evaluation of developer rfq proposals

Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Mixed-Use Developments for Lot 5 and Wallace Deck(Phase One of a Two Phase Development Plan)

Evaluation of Developer RFQ ProposalsDeveloper 1: East West Management Company and Stonebridge

Developer 2: Federal Development

Developer 3: OPUS South Corporation

Developer 4: Ram Development Company

Developer 5:: Grubb Properties and LeylandAlliance

Developer 6: Pizzuti Companies

February 18, 2005

Stainback Public/Private Real Estate (SPPRE)Houston, Texas

Table of ContentsPage Number

Weighting of the Evaluation Criteria

Developer 1 East West Management Company and Stonebridge 1-6

Developer 2 Federal Development 7-12

Developer 3 OPUS South Corporation 13-18

Developer 4 Ram Development Company 19-24

Developer 5 Grubb Properties and LeylandAlliance 25-29

Developer 6 Pizzuti Companies 30-35

Stainback Public/Private Real Estate (SPPRE)www.sppre.com Last Updated: 2/18/2005

Developer 1 Developer 2 Developer 3 Developer 4 Developer 5 Developer 6

Evaluation Criteria Categories Weight

East West Management Company and Stonebridge

Federal Development

OPUS South Corporation

Ram Development Company

Grubb Properties and LeylandAlliance

Pizzuti Companies

1 Developer Information 15 9 4 11 15 15 111.b. Developer Personnel 21.c. Developer/Company Overview 21.d. Financial Capacity 31.e. Current Workload 21.f. Assessment of Key Members: 21.g. Ability to Attract Tenants 21.h. Position on Recent Projects 2

2 Development Team/Architect Exp. 20 11 14 13 13 20 202.a. Development Team 32.b. Urban Designer/Master Planner 62.b. Architect Experience 82.e. LEED Certification 3

3 Developer Experience 30 19 9 21 19 23 193.a. Developer Experience 123.b. Public/Private Development 83.c. Public/Private Finance Plans 63.d. Three References Provided 4

4 Perceived Market Demand 5 5 1 3 5 5 5

5 Public/Private Finance Concept 5 4 2 5 5 1 4

6 Proposed Working Rel. w/ Town 5 5 4 4 4 5 5

7 Public/Private Dev. References 5 4 2 4 3 4 4

8 Awards 5 0 0 4 4 3 4

9 Subjective Criteria/Qualities/Concerns 10 8 5 7 7 8 7

Total 100 65 41 72 75 84 79

Ranking 5 6 4 3 1 2

Weighting the Evaluation Criteria

Stainback Public/Private Real Estate (SPPRE)www.sppre.com Last Updated: 2/18/2005

East West Management Company and Stonebridge Associates

SPPRE Evaluation of Developer RFQ Proposals (Phase One Developments) Developer 1: East West Management Company and StonebridgeTown of Chapel HillFebruary 18, 2005

NAV: Not AvailableNA: Not ApplicableEvaluation Criteria Assessment

Company Name Corporate Headquarters Project Office Location2.a. Development Team Managing Developer: Stonebridge Bethesda, MD NAV

Parent Company: NA NAV NAVCo-Developer: East West Management Company Chapel Hill, NC Chapel Hill, NCUrban Designer: Street-Works White Plains, NY NAVArchitect (1): JDavis Professionals Raleigh, NC NAVArchitect (2): GGA Architects NAV NAVConstruction Company: Resolute Builder Professionals Chapel Hill, NC Chapel Hill, NCFacility Operator(s): East West Management Company Chapel Hill, NC Chapel Hill, NCMEP Engineer: NAV NAV NAVStructural Engineer: Fluhrer Reed Professionals Raleigh, NC NAVCivil Engineer: NAV NAV NAVLandscape Architect: NAV NAV NAVLaw Firm: NAV NAV NAVEquity Investor(s) NAV NAV NAVConstruction Lender: See References (p 1.7)Leasing and Management: NAV NAV NAVOthers: Kimley-Horn Traffic/Parking Analysts

Development Firm ProfileEast West Real Estate Developer of mixed use residential and commercial projects. Stonebridge Real Estate Development and Investment firm

Section 11.a. Address of Managing Developer: Managing Developer Co-Developer

Office: Two Bethesda Metro Center, Suite 220 190 Finley Golf Course RoadBethesda, Maryland 20814 Chapel Hill, NC 27517

Telephone Number: 301-913-9610 919-929-0660

E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]. Developer Personnel

Principal: Douglas Firstenberg Roger PerryKevin Cosimano

Project Manager:Mr. Perry will be responsible for "directing the predevelompent effort" and Mr. Cosimano will "coordinate the work of the entire EW/S Team from predevelopment through completion of the project".

Prepared by Stainback Public/Private Real Estate (SPPRE)www.sppre.com Page 1 of 35 Last Updated: 2/18/2005


1.c. Developer/Company OverviewYear established: NAV (East West or Stonebridge)Relationship to Parent Company: NAResources of Project Office: NAV (East West or Stonebridge)

1.d. Financial CapacitySource of Debt/At-Risk Cash Investment: Do not specify current equity available or borrowing capacity., appear to have resources available.

Project No.1 (East West):Project No.2 (East West):

Project No.1 (Stonebridge):Project No.2 (Stonebridge):Project No.3 (Stonebridge):

1.e. Current WorkloadScope of Current Project(s):

East WestStonebridge

Status of Current Project(s):East West

Stonebridge

Workload of Principal:Roger PerryDoug FirstenbergKevin Cosimano

Workload of Project Manager:

1.f. Assessment of Key Members:Principal:

East West Partners

Stonebridge

StonebridgeProject Manager:

Project: Cedars of Chapel Hill, Debt: BNP Paribas & Barrow Street Capital, Equity: NAV

Project: Meadowmont, Debt: Central Carolina Bank, Structure: Joint Venture with Land Owner, EWP is implied to be responsible for Predevelopment Costs/Equity: NAV

Project: Chase Point, Debt:Bank of America, Equity: NAV

It is implied the principals will be the Project Managers, specifically Perry and Cosimano.

Roger Perry-Major projects in Chapel Hill and greater NC. Staffing resources for East West not conveyed in Qualifications.

Will be available for negotiations with Town later this year.

Doug Firstenberg-Managing Project Financing and retail Leasing for other high profile projects in the DC area. Role in Chapel Hill project appears to be in Financing and Deal Structuring.

Project: Two Metro Center, Debt: TIAA, Equity: $5.5 millionProject: Chevy Chase Center, Debt:TIAA and Bank of America, Equity: NAV

Oxford Park and Powell Place (GSF, Use Type NAV), Other projects not listed. Chevy Chase Center- 200,000 SF of retail, Chase Point: 107 luxury condominium units, 300sf daycare center.

Finishing entitlement and predevelopment of Oxford Park and Powell Place (No project descriptions included) Complete Financing at Chase Point (anticipated finish in January), retail Leasing for Chevy Chase Center (anticipated completion this Spring)

Workload of current projects appear to be workload of Principal.

Kevin Cosimano-Roles appear to be predevelopment and entitlement expertise. Currently involved in the predevelopment efforts of 3 large projects, 1 in DC, 1 in Philadelphia, and 1 in South Carolina. It is explained the projects in DC and Philadelphia should be concluded by this summer. A schedule for the project in South Carolina is not discussed. Implied to be joint effort between Mr. Perry and Mr. Cosimano.

Heavily loaded of predevelopment and entitlement responsibilities on other large projects.



1.g. Ability to Attract TenantsNational retail Tenants:

East West

StonebridgeLocal retail Tenants:

East WestStonebridge

1.h. Position on Recent ProjectsOwnership: General Partner of Ownership Entity, will act as the managing member of the proposed Joint Venture. Development:Equity Investor: NAVProperty Manager: NAVRetain Ownership or Sell? Depends on situation, typically sell residential, retain retail and office.Concern: Who will be the Development Manager?

Section 22.a 2.a is the first section evaluated (at the beginning of this evaluation). SPPRE believed the format was best to include this at the top of each evaluation.

