9,147,225 $ 9,460,931 $ 9,748,146 $ 10,043,978 $ 10,348,685 $ 10,662,534 $ 10,985,797 $ 137,197,081 $ 8,231,825 $7,860,331 $9,147,225 $9,460,931 $9,748,146 $10,043,978 $10,348,685 $ 10,662,534 $ 139,951,053 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 6,206,538 $ 86,481,317 $1,653,793 $2,940,687 $3,254,392 $3,541,608 $3,837,440 $4,142,147 $4,455,995 $ 53,469,737 4.47% 7.95% 8.80% 9.58% 10.38% 11.20% 12.05% 144.62%

Allocation of IRR 2018 Opp CF 2019 Opp CF 2020 Opp CF 2021 Opp CF 2022 Opp CF 2023 Opp CF 2024 Opp CFSum of PV Csh Flow Reversion $ 9,147,225 $ 9,460,931 $ 9,748,146 $ 10,043,978 $ 10,348,685 $ 10,662,534 $ 10,985,797 $ - $ 128,965,256 $ 6,913,535 $ 6,667,259 $ 6,869,665 $ 7,078,142 $ 7,292,874 $ 7,514,047 $ 7,741,856 $ 90,883,746 b $ 66,081,958 c 5.61% 5.41% 5.57% 5.74% 5.92% 6.10% 6.28% 53.62% 73.75%

Return ON/OF Investment 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2021 2022 $ 1,653,793 $ 2,940,687 $ 3,254,392 $ 3,541,608 $ 3,837,440 $ 4,142,147 $ 4,455,995 $ 4,779,259 $ 53,469,737 ($36,950,512) ($34,009,825) ($30,755,433) ($27,213,825) ($23,376,385) ($19,234,238) ($14,778,242) ($9,998,983) $ 43,470,753 ON ON ON ON ON ON ON OF OF Page | 50 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

VII. PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

Developers are ultimately responsible for the finished project and how it will function and be managed over the life of the project. Due to the varied specialized skills needed to develop complex projects and the likelihood of one individual having all of these specialties, it’s important to put together a team of consultants that can help design, build, and manage the various stages of the development process.

Development Team

Attorney – Meyers, Rodbell & Rosenbaum, P.A. http://www.mrrlaw.net/land-use-planning-and-developmentadministrative-law.html With over forty years of collective experience, the land use attorneys at MR&R regularly represent zoning clients in Prince George’s County for the purpose of securing approval for the establishment of all types of industrial and commercial and residential uses. With their wealth of experience, MR&R zoning lawyers are familiar with the land development trends in Prince George’s County and have the capability to take sites through all phases of development including:  Re-zonings;  Water and sewer category changes;  Special exceptions;  Solid waste plan amendments;  Master plan and sectional map  Site plan reviews; amendments;  Variances;  Subdivisions;  Obtaining permit approvals

The governmental agencies MR&R routinely deals with include the Prince George's County Council; departments within Prince George's County Government; Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission; Prince George's County Board of Appeals; Prince George's County Health Department; and municipalities located within Prince George's County. Architect – Brown Craig Turner http://www.bctarchitects.com Brown Craig Turner has developed a reputation for creating places for people and designs that resonate with and reinforce their surrounding community. While the breadth of our practice is expanding into mixed-use and multi-family residential projects, we continue to be recognized as leaders in the design of commercial projects for the retail, restaurant, hospitality and corporate office sectors. Today, BCT is a creative multi-disciplined design studio specializing in all aspects of master planning, architecture, interiors and graphics, and committed to adding value to our clients' projects through quality design.

Page | 51 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Civil Engineer, Landscape Architecture, Surveying, Environmental – Axiom Engineering Design www.axiom-ed.com

Axiom Engineering Design (AED) is a 100% woman owned small business established in 2008 offering civil engineering, land surveying, landscape architecture and land planning services to government, commercial, and residential clients. Our staff is highly experienced in conceptual planning, design, project management and approvals of complex land development projects.

Traffic Engineer – The Traffic Group http://trafficgroup.com The Traffic Group, Inc. is a leading Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning firm headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland. We provide consultation on all aspects of a project dealing with the movement of vehicles and pedestrians to, from and within the confines of a specified site or through a defined area. Our services include, but are not limited to: traffic engineering and transportation planning studies, expert testimony, roadway and parking lot design, and data collection services.

Any one or all of our services may be utilized throughout various phases of a project. Our site contains an extensive representative list of clients and projects throughout the United States, as well as projects we have undertaken internationally. We have conducted over 6,000 projects.

Structural Engineer – Hope Furrer Associates http://www.hfurrer.com Hope Furrer Associates, Inc. is a structural design and consulting firm specializing in architectural projects. Established in 1992, the firm has offices in Towson, Maryland and State College, Pennsylvania. Hope Furrer Associates demonstrates its design expertise in the fields of corporate, commercial, and institutional developments. By employing state of the art technologies, we provide a full range of structural engineering services to architects, contractors, and developers.

Hope Furrer Associates, Inc. is committed to providing structural engineering services with sensitivity to the architectural design objective. The firm pursues complete client satisfaction through strong design talent and an understanding of the client's needs. By utilizing a personalized approach to each building type, we provide high-quality services that are designed to meet the requirements of a diversified client base.

Page | 52 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Geo-Technical Engineer – Specialized Engineering http://www.specializedengineering.com Specialized Engineering provides engineering consulting services for projects in DC, DE, MD, PA, VA, and WV for public and private sector clients in the areas of:  Construction Materials Testing and Inspections  Laboratory Testing and Analysis  Geotechnical and Forensic Engineering  Environmental Consulting These services are routinely provided from initial site selection to project design through construction. We offer our own laboratories and offer a computerized, real-time reporting system.

General Contractor – Harkins Builders http://www.harkinsbuilders.com Founded in 1965, Harkins Builders is an industry leader in providing professional preconstruction and construction management services for clients with negotiated and design-build construction projects. With annual revenues of $250 million and two locations serving the Mid-Atlantic region, Harkins offers a diversified portfolio of commercial, mixed-use, multifamily, healthcare, student housing, senior living, and military construction expertise. We have extensive experience in renovation and historical renovation projects, and working with federal, state, and local governments. Throughout our history, Harkins’ approach to negotiated and design-build contracts has been to combine our preconstruction expertise with professional onsite management. Clients in need of solid long-term projections have come to rely on our ability to make preliminary estimates become reality and to maximize quality for the least cost. Clients in need of quality projects delivered on time and within budget appreciate the experience and professionalism of our people. Our project managers and executives have an average tenure of over 22 years with Harkins.

Brokerage Firm – Transwestern www.transwestern.net Transwestern's experienced multifamily investment sales advisors serve the industry's leading multifamily investors in the pursuit of several objectives, including: maximizing the value of clients' investments, identifying strategic market opportunities and facilitating well-executed transactions.

Retail real estate means much more than available square footage. Like the retail sector itself, real estate in this market is dynamic and multi-faceted on all levels. The right combination of visibility, foot traffic and proximity to complimentary tenants are what retailers are looking for. Ultimately, they seek the perfect site to access and attract clientele. Success demands a specialized point of view and a specific sensitivity ranging from identifying strategies that best suit the market to specific categories within retail.

Page | 53 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Developing retail assets are often more capital intensive early on in their life cycle and property owners demand a deeply networked and proven team to perform in real estate transactions. Whether the property is prime urban retail, shopping center leasing, or complex retail portfolio management, Transwestern Retail offers a comprehensive range of services including marketing, design, demographics and market analysis.

Property Management – Bozzuto Group www.bozzuto.com

 Established 1988  Over $375 million in annual gross revenue  A portfolio of more than 100 communities  More than 70% of our portfolio is owned by third parties  Active throughout the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions  More than 50 diverse clients from national investment groups to regional private developers  Experienced in all types of properties, from luxury urban high-rises to affordable, suburban garden communities  The nation’s 40th largest property management company  Two-time NAHB Best Property Management Company  The best talent in the business – 25% turnover (industry average is 60%)  Built on integrity, backed by technology

Page | 54 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This is an ambitious project, but if the properties can be assembled, there is a great chance that this could be a great project for the College Park area. Based on the location being so close to the University of Maryland campus, makes this project very possible. If and when the Purple Metro Line is constructed adjacent to the project, the project value will increase significantly. This project would be one of the closest properties to the western portion of the University campus and would allow for a high end mixed-use to be constructed as the western area is built up. The project as proposed would certainly be the highest and best use for the area. The project would also propose a second phase which could be all residential or possibly a mix of uses which may include a small portion of office and/or retail.

My recommendations are to assemble the properties necessary to develop the properties by negotiating the purchase and begin the subdivision process. This site has a better chance of success than some other nearby projects due to the location to campus and alternate routes of travel. This project could offer a competitive advantage over other sites in the area, and again, if the Metro is constructed, the value of this site will increase dramatically.

Given the lengthy time needed for approvals and entitlements in Prince George’s County, consideration should be given to starting the project soon. If this project was started before July 2012, it would be possible that the development could open by the end of 2014 to the beginning of 2015. This timing coincides with the proposed Purple Line Metro line and station breaking ground in 2015 with construction possibly being complete by 2018. It is also likely that the project could wait an additional year or so before beginning full entitlements, design, and then construction, but it is suggested that the land be tied soon, before this opportunity disappears.

