Legislation Details

File #: HIST-18104    Version: 1 Subject:
Type: Historical Status: Joint Consent
In control: City Council Meeting Agenda
On agenda: 10/24/2011 Final action: 10/24/2011
Title: JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM: Discuss and Receive Public Input on Developer Proposals for Development of 9300 Culver Boulevard (Parcel B).
Attachments: 1. JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA - J-1__11-10-24__CDD__JOINT__ Parcel B Developer Proposals - FINAL.docx, 2. JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA - 11-10-24_ATT_CDD__JOINT__ Parcel B Developer Proposals ATT.pdf
City of Culver City, California Agenda Item Report 1 Meeting Date: 10/24/11 Item Number: J-1 JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM: Discuss and Receive Public Input on Developer Proposals for Development of 9300 Culver Boulevard (Parcel B). Contact Person/Dept.: Joe Susca/CDD Todd Tipton/ CDD Phone Number: (310) 253-5763 (310) 253-5783 Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No [X] Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [] Attachments: [] Commission Action Required: Yes [X] No [] Date: 10/06/11 Advisory Committee on Redevelopment Public Notification (E-Mail) Redevelopment Agency Projects (10/13/11); (E-Mail) Meetings and Agendas – City Council (10/20/11); (E-Mail) The Downtown Business Association (10/13/11); (E-Mail) The Advisory Committee on Redevelopment (10/13/11); (E-Mail) The Gateway Neighborhood Association (10/13/11); (E-Mail) The Four Developer Respondents to the Parcel B RFP (10/13/11); (E-Mail) The Downtown Neighborhood Association (10/13/11); (E-Mail) The Culver City Chamber of Commerce (10/13/11); (E- Mail) Members of the public who attended the 11/09/10 workshop on the subject matter (10/13/11); (E-Mail) Members of the public who pulled speaker cards on the subject matter during the Agency Board meetings of 10/04/10, 02/14/11, 06/13/11, 09/12/11, 10/03/11 and 10/04/11 (10/13/11); The City’s Parcel B Webpage (10/12/11); The City’s Facebook Wall (10/12/11); (U.S. Post) A public notice was mailed to businesses, residents, and property owners in excess of a 500’ radius of the site (10/13/11); (U.S. Post and E-Mail) Rush Pacifica LLC (10/13/11). Department Approval: Sol Blumenfeld (10/19/11) City Attorney Approval: Carol Schwab (10/19/11) Agency Counsel Approval: Murray Kane (10/18/11) Chief Financial Officer Approval: Jeff Muir (10/19/11) City Manager/Executive Director Approval: John M. Nachbar (10/20/11) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council and Culver City Redevelopment Agency Board (Agency Board) receive public input and discuss proposals from four developers for redevelopment of 9300 Culver Boulevard (Parcel B). PROCEDURE: 1. Mayor/Agency Chair announces that for approximately one hour, the Parcel B developerswill be positioned at their display board stations throughout the City Council Chambers so the public may approach to view andpose any questions to the developer teams they may have; and, City of Culver City, California Agenda Item Report 2 2. Mayor/Agency Chair seeks a motion to recess the City Council/Agency Board Meeting to the interactive session (during the recess and interactive session, any questions asked/answers provided will not be part of the recorded session); and, 3. Mayor/Agency Chair reconvenes the City Council/Agency Board meeting; and, 4. Mayor/Agency Chair invites the public to fill out Requests to Speak and to submit them to the City Clerk if they wish to comment or ask questions about the developer proposals (such questions and any responses provided will be part of the recorded session); and, 5. Following public comment, the City Council/Agency Board may pose questions to staff andthe developers as desired. BACKGROUND: On October 3 and 4, 2011, the City Council/Agency Board received presentations from the four developers selected to respond to the Agency’s Request for Proposals to develop Parcel B in Downtown Culver City. Following the presentations, the public and City Council/Agency Board asked questions and provided comments. Based on the input received during the October 3 rd and 4 th meetings, the City Council/Agency Board directed staff to schedule an additional meeting in order to provide the public with another opportunity to ask questions and provide input. Following the October 3 rd and 4 th meetings, the development team PowerPoint presentations were posted on the City’s website (with a notice sent to approximately 8,300 subscribers to the City’s e-mail notification system) and the presentation boards were placed in the Community Development and Fire Department lobby in City Hall for the public to peruse at their convenience. Since October 14, 2011, there have been approximately 1,053 “hits” to the proposals on the City’s website and many have visited City Hall to review the submittals. Developer answers to questions posed during the October 3 rd and 4 th meetings are attached, along with written comments received by the public for the City Council/Agency Board’s reference. On October 6, 2011, the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment (ACOR) met to review and comment on the proposals. The draft ACOR minutes that include those comments are attached. City of Culver City, California Agenda Item Report 3 DISCUSSION Tonight, the public will have an additional opportunity to comment and ask questions directly of the developers. Because of the informal nature of this part of the meeting, questions and answers provided during the interactive session will not be part of the recorded session. Once the interactive session has concluded, the City Council/Agency Boardare requested toinvite members of the public to submit Requests to Speak prior to asking questions from staff and the developers about their proposals. Once this portion of the meeting is reconvened, such questions and answers will be part of the recorded session. Next Steps: On November 14 2011, the City Council/Agency Board will consider the selection of a developer for Parcel B. During the November 14 th meeting, the public will have another opportunity to provide input. Between now and then, the public may continue to ask questions of the development teams and provide comments to staff in person, via phone or email, or via the City’s website. Should the City Council/Agency Board select a developer at the November 14 th meeting, at some point in the future, as part of the City’s existing development review process, additional opportunities for public input will be provided as the selected development team refines their proposal and ultimately submits fully prepared plans for review by the City. FISCAL ANALYSIS: A project developed in accordance with the existing entitlements is estimated to generate approximately $5.5 million in net new tax increment over the remaining life of the Agency Project Area. The City would receive approximately $1 million in building permit and related fees, and sales tax, business tax and utility users tax totaling approximately $265,000 annually. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Developer answers to questions posed at the October 3 and 4, 2011 meeting. 2. Written comments received from the public. 