2.b. Urban Designer/Master Planner Street WorksMixed-Use Project No.1: Bethesda Row, Bethesda MD, Principals were designers and place makersMixed-Use Project No.2: Santana Row, San Jose CA, Master Planner, limited involvement in DesignMixed-Use Project No.3: Blue Back Square, West Hartford, CT, Master Planning servicesMixed-Use Project No.4: NAVMixed-Use Project No.5: NAVConcern: Streetworks only provides 3 project examples.

2.b. Architect Experience JDavis ArchitectsMixed-Use Project No.1: Meadowmont Village Center, Chapel Hill, NC, 2000Mixed-Use Project No.2: 510 Glenwood Ave., Chapel Hill, NC, 2001Mixed-Use Project No.3: NAVMixed-Use Project No.4: NAVMixed-Use Project No.5: NAVConcern:

Full responsibility for predevelopment and entitlement, not construction.

JDavis Architects only provides 2 project examples. No evidence of any projects from 2001-2005.

Successfully established relationship with Harris Teeter and UNC Wellness Center at the Meadowmont project. Other specific retailers were not listed. Discuss the planning concepts and intended uses of retail space at the Chevy Chase Center, however they do not list specific achievements or leases signed as a result of Stonebridge's leasing efforts. Clyde's restaurant is mentioned, however it is not mentioned how this tenant was secured.

Some description is offered of types of retail uses at developments, no specific tenants listed. Some description is offered of types of retail uses at developments, no local tenants listed.



2.e. LEED CertificationLEED Certified Level:LEED Silver Certified: NAVLEED Gold Certified: NAVLEED Platinum Certified: NAVNumber of Accredited Architects in Firm: NAVAIA "Top 10 Green Projects" list? NAVConcern: Firm with LEED certification is not mentioned.

Section 33.a. Developer Experience

Mixed-Use Project No.1: Meadowmont, Chapel Hill, NC-Strong project located in Chapel HillMixed-Use Project No.2: Chase Point, Chevy Chase, MD,-Status of project financing and construction? (suburban site not urban)

Mixed-Use Project No.3:

3.b. Public/Private DevelopmentPublic/Private Development No.1

Public/Private Development No.2Public/Private Development No.3

3.c. Public/Private Finance Plans

Public/Private Finance Plan No.1:



3.d. Three References Provided

SPPRE perceives this as Consulting. Virginia Tech/University of Virginia Northern Campus

SPPRE perceives this as Consulting. George Washington University (GWU) and District of Columbia School System (DCPS) SPPRE perceives this as Consulting. Lower Merion Township, Bryn Mawr, PA

Virginia Tech-Northern Virginia Campus-Stonebridge used RFP/Negotiation with public and private sector for site selection and acquisition, Public Finance Incentives offered by local municipalities, ground lease used for certain part of site, shared parking between public partners. Components of the deal were structured between private landowners, but appears to be primarily between the two Universities and local municipalities (City of Falls Church and Fairfax County). This project is considered mainly a Public-Public Partnership from the description provided.

"East/West Team has extensive LEED accredited professionals that will be committed to working on the development."

Chevy Chase Center, Chevy Chase, MD-Strong Project currently under construction, Joint Venture, Development Manager, Consultant, Fee-Developer? Not Developer/Owner?

Yes, Public Partner References were provided for percieved Consulting Assignments.

George Washington University-Stonebridge assisted GWU to acquire and develop institutional facilities on land owned by the DCPS. Stonebridge used rezoning and planned unit development designation, included an appraised land value for the transaction (with minimum land price), and substitute parking allocation between the public partners. This project is considered a Public-Public Partnership from the description provided. Lower Merion Township-Stonebridge is assisting the Twp with the formation of a Parking Authority, the asset transfer of a Hospital Garage the the Authority, and the financing of a second and third garage. It is assumed that the Hospital is a private entity. This project is considered a Public/Private Partnership.



Section 44 Perceived Market Demand In depth assessment of local market provided.

Retail Space Do not suggest GSF, however allude to retail uses such as GAFOMarket-rate Rental Housing Suggest strong demand over the foreseeable future.Market-rate Condominiums Condominiums will be a very viable product type for Lot 5 and WallaceArt and Entertainment UNC Arts Common project is the major entertainment generator. Theatre is not likely.Office Space University and Hospitals do not need space, therefore it is perceived weak. Position on Owner-occupied Housing

Section 55 Public/Private Finance Concept

Section 66 Proposed Working Rel. w/ Town EWP and Stonebridge want the process to be open and comprehensive

Plan to hold charette meetings to establish a project visionWilling to involve the public in many different capacities, public forums, presentations, etc.

Section 7

7 Public/Private Dev. ReferencesPublic/Private Development No.1 Executive Vice President, University of Virginia//Office of the President - Virginia TechPublic/Private Development No.2 President, District of Columbia Public School Board of Trustees//VP George Washington University.Public/Private Development No.3 Lawyer, Lower Merion Twp Commission//Chairman, Main Line Health Real EstatePublic/Private Development No.4 NAVPublic/Private Development No.5 NAVConcern: References appear to be for consulting services.

"Our approach is to try and address and balance as many objectives as possible in a cohesive plan that can be financed."

Indicate that it is premature to determine a final mix of uses, however do provide assessment of local market.

"At this early stage and without significant interaction with the Town and its advisor, EWP/Stonebridge does not have sufficient information to determine how best to balance the goals and objectives of the Town with our needs as a private developer." EWP and Stonebridge agree that "there is an opportunity to privately finance the development of Lot 5 and Wallace Deck while providing the Town with programmatic and financial benefits."

The following Public/Private Developer References are from perceived Consulting Projects. EWP and Stonebridge list Public Entity References acquired through traditional Development Projects in Section 7 of Qualifications.



Section 88 Awards/Ltrs of Reccomendation No Awards were provided.

Developer NAVArchitect NAV

Section 99 Subjective Criteria 1 General Tone of the Proposal2 Caliber of Presentation moderate3 Level of Detail Provided weak-moderate4 Perceived Enthusiasm

Area(s) of Concern

123456

7

Qualities1

2

Summary of Qualifications

Total Score: 65

East West has the advantage of local expertise and experience with the Meadowmont development. Also appear to have adequate Stonebridge appears to have significant experience in structuring Public/Private Finance and Development agreements. It appears that this experience was gained in a consulting capacity.

The East West/Stonebridge joint venture is a team that have significant insight into the development process in Chapel Hill. The Team benefits by having local development expertise while combining the public/private partership expertise and financial capacity of Stonebridge. The teams weakness is that there limited project experiences types that match the downtown urban infill development required in Chapel Hill, the strength of the Architect chosen and staffing concerns.

No downtown infill development experience presented. Chase Point appears suburban and Chevy Chase Center appears to be suburban retail/residential uses.

Does not describe the length or working relationship of the two Co-Developers. Do not allude to prior projects where either firm assisted the other in pursuit of development opportunities. Staffing Concerns are not addressed by either firm, apparent heavy workloads are present. Stonebridge strength is Deal Structuring and Financing, East West strength is development (excluding construction?)Overall uninspiring examples of Urban Design and Architecture. With three principals listed there is not a single point of responsibility indicated. No direct sources of equity provided, other than through debt providers.

moderate, upbeat, play heavily off of Meadowmont and two Stonebridge projects.

strong, knowledge of local market and politics, know the existing demand and value of sites.