This project lends itself to a longer hold than 10 years, if larger returns are desired.

Page | 55 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

IX. Bibliography A Coalition for Smarter Growth Report. (2010). Invest in Prince George's: Discover the potential of Prince George's 15 Metro Stations. A Coalition for Smarter Growth Report.

Anderson Strickler, LLC. (2011). 2011 Student Housing Market Analysis: University of Maryland, College Park. Gaithersburg: Anderson Strickler, LLC.

Associates, Delta. (2012). Washington Area Retail Outlook - First Quarter 2012. Washington, DC: Delta Associates.

City of College Park - Economic Development. (2012). 2012 College Park Real Estate Roundtable. College Park: City of College Park.

City of College Park, Economic Development. (2012). College Park Business Inventory & Analysis for 2011. College Park: City of College Park, Economic Development.

Deloitte, RERC, NAR. (2012). Expectations & Market Realities in Real Estate 2012 - New Foundations in an Uncertain World. Chicago: Real Estate Research Corporation.

Delta Associates. (2012). An Overview of the Washington/Baltimore Condominium Market. Alexandria: Delta Associates.

Delta Associates. (2012). Trendlines TwnetyTwelve. Alexandria: Delta Associates.

Marcus & Millichap. (2011). Annual Report: Strong Interest in the District Persists while Institutions Comb Suburbs for Large Assets. Marcus & Millichap.

Marcus & Millichap. (2011). Report: Retail Vacancy to Fall Well Below National Level.... Marcus & Millichap.

Marcus & Millichap. (2012). Hospitality Research Quarterly Update. Marcus & Millichap.

Maryland State Highway Administration. (2011). 2011 Traffic Volume Maps by County. Baltimore: Maryland SHA.

Report, Delta Associates Washington/Baltimore Condominium Market. (2012). An Overview of the Washington Apartment Market - First Quarter 2012. Washington, DC: Delta Associates.

Robert Charles Lesser & Company (RCLCO). (2010, June 11). Transit-Oriented Development: Framing the Future of Prince George's County. Prince Georg'es County Economic Forum. Maryland: Robert Charles Lesser & Company (RCLCO).

Smartergrowth.net. (2012). Invest in Prince George's - A Resource Document for Investors. Retrieved April 2012, from http://www.smartergrowth.net/anx/index.cfm/0,229,html

The Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission. (2002). Prince George's County Approved General Plan. M-NCPPC.

University of Maryland. (2011). Facilities Master Plan 2011-2030. College Park: University of Maryland.

Page | 56 JHU Practicum – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

APPENDIX

Existing and Proposed Property Assemblage

Property Parcel Information

Page | 2 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Page | 3 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Page | 4 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Page | 5 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Zoning and Development Regulations

Page | 6 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Page | 7 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Page | 8 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Page | 9 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

DIVISION 2. SPECIFIC MIXED USE ZONES.

SUBDIVISION 1. M-X-T ZONE (MIXED USE - TRANSPORTATION ORIENTED).

Sec. 27-542. Purposes.

(a) The purposes of the M-X-T Zone are: (1) To promote the orderly development and redevelopment of land in the vicinity of major interchanges, major intersections, major transit stops, and designated General Plan Centers so that these areas will enhance the economic status of the County and provide an expanding source of desirable employment and living opportunities for its citizens; (2) To implement recommendations in the approved General Plan, Master Plans, and Sector Plans, by creating compact, mixed-use, walkable communities enhanced by a mix of residential, commercial, recreational, open space, employment, and institutional uses; (3) To conserve the value of land and buildings by maximizing the public and private development potential inherent in the location of the zone, which might otherwise become scattered throughout and outside the County, to its detriment; (4) To promote the effective and optimum use of transit and reduce automobile use by locating a mix of residential and non-residential uses in proximity to one another and to transit facilities to facilitate walking, bicycle, and transit use; (5) To facilitate and encourage a twenty-four (24) hour environment to ensure continuing functioning of the project after workday hours through a maximum of activity, and the interaction between the uses and those who live, work in, or visit the area; (6) To encourage an appropriate horizontal and vertical mix of land uses which blend together harmoniously; (7) To create dynamic, functional relationships among individual uses within a distinctive visual character and identity; (8) To promote optimum land planning with greater efficiency through the use of economies of scale, savings in energy, innovative stormwater management techniques, and provision of public facilities and infrastructure beyond the scope of single-purpose projects; (9) To permit a flexible response to the market and promote economic vitality and investment; and (10) To allow freedom of architectural design in order to provide an opportunity and incentive to the developer to achieve excellence in physical, social, and economic planning. (CB-84-1990; CB-47-1996; CB-78-2006)

Sec. 27-543. Uses.

The uses allowed in the M-X-T Zone are as provided for in the Table of Uses (Division 2 of this Part), including the mix of uses required by Section 27-547(d). (CB-78-2006)

Sec. 27-544. Regulations.

(a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), additional regulations concerning the location, size, and other provisions for all buildings and structures in the M-X-T Zone are as provided for in Divisions 3 and 4 of this Part, General (Part 2), Off-Street Parking and Loading (Part 11), Signs (Part 12), and the Landscape Manual. (b) For property placed in the M-X-T Zone through a Sectional Map Amendment or through a Zoning Map Amendment intended to implement land use recommendations for mixed-use development

Page | 10 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

recommended by a Master Plan or Sector Plan that is approved after October 1, 2006, and for which a comprehensive land use planning study was conducted by Technical Staff prior to initiation: (1) The design guidelines or standards intended to implement the development concept recommended by the Master Plan, Sector Plan, or the Sectional Map Amendment Zoning Change, and a referenced exhibit of record for the property shall provide guidance for the development regulations to be incorporated into the Conceptual Site Plan. (2) The limitations on the maximum percentages of townhouses contained in Section 27-547(b)(7), footnote 7 and the lot size and lot width requirements in Section 27-548(h) shall not apply. However, the Planning Board or District Council may impose similar restrictions where appropriate, only to implement the recommendations of the Master Plan or Sector Plan. (c) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 27-270, a grading permit may be issued as long as it is in conformance with an approved Conceptual Site Plan. (d) Mixed-Use Planned Community regulations. (1) A Mixed Use Planned Community shall conform to the purposes, regulations, and required findings and review process set forth in Division 2 of this Part, Subdivision 6, for the M-X-T Zone. (2) It shall include retail, residential and office/employment uses. The use mixture shall consist of the following, based on the total gross floor area for residential, retail and office combined:

TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA MIN. MAX.

Residential (at least two different types) 50% 70% Retail 10% 20%

Office/Employment 20% 40%

(3) It may include hotel uses. Hotel use is not included in the residential, retail or office/employment categories for purposes of calculating gross floor area for percentages of use. There is no percentage restriction applied to the hotel uses. (4) It shall provide at least one institutional or civic use, shall have an integrated network of streets, sidewalks, and open space, public or private, and shall give priority to public space and appropriate placement of institutional and civic uses. (5) Where a conflict arises between E-I-A Zone requirements and M-X-T Zone requirements, the M-X-T requirements shall be followed. (6) The community shall be focused on a central public space that is surrounded by a combination of commercial, civic, cultural or recreational facilities. (A) The space shall be a minimum of twenty-five (25) acres, and may include a lake. (B) It shall be designed with adequate amenities to function as a fully shared space for the entire community. (7) The community shall contain additional, linked open space in the form of squares, greens and parks that are accessible, visible, safe and comfortable. (A) The open spaces should provide a variety of visual and physical experiences. (B) Some of these open spaces should be bordered by buildings and be visible from streets and buildings. (8) The retail uses shall be designed to: (A) Create a sense of place by: creating a design that is preferably a village or main street theme; providing amenities such as plazas, parks, recreational opportunities, entertainment and cultural activities, public services and dining; and providing attractive project gateways and public spaces. (B) Create outdoor amenities, such as brick pavers, tree grates, decorative lighting, signs, banners, high quality street furniture and extensive landscaping, including mature trees. (C) Create attractive architecture by: using high quality building materials such as stone, brick or split-face block, and providing architectural elements such as façade articulation in fifty