3. October 6, 2011 Draft ACOR Minutes City of Culver City, California Agenda Item Report 4 MOTION: That the City Council and Agency Board: 1. Announce that this is the time and place for an informal, interactive session with the four development teams that have submitted proposals for development of Parcel B; and, 2. Recess the City Council and Agency Board meetings to conduct the informal session; and, 3. Reconvene the City Council/Agency Board meetings and announce that Request to Speak cards are available to any member of the public who wishes to present further comment to the City Council/.Agency Board; and, 4. Direct the City Manager/Executive Director to place on the November 14, 2011 City Council/Agency Board agenda an item where the City Council/Agency Board will consider selection of a developer for Parcel B. MEETING DATE: 10/24/11 AGENDA ITEM: JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD ITEM: Discuss and Receive Public Input on Developer Proposals Received for Development of 9300 Culver Boulevard (Parcel B). ATTACHMENTS Item Description Pages 1 2 3 Written comments received from the public. Developer answers to questions posed at the October 3 and 4, 2011 meeting. October 6, 2011 Draft ACOR Minutes 1-10 11-58 59-64   -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Edwards Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 4:28 PM To: Susca, Joe Subject: Parcel B Development Clever City should require the developer of Parcel B to include affordable housing, like other cities, such as Santa Monica, do. Jennifer Edwards 25 year Culver City Resident -----Original Message----- From: HowardCohen Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 11:15 AM To: Susca, Joe Subject: RE: Parcel B Web Page Update These are some very professional presentations, and I'm sure (if the economic works & the economy improves) each has the capacity of being successful, but I still believe downtown needs more "Residential" on Parcel "B" and elsewhere to improve & sustain the downtown core. I'm still looking forward to see how the one selected executes it’s Project. Thank you! Howard From: Albert Cutler Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 9:58 AM To: Susca, Joe Cc: sginsberg@combined.biz Subject: Parcel B Appreciate the detailed Emails on the proposals for Parcel B. If the resident's input counts, I'm in favor the the proposal by Combined Properties. It is the most dynamic of the proposals and would spark our rather "stogy" downtown! Al Cutler Culver City, CA From: Maya Mallick Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 12:15 PM ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 1To: Malsin, Scott; Armenta, Christopher; Cooper, Jeffrey; michal.oleary@culvercity.org; Weissman, Andrew Cc: Nachbar, John; Blumenfeld, Sol Subject: Parcel B presentations Good Afternoon Mayor and Council Members, Thank you for offering the community a chance to participate in this month’s developer presentations of Parcel B. The Culver Hotel along with the rest of the community is very much looking forward to the successful development and completion of the project. It is clear to me that all 4 developers have put a tremendous amount of effort and expense into understanding that we are a special city that will embrace and benefit from a project that places value on architecture, pedestrian friendly open spaces and as many green areas as possible. Per Mr. Malsin's request, I would like to share additional comments and a few questions on the four presentations: The Spanish Steps, the Art Pavilion and the Green Roof were 3 of my favorite features throughout the presentations. I believe that those are excellent concepts which would be great to combine on some level in the same development with whomever you select if at all possible. Additional ideas which I felt were strong and seemed to carry out throughout the presentations were the terraced/stepped buildings, high ceilings on the ground level, light color materials as well as floor to ceiling glass in certain areas creating a more updated feel. Passageways, open spaces and separate buildings are of course necessary features and creating a venue which could call for a weekly/monthly cultural or music event would be a great draw to the area. This could also tie into the existing Third Wednesdays which the DBA currently organizes. There are a few things which I would love to see some of… More green on the ground level and additional water elements, or one central and larger water element to create a focal point. Too much concrete does not promote a neighborhood feel. Also, the model presented by the Tolkin Group was a very nice touch as it helped feel the scale of the project. I would encourage a physical model for the other developers if at all possible to help put their project into perspective with regards to how it would flow with the surrounding areas. Last but not least, a complete interior renovation of the theatre would greatly enhance the entire area and certainly complement whatever is going to happen on Parcel B. With Culver City being the heart of Screenland, it is a perfect opportunity and an absolute must to create something spectacular and unique in a city with so much movie making presence and history. ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 2Although the presentations nicely outlined the architecture and ambiance of the projects, there was not much information as to the actual details of impacts of noise, dirt, traffic flow, dust, road closures and how the site will be contained to minimize impact on the surrounding neighborhood. How will the selected developer ensure the timely completion of the project and what is the projected timeline from start to finish? Are there any incentives to completing on time or early? What are the financing criteria? The community is concerned that the site is actually going to be completed, especially given these financial times. As the operator of The Culver Hotel, I am interested in late night and early morning noise both during the construction phase as well as after completion, when the businesses and outdoor entertainment are in full operation. What will these noise guidelines follow and will there be any negative noise impact for our hotel guests? In closing, I appreciate the developers sensitivity towards developing something complimentary to the Historic Culver Hotel and Culver Studios and creating an environment that promotes people friendly and open areas, interesting and inviting buildings which tie in art, food, entertainment and culture. We wholeheartedly look forward to embracing the best project as our new neighbor. Sincerely, Maya Mallick T 310.558.9400 | F 310.815.0797 THE CULVER HOTEL 9400 Culver Blvd. Culver City, CA 90232 HOTEL BEVERLY TERRACE 469 N. Doheny Dr. Beverly Hills, CA 90210 www.hotelbeverlyterrace.com ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 3ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 4ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 5ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 8 From: r sergant [mailto:rsergant@msn.com] Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2011 5:39 AM To: Susca, Joe Subject: Downtown CC plan I looked at the four power point proposals for parcel B (near Trader Joe's) My favorite was the Runyon plan. I liked the emphasis on the Mission Style. Plenty of parking below. I also liked the presentation by Tolkin.. but the design was a bit too glitzy for that area.. It seems like parking is the main focus of that plan... Elements of the other two plans were good, but also w/ a downside. I liked the rooftop growing great garden. I worry about all of the steps and possible problems w/ skateboards, etc. Any elevators for the disabled? limited mobility? Question: Will any of these plans impact our Farmer's Market? In what way? Any protection during the winter rains? Thank you, r sergant From: Schafer, Ron Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 2:57 PM To: Susca, Joe Subject: Parcel B comments Hey Joe, As an Architect and Culver City Resident, I thought I would present my opinions related to the developer designs presented to the Council earlier this month. In my opinion the method to create a project that is of its place and creates a welcoming sense of place; would be a combination of Cardiff Realty’s façade treatments and Runyon Group’s plan arrangement. Why? Façade: The more contemporary façade treatments by the Cardiff scheme brings a more contemporary style yet maintains the pedestrian scale truly needed to continue the success of the existing downtown district. Plan: The key to having an internal shopping environment “work” visitors need to have many views into the space and vice versa the visitors need to have many exits from this space. It may reside in the animal DNA in each of us, but I believe it has to do with our survival instincts that we really want to have multiple ways “out” to feel comfortable. Note: ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 9I do believe that the Combined great Stair has a considerable amount of merit. It would be a unique feature in Culver City, but it really relies very heavily on what is happening on the second level. You may be able to achieve the draw using multiple restaurant tenants, the stair does allow a considerable amount of viewing of the tenants from afar. The only drawback with this scheme is the façade treatment on the corner. Thanks for accepting comments, Best, Ron E. Schafer, AIA DESIGN LEAD, SENIOR ASSOCIATE R N L | www.rnldesign.com ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Page 10Parcel B Developer Questions 1 What is the tenant mix for the project and what design criteria was used to select them?    2 How will cut-through traffic into the adjacent neighborhood be minimized?    