Federal Development

SPPRE Evaluation of Developer RFQ Proposals (Phase One Developments) Developer 2: Federal DevelopmentTown of Chapel HillFebruary 18, 2005


Company Name Corporate Headquarters Project Office Location2.a. Development Team Managing Developer: Federal Development Washington, DC NAV

Parent Company: First Public Trust NAV NAVCo-Developer: NA NA NAProject Manager Hamilton Merritt Raleigh/Durham Raleigh/DurhamUrban Designer: RTKL Associates Baltimore, MD NAVArchitect: New Chapel Hill Associates Chapel Hill, NC Chapel Hill, NCConstruction Company: Whiting-Turner Construction NAV NAVFacility Operator(s): Federal Parking Associates NAV NAVMEP Engineer: NAV NAV NAVStructural Engineer: NAV NAV NAVCivil Engineer: John R. McAdams Research Triangle Park Research Triangle ParkLandscape Architect: NAV NAV NAVLaw Firm: Kilpatrick Stockton NAV NAVEquity Investor(s) First Public Trust NAV NAVConstruction Lender: Delta Group? NAV NAVLeasing and Management: AdvantisGVA NAV NAVOthers:Telecommunications Rockefeller Telecom NAV NAV

Development Firm ProfileFederal Development International real estate development firm specializing in the master development of publicly owned real estate assets.

Hamilton Merrit

Section 11.a. Address of

Managing Developer: Office: 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 700Washington, DC 20004

Telephone Number: 202-589-0072

E-Mail: NAV

Commerical Real Estate Company, specializes in the development and acquisition of Class A single and multi-story retail, residential and office as well as mixed use and institutional grade properties.


Federal Development

1.b. Developer PersonnelPrincipal: John D. Infantino

Gregg Sandreuter, Hamilton Merritt Inc. Philip Szostak, New Chapel Hill Associates

Project Manager: Gregg Sandreuter, Hamilton Merritt Inc.

1.c. Developer/Company OverviewYear established: NAV, SPPRE estimates a start date of 2002Relationship to Parent Company: Subsidiary in Section 1, as an affiliate in Section 8.Resources of Project Office: NAV

1.d. Financial CapacitySource of Debt/At-Risk Cash Investment:

Project No.1 :Project No.2 :Project No.3 :Project No.4 :Project No.5 :

Concern:

1.e. Current Workload

Scope of Current Project(s):

Status of Current Project(s): FD does not list the status of any current projects.

Workload of Principal:John Infantino FD does not list the current workload of John Infantino. (See above 13 projects)


The Design Manager, New Chapel Hill Associates, is listed as a principal of the Development Team. Qualifications presented do not clearly illustrate their experience in this capacity. All Federal projects are in the predevelopment stage, none appear constructed.

FD: Fort Howard, $100 million, First Public Trust, Debt & Equity not specified

FD lists 13 "current public clients". Federal also states that as work is assumed and allocated there will be a full staff, from the entire development team, all the time. FD does not list current scope of projects.

The current workload of the project manager is not indicated.

Qualifications bundle examples of project financing among FD, Hamilton Merritt, and New Chapel Hill Associates.FD: Durham Vetran Affairs (VA) Garage, $20 million, First Public Trust, Debt & Equity not specifiedFD: Del Ray Oaks, $450 million, Citigroup, First Public Trust, Rockefeller Group Development Corp. Debt & Equity not specified.Stanley Hall, $12 million, First Public Trust, Debt & Equity not specified

FD: Nicelli Airport, Venice, Italy, £80 million- Barclay's Bank, Debt & Equity not specified


Federal Development

1.f. Assessment of Key Members:Principal:

John Infantino

Project Manager:

Gregg Sandreuter, Hamilton Merrit Inc.

1.g. Ability to Attract Tenants

National retail Tenants:

Local retail Tenants: See Above.

1.h. Position on Recent ProjectsOwnership: NAVDevelopment: NAVEquity Investor: NAVProperty Manager: NAVRetain Ownership or Sell? NAV


2.b. Urban Designer/Master Planner RTKL Associates


Mixed-Use Project No.2:Mixed-Use Project No.3:Mixed-Use Project No.4:Mixed-Use Project No.5:

Note:

Access to FPT which has extensive development experience in single family, suburban locations which are not related to Chapel Hill Projects. Extensive list of current Public Clients. No status given on FD current projects and scope. Question capacity to handle additional workload.

Manages an acquisition fund. Strong in office and retail components. Limited downtown development experience offered. "The Dawson on Morgan" project is the only similar project to Chapel Hill.

FD has included AdvantisGVA as a commercial retail and residential leasing specialist. No tenant list or list of prior retail and residential projects were included in her description. No national retail tenants were listed.

It is percieved by SPPRE that RTKL is positioned to work with the John McAdams firm on land planning and New Chapel Hill Associates on Architecture of the Project.

Downtown Silver Spring, Maryland-14 screen theatre, 152 units of attached housing, At buildout will manage over 4,000 parking spaces. Pentagon Row, Washington DC, 325,000 sf of street level retail, 65,000sf health club, 420 apartments, 1,500 space underground garage. State Thomas District, TX, GSF/mix of uses not indicated.Peabody Place, Memphis TN, 275,000 sf of retail, 5,000 seat theatre, 16 story office tower, 2,500 parking spaces. Addison Circle, TX, 3,500 residential units, 4 million sf for office, Hotel, and retail space.


Federal Development

2.b. Architect Experience New Chapel Hill Associates ("Design Manager")Mixed-Use Project No.1:Mixed-Use Project No.2: NAVMixed-Use Project No.3: NAVMixed-Use Project No.4: NAVMixed-Use Project No.5: NAV

2.e. LEED CertificationLEED Certified Level: NAVLEED Silver Certified: NAVLEED Gold Certified: NAVLEED Platinum Certified: NAV

Number of Accredited Arcitects in Firm:AIA "Top 10 Green Projects" list? NAV


Mixed-Use Project No.1: FD: Rogers Avenue, residential, Apartments, Townhomes (Status?)

Mixed-Use Project No.2:Mixed-Use Project No.3:

3.b. Public/Private Development

Public/Private Development No.1



Rosemary Square, Chapel Hill, NC, 250 room Hotel, 60,000sf of retail/office, 450 space underground Garage. (status?).

RTKL-30% of Local office(?) are Certified, Staff Count in office? New Chapel Hill Assoc.-1 Associate is Certified. Whiting Turner-1 Associate is Certified.

Hamilton: The Dawson at Morgan, Raleigh, NC, 110,000 condominium project with ground floor retail. Construction has not started however pre-sales are available, Construction will start once 50% of the units are sold.FD and Hamilton provide examples of mixed-use, but not the uses proposed in this project.

Cannot determine if projects for FD are public/private developments from descriptions provided. It is not clear what the structure of the Partnership was (if any). Cannot determine if projects for FD are public/private developments from descriptions provided. It is not clear what the structure of the Partnership was (if any). Cannot determine if projects for FD are public/private developments from descriptions provided. It is not clear what the structure of the Partnership was (if any).


Federal Development


Public/Private Finance Plan No.1:Public/Private Finance Plan No.2: NAVPublic/Private Finance Plan No.3: NAV

3.d. Three References Provided NAV

Section 44 Perceived Market Demand

Retail Space No specific information provided. Market-rate Rental Housing No specific information provided. Market-rate Condominiums No specific information provided. Art and Entertainment No specific information provided. Office Space No specific information provided. Position on Owner-occupied Housing No specific information provided.

Section 5

5 Public/Private Finance Concept

Section 6

6 Proposed Working Rel. w/ Town

Section 77 Public/Private Dev. References

Public/Private Development No.1 FD: Duke Human Vaccine Center-No Title-Not mentioned elsewhere in submittalPublic/Private Development No.2 FD: Economic & Planning Systems-No Title-Not mentioned elsewhere in submittalPublic/Private Development No.3 FD: Army Corps of Engineers-No Title-Not mentioned elsewhere in submittalPublic/Private Development No.4 Hamilton: Senior VP Wachovia-No related project mentionedPublic/Private Development No.5 NAV

No description provided of any public/private finance plans for projects are provided. FD does allude to "enhanced use" development technique with some public partners.

FD wants to conduct further analysis and information gathering sessions to validate ERA intial findings.

"The FEDERAL Team will work collaboratively with the Town of Chapel Hill to identify the financing solutions that will benefit all stakeholders in the Chapel Hill Development project." A very broad description offered, almost non-responsive.

"FEDERAL will establish both guidelines and schedules for the City's involvement." Interactive and constructive partcipation that will allow the Town to create the framework that will plan, design, manage and participate in profit from the project.