Page | 11 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

(50) foot to seventy-five (75) foot increments, second floor levels, dormer windows, canopies, arcades, varied roofscapes and customized shopfronts to create a street-like rhythm. (D) Promote attractiveness by doing things such as surrounding "big box" stores with "sleeves" of retail and service uses to minimize blank walls and dead spaces; designing attractive, quality façades of all commercial buildings on all four sides where the façade is visible from public space; and completely screening loading, service, trash, HVAC and other unsightly functions. (E) Creating a retail area where: pedestrians may travel with ease, with attractive walkways and continuous street front experiences to maximize the quality of the pedestrian environment; all uses are connected by sidewalks; crosswalks run through and across the parking lots and drive aisles to connect all buildings and uses; sidewalks are wide, appealing, shaded and configured for safe and comfortable travel; pedestrian walkways are separated from vehicular circulation by planting beds, raised planters, seating walls, on-street parallel parking and/or structures; walking distances through parking lots are minimized and located to form logical and safe pedestrian crossings, and walkways are made more pedestrian-friendly through the use of arcades, canopies, street trees, benches and tables and chairs. (F) Shield and enhance the surrounding view through techniques such as screening views of parking lots along the main frontal streets with fifty (50) to one hundred (100) foot wide green bermed and landscaped strips, or a low brick (or other quality material) wall, in order to screen parking from the public frontage streets, and ensuring that attractive buildings and limited signage are to be visible from the public frontage streets. (G) Minimize expanse of parking lots through the use of shared parking, structured parking or decks, landscape islands or the location of buildings and streets. (H) Provide a hierarchy of pedestrian-scaled, direct and indirect, high quality, energy efficient lighting that illuminates walkways, ensures safety, highlights buildings and landmark elements, and provides sight lines to other retail uses. (I) Create a signage package for high quality signs and sign standards and requirements for all retail and office tenants and owners, which shall address size, location, square footage, materials, logos, colors and lighting. For office and retail uses, a Conceptual Site Plan for Signage shall be approved prior to release of any sign permits. All sign permits shall conform to the approved Conceptual Site Plan for Signage. (J) Enhance retail pad sites designs to be compatible with the main retail component. If the retail pad sites are located along the public frontage streets, parking shall be located to the rear and sides of the pad sites. (K) Green areas should be provided between pad sites. (L) Restaurants should have attractive outdoor seating areas with views of the central public space/lake or other natural features. (9) Residential uses shall meet the following design standards: (A) Single family detached. (i) There shall be a range of lot sizes, with a minimum square footage on any lot of two thousand, two hundred (2,200) square feet of finished living space. (ii) At least twenty percent (20%) of the houses shall be a minimum of two thousand, six hundred (2,600) square feet of finished living space. (iii) Garages may not dominate the streetscape, and all garages shall either be detached, located in the rear (accessible by alleys or front street), attached and set back a minimum of eight (8) feet from the front façade, or attached and side entry. (iv) All streets, whether public or private, shall have sidewalks. (B) Multifamily. (i) Building materials shall be high quality, enduring and distinctive. (ii) Use of siding should be limited. (iii) A significant number of amenities such as are typically provided for luxury rental and condo projects shall be provided. (e) Regional Urban Community Regulations.

Page | 12 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

(1) A Regional Urban Community shall conform to the definitions, regulations, and requirements set forth in Sections 27-107.01, 27-276, and 27-508 of the Zoning Ordinance. (2) In addition to the definition, regulations, and other requirements set forth in Sections 27- 107.01, 27-276, and 27-508 of this Code, the following regulations shall apply to a Regional Urban Community in the M-X-T Zone: (A) The maximum percentage of attached dwelling units, which includes but is not limited to townhouses, two over twos and triplexes, shall be fifty percent (50%) of the total units in the project; (B) For Regional Urban Community developments in the M-X-T Zone, the woodland conservation and afforestation thresholds shall be fifteen percent (15%) with no requirement for on-site mitigation. A fee-in-lieu of $0.30 per square foot shall be required. (C) Innovative stormwater management techniques may be used upon a finding that the techniques meet the purpose of the M-X-T Zone as set forth in Section 27-541(a)(2), including but not limited to the utilization of stream channel and floodplain enhancement and restoration. Stream restoration may be utilized to meet channel protection and water quality volumes. (D) No setback shall be required from the 100-year floodplain to the lot line. There shall be a twenty-five (25) foot setback from the building to the 100-year floodplain for residences as a building restriction line as set forth in Section 24-129. (E) The maximum number of townhouse dwelling units per building group shall be ten (10). No more than thirty percent (30%) of the building groups shall contain nine (9) to ten (10) dwelling units. All other townhouse building groups shall contain no more than eight (8) dwelling units. (F) The number of parking spaces required in the core area of the Regional Urban Community are to be calculated by the applicant and submitted for Planning Board approval at the time of Detailed Site Plan approval. The applicant shall submit the methodology, assumptions, and data used in performing the calculations with the Detailed Site Plan. The number of parking spaces within the core area of the Regional Urban Community shall be calculated based on the procedures described in Sections 27-574(b) and (c). (G) End units on townhouse building groups shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet in width and the minimum building width of a contiguous attached townhouse building group shall be sixteen (16) feet per unit. A variety of townhouse sizes shall be provided, with a minimum gross living space of a townhouse unit shall be 1,500 square feet except that ten percent (10%) of the townhouse units may be reduced to 1,200 square feet. (H) The minimum front setback from any public or private right-of-way may be reduced to seven (7) feet. In the core area, the public maintenance shall be one foot from back-of-curb to one foot to back-of-curb. (CB-1-1989; CB-84-1990; CB-47-1996; CB-44-1997; CB-13-2002; CB-78-2006; CB-29-2008)

Sec. 27-545. Optional method of development.

(a) Purposes. (1) Under the optional method of development, greater densities shall be granted, in increments of up to a maximum floor area ratio of eight (8.0), for each of the uses, improvements, and amenities (listed in Subsection (b)) which are provided by the developer and are available for public use. The presence of these facilities and amenities is intended: (A) To make possible a livable environment capable of supporting the greater density and intensity of development permitted; (B) To encourage a high degree of urban design; (C) To increase pedestrian-oriented activities and amenities; and (D) To provide uses which encourage a lively, twenty-four (24) hour cycle for the development. (b) Bonus incentives.

Page | 13 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

(1) Open arcade. (A) Three (3) gross square feet shall be permitted to be added to the gross floor area of the building for each one (1) square foot of open arcade provided. For the purpose of this incentive, an open arcade is a continuous, covered area (excluding areas covered by such things as canopies), located along the perimeter of a building and designed for pedestrian uses. The arcade shall adjoin a street, plaza, or court and, except for the columns, piers, or arches which support the building or roof, the arcade shall be open to the street, plaza, or court. An open arcade shall have an unobstructed passageway at least ten (10) feet wide for its entire length. If an open arcade adjoins a street, it shall (at both ends) connect with other open arcades or be a part of a continuous sidewalk along the street. (2) Enclosed pedestrian space. (A) Four (4) gross square feet shall be permitted to be added to the gross floor area of the building for each one (1) square foot of enclosed pedestrian space provided. For the purpose of this incentive, an enclosed pedestrian space is a wholly enclosed area located within a building and designed for pedestrian use. The space may be covered by a roof of a transparent material which exposes the area to natural light. The enclosed pedestrian area shall be directly accessible to the public, have a minimum ceiling height of twenty (20) feet, and have at least one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of gross floor area. The space shall be appropriately lighted, and at least three (3) of the following shall be provided: balconies with inter-floor connections; planting or landscaping; ornamental fountains; statuary; furniture; kiosks; works of art; overhead banners, pennants, mobiles, or other decorative elements; or other similar features. (3) Theater. (A) Four (4) gross square feet shall be permitted to be added to the gross floor area of the building for each one (1) square foot of theater or other performing arts facility containing a minimum of one hundred fifty (150) seats. (4) Residential use. (A) Additional gross floor area equal to a floor area ratio (FAR) of one (1.0) shall be permitted where twenty (20) or more dwelling units are provided. (5) Rooftop activities. (A) One (1) gross square foot shall be permitted to be added to the gross floor area of the building for each one (1) square foot of landscaped rooftop provided. The area shall be accessible to the public and shall contain observation and sitting areas. (B) One (1) gross square foot shall be permitted to be added to the gross floor area of the building for each one (1) square foot of restaurant with outdoor seating, or for each one (1) square foot of outdoor recreational facilities, provided on the rooftop. (6) Outdoor plaza. (A) Eight (8) gross square feet shall be permitted to be added to the gross floor area of the building for every one (1) square foot of outdoor plaza provided. The plaza shall be open to the sky, except for street furniture, landscaping, or similar items, or any sun or rain shades (not including open arcades) which cover not more than twenty percent (20%) of the plaza area. The plaza shall reflect a high degree of urban design which encourages a variety of human activities, such as walking and sitting in a pleasant public space. The plaza, and any buildings on the south side of the plaza, shall be arranged and designed to admit sunlight to the plaza. The plaza shall contain extensive plantings, a range of seating options, other street furniture, and works of art or water features, such as statuary, fountains, and pools. The plaza shall be surfaced in textured concrete, masonry, ceramic paving units, wood, or other approved special surfacing material. Lighting shall be furnished which provides for both safety and visual effect. The minimum size of a plaza shall be eighty (80) feet by one hundred (100) feet. (CB-78-2006)

Sec. 27-546. Site plans.