3 What is the square feet of the project and are you maximizing the current entitlement?  If less, why?    4 Will the spaces be leased prior to constructing the building?    5  How is your proposal a human scale development and how does it compliment downtown in its  scale and character?    6 How many employees will work at one time in the building and how will they park?  Will they park  on site for free and be required to park on site?  7 How much space will be dedicated to the cars on The Culver Studios side of the project (if you have  a subterranean ramp leading to parking below)?   8 How many square feet in the project is dedicated to dining?    9 How will you secure quality retailers?    10 How is your building green? What is your carbon footprint?    11 How much of the space is walkable?      ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 119300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011    To:   Culver City       From:   Scott Ginsburg on behalf of Combined Properties, Inc & Hudson Pacific Properties    Date:   October 14, 2011    Subject:  9300 Culver Blvd/ Parcel B Project      Responses to Questions         Parcel B Developer Questions      1. What is the tenant mix for the project and what design criteria was used to select them?      The tenanting of our project is a multi-faceted process. First and foremost, we set the goal of  making sure that the project communicates and complements — not competes with — the  surrounding Downtown businesses. We accomplished this by creating Retail Rows, or “Districts,”  on each of the sides of the building. For example, the Washington Boulevard side will be lined  with  retailers  offering  arts  and  crafts,  fresh  seafood,  and  yoga  classes  —  complementary  destinations that shoppers at Trader Joe’s will be pleased to find just across the street. (More  information regarding the Retail Districts can be found in our RFP response.) Once we finished  characterizing and “merchandising” the Retail Districts, we relied on our experience, input from  our consultants and feedback from retailers to ensure that our design was best suited for the  types of tenants that we want to draw to the project.  Lifestyle tenants such as Patagonia, Urban  Outfitters and other unique national and local tenants will require an outstanding design which  we feel confident that we have provided for. The tenants will all have specific requirements and  want  unique  storefronts which  our  design  accounts  for,  by  utilizing  unique  tenant  signage  elements and materials such as wood and metal to enhance the glass storefront design.  (See  some of the storefronts depicted in our RFP which we used for a reference). We understand  that,  like  any  other  development  project,  there  is  more  work  to  do  and  input  from  the  community and stakeholders to be incorporated, but we are confident that our street-facing,  extroverted plan will be desirable to the tenants.    Hudson Pacific Properties (“Hudson”) is a New York Stock Exchange listed public company that  focuses on office and media and entertainment properties. The Company owns office space in  Culver City nearby at 10950 Washington and, therefore, has intimate office market knowledge.  Based  on  this,  Hudson  is  confident  that  it  can  lease  the  office  to  quality  entertainment,  technology and media tenants. We think that it is very important to emphasize the viability of  office leasing in the project. These office users will enhance the businesses in the project and  help  support  the  Downtown  business  area.  Because  we  are  focused  on  significant  entertainment,  media  and  new  technology  companies,  we  believe  that  they  will  be  complementary to Sony Studios, Culver Studios and the creative office tenants in the Hayden  Tract.  As a result of this interaction between the local businesses, our project will be the  epicenter of these different areas.  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 129300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011      2. How will cut-through traffic into the adjacent neighborhood be minimized?     This project was designed to comply with the ingress egress requirements outlined in the RFP.    3. What is the square feet of the project and are you maximizing the current entitlement?  If less, why?      The total gross area of the proposed project is 115,108 square feet. We were able to design a  project that promotes a very open, extroverted and pedestrian-friendly feel that is inviting and  embraces Downtown.  The project is visually distinct and the facades are broken into districts  which are urban in nature yet very visually appealing. By designing the project within the  allowable density, we are planning to provide the Downtown with as much retail as possible,  and offer the best opportunity to make the project financially viable and buildable in today’s  market.    3a. Will the spaces be leased prior to constructing the building?    Once chosen as the developer for 9300 Culver Blvd, we will immediately go to the market to  secure two or three key retail tenants.  Though we do not feel that we will need to lease a  majority  of  the  space  prior  to  starting  construction,  it  may  be  in  all  parties’  best  interest  (including the City’s) to secure a key retail tenant or two before commencing construction.  Given Combined Properties, Inc (“Combined”) and Hudson’ expertise in retail and office leasing,  respectively, as well as their in-house capabilities and services of The McDevitt Company, the  Development Team will rely on its experience and is the most capable of securing the necessary  tenancy for the project expeditiously.    4.  How is your proposal a human scale development and how does it compliment Downtown in its  scale and character?     The project was designed to enhance the pedestrian experience and embrace Downtown by  being externally focused.  The Grand Steps are oriented in a way to expand the Town Plaza and  embrace pedestrians.  It invites the public to experience the Elevated Plaza and offers a new  major focal point for Downtown.  By lowering the heights on three sides of the project and  stepping back the second floor retail we are reducing the impact on the neighborhood.  Our  single-story orientation along the Culver Studios and Town Plaza sides of the project creates a  low scale orientation similar to other buildings in the Downtown.  The highest point of the  project, 56 feet, is oriented on the east side—across the similarly massed Ince garage and Trader  Joe’s.    The character of the project enhances Downtown by orienting to the street and complimenting  the existing architecture through the use of brick, wood, glass and metal, wide sidewalks and  landscaping. As important, the retail’s street front focus will enhance pedestrian activity in  Downtown.  Rather than focusing inward where customers might have a tendency to walk from  the parking to the project and back to the parking, the pedestrian will walk on the streets which  will enable the other Downtown businesses to draw foot traffic to their stores.     ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 139300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011    Our Development Team has managed to create a plan that maximizes the entitlements while  creating  a  building  that  respects  and  communicates  with  its  surroundings.  In  essence,  the  project consists of three portions: a 4-story portion, a 2-story portion, and a 1-story portion. The  4-story office/retail building faces Washington Boulevard and is exactly the same height as the  building across the street, which houses the Ince parking structure and Trader Joe’s. For most of  its exposure on Culver Boulevard, the project rises just 2-stories above ground so as not to  tower over the businesses that line the street—again, complementing them. The Elevated Plaza  rises just one-level above ground, allowing pedestrians to have clear views of the Culver Studios,  Culver Hotel, and the rest of Downtown Culver City. Moreover, the scale of the project on all  four sides ensures that the Culver Studios and Culver Hotel are clearly and proudly displayed  and accessible.      It is important to note that we have worked hard to ensure that we are preserving the views of  the Culver Studio Mansion and Culver Hotel. Our project is meant to honor the City’s rich history  and display the historic buildings. The tallest point of the project, 56 feet, is massed on the  eastern edge across from Trader Joes and the Ince structure which is the same height.  We  purposely lowered the portion of the site adjacent to Culver Studio and the Culver Hotel to one- story so we would not block those structures.  We also purposely focused the Elevated Plaza to  overlook Culver Studio and built out the storefronts on the Studio side to take advantage of  additional hardscape and views of the Studio.  We want to take advantage of the “quiet” side of  the project and envision a seating for people along an extended plaza.  We built out the Grand  Stair in a way that preserves the view corridor from Main Street to Culver Studio. We are  keeping massing high on the Trader Joes/Culver Blvd side, meeting the Town Plaza at the Culver  Hotel side and offering great views from the Elevated Plaza of the Culver Studios.    The Grand Stairs can be used as an amphitheater facing the Town Plaza, as seating for the  summer concert series and other events. Additional seating can be added for larger gatherings.  According  to  the  City,  they  have  estimated  that  the  Amphitheater  will  accommodate  approximately 300 people in addition to the 700 that will be accommodated in the Town Plaza.  The  Elevated  Plaza  can  be  used  for  casual  gathering  or  for  organized  festivals,  fairs  or  ceremonies and would be available to the public.  We would work with community groups and  the city to program events in the Elevated Plaza.  We also envision the Elevated Plaza being an  ideal  place  to  have  art  displays  and  hold  private  functions  in  conjunction  with  the  local  restaurants or special catered events for the local businesses.  This could include events such  after parties for movies premiering at Sony or Culver Studios and additional to art openings.  It  also offers a venue for people within the community to hold private events.      5.  How many employees will work at one time in the building and how will they park?  Will they park  on site for free and be required to park on site?    We are conducting further analysis and research and will provide feedback at the October 24,  2011 meeting.         ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 149300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011    6.  How much space will be dedicated to the cars on The Culver Studios side of the project (if you have  a subterranean ramp leading to parking below)?     We need further clarification on this question; however, we do potentially envision some short  term parking and/or valet drop-off along the Culver Studio side of the project.     7.  How many square feet in the project is dedicated to dining?      There are 6,465 square feet of restaurant space on the Elevated Plaza. The restaurant space on  the Elevated Plaza will have balcony seating with unprecedented views of Downtown Culver  City.  We also expect to include a café and sandwich shop on the ground floor adjacent to the  Town Plaza, which will have outdoor seating.    8.  How will you secure quality retailers?      CPI  will  secure  quality  retailers  by  utilizing  its  full-service,  in-house  leasing  team  as  well  augmenting our capabilities with The McDevitt Company — a boutique consultant specializing in  high-end, unique retail tenants. CPI’s track record speaks for itself as far as its ability to execute  lease transactions that benefit the community, the landlord, and the tenant. We understand  retailers, their needs and how to execute leases. We actively negotiate with retailers, their  brokers  and  representatives  and  will  rely  on  our  relationships  and  direct  and  immediate  experience leasing to tenants.     CPI has deep experience with retailers including many national, local and unique retailers. The  following is a sampling of the tenants we have worked with and continue to work with:     • Borders Books  • Whole Foods  • REI  • Nordstrom  • Macy’s  • Coldwater Creek  • Chico's  • The Fresh Market  • Barnes & Noble  • White House Black Market  • LA Fitness  • Buy Buy Baby  • Ann Taylor Loft  • Ulta  • Talbot's  • Francesca's  • Trader Joe's  • South Moon Under  • Elizabeth Arden Red Door Salon  • PF Chang’s  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 159300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011    • Chico’s  • Mac  • Children’s Place  • Yard House  • Lazy Dog Café  • Johnston Murphy  • Sunglass Hut   • House of Blues/Live Nation    CPI and its team member have also worked with many small business owners to help develop  their businesses and create new retail and restaurant concepts. One example is the Hungry Cat  Restaurant, an award winning restaurant in Hollywood opened by David Lentz and James Beard  award winning chef Suzanne Goin. We have also worked with restaurateurs Susan Feniger and  Mary Sue Milikan at Border Grill, Ciudad and Street to help them develop their concepts.     Lastly,  we  want  to  emphasize  that  our  retail  faces  the  street,  enhancing  the  pedestrian  experience along all the edges of our site. The project is EXTROVERTED, not introverted  --- it  opens up to the Downtown and creates synergies with the existing business and urban fabric on  all sides.  This will enable all of the retailers and businesses in Downtown (including those in our  project) to work in conjunction with each other rather than to compete against each other. In  addition, the retail is all serviced through an internal service corridor in the back of each retail  space so there is no need for pedestrians and patrons of the shops to be disturbed by loading or  trash collection.  Lastly, the trucks will have their own loading facility so there will be no loading  at the street.    9.  How is your building green? What is your carbon footprint?      We are aiming to build the project to achieve a LEED Silver rating. This project will also comply  with Cal Green and Culver City's Green Building Requirements. We will also comply with Culver  City's PV requirement. They would go on the rooftop, shading the mechanical equipment and  reducing the solar gain from direct sunlight. We may use operable windows, which not only help  occupants control their environment, but also connect people with the outside activity. Basic  solar orientation principles have been followed: ample day lighting/glazing on the north, vertical  fins on the west and deep overhangs on the south. These elements also serve the dual purpose  of giving human scale to the facades. Moreover, we plan to incorporate a grey water system  into the project.     