Federal Development

Section 88 Awards

Developer NAVArchitect NAV

Section 99 Subjective Criteria

1 General Tone of the Proposal Moderate-weak2 Caliber of Presentation Disjointed, difficult to understand team and responsibilities of team members. 3 Level of Detail Provided Weak4 Perceived Enthuiasm Moderate

Area(s) of Concern

12345

Exceptional Qualities1 Has potentially strong Team members (RTKL and Rockefeller) , but Rockefeller is not well described.


Total Score: 41

Federal Development has assemebled a team with varying expertise and development experience. Public/Private development projects are provided with no description of the financing arrangement, the public partner's role, or the project status. Project examples provided were wide ranging, spanning from a converted 12,000sf educational facility to master-planned communities, to parking structures, little of which is applicable to Chapel Hill.

No professional references for any projects listed in project examples.

Access to Equity and Debt Relationships are not adequately explained. What is the relationship between Rockefeller Group and Federal? Rockefeller seems misplaced in this package. No reference provided for Rockefeller Group contact.Lack of reference to Town Planning Reports and SPPRE work to date. Very general approach to Public/Private Finance Plan.Limited downtown infill development experience.


Opus South Corporation

SPPRE Evaluation of Developer RFQ Proposals (Phase One Developments) Developer 3: OPUS South CorporationTown of Chapel HillFebruary 18, 2005


Company Name Corporate Headquarters Project Office Location2.a. Development Team Managing Developer: OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAV

Parent Company: OPUS Group Minneapolis, MN NACo-Developer: NA NA NAProject Manager OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAVUrban Designer: OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAVArchitect: LS3P Architects Charlotte, NC NAVConstruction Company: OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAVFacility Operator(s): NAV NAV NAVMEP Engineer: OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAVStructural Engineer: OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAVCivil Engineer: OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAVLandscape Architect: OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAVLaw Firm: NAV NAV NAVEquity Investor(s) OPUS Group NAV NAVConstruction Lender: Bank of America/Wachovia NAV NAVLeasing and Management: OPUS South Corporation Alpharetta, GA NAVOthers:

Development Firm Profile

OPUS


Managing Developer: Office: 925 Northpoint Parkway, Suite 150Alpharetta, GA 30005


E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Vertically integrated company with in-house development, architecture, construction, engineering, finance and facilities management expertise. Focused on Design-Build market, primarily for public facilities, office and industrial projects.



1.b. Developer PersonnelPrincipal: Duane Wood, VP Development, (not indicated whether part of OPUS Group or OPUS South)

Project Manager: Keith Hornsby, Senior Project Manager (not indicated whether part of OPUS Group or OPUS South)

1.c. Developer/Company OverviewYear established: 1953Relationship to Parent Company: Regional Office, OPUS South is one of 26 regional offices in the U.S.Resources of Project Office: Regional Office has 23 Project Managers, total of approximately 100 employees.

1.d. Financial Capacity

Source of Debt/At-Risk Cash Investment:Project No.1 : NAVProject No.2 : NAVProject No.3 : NAVProject No.4 : NAVProject No.5 : NAV

1.e. Current WorkloadScope of Current Project(s): NAV

Status of Current Project(s): NAV

Workload of Principal: NAV

Workload of Project Manager: NAV

1.f. Assessment of Key Members:Principal: Duane Wood, VP Development

Project Manager: Keith Hornsby, Senior Project Manager

Capital Sources are provided (Wachovia and B of A). Specific details of recent project financings not provided. There is some uncertainty whether OPUS invests its own equity in projects.

Opus South Office: 23 Project Managers, 6 Architects, 11 Development Associates, 25 Administrative Assistants. Not many specifics to OPUS South, many references to the aggregated budgets and completed projects under OPUS Group.

All team members are well qualified. Emphasis in industrial, office and retail development experience.



1.g. Ability to Attract Tenants

National retail Tenants:

Local retail Tenants:

1.h. Position on Recent ProjectsOwnership: NAVDevelopment: NAVEquity Investor: OPUS Equity Capital, typically 20% equity in projects. Property Manager: NAVRetain Ownership or Sell? NAV


2.b. Urban Designer/Master Planner OPUS South


Mixed-Use Project No.2:Mixed-Use Project No.3:Mixed-Use Project No.4: NAVMixed-Use Project No.5: NAV

2.b. Architect Experience LS3P





Allude to discussions already taken place with a regional grocery store and national book seller about the possibility of being involved in the project. Most national tenants provided would not fit the scope of the Chapel Hill project.

Have identified a local retail leasing firm to work with, but do not list the firm name.

Lakewood City Commons, Lakewood CO. Indicate that Opus developed non-retail components, City Hall, Arts Center, Library, does not specify who built residential. Bremerton Conference Center, Bremerton, WA. 7,000sf retail, 35,000sf office, 6,000sf Restaurant, Hotel, Marina. Public Partner was City of Bremerton. Developer/Contractor.Parkshore Plaza on Beach Dr., St. Petersburg, FL., 24,000sf retail, 118 unit condominium high rise. Contractor Only

Philips Place, Charlotte, NC: 100,000sf of retail Space, 30,000sf Theatre, Hotel, residential Townhouses and Flats, two above grade parking garages..

Saks Majestic Square Complex, Charleston, SC-Successfully integrated the structure into the surrounding community. Saks store and light office and retail wrapping the parking garage. No residential presented. Garage received SCAIA Merit Award 2002. 100 North Spring St., Greenville, SC, office and retail project downtown. Conceived as public/private development with a revenue bond. The deal structure was clearly described. Fifth and Poplar residential Complex, Charlotte, NC-Best mixed use project type included. Two level underground garage, 350,000sf of residential, 22,000 sf retail, 18,000 sf grocery store. Piedmont Town Center, Charlotte, NC-415,000 sf of office, 90,000 sf of street level retail, 340 units of residential.



2.e. LEED CertificationLEED Certified Level: NAVLEED Silver Certified: NAVLEED Gold Certified: NAVLEED Platinum Certified: NAVNumber of Accredited Architects in Firm:

AIA "Top 10 Green Projects" list?


Mixed-Use Project No.1:Mixed-Use Project No.2:Mixed-Use Project No.3:Mixed-Use Project No.4:Mixed-Use Project No.5:Mixed-Use Project No.6:Mixed-Use Project No.7:Mixed-Use Project No.8:

3.b. Public/Private Development

Public/Private Development No.1Public/Private Development No.2Public/Private Development No.3 Lakewood Commons, Mixed-use, Retail, Civic Center, Arts Center, Library, Residential. DeveloperPublic/Private Development No.4Public/Private Development No.5





One Architect for LS3P listed as LEED Certified. Implied to be part of project. Provided 10 examples where Architect was Principal or Project Manager. However, only one project description lists incorporating LEED criteria.

1215 Dexter Ave. Apts., Seattle WA, retail and multifamily with underground parking. Design/Build contractor.Altaire, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, 22,000sf retail, 125 condominium Units. ContractorEmerald Cay, Jupiter, FL, 112 residential Units, 7,000 sf Restaurant, 4,000 sf Restaurant. Contractor

Bremerton Conference Center, Bremerton WA, Public Partner was Bremerton City. OPUS Only developed non-retail components

The Meridian at North Ocean: Lifestyle Development with Retail and Condominiums. ContractorParkshore Plaza on Beach Drive: Mixed-use residential and Retail. ContractorGrant Park: Multifamily Condominium. -Not Mixed Use- Joint DevelopmentSancerre Luxury Condominiums: Multi-Family -Not Mixed Use- Residential Development ContractorLaguna at Rivera Dunes: Multifamily Residential: -Not Mixed Use-Contractor

Arbor lakes, Maple Grove, MN, Public Partner not listed. Developer

Arizona Dept. of Administration and Env. Quality.- lease to own project with State of Arizona. Design/Build Contractor

Research and Development building, $55 million, King County and OPUS-used bond financing under Revenue Ruling 63-20 Corporation (lease to own financing) OPUS developed, supported financing, design and constructed as well as provided payment and performance bonds for the entire cost of the project.