Page | 14 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

(a) A Conceptual Site Plan and a Detailed Site Plan shall be approved for all uses and improvements, in accordance with Part 3, Division 9, of this Subtitle. (b) In addition to the information required by Part 3, Division 9, for Conceptual Site Plans, the following information shall be included on Plans in the M-X-T Zone: (1) A general description of the pedestrian system proposed; (2) The proposed floor area ratio; (3) The type and location of uses proposed, and the range of square footage anticipated to be devoted to each; (4) A general description of any incentives to be used under the optional method of development; (5) Areas proposed for landscaping and screening; (6) The proposed sequence of development; and (7) The physical and functional relationship of the project uses and components. (8) Property placed in the M-X-T Zone by a Sectional Map Amendment shall provide supporting evidence which shows whether the proposed development will exceed the capacity of transportation facilities that are existing, are under construction, for which one hundred percent (100%) of construction funds are allocated within the adopted County Capital Improvement Program or within the current State Consolidated Transportation Program, will be provided by the applicant, or are incorporated in a specific public facilities financing and implementation program. (c) In addition to the information required by Part 3, Division 9, for Detailed Site Plans, the following information shall be included on Plans in the M-X-T Zone: (1) The proposed drainage system; (2) All improvements and uses proposed on the property; (3) The proposed floor area ratio of the project, and detailed description of any bonus incentives to be used; and (4) Supporting evidence which shows that the proposed development will be adequately served within a reasonable period of time with existing or programmed public facilities shown in the adopted County Capital Improvement Program or within the current State Consolidated Transportation Program, will be provided by the applicant, or are incorporated in a specific public facilities financing and implementation program, if more than six (6) years have elapsed since a finding of adequacy was made at the time of rezoning through a Zoning Map Amendment, Conceptual Site Plan approval, or preliminary plat approval, whichever occurred last. (d) In addition to the findings required for the Planning Board to approve either the Conceptual or Detailed Site Plan (Part 3, Division 9), the Planning Board shall also find that: (1) The proposed development is in conformance with the purposes and other provisions of this Division; (2) For property placed in the M-X-T Zone through a Sectional Map Amendment approved after October 1, 2006, the proposed development is in conformance with the design guidelines or standards intended to implement the development concept recommended by the Master Plan, Sector Plan, or Sectional Map Amendment Zoning Change; (3) The proposed development has an outward orientation which either is physically and visually integrated with existing adjacent development or catalyzes adjacent community improvement and rejuvenation; (4) The proposed development is compatible with existing and proposed development in the vicinity; (5) The mix of uses, arrangement and design of buildings and other improvements, and provision of public amenities reflect a cohesive development capable of sustaining an independent environment of continuing quality and stability; (6) If the development is staged, each building phase is designed as a self-sufficient entity, while allowing for effective integration of subsequent phases;

Page | 15 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

(7) The pedestrian system is convenient and is comprehensively designed to encourage pedestrian activity within the development; (8) On the Detailed Site Plan, in areas of the development which are to be used for pedestrian activities or as gathering places for people, adequate attention has been paid to human scale, high quality urban design, and other amenities, such as the types and textures of materials, landscaping and screening, street furniture, and lighting (natural and artificial); and (9) On a Conceptual Site Plan for property placed in the M-X-T Zone by a Sectional Map Amendment, transportation facilities that are existing; that are under construction; or for which one hundred percent (100%) of construction funds are allocated within the adopted County Capital Improvement Program, or the current State Consolidated Transportation Program, will be provided by the applicant, or are incorporated in an approved public facilities financing and implementation program, will be adequate to carry anticipated traffic for the proposed development. The finding by the Council of adequate transportation facilities at the time of Conceptual Site Plan approval shall not prevent the Planning Board from later amending this finding during its review of subdivision plats. (10) On the Detailed Site Plan, if more than six (6) years have elapsed since a finding of adequacy was made at the time of rezoning through a Zoning Map Amendment, Conceptual Site Plan approval, or preliminary plat approval, whichever occurred last, the development will be adequately served within a reasonable period of time with existing or programmed public facilities shown in the adopted County Capital Improvement Program, within the current State Consolidated Transportation Program, or to be provided by the applicant. (11) On a property or parcel zoned E-I-A or M-X-T and containing a minimum of two hundred fifty (250) acres, a Mixed-Use Planned Community including a combination of residential, employment, commercial and institutional uses may be approved in accordance with the provisions set forth in this Section and Section 27-548. (CB-1-1989; CB-26-1991; CB-13-2002; CB-78-2006)

DIVISION 3. USES PERMITTED.

Sec. 27-547. Uses permitted.

(a) No use shall be allowed in the Mixed Use Zones, except as provided for in the Table of Uses. In the table, the following applies: (1) The letter "P" indicates that the use is permitted in the zone indicated. (2) The letters "SE" indicate that the use is permitted, subject to the approval of a Special Exception in accordance with Part 4 of this Subtitle. (3) The letters "PA" indicate that the use is permitted, subject to the following: (A) There shall be no entrances to the use directly from outside the building; (B) No signs or other evidence indicating the existence of the use shall be visible from the outside of the building, other than a business identification sign lettered on a window. The sign shall not exceed six (6) square feet in area; and (C) The use is secondary to the primary use of the building; (4) The letters "PB" indicate that the use is permitted, subject to the following: (A) The use shall be related to, dependent on, and secondary to a principal use on the premises; (B) The use shall be located on the same record lot as the principal use; (C) The use shall not be located within a building not occupied by the principal use; and (D) The floor area of any building (and the land area occupied by any structure other than a building) devoted to the use shall not exceed an area equal to forty-five percent (45%) of the gross floor area of the building within which the principal use is located. (5) The letters "SP" indicate that the use is permitted subject to the approval of a Special Permit, in accordance with Section 27-239.02.

Page | 16 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

(6) The letter "X" or a blank (unless otherwise clear from the context) indicates that the use is prohibited. (7) All uses not listed are prohibited. (8) Whenever the table refers to an allowed use, that use is either permitted (P), permitted by Special Exception (SE), permitted by Special Permit (SP), or permitted as a (PA) or (PB) use, as accordingly listed in the zone in which it is allowed. (CB-23-1988; CB-2-1994) (b) TABLE OF USES. ZONE

USE M-X-T M-X-C

(1) COMMERCIAL: All Types Offices and Research P P Banks, savings and loan association, or other savings or lending institution P P Bulk Retailing X9 X (CB-83-2006) Check Cashing Business SE11 SE11 (CB-23-2009) Data processing facilities P P Eating or Drinking Establishments P P Offices (may include a private spa in a medical practitioner's office or medical clinic) P P Research, development, and testing laboratory (may include testing facilities and P P6 equipment), medical or dental laboratory Services and Trade (Generally Retail): Barber or beauty shop P P Blue printing, photostating, or other photocopying establishment P P Book (except adult book store), camera, gift, jewelry, music, souvenir, or other specialty P P store not specifically listed (CB-63-1992) Buying of items within guest rooms or vehicles, pursuant to Section 27-115(a)(2) X X Department store P X Pet grooming establishment P P (CB-63-1992) Dry cleaning or laundry establishment P P Drug paraphernalia display or sales, pursuant to Section 27-115(a) X X Drug store P P Food or beverage store P P (CB-63-1992) Gas station: (A) With or without a service center for minor repairs (placed underground or in a P P wholly enclosed structure) (B) With or without a service center, and may include a car wash X P (CB-63-1992) Hardware store P P (CB-63-1992) Hobby shop P P

Page | 17 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

ZONE USE M-X-T M-X-C

Pet (sales) shop, provided all animals are confined to the interior of the building and P P adequate measures are taken to control noise and odor (CB-63-1992) Photographic supply store P P Private Automobile and Other Motor Vehicle Auctions X12 X (CB-59-2010) Seafood market P P (CB-49-1987) Seasonal decorations display and sales as a temporary use, in accordance with P P Sections 27-260 and 27-261 Studio for artistic practice P P Repair shops for small items (such as bicycles, watches, clothing, and shoes) P P (CB-63-1992) Valet shop P P Variety or dry goods store P X Veterinary clinic P P (CB-63-1992) Waterfront Entertainment/Retail Complex P X (CB-44-1997)

(2) INDUSTRIAL: Manufacturing, fabrication, assembly or repair of the following, from materials or parts previously produced elsewhere: Artist's supplies and equipment P X Business machines P X Drafting supplies and equipment P X Electrical and electronic equipment and component parts for radio, television, P X telephone, computer, and similar equipment Jewelry and silverware P X Musical instruments P X Optical equipment and supplies P X Photographic developing and processing establishment P X Photographic equipment and supplies P X Scientific and precision instruments, devices, and supplies P X Small electrical household appliances (including televisions, but excluding refrigerators P X and the like) Surgical, medical, and dental instruments, devices, and supplies P X Toys, sporting and athletic equipment (excluding ammunition, firearms, and fireworks) P X Watches, clocks, and similar timing devices P X Wearing apparel P X Where not otherwise specifically permitted, any use allowed in the I-1 Zone (excluding P10 X those permitted by Special Exception) (CB-6-2007)

(3) INSTITUTIONAL/EDUCATIONAL: Adult day care facility P P (CB-63-1992)

Page | 18 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

ZONE USE M-X-T M-X-C

Assisted Living Facility, subject to the requirements of Section 27-464.04 X P (CB-26-2002) Church or similar place of worship, convent, or monastery P P (CB-23-1988) Day care center for children P P (CB-23-1988) Eleemosynary or philanthropic institution (excluding hospital) P P Family day care P P Modular classroom as a temporary use, in accordance with Sections 27-260 and 27-261 P P (CB-106-1989) Nursing or Care Home X P (CB-26-2002) School, private or public, all types (which may include private spas) P P Small group child care center P P (CB-131-1993)