10. How much of the space is walkable?      The Grand Stairs and Amphitheatre seating comprises 3,030 square feet. The Elevated Plaza is  nearly 12,000 square feet. There is 6,050 square feet of walkable space on the ground level  within the property line, where the buildings have been set back to provide for wider sidewalks  around the perimeter of the building. The project is set back from the property around the  whole building at varying widths (with the exception of the western face along the Town Plaza  where the Grand Stairs meet the Plaza). The set-backs range from approximately 14’ along  Culver Boulevard to 11’ along Washington Boulevard to 8’ along the façade facing the Culver  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 169300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011    Studio. There is a total of approximately 20,350 square feet of walkable area in our project that  is easily accessible and inviting to pedestrians.     ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 179300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011    Questions for Parcel B Developers (document 2):      1.  What experience do you have in building and leasing office properties?    Hudson owns 15 Office properties with 3.2 million square feet and 2 Studio properties in  Hollywood with 1 million square feet. The company’s management team, including its leasing  personnel, has deep experience operating and leasing office properties. In a highly successful  stock offering in 2010, the Company went public on the New York Stock Exchange, proving that  both institutional and private investors have full confidence in Hudson’s ability acquire, develop,  manage,  and  lease  office  properties  in  accordance  with  its  strategy.  Most  of  Hudson’s  management team is comprised of professionals who helped run Arden Realty—a very well- known and successful office owner and operator known throughout the real estate community.    In addition, Marianne Lowenthal from CPI was involved in the development of CitiCorp Plaza in  Downtown LA and has leased over one-million square feet of office space. CPI currently owns  manages, and leases its office building in Beverly Hills located at 9320 Wilshire Boulevard.     2.  What experience do you have in building and leasing retail properties?    CPI  brings  27  years  of  retail  ownership,  development,  management,  and  leasing  to  the  Development Team. Not only has CPI developed land into fully leased, highly successful retail  and  mixed-use  properties,  it  has  also  rehabilitated  and  renovated  neglected  retail  centers,  brought in major tenants and maximized value.     3.  How do you plan to finance this project? Do you have the equity available or will you need to  partner with an equity provider?    The Development Team has strong and immediate access to equity capital. The principal of CPI,  Ronald Haft, has the resources to construct the entire project using only his personal equity,  which he has been done in the past.     Hudson is a publicly traded company with plenty of liquidity. As of the second quarter of 2011,  the company had assets valued at over $1 billion and cash and cash equivalents of over $85  million.  In  addition  to  the  ability  to  raise  equity  and  debt  through  public  stock  and  bond  offerings, respectively, the Company has access to a $250 million revolving line of credit. In 2011  alone, Hudson raised over $150 million of equity through a single stock offering.    4.  Can you please provide us with information about your experience procuring construction loans?    We will provide addition detail to the Council regarding our cumulative financing experience  including recent experience procuring loans at the October 24, 2011 meeting.           ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 189300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011    5.  How many retail leases have you or your organization negotiated and executed?    Since its establishment 27 years ago, CPI has negotiated and executed hundreds of retail leases  for millions of square feet of retail space. This year alone, CPI will execute over 400,000 SF of  retail leases. We understand the retailers, their needs and how to complete their deals. We  actively negotiate the retailers, their brokers and representatives and will rely on our direct and  immediate experience leasing to tenants.    6.  How many development projects have you done previously?    CPI, Hudson and their key employees have deep real estate development experience. We will  provide additional detail at the October 24, 2011 meeting.     7.  How many of your previous development projects do you still own?    CPI and Hudson are both long term owners of real estate. We expect to retain ownership of this  property once complete.  CPI has retained ownership of all its development projects.     8.  Are you planning to own this project after it is built?    Yes.    9.  What does your project do in terms of sustainable development and what have you done in order to  make your project “green”    See answer #9 above.     10. How does your project address the agency’s request to add additional parking at the site?    Per  the  Agency’s  direction,  many  parking  options  were  studied  and  three  options  were  presented for consideration in the RFP. To minimize excavation and maximize efficiency, the  parking in all three schemes is strictly rectangular in plan.     • Parking Option 1 provides 98 spaces and is fully underneath the property line of the project;   • Parking Option 2 provides 126 spaces and extends underneath the Town Plaza; and  • Parking Option 3 is an identical footprint to Parking Option 2 but extends down a spiraling  ramp. We are showing 256 parking spaces (2 levels or parking) however the ramp can be  extended further downwards to increase the total parking count.     It is important to note that we believe that we can, at the very least, deliver the number of  spaces identified plans we have proposed. Unlike others, our plans consider loading, handicap  parking and structural columns in the parking areas.     We  are  continuing  to  study  the  parking  and  ways  to  provide  for  additional  spaces  while  maintaining the efficiency of the structure. We are very aware of the costs associated with  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 199300 CULVER BOULEVARD MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, Culver City    Response to Questions from Agency – October 14, 2011    building subterranean parking structures and want to ensure that we are providing for the most  efficient structure so that the City may get the best “bang for its buck”.     11. We know that tenants come and go over time. What consideration have you given to that reality  and what have you done to ensure the long term future of the project? How flexible will your  project be if the tenants you propose today are gone in 5, 10 or 20 years?    CPI is a long-term owner of real estate. We are not “merchant builders”—developers who  purchase land, construct a building, lease it up, and sell the project once stabilized. Because of  this, CPI’s management team has extensive experience with and a strong understanding of long- term real estate holding strategies and ensures that its projects maintain viability for the long- term.      Specifically, the Development Team has worked with its team of architects, engineers, and  leasing personnel to design the projects floors to ensure for future flexibility. For example, the  floor plates are purposely shaped to allow walls to be moved easily, making spaces easily  expandable or contractible based on future tenant need.  This is the case for both the retail and  office space. Moreover, the second floor of the building can be reconfigured to include only  office or retail, or a combination of both (as it is now), making it fully adaptable to market  conditions. Most important, the street-front nature of this project will ensure that the retail  space will always be coveted by tenants.  