Department of Labor building, $45 million, State of Washington and OPUS. OPUS designed, financed, developed and constructed the 410,000 sf office complex . Design won an 'design-build award'. Building is owned by State of Washington.

Arizona Dept. of Env. Quality. -lease to own project with State of Arizona. Design/Build Contractor

Berks County Industrial Park, (No development budget), -OPUS acts as master developer and general partner responsible for mix of uses, financing, construction marketing, sales and/or leasing, and exit strategy. Public partner will contribute land, arrange for various loans and will be a limited partner.





Retail Space ERAMarket-rate Rental Housing ERAMarket-rate Condominiums ERAArt and Entertainment ERAOffice Space ERAPosition on Owner-occupied Housing

Section 5


Section 6



Public/Private Development No.1 State of Washington, Facilities Service Program ManagerPublic/Private Development No.2 King County, Director of PlanningPublic/Private Development No.3 City of Bremerton, MayorPublic/Private Development No.4 Mohave County, County Finance DirectorPublic/Private Development No.5 Contracting Officer, Department of the Interior

Section 8

8 AwardsDeveloper NAVArchitect NAV

Yes, Project References-Lakewood City Commons(Developer of only non-retail projects), Bremerton, State of Arizona

Accepts the current ERA study at face value. OPUS will perform its own market analysis and due diligence if they are selected.

OPUS states "...our goal will be to maximize the number of owned housing units and green space. "

OPUS discusses as some length the purpose and meaning behind PPPs. They conclude by stating that "We do not typically go in with a fixed plan, but bring in some ideas and are ready to listen, so people feel they've had a chance to get involved in the project."

Use a process of 'Scope Management' and 'Design Quality Assurance' through the lead Project Manager. This is the central point of responsibility and will work with the Town to ensure that the Town's needs are met.

3 Letters of recommendation and commendation on projects completed. Development, Architectural, and Construction services were noted in the letters.




1 General Tone of the Proposal Strong, OPUS is very experienced, full-service, one-stop shop for design, development, and construction. 2 Caliber of Presentation Strong3 Level of Detail Provided Moderate to strong4 Perceived Enthusiasm Moderate

Area(s) of Concern

12

3

Exceptional Qualities12 Financial Capacity, strong reputation, experienced project managers.


Total Score: 72

Strong firm with access wide range of services (Design-Build).

OPUS is an excellent firm with strong qualifications. OPUS has public/private development expertise but primarily for public facilities, infrastructure and office/industrial uses and a majority of the public.private partnership examples are with state and federal agencies on large institutional projects. They can provide the Town with access to a wide range of Real Estate related services that can provide flexibility and ensure a quality project. OPUS only weakness apparent is that

Keith Hornsby has no experience with mixed-use or public/private partnership developments. Some Condominium experience.

Projects tend to be weighted toward Institutional facilities for State's and the Federal Government.

Public/Private Developments: Developer of non-commercial components of Lakewood City Commons. Lakewood City Commons and Arbor Lakes Public Private Finance Plans were not described.



SPPRE Evaluation of Developer RFQ Proposals (Phase One Developments) Developer 4: Ram Development CompanyTown of Chapel HillFebruary 18, 2005


Company Name Corporate Headquarters Project Office Location2.a. Development Team Managing Developer: Ram Development Company Palm Beach Gardens, FL Palm Beach Gardens, FL

Parent Company: NA NA NACo-Developer: NA NA NAProject Manager Ram Development Company Palm Beach Gardens, FL Palm Beach Gardens, FLUrban Designer: Duany Platner-Zyberk Miami, FL Miami, FLArchitect: Duany Platner-Zyberk Miami, FL Miami, FLArchitect (residential): Roger Fry and Associates Coconut Grove, FL Coconut Grove, FLArchitect (retail): Marc Weiner Boca Raton, FL Boca Raton, FLConstruction Company: Turner Construction Raleigh, NC Raleigh, NCFacility Operator(s): Ram Realty Miami, FL Miami, FLMEP Engineer: Pistorino & Alan Miami, FL Miami, FLStructural Engineer: Pistorino & Alan Miami, FL Miami, FLCivil Engineer: Pistorino & Alan Miami, FL Miami, FLLandscape Architect: Duany Platner-Zyberk Miami, FL Miami, FLLaw Firm: NAV NAV NAVEquity Investor(s) Ram Development Company Palm Beach Gardens, FL Palm Beach Gardens, FLConstruction Lender: Multiple Sources Listed NA NALeasing and Management: Ram Realty Palm Beach Gardens, FL Palm Beach Gardens, FLOthers:

Development Firm Profile Retail and multifamily developer. Acquires, develops and renovates properties in partnership with principals.


Managing Developer: Office: 3399 PGA Boulevard, Suite 450Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33331


E-Mail: NAV



1.b. Developer PersonnelPrincipal: Ivy Greaner, Managing Partner, Commercial, RAM

Mike Hammon, Managing Partner Residential, RAM

Project Manager: Susan Tjarksen-Roussos, VP of Development

1.c. Developer/Company OverviewYear established: 1978Relationship to Parent Company: NAResources of Project Office: Sufficient resources available, Employee count: 120

1.d. Financial Capacity

Source of Debt/At-Risk Cash Investment:Project No.1 : NAVProject No.2 : NAVProject No.3 : NAVProject No.4 : NAVProject No.5 : NAV


Status of Current Project(s):

Workload of Principal:


1.f. Assessment of Key Members:Principal: Experienced in all phases of real estate development.

Project Manager: Experienced in all phases of real estate development.

Ram's maximum loan capacity is $100 million each for 3 separate lenders. Access to $20 million in equity. Principles have equity risk in every development they work on. If Ram receives a promoted interest in a project, then Ram will have equity involved in the deal. Ram participates from 10% to 100% of the required equity investment for projects.

11 projects of various types and sizes

11 projects in various stages, two projects in Michigan, 8 in Florida, and Walgreen projects in Florida and North Carolina.

Not Clear, appears to be involved in all/most of the 11 projects.

Assigned Project Manager is currently working on one project that is in the approvals process.





1.h. Position on Recent ProjectsOwnership: RAM states they "typically owns 30% to 50% of investments". Not clear what investments refer to. Development: Can act as developer or codeveloperEquity Investor: Can support the equity for the project. Property Manager: Can be the property manager for the project.Retain Ownership or Sell? Typically retain ownership of projects.

Section 2

2.a 2.a is the first section evaluated (at the beginning of this evaluation). SPPRE believed the format was best to include this at the top of each evaluation.

2.b. Urban Designer/Master Planner Duany Plater Zyberk Mixed-Use Project No.1:


2.b. Architect Experience Roger Fry & Associates




Mixed-Use Project No.4:Mixed-Use Project No.5:Concern:

Provided list of national tenants that they have worked with before. Some may be applicable to CH development sites.

Ram is a firm believer in local and small shop tenants. Ram has provided a detailed description of their ability to attract nationaand local retail tenants. SPPRE was impressed with their stragety and their in house-leasing capabilities.

Southside, Greensboro, NC-10 acres, Townhome, Live/Work Units, Townhouses, Community Master Plan.

Celadon, Beaufort, SC- 60 acre, No Building Program Listed. Strong on planning and design components of the community. Anchor Mill, Mecklenberg, NC- 32 acre, TOD Project, no building program offered. Seaside, Walton County, FL- 80 acre, Master Community Land Plan.Center City Hickory, Hickory NC, Performed general Land Use Plan and recommendations.

Promenade at Bayview, Pompano Beach, FL-225 urban infill apartments in 5 buildings The description states the project was mixed use, but does not describe the other types of uses. (No images provided)Cityplace, West Palm Beach, FL, 586 apartment units over retail and Urban Townhouses. Only 1 sketch provided, vague in appearance. (Not Mixed-Use)Yacht Club, Aventura, FL-430 Unit Mid-rise project. Does not specify if they were apartments or condominiums. (Not Mixed-Use, no images)St. James Club, Boca Raton, FL, -224 Apartment Community. Won merit award for best new apartment project. (Not Mixed-Use, no images)Moorings, Latanta, FL, -357 apartments over retail in two buildings. (Current Project)No photos of completed projects.