(4) MISCELLANEOUS: Accessory structures and uses P P Cemetery, accessory to a church, convent, or monastery5 P P (CB-11-1991) Home occupations (except in multifamily dwellings) P P Metro Planned Community P X (CB-35-1998) Mixed Use Planned Community; list of permitted uses is the same as in the M-X-T Zone P X (CB-13-2002) Mobile home, with use for which amusement taxescollected2 P X Other uses of appropriate size, which can be justified as similar to one of the uses listed P P in this Section Real estate subdivision sales office as a temporary use, in accordance with Sections 27- P P 260 and 27-261 Regional Urban Community P X (CB-29-2008) Signs, in accordance with Part 12 P P Temporary contractor's office (must include sanitary facilities), construction yard, P P construction shed, or storage building, in connection with a construction project on the same property; provided no item stored or assembled there is offered for sale at the location, and in accordance with Sections 27-260 and 27-261

(5) PUBLIC/QUASI PUBLIC: Library P P Post office P P Public building and use, if not otherwise specified X P (CB-63-1992) Sanitary Landfill or rubble fill X X (CB-63-1992) Volunteer fire, ambulance, or rescue station1 P P

Page | 19 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

ZONE USE M-X-T M-X-C

(6) RECREATIONAL/ENTERTAINMENT/SOCIAL/CULTURAL: Community building P P Convention center P X Exhibition halls and facilities P X Golf course or country club P P (CB-63-1992) Indoor theater or recital hall P P Marina: (A) In accordance with Sections 27-371.01(a) and 27-548.01.01 P SE (B) All others SE SE (CB-72-1987; CB-34-1989) Museum, art gallery, aquarium, cultural center, or similar facility (noncommercial) P P Outdoor exhibition, displays, entertainment, or performance P P Park, playground, or other outdoor recreational area P P Private club or service organization P P Recreational or entertainment establishment (commercial or noncommercial) P P Reducing/exercise salon or health club P P Skating facility P P (CB-89-1994) Spa, community P P Spa, private P P Spa, public, accessory to hotel, motel, reducing/exercise salon, health club, or swimming P P pool Swimming pool (indoor or outdoor) commercial or noncommercial P P (CB-63-1992) Tennis, basketball, handball, or similar court (indoor or outdoor) commercial or P P noncommercial (CB-63-1992) Tourist home P P (CB-63-1992)

(7) RESIDENTIAL/LODGING: Country inn P P (CB-63-1992) Dwellings, all types (except mobile homes) P7 P (CB-56-1996) Flag lot development, subject to the provisions of Section 24-138.01 of Subtitle 24 X P (CB-25-2002) Group residential facility for up to 8 mentally handicapped dependent persons P P Hotel or motel P P

(8) TRANSPORTATION/PARKING/COMMUNICATIONS/UTILITIES: Heliport P SE Helistop P SE (CB-63-1992)

Page | 20 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

ZONE USE M-X-T M-X-C

Parking lot or garage, or loading area, in accordance with Part 11 P P Parking of mobile home in public rights-of-way3 X X Parking of mobile home not otherwise provided for X X Passenger transportation station or depot (such as rapid transit station, bus stop, taxi or P P auto rental stand) Public utility use or structure: (A) Railroad yard, round house, car barn, and freight station X X (B) All others P P Radio or television broadcasting studio P X Satellite dish antenna, in accordance with Section 27-541.02: (A) Up to 10 feet in diameter, to serve only 1 dwelling unit P X (B) Over 10 feet in diameter, to serve only 1 dwelling unit SE X (C) All others P X (CB-19-1985) Storage of any motor vehicle which is wrecked, dismantled, or not currently licensed, X X except where specifically authorized4 (CB-4-1987) Telegraph or messenger service P P Tower, pole, or antenna (electronic, radio, or television, transmitting or receiving), except a public utility structure or a satellite dish antenna: 8 (A) Maximum of 150 feet P P (B) Exceeding 150 feet SE SE (CB-123-1994; CB-103-1997)

1 Provided the site is either: (A) In the proximity of an area designated as a fire or rescue station on an approved Functional Master Plan of Fire and Rescue Stations; (B) In a location which the Fire Chief has indicated (in writing) is appropriate; or (C) Is occupied by a station that was in use immediately prior to July 1, 1982.

The following activities are considered to be ancillary uses permitted within the hall/assembly area of a voluntary fire, ambulance, or rescue station: bingo (with an approved license from the Department of Environmental Resources), weddings, dinners, community events, organization functions, and private events (with no advance or at the door ticket sales).

All events must comply with County or State regulations, and events requiring a specific license must obtain such license to be considered a permitted ancillary use. All events must be organized by the voluntary fire, ambulance, or rescue corporation or company and/or a community group from within the immediate vicinity of the station. For weddings, receptions, and dinners, the event may be organized by an individual in conjunction with the voluntary fire, ambulance, or rescue corporation or company and/or a community group within the immediate vicinity of the station. A permitted ancillary use does not include the leasing of the station facility for use by a promoter. Private events may not have advance or at the door ticket sales. All events must end by 10:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday (except that bingo events must end by 11:00 p.m.), and by midnight on Friday and Saturday, with all patrons off the site within thirty (30) minutes after closing. (CB-70-2008)

Page | 21 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

2 Provided: (A) The mobile home is located on a lot having a net area of at least five (5) acres; (B) The use of the mobile home is in connection with another use on the property for which the County levies or collects an amusement tax. (C) The occupants of the mobile home are employed by, or reasonably connected with, the other use; and (D) The mobile home shall not be located on the property for more than one hundred twenty (120) cumulative days per calendar year, except mobile homes used in connection with pari-mutuel racetracks when the use shall not exceed two hundred eighteen (218) cumulative days per calendar year. 3 Except in an emergency. In this case the parking shall be subject to the traffic and parking regulations applicable to the right-of-way. 4 This shall not apply to: (A) Storage accessory (and related) to an allowed use; or (B) One (1) such vehicle stored in a wholly enclosed garage. 5 Provided both uses were existing as of January 1, 1991. (CB-11-1991) 6 Accessory uses such as light manufacturing, assembly service, repair, or warehousing associated with this use are permitted. (CB-63-1992) 7 Except as provided in Section 27-544(b), for development pursuant to a Detailed Site Plan for which an application is filed after December 30, 1996, the number of townhouses shall not exceed 20% of the total number of dwelling units in the total development. This townhouse restriction shall not apply to townhouses on land any portion which lies within one-half (½) mile of an existing or planned mass transit rail station site operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and initially opened after January 1, 2000. (CB-56-1996; CB-40-2002; CB-78-2006) 8 Any related telecommunications equipment building shall be screened by means of landscaping or berming to one hundred percent (100%) opacity. (CB-103-1997) 9 Bulk retailing may be permitted as part of a Detailed Site Plan for a planned mixed use development which, at a minimum, includes other commercial retail uses (at least one (1) of which shall be a freestanding use consisting of a minimum of seventy-five thousand (75,000) square feet) as well as commercial office uses. (CB-83-2006) 10 Provided: (A) The property was rezoned from the I-1 Zone to the M-X-T Zone through a Sectional Map Amendment approved after January 1, 2007; and (B) All or part of the property is located within an airport noise zone subject to noise measuring a minimum of seventy (70) dBA at the time the property was zoned M-X-T. (CB-6-2007) Editor's Note: Pursuant to Section 2 of CB-5-2010, this Ordinance shall be abrogated and no longer effective after July 9, 2012, at which time, the use(s) then located on the property or for which permits were issued pursuant to this Ordinance shall be deemed nonconforming. 11 Businesses with a valid state license for check cashing issued prior to September 1, 2009 may continue as a matter of right and shall not be deemed nonconforming. Any change in tenant or ownership of the check cashing business requires approval of a special exception for this use prior to issuance of the Use & Occupancy permit. (CB-23-2009) 12 Any private automobile and other motor vehicle auction operating in the M-X-T Zone prior to January 1, 2011, shall have until January 1, 2013, to cease all auction operations on the property. (CB-59-2010)

DIVISION 4. REGULATIONS.

Page | 22 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Sec. 27-548. M-X-T Zone.