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 20Parcel B Developer Questions Tolkin Group Responses October 14, 2011   First Set of Questions:  1 What is the tenant mix for the project and what design criteria was used to select them?   Tolkin Group’s (“TG”) expertise is in working in existing downtown retail, dining and entertainment districts.  The company’s philosophy is to respect the culture, character, scale, and ambience of the existing  downtown and to integrate projects with the goal of reinforcing and enhancing what already exists. TG  projects are not stand alone developments in the traditional sense, but are buildings interwoven into the  fabric of the community.  TG’s design criteria is that their developments have a mix of unique independent entrepreneurial retailers as  well as recognizable brand name businesses that are designed to reinforce and enhance the existing mix of  businesses in downtown.   The tenant mix proposed for Parcel B (“Culver X”) is a major national anchor tenant(s) with a mix of unique  local and national retailers at the ground floor (street) level, some of which will have courtyard and plaza  seating and/or dining. On the second floor, TG envisions entertainment, restaurant, health & fitness, and  personal service type uses that work synergistically with the retail below. Above this, on the third and  (partial) fourth floors, there will be flex office space for creative uses such as film production, branding and  technology companies that want to be located downtown.  A finely curated mix of tenants will help to  ensure the financial success of the project.  At the ground floor, TG’s proposal contains 33,537 sf of retail and restaurant and other unique food  concepts (i.e. from a high-tech anchor to an optical boutique and bakery.) The second floor contains  approximately 30,242 sf which could potentially house the following uses: restaurant; entertainment such as  a bowling alley, billiards, digital gaming; health and fitness uses such as a day spa, yoga and spin studio; a  children’s gym. The balance of the second floor could contain uses such as a children’s dentist, adult  cosmetic dentistry or orthodontist. TG has included these uses in other projects and has found them to be  synergistic with retail and office environments. The third and fourth floors have 26,338 sf and 17,949 sf  respectively. TG sees this space leased to creative office users such as production companies, branding  studios and technology companies.  For additional information please refer to the TG proposal Section A.I, Project Narrative (pages 5, 10 & 12);  and Section C, Tenant Mix. Please see attached Dembo Realty’s potential tenant mix for the ground level  and second floor (Section C of TG’s proposal).  2 How will cut-through traffic into the adjacent neighborhood be minimized?    TG will work closely with Redevelopment Agency staff, the City’s Traffic Engineer and Public Works  Department and the Community to come up with appropriate solutions as TG has done with all of its  projects.      ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 21Page 2 of 8  Tolkin Group Responses to Parcel B Questions  October 14, 2011    3 What is the square feet of the project and are you maximizing the current entitlement?  If less, why?    Gross Building Area Breakdown  Ground Floor       33,537 s.f.  Second Floor       30,242 s.f.  Third Floor       26,338 s.f.  Fourth Floor       17,949 s.f.  Total       108,066 s.f.  2002 Entitled total gross building area  115,108 s.f.  Net reduction in floor area           7,042 s.f.    The overall project size and massing were reduced to appropriately scale the project to the site, fitting with  the existing downtown, and ensuring high quality light and open space.  Culver X provides setbacks that mirror the existing surrounding streets; walk streets that connect the  interior courtyard to Washington and Culver Boulevards; and “public spaces” that are well joined to the  City’s Town Plaza. The project is designed to provide optimum storefront visibility to the retailers both from  Culver and Washington Boulevards, as well as onto walk-streets, interior courtyard, and connected Town  Plaza. To create view corridors and vistas, the buildings have been stepped down.  TG’s financial pro forma section of their proposal also includes options with a two-story retail, restaurant,  entertainment, health & fitness, personal service uses. This alternative provides for further scale reduction  on the project and actually increases the residual land value of Parcel B due to the current office space  market and the related high construction costs for office buildings.     4 Will the spaces be leased prior to constructing the building?    TG anticipates leasing approximately 55 to 65% prior to start of construction.  5  How is your proposal a human scale development and how does it compliment downtown in its scale and  character?      TG’s approach to designing urban infill mixed-use development, is that they fit in with the existing  downtown’s character, complement and expand the downtown. As stated in TG’s proposal and presentation  before Council, Culver X does the following to provide a human scale development:    1) TG acknowledges the geometry of the existing city, i.e. the triangular shaped lots and spaces.  2) TG uses the existing block structure as the basic building block for their project, i.e. the 25x100 foot lots.  3) TG references the existing alley system across Culver Boulevard when forming new pedestrian walk- streets in the project.  4) TG integrates and orients access points to Culver X within the City’s public parking structure system.  5) TG mirrored the large setback that exists on the north side of Culver Boulevard along the north elevation  of their project, encouraging a retail street life as well as providing for outdoor dining and seating  opportunities.  6) TG has employed a scale and rhythm along the lower two floors of the project that mimics the 25, 50  and 75 foot wide building storefronts found within the existing facades across Culver Boulevard.  7) TG has set back the third and fourth floor offices from 6 feet (along the Culver and Washington  elevations) to 2 feet (along the south elevation facing Culver Studios) from the retail facades below.  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 22Page 3 of 8  Tolkin Group Responses to Parcel B Questions  October 14, 2011    Thus, from a pedestrian perspective walking along the street elevations, the building feels like a one and  two story structure.    8) TG has improved the hardscape and landscape of what they are calling “Washington Promenade” (on  the Culver Studios side) creating a quiet side of the project for outdoor seating, potential bicycle  parking, bicycle shop/maintenance and other amenities.  9) TG has integrated the project with the Town Plaza (Culver Plaza) by incorporating an interior courtyard  (what TG calls the Lillian Roberts’ Court). Together, these public spaces provide various amenities such  as seating, interactive fountains, public art, lighting, and landscaping; as well as various opportunities for  public programming such as a farmer’s market, art installations, programs for children and schools,  outdoor movies, outdoor theatre and fairs.  10) Furthering the pedestrian scale and complementing the character of the existing downtown Culver City  is TG’s use of materials, authentic materials such as brick (in a range of colors) and wood, incorporation  of concrete bulkheads that can be used for seating, awnings for shade, as well as high quality lighting  and signage.  11) Perhaps most importantly, the storefronts and retail facades are scaled to human proportions, by the  employment of traditional architectural methods such as the use of recessed entrances, transom  windows above, storefront and bulkhead below. These all serve to create a pedestrian friendly and  human scaled building.     