2.e. LEED CertificationLEED Certified Level: NAVLEED Silver Certified: NAVLEED Gold Certified: NAVLEED Platinum Certified: NAVNumber of Accredited Architects in Firm:AIA "Top 10 Green Projects" list? NAV



3.b. Public/Private DevelopmentPublic/Private Development No.1Public/Private Development No.2Public/Private Development No.3



Public/Private Finance Plan No.2:Public/Private Finance Plan No.3:


DPZ-50% of firm's Architects are certified.

The Ellington, Detroit, MI- retail and residential with Garage-No building program provided. The Residences at Bayview, Pompano Beach, FL-225 luxury Apartments, 6,500 sf of retail. Pineapple Cove and Commons, Stuart, FL-200,000 sf of commercial, 260 luxury apartments.

Only the two projects below indicate any substantial public involvement to warrant categorizing them as Public/Private Development. Detroit Symphony Orchestra. office/retail, parking deck, high school and renovations (RAM Chairman only, not RDC)Ellington Mixed-Use Development

Orlando Square, 190,000sf Retail Center, worked with the City to reposition and asset.

Office and retail components were funded through $28 million State of Michigan Bond, $7 million Detroit Symphony Orchestra. Music Center was funded privately. School was financed publicly.

Partnered with Wayne State University and Detroit Public Schools to 'purchase' their portion of a newly constructed garage.

Yes for both Orchestra, and Ellington. High level officials related to the project.

Other two projects have no public partners.

No significant public partner.




Retail SpaceMarket-rate Rental Housing

Market-rate Condominiums

Art and EntertainmentOffice Space

Position on Owner-occupied Housing

Section 5


Section 6



Public/Private Development No.1 Martin Downs, Martin, FL, County Attorney, Martin County Florida, Public/Private Development No.2Public/Private Development No.3 Borland Center,-CRH Advisors, former planning commissionerPublic/Private Development No.4 Borland Center,-Principal of Architectural FirmPublic/Private Development No.5 Borland Center,-Growth Management Director, City of Palm Beach Gardens

Section 88 Awards

DeveloperArchitect Andres Duaney, of DPZ, has received planning awards for numerous projects.

"It is our intent to follow the suggestions for new users as defined by ERA"

Borland Center, mixed use development, no project sheet listed. -Community Church, Part owner

Do not address rental housing. Suggest that the current environment is strong for "for-sale" housing, request that this statement needs further review and analysis if Ram is selected.

Propose civic functions that promote weekend and nightlife actives. Do not address movie theatre conclusions by ERA. Do not address office space.

Received local acclaim for development efforts for the Detroit Symphony Orchestra project.

Suggest that the current environment is strong for "for-sale" housing, Ram requests that this statement needs further have review and analysis if Ram is selected.

Ram is open to exploring the land lease under for-sale units concept, refer to many of the tax and non-tax income streams as feasible as presented by SPPRE. Willing to bring other financing concepts to the table.

Acknowledge the time intensive process of working with multiple public constituents, open to discussing a plan that is financiallyfeasible. "We could meet as often as necessary with Town Council and hold community groups"




1 General Tone of the Proposal RAM is a strong firm, well qualified.2 Caliber of Presentation moderate3 Level of Detail Provided moderate to strong4 Perceived Enthusiasm moderate

Area(s) of Concern

1

2

3

4

5

Exceptional Qualities1 RAM has the financial capacity and is a responsive firm that invests in the projects they develop. 2 Have parterned with one of the best land planners in the country. 3 RAM has in-house leasing capabilities. 4 SPPRE is impressed with Orlando Square development and the problem-solving skills with the City. 5 RAM accepts ground lease concept.


Total Score: 75

RAM is a well qualified firm with many mixed-use projects under its control, they have formed a strong Team, and have the financial capacity to deliver this project. Architect experience and capacity is not adequately portrayed in the Qualifications.

DPZ experience is on large scale planning for Towns and Cities, will their services be applicable on these two small sites? SPPRE is concerned with their qualifications as a Master Architect.

Limited Public/Private Development Experience. Appear to categorize traditional development projects in Public/Private Development. (zoning and public hearings do not constitute Public/Private Development)

Only two sketches were provided by Roger Fry Associates. Ram teamed up with one of the best land planners in the country and provided a lackluster presentation of Architect. No projects sheets provided on the 'retail Architect' Marc Weiner.

No information provided on Turner Construction in Qualifications. SPPRE is aware this national firm is well qualified. Current workload of Architect has fair amount of mixed-use project types, however, completed work relating to mixed-use is lacking.



SPPRE Evaluation of Developer RFQ Proposals (Phase One Developments) Developer 5: Grubb Properties and LeylandAllianceTown of Chapel HillFebruary 18, 2005


Company Name Corporate Headquarters Project Office LocationDevelopment Team Managing Developer: Grubb Properties Charlotte, NC Charlotte, NC

Parent Company: NA NA NACo-Developer: LeylandAlliance Tuxedo, NY Tuxedo, NYProject Manager Grubb and LeylandAlliance Charlotte, NC Charlotte, NCUrban Designer: Urban Design Associates Pittsburgh, PA Pittsburgh, PAArchitect: FMK Architects Charlotte, NC Charlotte, NCConstruction Company: Resolute Building Company Charlotte, NC Charlotte, NCFacility Operator(s): NAV NAV NAVMEP Engineer: Saber Engineering Raleigh, NC Raleigh, NCStructural Engineer: Bulla Smith Design Engineering Charlotte, NC Charlotte, NCCivil Engineer: ColeJenest & Stone Raleigh, NC Raleigh, NCLandscape Architect: NA NA NALaw Firm: LeylandAlliance-has attorneys Tuxedo, NY Tuxedo, NYEquity Investor(s) Grubb implies equity Charlotte, NC Charlotte, NCConstruction Lender: Bank of America Charlotte, NC Charlotte, NCLeasing and Management: Gibbs Planning Group Birmingham, MI Birmingham, MIOthers:

Development Firm Profile

Grubb Properties

LeylandAlliance

Section 11.a. Address of Grubb Properties LeylandAlliance

Managing Developer: Office: 1523 Elizabeth Ave., Suite 220 16 Sterling Lake Rd. Charlotte, NC 28204 Tuxedo, NY 19087


E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

"Full service real estate development company providing design, development, construction, acquisitions, sales, leasing and management.""A developer of new, mixed-use and residential communities based on the principles of Traditional Neighborhood Designs. " Also have extensive 'town and gown' experience.



1.b. Developer PersonnelPrincipal: Jeffrey Harris, Grubb Properties

Project Manager: Jeffrey Harris, Grubb PropertiesMacon Toledano, LeylandAlliance

1.c. Developer/Company OverviewYear established: 1963Relationship to Parent Company: NAResources of Project Office: Extensive in Charlotte, NC, Employee count: 100


Project No.1 :Project No.2 :Project No.3 :

Project No.4 :Project No.5 :

Note:


Status of Current Project(s): Many projects are in construction or close to construction, which is another indication of their ability to implement.

Workload of Principal: Company specific workloads are provided, details related to project managers are not provided.

Jeffery Harris


1.f. Assessment of Key Members:Principal/Project Manager:

Jeffrey Harris

Project Manager:Macon Toledano

Sterling Elizabeth, Charlotte, NC, mixed use-office and retail, Grubb provided 100% of the equity, debt totaled $7.5 millionSterling Magnolia, Charlotte, NC, Grubb and individual partners provided $3 million in equity, received $24 million from HUD.Morrison Place, Charlotte, NC, Grubb invested $11 million of equity in a $32 million dollar project. East Beach Development, Norfolk, VA Currently in Phase 3, 50% of the equity is invested by LeylandAlliance, no details on total development budget. Warwick Grove, Warwick, NY, initially invested 100% of equity and then partnered with Tarragon.

Large, extensive projects of varying size and scope. Most of the projects are similar to Chapel Hill.