(a) Maximum floor area ratio (FAR): (1) Without the use of the optional method of development -- 0.40 FAR; and (2) With the use of the optional method of development -- 8.00 FAR. (b) The uses allowed in the M-X-T Zone may be located in more than one (1) building, and on more than one (1) lot. (c) Except as provided for in this Division, the dimensions for the location, coverage, and height of all improvements shown on an approved Detailed Site Plan shall constitute the regulations for these improvements for a specific development in the M-X-T Zone. (d) Landscaping, screening, and buffering of development in the M-X-T Zone shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of the Landscape Manual. Additional buffering and screening may be required to satisfy the purposes of the M-X-T Zone and to protect the character of the M-X-T Zone from adjoining or interior incompatible land uses. (e) In addition to those areas of a building included in the computation of gross floor area (without the use of the optional method of development), the floor area of the following improvements (using the optional method of development) shall be included in computing the gross floor area of the building of which they are a part: enclosed pedestrian spaces, theaters, and residential uses. Floor area ratios shall exclude from gross floor area that area in a building or structure devoted to vehicular parking and parking access areas (notwithstanding the provisions of Section 27-107.01). The floor area ratio shall be applied to the entire property which is the subject of the Conceptual Site Plan. (f) Private structures may be located within the air space above, or in the ground below, public rights-of-way. (g) Each lot shall have frontage on, and direct vehicular access to, a public street, except lots for which private streets or other access rights-of-way have been authorized pursuant to Subtitle 24 of this Code. (h) Townhouses developed pursuant to a Detailed Site Plan for which an application is filed after December 30, 1996, shall be on lots at least one thousand eight hundred (1,800) square feet in size, and shall have at least sixty percent (60%) of the full front facades constructed of brick, stone, or stucco. In addition, there shall be no more than six (6) townhouses per building group, except where the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Planning Board or District Council, as applicable, that more than six (6) dwelling units (but not more than eight (8) dwelling units) would create a more attractive living environment or would be more environmentally sensitive. In no event shall the number of building groups containing more than six (6) dwelling units exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total number of building groups in the total development, and the end units on such building groups shall be a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet in width. The minimum building width in any continuous, attached group shall be twenty (20) feet, and the minimum gross living space shall be one thousand two hundred and fifty (1,250) square feet. For the purposes of this Subsection, gross living space shall be defined as all interior building space except the garage and unfinished basement or attic area. The minimum lot size, maximum number of units per building group and percentages of such building groups, and building width requirements and restrictions shall not apply to townhouses on land any portion which lies within one-half (½) mile of an existing or planned mass transit rail station site operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and initially opened after January 1, 2000. In no event shall there be more than ten (10) dwelling units in a building group and no more than two (2) building groups containing ten (10) dwelling units. For purposes of this section, a building group shall be considered a separate building group (even though attached) when the angle formed by the front walls of two (2) adjoining rows of units is greater than forty-five degrees (45o). Except that, in the case of a Mixed-Use Planned Community, there shall be no more than eight (8) townhouses per building group, except when the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Planning Board or District Council, as applicable, that more than eight (8) dwelling units (but not more than ten (10) dwelling units) would create a more attractive living environment or would be more environmentally sensitive. In no event shall the number of building

Page | 23 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

groups containing more than eight (8) dwelling units exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total number of building groups in the total development, and the end units on such building groups shall be a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet in width. The minimum building width in any continuous, attached group shall be twenty-two (22) feet, and the minimum gross living space shall be one thousand two hundred and fifty (1,250) square feet. For the purposes of this Subsection, gross living space shall be defined as all interior building space except the garage and unfinished basement or attic area. Garages may not dominate the streetscape. Garages that are attached or incorporated into the dwelling shall be set back a minimum of four (4) feet from the front façade and there shall not be more than a single garage, not to exceed ten (10) feet wide, along the front façade of any individual unit. Garages are preferred to be incorporated into the rear of the building or freestanding in the rear yard and accessed by an alley. Sidewalks are required on both sides of all public and private streets and parking lots. At the time of Detailed Site Plan, the District Council may approve a request to substitute townhouses, proposed for development as condominiums, for multifamily dwellings that were required as a condition of approval in a Conceptual Site Plan approved prior to April 1, 2004. Such substitution shall not require a revision to any previous plan approvals. Further, such townhouses are subject to all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. (i) The maximum height of multifamily buildings shall be one hundred and ten (110) feet. This height restriction shall not apply within any Transit District Overlay Zone, designated General Plan Metropolitan or Regional Centers, or a Mixed-Use Planned Community. (j) As noted in Section 27-544(b), which references property placed in the M-X-T Zone through a Sectional Map Amendment approved after October 1, 2006, and for which a comprehensive land use planning study was conducted by Technical Staff prior to initiation, regulations for Conceptual or Detailed Site Plans (such as, but not limited to density, setbacks, buffers, screening, landscaping, height, recreational requirements, ingress/egress, and internal circulation) should be based on the design guidelines or standards intended to implement the development concept recommended by the Master Plan, Sector Plan, or the Sectional Map Amendment Zoning Change and any referenced exhibit of record for the property. This regulation also applies to property readopted in the M-X-T Zone through a Sectional Map Amendment approved after October 1, 2006 and for which a comprehensive land use planning study was conducted by Technical Staff prior to initiation of a concurrent Master Plan or Sector Plan (see Section 27-226(f)(3) of the Zoning Ordinance). (CB-46-1985; CB-1-1989; CB-56-1996; CB-13-2002; CB-40-2002; CB-78-2006; CB-93-2010)

SUBDIVISION 3. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.

Sec. 27-568. Schedule (number) of spaces required, generally.

(a) In all zones (except the M-X-T Zone), the minimum number of required off-street parking spaces for each type of use shall be as listed in the following schedule. In the schedule, each "employee" means each employee on the largest shift.

NUMBER OF TYPE OF USE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT SPACES

(1) RESIDENTIAL: Congregate living facility for elderly/physically handicapped 1.0 4 residents Conversion of one-family detached dwelling (to include 1.0 Dwelling unit additional dwelling units) Dwelling unit within a building containing commercial or 2.0 For each dwelling unit industrial uses (CB-28-1985)

Page | 24 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

NUMBER OF TYPE OF USE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT SPACES

Group residential facility 1.0 4 residents Multifamily dwelling: (A) Housing for the elderly or physically handicapped 0.66 Dwelling unit (B) If wholly within a one mile radius of a metro station 1.33 Dwelling unit +0.33 Bedroom in excess of one per unit (C) Containing at least 90% one bedroom units 1.5 Dwelling unit +0.5 Bedroom in excess of one per unit (D) All others 2.0 Dwelling unit (CB-26-1989) +0.5 Bedroom in excess of one per unit One-family detached dwellings: (A) Cluster Development 1.5 Dwelling unit (B) Mobile Home 2.0 Dwelling unit (C) All others 2.0 Dwelling unit Three-family dwelling 2.0 Dwelling unit Townhouse or other one-family attached dwelling 2.04 Dwelling unit Two-family dwelling 2.0 Dwelling unit

(2) LODGING: Bed-and-Breakfast Inn 1.0 Guest Room not to exceed eight (8) (CB-39-2009) Country Inn: (A) Lodging 1.0 Guest Room (B) Food service +1.0 3 seats (C) Accessory retail sales areas and exhibits +2.0 1,000 sq. ft. of GFA Dormitory 1.0 2 residents Fraternity or sorority house 1.0 2 residents Hotel (not including restaurant or other accessory use 1.0 2 guest rooms requirements) Motel 1.0 Guest room Rooming house, boardinghouse, or other renting of guest 1.0 Guest room rooms in a dwelling

Tourist cabin camp 1.0 Cabin +1.0 Employee

(3) INSTITUTIONAL/EDUCATIONAL: Adult day care center 1.0 3 occupants (including operators) Assisted Living Facility 1.0 3 residents (CB-72-1996) 1.0 4 seats in main auditorium

Church or similar place of worship 1.0 4 seats in main auditorium +1.0 4 seats in other rooms occupied at same time as main auditorium

Page | 25 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

NUMBER OF TYPE OF USE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT SPACES

Day care center for children 1.0 8 children (CB-23-1988) Day care center for children within an existing multifamily 0.0 (None required) development in excess of one hundred (100) units (CB-24-1999) Family day care 0.0 (None required) Hospital 1.5 Bed Nursing home 1.0 3 beds Private school: (A) Which offers instruction at levels below 10th grade 1.0 6 students (including nursery school and kindergarten) (CB-23-1988) (B) 10th grade and above (including adult education) 1.0 3 students Small group child care center 2.0 Center, if on-street parking is not (CB-131-1993) permitted in front of the center at all times

(4) RECREATIONAL/ENTERTAINMENT/SOCIAL/CULTURAL: Adult Entertainment 1.0 80 sq. ft. of GFA (CB-46-2010) Amusement park Determined as a part of the Special Exception Athletic field 1.0 4 seats (of spectator seating) Beach (open to public) 1.0 4 persons legal occupancy (CB-28-1985) Billiard or pool parlor 4.0 Table +1.0 Employee Boat ramp (open to public) 15.0 Each ramp (CB-28-1985)

Bowling alley, archery/batting/shooting range 5.0 Lane or target +1.0 2 employees Campground: (A) For trailers 1.0 Site (sufficient space for 1 trailer and 1 automobile on each campsite) (B) For tents 1.0 Site (within reasonable walking distance of campsite) Club, private Determined by uses comprising the club (such as eating or drinking establishment, office, auditorium, recreational area)

Commercial recreational attractions Determined as a part of the Special Exception Community building Determined by uses comprising the community building (such as office, auditorium, eating or drinking establishment, recreational area) Fishing pier (open to public) 1.0 50 sq. ft. of gross pier surface area (CB-28-1985)

Page | 26 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

NUMBER OF TYPE OF USE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT SPACES