6 How many employees will work at one time in the building and how will they park?  Will they park on site  for free and be required to park on site?    Consistent with TG’s development philosophy, it is important that the downtown and Culver X’s inclusion  within it, as they relate to parking, be understood as a district wide solution. As specialists in downtown  mixed-use projects, TG understands that peak retail and restaurant parking occur on nights and weekends,  and peak office demand occurs during weekdays. TG’s approach to managing onsite parking provided with  the project would take this into account.    The amount of employees is very specific to the needs of the actual tenants for retail, restaurant and the  office and cannot be accurately determined at this time. The answer to this question will also depend on  which parking scenario is built as there is a large variation in the number of spaces between options. The  schemes with more parking will theoretically have more employee parking available on site.    Culver X is meant to be part of the downtown; and therefore the employees of retail and restaurant uses,  with the exception of valet or evening entertainment uses, will use the Ince Parking structure as indicated in  the RFP. The Ince Parking structure presently has 2 hours of free parking, but our assumption is that the  employees will buy monthly passes. However, this is something that needs to be coordinated with the City’s  parking management plan.    For the office portion of the project, executives and visitors would use the parking below the site provided  for this use (indicated in the RFP). The majority of office employees would buy monthly parking at the Ince  parking structure.    7 How much space will be dedicated to the cars on The Culver Studios side of the project (if you have a  subterranean ramp leading to parking below)?   TG is proposing that the parking ramp be located under the building accessed from the Culver Studios side,  close to Washington Boulevard. TG is not dedicating space to cars or a parking structure ramp in the middle  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 23Page 4 of 8  Tolkin Group Responses to Parcel B Questions  October 14, 2011    of the street on this side of the project. At Culver X, we see this side of the project (which we refer to as  “Washington Promenade”) as a less auto intensive, generously landscaped and hardscaped improvements  that integrate and mediate the relationship between Culver X and the Culver Studios.  While access needs to  be maintained for Culver Studios, we imagine this as a quieter street.  For further information, please refer to the TG proposal, Section A.I (page 11) and the site plan in Section  A.II (page 24).  8 How many square feet in the project is dedicated to dining?    At this point, TG does not have a firm number. TG is aware of the downtown business community’s concern  over too many restaurants. Restaurants generate foot traffic and in our experience some amount of  restaurant space is necessary to support a vibrant retail mix. TG has indicated 1 restaurant (Space 116 at  2,837 sf) and 1 café (Space 101 at 1,483 sf) on the ground floor, totaling 4,320 sf. In addition, TG showed  space 112 as an optional retail/restaurant space with 3,569 sf. On the second floor TG has shown two spaces  that could potentially be retail or restaurant. Space 201 is 3,670 sf and Space 207 is 3,831 sf.  TG is confident that the ground floor will benefit most by having two restaurants adjacent and spilling onto  the Town Plaza. As the tenant mix is finalized, the total amount of restaurant area would be determined.   The intention is to create a retail environment with the synergy that several restaurants can provide.  Within  the district, having the right balance of restaurant supporting retail will help to ensure the project’s success  and enhancement of the rest of the downtown Culver City district. TG’s experience has shown over time  that if the tenant mix at Culver X is balanced, it will lead to an increase to the retail to restaurant ratio in the  rest of downtown Culver City.  9 How will you secure quality retailers?    TG has over 31 years of experience of encouraging and germinating unique specialty retail such as Petros  Greek Restaurant, Mi Piacci, Salon Brit, Trilogy Day Spa, Saladang Song, Blue Café (jazz club), Z Gallerie, Bath  Junkie, Jakes Billiards (now Gameworks) and many others. TG also has experience attracting major  recognizable brands such as Apple, Design Within Reach, Le Pain Quotidian, Crate & Barrel, American  Apparel, Restoration Hardware, Starbucks, Bath & Body Works, and Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf to name a few.  TG has the experience, relationships and reputation with the tenants and brokerage community to secure  quality retailers.  TG invites you to visit their projects and is happy to arrange a tour.  10 How is your building green? What is your carbon footprint?    TG is committed to promoting green building and sustainable development in its projects and its design and  construction team has worked closely together on Culver X with the goal of achieving LEED certification.  TG  is confident that it will be able to achieve LEED Silver rating under LEED 2009 Core and Shell. Attached is the  initial LEED checklist and a letter outlining some of the highlights of our approach, prepared by TG’s General  Contractor, Pankow.  There are a number of visible architectural features in Culver X that contribute to the project’s overall  sustainability goals including the incorporation of bicycle parking, the green screen on the south facing  façade across from Culver Studios, the upper level office facades will be designed with passive solar  principals and the intent of maximizing natural day light and ventilation while minimizing solar heat gain and  glare.  A roof top deck/garden with a photovoltaic veranda on the upper floor roof that serves the office  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 24Page 5 of 8  Tolkin Group Responses to Parcel B Questions  October 14, 2011    tenants is provided as well. From a building materials standpoint TG intends to incorporate recycled and  local materials wherever possible to help meet LEED goals and because it’s the right thing to do.    In addition TG has begun researching, with its design build electrical sub-contractor the possibility of  incorporating a photovoltaic power generating system on the roof of Culver X through a Power Purchasing  Agreement (PPA) where Culver X would lease its roof to the operator of the system and purchase back the  power.  TG would like to pursue this possibility once awarded the project.  A letter, from AJ Kirkwood &  Associates, Inc., is included in the Appendix Section of TG’s proposal that outlines briefly the system.      Once the project is complete TG plans to implement “green” management best practices in the daily  operation and management of the building and site.   Determining the actual carbon footprint of this project is a complex calculation that is difficult to answer  accurately at this point in the process. TG intends to make this the most sustainable project possible.  11 How much of the space is walkable?    Public walkable space, which includes, the Lillian Roberts’ Court, the sidewalk setbacks and walk streets  within Culver X, comprises approximately 30 % of the Parcel B site area. In addition to this the project  provides uncovered walkways and outdoor decks on the upper floors, as well as a roof deck/garden on the |1010|th  floor of the south building.   Parcel B Site Area:         50,730 sf  Town Plaza (Culver Plaza) with Washington Promenade:     39,684 sf    The walkable area for Culver X breaks down as follows:  Ground Floor Walkable Open Space:       15,080 sf  Lillian Roberts’ Court, Ince Walk-Street and Culver Walk-Street    (This is in addition to the City’s Town Plaza)   |1010|nd  Floor walkways and decks:         5,690 sf |1010|rd  Floor walkways:          2,709 sf |1010|th  Floor walkways and roof decks:        5,796 sf                       ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 25Page 6 of 8  Tolkin Group Responses to Parcel B Questions  October 14, 2011    Second Set of Questions:    1. What experience do you have in building and leasing office properties?    