Senior Vice President, has executive oversight over multiple developments.

Has completed a variety of project types similar to those proposed in Chapel Hill.

Day-to-day project manager is not clearly indicated? Is this really going to be Mr. Harris and Mr. Toleando?

Has led various complex projects of size and scope both domestically and internationally.

Compartively, one of the best of the six developers with regard to Financial Capacity.



1.g. Ability to Attract Tenants Partner with Gibbs Planning Group for retail Leasing Services. National retail Tenants:


1.h. Position on Recent ProjectsOwnership: Both Grubb and Leyland maintain significant ownership positions in their projects. Development:Equity Investor: Grubb or Leyland (can provide 100% of the at risk equity, very important)Property Manager: GrubbRetain Ownership or Sell? Retain Ownership, depending on use type.


2.b. Urban Designer/Master Planner Urban Design AssociatesMixed-Use Project No.1:Mixed-Use Project No.2:Mixed-Use Project No.3:Mixed-Use Project No.4:Mixed-Use Project No.5: NAV

2.b. Architect Experience FMK Architects

Mixed-Use Project No.1:Mixed-Use Project No.2:Mixed-Use Project No.3:Mixed-Use Project No.4:Mixed-Use Project No.5:Note:

2.e. LEED Certification Steve Winter AssociatesLEED Certified Level: NAVLEED Silver Certified: NAVLEED Gold Certified: NAVLEED Platinum Certified: NAVNumber of Accredited Architects in Firm:

AIA "Top 10 Green Projects" list?


Mixed-Use Project No.1: Latta Pavilion, Charlotte, NC, 33,00sf of commercial, 162 apartments, 101 condos (Developer and Architect worked together)Mixed-Use Project No.2:


Have specialty retailers that would fit the desired downtown Chapel Hill mix of retail.

Goler-Depot Street Renaissance, Winston-Salem, NC, Market Research and Land Use Planning ServicesCampus Housing Plan, Santa Barbara, CA-Consulted to solve workforce housing and student housing problems. First Ward Master Plan- Charlotte, NC, mix of uses, creted neighborhoods and precincts. Gilroy Cannery, Gilroy, CA, mixed-use, no building projgram provided.

Latta Pavilion, Charlotte, NC-1590 apartments, 98 condos, office/retail, Parking Deck (Developer and Architect worked together)715 North Church, Charlotte, NC, 89 Condos, retail, Below Grade Deck626 North Graham, Charlotte, NC, 43 condos, retail3030 South Boulevard, Charlotte, NC, 95 Condos, retail, officeFirst Ward Place, Charlotte, NC, 160 affordable and Market Rate Apartments

The Ratcliff, Charlotte, NC, 57 Condo units, 60,000sf of Commercial SpaceMorrison Place-Charlotte, NC, mixed-use, varying types, and large development site. The two proposed project managers worked on this project in the past.

Substantial, 65 employees, architects, engineers, and building scientists. Substantial, Steve Winter Associates have worked on many projects andare involved in many organizations regarding building efficiency.

See Above. Largest sellet of Condos in North Carolina (2,200 units)

Grubb and FMK have completed two mixed-use projects together.



3.b. Public/Private DevelopmentPublic/Private Development No.1Public/Private Development No.2Public/Private Development No.3







Retail SpaceMarket-rate Rental Housing

Market-rate CondominiumsArt and Entertainment

Office SpacePosition on Owner-occupied Housing

Section 5


Provided significant insight into their perception of the market, do not mention ERA report.

Elizabeth Ave., Charlotte, NC, mixed use, office, retail, residential, Partner with Presbyterian Hospital.East Beach, Leyland Alliance, partner with City of Norfolk, VA. 100+ acre site on the Chesapeake Bay.Hammonds Ferry, SC, partner with City of Augusta and Charleston. Mixed Use, 200+ acres on Savannah river.

Elizabeth Ave. Parking, Grubb Partnered with the City of Charlotte to purchase 1,000 parking spaces upon completion of a 3,000 parking space build out. The total investment by the City was $14 million. The total parking cost was $51 million.

Suggest office-condominium units would be attractive. Class A space is only required by the University and is not in demand currently.Suggest that they will be geared towards the current market conditions.

State that they will perform their own market analysis to estimate their market-rate return on the project as well as expect subsidies for components the town desires to include that are not evident in the market demand analysis. SPPRE was dissapointed Grubb never mentioned any financial returns on the Town investment in land and infrastructure improvements. Suggest a mutually agreed upon design concept prior to offering a Public/Private finance concept.

Suggest Class A space is not in demand and national retail tenants have been located to Southpoint. Suggest that restaurants on Franklin street would be a positive retail amenity. Categorize this as 'student housing', and state "demand for student-oriented housing does exist and can be a component'.Suggest demand for condominium units is limited and will be attractive to interim purchasers and investors. Suggest the units would still have to be geared toward student occupiers. Suggest for-sale art gallery, or music venue potentially.

East Beach Development, LeylandAlliance worked with the Norfolk Redevelopment Housing Authority (NHRA)to develop the land while the NHRA retained ownership of the land. The acquisition price of each parcel would be paid as units are sold. However to make the project happen, the NHRA did have to put the land up for collateral later. By maintaining control of the land they were able toensure their vision.

Hammonds Ferry, SC, It appears the City has 'contributed' $3 million to the predevelopment efforts (ne return to the CIty yet) and Leyland has contributed approximately $3 million. The description implies that Leyland assisted the City of obtain Public Funding.

Yes, Leyland provides public partner references, Grubb provides mainly private entitty references.



Section 6


Section 77 Public/Private Dev. References Grubb has limited public partner references. LeylandAlliance has many.

Public/Private Development No.1 East Beach, City Councilman, Norfolk, VAPublic/Private Development No.2 Hammonds Ferry, Director of Economic and Community Development, City of Augusta, GAPublic/Private Development No.3 East Beach, Director of Design and Construction, Norfolk Redevelopment Housing Authority, VAPublic/Private Development No.4 Storrs Center, Executive Director, Mansfield Downtown Partnership, Mansfield, CT Public/Private Development No.5 Hammonds Ferry, Mayor, City of North Augusta, SC

Section 88 Awards

Developer NAVArchitect UDA has many awards. FMK Architects did not list any awards.


1 General Tone of the Proposal Realistic Approach2 Caliber of Presentation Moderate3 Level of Detail Provided Strong (provided balance sheets, in depth market-assessment)4 Perceived Enthusiasm High enthusiasm, Principles are both Alumni of UNC

Area(s) of Concern1

Exceptional Qualities

12


Total Score: 84

Grubb Properties and Leyland Alliance are strong firms that have assembeld a strong team that and are well qualified to complete the projects. The projects completed, financial capacity to perform, ownership interest, and history in North Carolina are are factors that make this an outstanding proposal. There is no financial return to the Town mentioned in the conceptual Public/Private finance plan which should be noted.

Good working history between FMK Architects and Grubb Properties.

No mention on financial return to Town investment. Vague approach to public/private finance plan.

Stated goal is 'to help the Town achieve its aesthetic and programmatic objectives subject to the demands of the market and the willingness of the Town to absorb the cost and risk of pursuing elements of the redevelopment that are not supported by the market'

FMK Architects have regional experience with similar building types as related to Chapel Hill. Affordable Housing, Mixed-Income experience is a plus.


Pizzuti Companies

SPPRE Evaluation of Developer RFQ Proposals (Phase One Developments) Developer 6: Pizzuti CompaniesTown of Chapel HillFebruary 18, 2005


Company Name Corporate Headquarters Project Office Location2.a. Development Team Managing Developer: Pizzuti Companies Columbus, OH Columbus, OH

Parent Company: NA NA NACo-Developer: NA NA NAProject Manager Pizzuti Companies Columbus, OH Columbus, OHUrban Designer: NAV NAV NAVArchitect: HKS Architects Dallas, TX Dallas, TXConstruction Company: Brasfield & Gorrie Birmingham, AL Raleigh, NCFacility Operator(s): NAV NAV NAVMEP Engineer: TLC Engineering Orlando, FL NAVStructural Engineer: TLC Engineering Orlando, FL NAVCivil Engineer: NAV NAV NAVLandscape Architect: NAV NAV NAVLaw Firm: NAV NAV NAVEquity Investor(s) NAV NAV NAVConstruction Lender: Nationwide and USAA Real Estate NAV NAVLeasing and Management: Pizzuti Companies Columbus, OH Columbus, OHOthers:

Development Firm Profile Full service real estate company and backed by a very strong capital base.