Go-cart track 1.0 Carts available +1.0 Employee Golf course 8.0 Hole +1.0 Employee Plus 50% of spaces normally required for accessory uses such as eating or drinking establishment, pro shop, driving range) Golf driving range 1.0 Tee +1.0 Employee Golf, miniature 2.0 Hole +1.0 Employee

Marina 1.0 Boat slip Museum, art gallery, aquarium, cultural center, library, or 2.5 1,000 sq. ft. of GFA similar facility Other commercial recreation 1.0 80 sq. ft. of GFA or patron service area Picnic area 1.0 Table Racetrack Determined as a part of the Special Exception

Riding stable 1.0 2 stalls Skating rink or facility 1.0 4 persons legal occupancy (CB-89-1994) Spa, community (other than incidental to a multifamily 1.0 7 persons permitted to occupy spas development)

Spa, public 1.0 2 persons permitted to occupy spa; +1.0 250 sq. ft. of GFA of lobby and office space Swimming pool, commercial 1.0 4 persons legal occupancy

Swimming pool, community (other than incidental to a 1.0 7 persons legal occupancy multifamily development)

Tennis, racquetball 4.0 Court +1.0 Employee Plus 50% of spaces normally required for accessory uses (such as eating or drinking establishment, pro shop, exercise area) Theater, auditorium, or stadium 1.0 4 seats

Page | 27 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

NUMBER OF TYPE OF USE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT SPACES

(5) COMMERCIAL TRADE (GENERALLY RETAIL)/SERVICES: (A) Normal Parking Generation Group 1.0 150 sq. ft. of the first 3,000 sq. ft. GFA (This group consists of retail sales and service establishments that generate an average parking demand, and 200 sq. ft. of GFA above the first 3,000 include all such uses that are not listed below.) +1.0 sq. ft.

(B) Low Parking Generation Group 1.0 500 sq. ft. of GFA (This group consists of: furniture stores; carpeting and floor covering stores; retail upholstery shops; sporting goods, which may include marine equipment and supplies; vehicle, trailer, mobile home, and boat sales (indoor); office supply and business machine sales; similar uses which, because of their large areas of display space, generate relatively small demands for parking space.) (C) Shopping Centers (such as integrated shopping centers, malls, and plazas): (i) 25,000 to under 400,000 sq. ft. of GLA: (aa) All uses, except as provided below 1.0 250 sq. ft. of GLA (excluding theaters) (bb) Office, Medical Practitioner's (medical clinic):

(I) If in excess of 20% of GLA or 50,000 sq. ft. of GLA, whichever is smaller 1.0 200 sq. ft. of GLA

(II) If not in excess 1.0 250 sq. ft. GLA (cc) Office, all others: (I) If in excess of 20% of GLA or 50,000 sq. ft. of 1.0 250 sq. ft. of the first 2,000 sq. ft. GLA, whichever is smaller +1.0 400 sq. ft. of GLA above the first 2,000 sq. ft. (II) If not in excess 1.0 250 sq. ft. of GLA (dd) Theaters 1.0 4 seats (i) 400,000 sq. ft. or more of GLA: (aa) All uses, except as provided below 1.0 200 sq. ft. of GLA (excluding theaters)

(bb) Office, Medical Practitioners (medical clinic) 1.0 200 sq. ft. of GLA

(cc) Office, all others: (I) If in excess of 20% of GLA or 50,000 sq. ft. 1.0 250 sq. ft. of the first 2,000 sq. ft. of of GLA, whichever is smaller GLA +1.0 400 sq. ft. of GLA above the first 2,000 sq. ft (II) If not in excess 1.0 200 sq. ft. of GLA (dd) Theaters 1.0 4 seats (ii) 750,000 sq. ft. or more gross leasable area (GLA) if erected prior to 1970 and having at least 2 anchor tenants, each with a GLA of at least 100,000 sq. ft.:* (aa) Retail 1.0 250 sq. ft. of GLA (bb) All other uses As specified in paragraph (C)(ii), above (CB-3-1986; CB-10-1987; CB-39-1989) *Editor's Note: CB-39-1989 provided that paragraph (C)(iii) shall be of no force and effect after April 15, 1991.

Page | 28 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

NUMBER OF TYPE OF USE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT SPACES

(D) Miscellaneous: Airport Determined as a part of the Special Exception, but not less than 50 spaces

Animal hospital, veterinarian: (i) Kennel area 1.0 500 sq. ft. of GFA (ii) All other floor area +1.0 200 sq. ft. of GFA (CB-149-1987) Animal Training 1.0 Animal +1.0 Employee Boat or trailer service or repair 1.0 Employee (CB-28-1985) Boat, trailer, or mobile home sales or rental lot (also see Low 1.0 2,500 sq. ft. of gross outdoor display Parking Generation, above, for indoor) area Bus station or terminal Determined by the Planning Board (or designee) on a case by case basis, based on location, projected passengers, and accessory uses (such as eating or drinking establishment, newsstand) Car wash 1.0 500 sq. ft. of GFA Catering Establishment with food prep only 1.0 500 sq. t. of GFA (CB-56-2011) Catering with Seating 1.0 4 seats (CB-56-2011) Eating or Drinking Establishment (including drive-through 1.0 3 seats service or carryout) (CB-19-2010; CB-56-2011) +1.0 50 sq. ft. of GFA (excluding any area used exclusively for storage or patron seating, and any exterior patron service area) Eating or drinking establishment (not including drive through 1.0 3 seats service) (CB-89-1993; CB-19-2010) Eating or drinking establishment, permitting music of any kind 1.0 3 seats or 3 persons legal occupancy, and patron dancing, with hours of operation that extend beyond whichever is greater 12:00 A.M. excluding adult entertainment. (CB-89-1993; CB-56-2011) Funeral parlor 1.0 4 persons legal occupancy in rooms used for viewing and funeral services

Gas station or vehicle repair and service station: (i) Not self-serve 3.0 Service bay or similar service area (ii) Self-serve 1.0 Each employee

Nursery or Garden Center 1.0 150 sq. ft. of GFA +1.0 1,000 sq. ft. of gross outdoor sales and display area (including greenhouse) Pawnshop 1.0 150 sq. ft. of the first 3,000 sq. ft. GFA (CB-22-2010) 200 sq. ft. of GFA above the first 3,000 +1 sq. ft. Pawnshop with motor vehicles pledged as collateral +1 For each motor vehicle pledged (CB-22-2010)

Page | 29 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

NUMBER OF TYPE OF USE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT SPACES Private Automobile and Other Motor Vehicle Auctions 1.0 1,000 square feet of gross outdoor (CB-59-2010) display area Public utility uses (other than offices and transmission or 1.0 Employee (unless modified by the distribution lines) Council in approving a Special Exception)

Taxicab dispatching 1.0 Employee Vehicle sales lot (also see Low Parking Generation, above, for 1.0 1,000 sq. ft. of gross outdoor display indoor) area Voluntary fire, ambulance, or rescue station 1.0 Dispatcher or other office personnel

Emergency vehicle +2.0 4 persons legal occupancy in hall or +1.0 auditorium

(6) OFFICES: Bank, savings and loan association, or other savings or lending institution: (A) Automatic teller machine only 0.0 (None)

(B) Unrestricted 1.0 250 sq. ft. of the first 2,000 sq. ft. of (CB-28-1985; CB-38-1988) GFA

+1.0 400 sq. ft. of GFA above the first 2,000 sq. ft Medical practitioners' office/medical clinic: (A) In an office building or office building complex 1.0 200 sq. ft. of GFA

(B) In a one-family dwelling 1.0 100 sq. ft. of GFA (C) In a dwelling other than a one-family dwelling 1.0 200 sq. ft. of GFA

Office building or office building complex (except medical 1.0 250 sq. ft. of the first 2,000 sq. ft. of practitioners' offices) GFA (CB-38-1988) +1.0 400 sq. ft. above the first 2,000 sq. ft. of GFA

(7) INDUSTRIAL/MANUFACTURING/STORAGE:

Consolidated storage 1.0 50 units having direct access only from (CB-45-1999) within a building

+4.0 1,000 sq. ft. of GFA of office space

+2.0 Resident manager Industrial plant 2.0 1,000 sq. ft. of GFA Junk yard or auto salvage yard 1.0 1,000 sq. ft. of gross storage area of (CB-126-1984; CB-133-1984; CB-33-1985) the first 10,000 sq. ft. Warehouse unit (except consolidated storage) +1.0 10,000 sq. ft. of gross storage area (CB-45-1999) above the first 10,000 sq. ft. 3.0 First 1,500 sq. ft. (or fraction) of GFA +1.0 Additional 1,500 sq. ft. of GFA, up to 100,000 sq. ft. +0.20 Additional 1,000 sq. ft. of GFA above the first 100,000 sq. ft. Wholesale establishment 3.0 First 1,500 sq. ft. (or fraction of GFA) +1.0 Additional 1,500 sq. ft. of GFA

Page | 30 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

NUMBER OF TYPE OF USE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT SPACES

(b) The number of parking spaces required by Section 27-568 (a) may be reduced by up to a maximum of fifteen (15) percent for the purpose of fulfilling the Parking Lot Interior Planting Requirement of Section 4.3c (2) (a) of the Landscape Manual in association with the following: (1) Any permit for construction, alteration or use and occupancy applied for on a site within the Developed Tier, Corridor Node, or Center where existing impervious area exceeds forty (40) percent of the net lot area of the site, or (2) Any permit for construction, alteration or use and occupancy applied for on a site within the Developing Tier where existing impervious area exceeds eighty (80) percent of the net lot area of the site. (CB-67-2010)

Sec. 27-574. Number of spaces required in the M-X-T Zone and in a Metro Planned Community.

(a) The number of parking spaces required in the M-X-T Zone and in a Metro Planned Community are to be calculated by the applicant and submitted for Planning Board approval at the time of Detailed Site Plan approval. Prior to approval, the applicant shall submit the methodology, assumptions, and data used in performing the calculations. (b) The number of off-street parking spaces required for development in the M-X-T Zone and in a Metro Planned Community shall be calculated using the following procedures: (1) Determine the number of parking spaces required for each use proposed, based on the requirements of Section 27-568. These parking spaces are to be considered as the greatest number of spaces which are occupied in any one (1) hour and are to known as the peak parking demand for each use. At less than this peak, the number of spaces being occupied is assumed to be directly proportionate to the number occupied during the peak (i.e., at eighty percent (80%) of the peak demand, eighty percent (80%) of the peak parking demand spaces are being occupied). (2) For each hour of the day the number of parking spaces to be occupied by each use shall be calculated. These numbers are known as the hourly fluctuation pattern. For each use, at least one (1) hour shall represent the peak parking demand, and the remaining hours will represent a percentage of the peak. There may be more than one (1) hour at the peak level. (3) The total number of parking spaces required for all uses proposed in the M-X-T Zone and in a Metro Planned Community shall be the greatest number of spaces in any one (1) hour for the combined total of all uses proposed, based on the calculations in paragraphs (1) and (2), above. This total is known as the base requirement. (4) The base requirement may be reduced in the following manner: (A) Conservatively determine the number of trips which are multipurpose. A multipurpose trip is one where a person parks his car and uses a number of facilities (i.e.; an office, eating or drinking establishment, and store) without moving the car. The number of spaces required for a multi- purpose trip shall be the greatest number of parking spaces required by Section 27-568 for any one (1) use within the multipurpose trip. The base requirement may be reduced by the number of parking spaces for the other uses involved in the multipurpose trip. (B) Determine the number of parking spaces which will not be needed because of the provision of some form of mass transit, such as rapid rail, bus, forced carpool, van pool, and developer provided services. The base requirement may be reduced by this number. (5) In addition to the foregoing calculations, the Planning Board shall take the following into consideration:

Page | 31 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

(A) The number of off-street parking spaces which are to be held as exclusively reserved spaces for any period of time during the day. These parking spaces may not be made available for other uses during the time they are reserved; and (B) The location of parking spaces relative to the uses they serve. If the shared parking spaces are so remote that the walking distance is unacceptable for some uses, the effectiveness of shared parking will be reduced. The Planning Board may require a number of parking spaces (in addition to the base requirement) to be reserved for any specific use that is in need of spaces in the immediate vicinity of that use. (c) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 27-573(a), required off-street parking spaces may be provided on a lot other than the lot on which the mixed use development is located, provided: (1) The other lot is used in accordance with the requirements of the zone in which it is located; and (2) The Planning Board determines that the other lot is convenient to the mixed use development, taking into account the location of the lot, the uses to be served, the safety of persons using it and any other considerations. (CB-35-1998)

Cost of Living Comparison

Page | 32 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Alternative Design Concepts – White Parcel

Page | 33 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

University of Maryland Master Plan

Proposed Proposed Development Site Area

Page | 34 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

650

650

368

293

992

946

901

369

516

630

Beds

9,240

1,100

1,825

Student Student

75

50

748

266 120

237

Hotel Keys Hotel

0

0

0

0

0

0

0 0

Project Breakdown 0

5,800

5,670

9,580

7,500

7,000

Retail

40,000

22,000

18,960

14,300

20,000

11,600

10,000

25,000

30,000

40,000

289,500

120,000

120,000

110,000

100,000 1,006,910

1,800

22,000

39,000

Office 512,800

450,000

92

150

352

389

204

520

300

272

313

258

177

154

231

250

200

355

995

205

6,617 1,200

Units Residential

Developer/Builder

UniversityofMaryland

UniversityofMaryland

OtisWarren

Clark ConstructionClark

Clark ConstructionClark

Star Hotels Star

CityofCollege Park

Roadside

ZH Investments, ZH LLC

Opus East Opus

Manekin

Manekin

Monument Properties Monument

Camden

OwnerII,FundEntityLLC

Clark ConstructionClark

R & J Company J & R

CollegePropertiesGateway Park

Star Hotels Star

Otis Warren/Clark ConstructionOtis Warren/Clark

CollegiateHall

Hanover

JPI,Inc

UniversityofMaryland

UniversityofMaryland

Cafritz Tract LLC CafritzTract

JPI,Inc

Baywood PropertiesBaywood

Baywood HotelsBaywood

KeaneEnterprises VasuLLC Conference & Inn Center Marriott

Address

East Campus SiteCampus East

Valley Dr and Farm Dr ValleyFarm and Dr

8204 Baltimore Ave 8204

Knox Rd and Preinkert and Knox Rd Dr

Mowatt Dr and Reinkert and Dr Dr Mowatt

8700 Baltimore Ave 8700

Knox Road and YaleAve and Knox Road

10250 Baltimore Ave 10250

9909 Baltimore Ave 9909

Haiig Crt @ River Road @ HaiigCrt

5850 University Crt Research 5850

5825 University Crt Research 5825

8428 and 8430 Baltimore Ave 8430 and 8428

9600 Milestone Wy 9600

Campus Dr and Mowatt La Mowatt and Dr Campus

8320-8400 Baltimore Ave 8320-8400

CollegeAve.Baltimore Ave.&

8136, 8150, & 8152 Baltimore Ave 8152 & 8150, 8136,

8700 Baltimore Ave 8700

8300 Baltimore Ave 8300

9524 and 9528 Baltimore Ave 9528 and 9524

Campus Drive and Mowatt La Mowatt Drive Campusand

9122, 9124, & 9128 Baltimore Ave 9128 & 9124, 9122,

Paint Branch Pwy & Baltimore PwyAve& PaintBranch

Paint Branch Pwy & Baltimore PwyAve& PaintBranch

US Route 1 & MD 410 MD & Route1 US

9091 Baltimore Ave 9091

9620 and 9624 Baltimore Ave 9624 and 9620

9137 Baltimore Ave. 9137

8315 Baltimore Ave. 8315

8419 Baltimore Ave. 8419 3501 University Blvd. 3501

Status

Planned

Construction

Completed

Completed

Completed

Approved

Completed

Completed

Inactive

Construction - Inactive-Construction

Construction

Completed

Inactive

Completed

ApprovedInactive-

Planned

Planned

Construction

Construction

Completed

Completed

Planned

Inactive

Planned

Planned

Planned

Inactive

Planned

Planned

Planned Construction Completed

Project

East Campus Grad Housing Grad Campus East

OaklandHall

UniversityView (Phase I)

South Campus Commons 1-6 Commons Campus South

South Campus Commons #7 Commons Campus South

The Enclave(StarviewThe Plaza) Phase-II

DowntownGarage

The VillageThe College at Park

HollywoodStation

NOAABuilding

M Square 2 Square M

M Square 1 Square M

Northgate CondominiumsNorthgate

Camden at College Camdenat Park

Mosaic at TurtleCreek at Mosaic

UniversityView (Phase UniversityIII aka. Village)

Maryland Book Exchange Book Maryland

The VarsityThe

The Enclave(StarviewThe Plaza) Phase-I

UniversityView (PhaseUniversity aka. -IIView Overlook)

Mazza Grandmarc Apartments Grandmarc Mazza

The Domain at College at DomainThe Park

JPI West (Hillcrest/Lasicks)JPIWest

East Campus Phase1 Campus East

East Campus Phase2+ Campus East

Cafritz Property at RiverdaleCafritz Propertyat Park

JeffersonApartmentsSquare

TownplaceSuites Marriott by

SpringhillSuites Homewood/Suites

Koon's Ford Koon's

Best WesternBest

The Marriott Inn and Conference and Inn Center Marriott The

Use

StudentHousing

StudentHousing

StudentHousing

StudentHousing

StudentHousing

StudentHousing

ParkingGarage

Office/Retail

Office

Office

Office

Office

Multifamily

Multifamily

Multifamily

Mixed Use StudentMixedHousing Use

Mixed Use StudentMixedHousing Use

Mixed Use StudentMixedHousing Use

Mixed Use StudentMixedHousing Use

Mixed Use StudentMixedHousing Use

Mixed Use StudentMixedHousing Use

Mixed Use MultifamilyMixed Use

Mixed Use MultifamilyMixed Use

Mixed Use Mixed Use

MixedUse

MixedUse

MixedUse

Hotel

Hotel

Hotel

Hotel Hotel

Page | 35 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman

Page | 36 JHU Practicum – Appendix – Spring 2012 Adam J. Morman