Managing Developer: Office: Two Miranova Place, Suite 800Columbus, Ohio 43215



Pizzuti Companies

E-Mail: [email protected]. Developer Personnel

Principal: Joel Pizzuti, Exec. VP, Pizzuti

Project Manager: Jim Russell, CEcD, Pizzuti

1.c. Developer/Company OverviewYear established: 1976Relationship to Parent Company: NAResources of Project Office: Employee count not provided, lists staff as substantial.


Project No.1 :Project No.2 :Project No.3 :Project No.4 : NAVProject No.5 : NAV

1.e. Current Workload

Scope of Current Project(s):

Status of Current Project(s): See Above

Workload of Principal: Both projects listed above

Workload of Project Manager: Both projects listed above

1.f. Assessment of Key Members:

Principal:

Project Manager:

Pinnacle 9 (no location, images, or building program provided), Speculative development, 20%/80% split, $18 millionCreekside 13 (no location, images, or building program provided), Speculative development, 20%/80% split, $14 millionPinnacle 10 (no location, images, or building program provided), Build to Suit development, 20%/80% split, $12.5 million

Two Projects, Marina District project in Toledo currently in environmental remediation, 10-year build out. Developing Marketing and Business plan for Preble County, Ohio.

Only one project listed in Toledo under the Principals experience. The project is currently in predevelopment and construction timeframe is not specified.

Structured incentives for retail tenants, however limited depth is given to the actual nature, experience, and role in completed projects.


Pizzuti Companies



1.h. Position on Recent ProjectsOwnership:Development:Equity Investor:Property Manager: NAVRetain Ownership or Sell?


2.b. Urban Designer/Master PlannerMixed-Use Project No.1: Project examples provided in the Qualifications are provided below. Mixed-Use Project No.2: NAVMixed-Use Project No.3: NAVMixed-Use Project No.4: NAVMixed-Use Project No.5: NAV

2.b. Architect Experience HKS ArchitectsMixed-Use Project No.1:Mixed-Use Project No.2:



Discuss alliances with national brokerage firms for leasing and sales of projects. List national retail tenants as well as relationships with local Columbus retail tenants to illustrate incorporating local flavor. List Sears, GNC, Hard Rock Café, Publix, Kroger, Rally's and Walgreens.

List relationship with Cameron Mitchell who is a restaurateur in Ohio. No plan given on how to engage local retail leasing opportunities from Columbus. Have in-house leasing capabilities.

Typically retain projects for investment purposes. Assume a variety of development roles, from fee-developer to master developerInvest Pizzuti equity in predevelopment when required (Toledo). Typically provide 100% of the 20% equit/80% of debt.

Depends on recommendation from Pizzuti's Asset Management Division.

SPPRE assumes HKS will perform the urban design work with the Town.

Mixed Use Downtown Projects for Lots 2, 5 and Wallace Deck, Chapel Hill, NCWhole foods Market at Sixth and Lamar, Austin, TXThe CNL and Florida Center for Arts and Education, Orlando, FL-Office buildings, University Classrooms, Retial Space, Residnetial Areas, Public plaza, Cinema and theatres. The Square at Falling Run, Morgantown, WV, The Augusta-15 story residential building, Retail Space, Resturants, Fuve Screen Cineplex, two level parking garage.Arlington Gateway, Arlington, VA-400 Guest rooms, 200-residential unis, retail space, resturant space, courtyard.


Pizzuti Companies

2.e. LEED CertificationLEED Certified Level: NAVLEED Silver Certified: NAVLEED Gold Certified: NAVLEED Platinum Certified: NAVNumber of Accredited Architects in Firm: NAVAIA "Top 10 Green Projects" list? NAV


Mixed-Use Project No.1:Mixed-Use Project No.2:Mixed-Use Project No.3:Note:

3.b. Public/Private DevelopmentPublic/Private Development No.1 Miranova, 140 condominiums, retail, Garage,Public/Private Development No.2Public/Private Development No.3






TLC Engineering will provide LEED services.

Miranova, Columbus, OH- 140 condominiums, retail, Garage (no images)The Carlile, Columbus, OH- retail uses, signature restaurant (no images, no residential?)Creekside Industrial Center, Obetz, OH-Industrial Park, no other uses provided. (no images, Consultant project?)

Creekside Industrial Center, Industrial Park in OH.

Pizzuti has developed 35 million sf of commercial developments. No project images provided on completed developments.

Rickenbacker III and IV, Columbus, OH- no uses specified.

Miranova, Structured payments back to Pizzuti for $5 million public infrastructure improvements through TIF. Assisted in Brownfield legislation for OH.Creekside Industrial Center, (as consultant? Property manager?) Structure various public financing arrangements, loans and grants to get infrastructure completed. Rickenbacker II & IV, does not specify what the uses at the site were. The public partner has a participating interest in the proceeds from the sale of the completed projects.

Yes, public partner officials provided for three different projects, an Economic Development Administrator, a Village Administrator, and a Rickenbacker Development Director.


Pizzuti Companies

Section 44 Perceived Market Demand "Our conclusions generally support the conclusions of the Town's consultant"

Retail SpaceMarket-rate Rental HousingMarket-rate CondominiumsArt and EntertainmentOffice SpacePosition on Owner-occupied Housing NAV

Section 5


Section 66 Proposed Working Rel. w/ Town


Public/Private Development No.1 Commissioner of Real Estate, City of Toledo, OHPublic/Private Development No.2Public/Private Development No.3 Economic Development Administrator, City of Columbus, OHPublic/Private Development No.4 Director, Development Department, City of Westerville, OH (project not specified)Public/Private Development No.5 Director, Development Department, City of Gahanna, OH (project not specified)

Section 88 Awards

DeveloperArchitect Since 1975 HKS has received 224 awards for 122 projects.

Reiterate some of the ERA conclusionsSuggest demand will remain strong and 60% of the existing market is renter-occupied. Suggest price point of $150-$225/sfSuggest exploring additional opportunities at the development for Arts & Entertainment.Do not see a demand for additional office space.

"Our objective is to create improvements to the Town's tax base that provide adequate incremental revenue to the Town which supports the development of the improvements and ensures that improvements do not create additional obligations for the Town. "

Pizzuti outlines a framework of communication and interaction with the Town that is acceptable

Village Administrator, Village of Obetz, OH

Has received positive press regarding its developments.


Pizzuti Companies


1 General Tone of the Proposal Positive2 Caliber of Presentation moderate-strong3 Level of Detail Provided Adequate, no project sketches or photos provided on development experience. 4 Perceived Enthusiasm moderate-strong

Area(s) of Concern12

345

Exceptional Qualities1 Have assembled a strong team between HKS and Brasfield & Gorrie.2 Financial capacity to perform projects.


Total Score: 79

Display strength in the Columbus market, have concerns about specialty in the North Carolina market.

Pizzuti has assembled aquality Team by including Brasfield & Gorrie and HKS Architects. There is some question pertaining to development experiences of the Principle and Project Manager. No images provided by Pizzuti on development project sheets is a concern from a design standpoint. Developments and operations feel centralized to the Ohio region, some concerns regarding the capacity to manage the project from Ohio.

Principal and Project Manager do not have extensive personal histories offered of applicable roles in development projects. (not provided)Geographic and distance concerns, this project may take more time and meetings than is anticipated by the developer.

Lean heavily on a series of three projects. A company that is 30+ years old should have a greater showcase of experience. Limited project images from the Pizzuti (if any)


evaluation of developer rfq proposals

Documents