TG has 31 years of experience in building and leasing downtown infill office and retail properties. In contrast to  stand alone office buildings, our experience is almost exclusively in building and leasing office space above retail,  entertainment and restaurant uses in downtown shopping districts. The majority of our projects have office  space above retail. Projects similar in scale to Parcel B, are Metlox (a mixed use retail, restaurant & office  development), which includes a 40 room boutique hotel, totaling an approximately 74,000 s.f. extension to  Downtown Manhattan Beach; Claremont Village Expansion, a redevelopment infill site of approximately 130,000  s.f. of building area, including a 27 room boutique hotel; the approximately 109,481 s.f. Mainstreet Merced,  comprised of 3 adjacent sites that include a movie theatre, retail, office building, and live/work lofts;  Exchange  Block Building an approximately 24,000 sf certified historic renovation and adaptive reuse to multi-tenant retail,  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 26Page 7 of 8  Tolkin Group Responses to Parcel B Questions  October 14, 2011    restaurant and office project in Old Pasadena; Glendale market place, a redevelopment of a city block with an  approximately 160,000 square foot multi-level urban shopping, dining and entertainment destination; among  others.    2. What experience do you have in building and leasing retail properties?    See answer to question 1 above.    3. How do you plan to finance this project? Do you have the equity available or will you need to partner with an  equity provider?    TG has relationships and a long term successful history of financing with investors and banks that have financed  their projects. TG’s intention is to finance the project the same way they have successfully financed and  completed 29 projects over the last 31 years. For further information see Section C “Financial Capability” of TG’s  qualifications response to the RFQ. TG has developed relationships with equity partners and successfully raised  millions of dollars in equity from a large pool of individual investors. These investors are interested in providing  equity for the Parcel B project. In addition, TG has long-standing banking relationships that are prepared to  provide financing for the project. See attached letters in both the RFQ and RFP responses. This strategy has been  successful for TG throughout three decades (including in down economic times) as it spreads the economic risk  among a group of investors rather than on one large source of equity who may go in and out of the business  depending on economic cycles.    4. Can you please provide us with information about your experience procuring construction loans?    TG has procured construction loans for all of their projects over the past 31 years. Most recently TG procured  construction financing for Claremont Village Square, Metlox , the Mondo Building , MLofts, and Mainplace  Merced. TG anticipates using the same lender(s) for Culver X. A letter from their current construction lender  (Preferred Bank) is included their qualifications package and proposal.    5. How many retail leases have you or your organization negotiated and executed?    Over the last 31 years, TG has negotiated and executed approximately 300 retail leases.  In addition, TG has  negotiated and executed 225 office leases. Included in these leases are major national retail tenants, unique  local retailers, movie theatres, entertainment uses, personal service, major national office tenants, as well as  small independent entrepreneurs. TG has the experience, relationships and reputation with the tenants and  brokerage community to secure quality retailers and office tenants.    6. How many development projects have you done previously?    TG has completed 29 development projects in downtown shopping districts.  In addition TG has entered into 6  DDAs (Disposition and Development Agreements) with redevelopment agencies for downtown infill  development projects.  In all projects TG has worked with city/redevelopment agencies to further their  development goals.            ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 27Page 8 of 8  Tolkin Group Responses to Parcel B Questions  October 14, 2011    7. How many of your previous development projects do you still own?    TG has long term holds, and our average hold time is ten plus years. TG currently owns Claremont Village  Square, Hotel Casa 425, Metlox, the Mondo Building, MLofts, FNM (36 to 40 West Colorado Boulevard), 51 West  Dayton, and 712-714 Foothill Boulevard.  All projects are located in downtown commercial districts.    8. Are you planning to own this project after it is built?    Yes, TG’s intention is to have long term ownership and we are willing to include this in the development  agreement with the city.    9. What does your project do in terms of sustainable development and what have you done to make your project  “green?”    Please see TG’s answer to question 10 above in the first set of questions.    10. How does your project address the Agency’s request to add additional parking at the site?    TG provided 3 options (required by the city) to provide additional parking, as well as an additional alternative  scheme that is more economically advantageous per parking space due to its regular rectangular shape and ease  of construction. For more information, please see TG’s proposal, Section A.I (pages 14-15). TG is willing to work  with the city to determine the best solution as each one has economic ramifications.  It’s important to TG that  they work closely with the city and community to determine the appropriate number of spaces built on site to  accommodate the district’s demand for parking while at the same time distributing the parking throughout the  district to introduce more customers to the entire downtown so that they are not captured eculsively by one  project with its own parking.    11. We know that tenants come and go over time. What consideration have you given to that reality and what have  you done to ensure the long-term future of the project? How flexible will you project be if the tenants you  propose today are gone in five, 10 or 20 years?    TG acknowledges that tenants come and go, and therefore the project is designed with the utmost flexibility so  that it can adapt to change. With the use of high ceilings and a steel structure which allows for flexibility in  locating demising walls, Culver X produces a large variety of tenant mix and space size options.  In addition the  storefront system proposed allows for flexibility in signage and storefront widths. In addition, the way TG has  laid out the site plan around a courtyard with a large anchor tenant on the corner and a series of spaces arrayed  around it allow for great flexibility.  TG projects have been successful in accommodating the more common  smaller tenants, while at the same time remaining flexible enough for larger tenants.    ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 28 9595 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 208, BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90212 / TEL 310 278 4747 / FAX 310 278 0607 WWW.DEMBOREALTY.COM CULVER CITY DEVELOPMENT PARCEL “B” 9300 CULVER BLVD., CULVER CITY, CA 90232 POTENTIAL TENANT LIST AND MIX Downtown Culver City is a vibrant destination that attracts local, cross-town and tourist visitors. Our vision is to keep the old world charm while improving the retail flavor by taking samples from some of Los Angeles’ best local neighborhoods—Abbot Kinney, Montana Ave, 3 rd Street, Larchmont Village and Old Pasadena. The enclosed list of prospective tenants is a representation of our ideal tenant mix. Careful consideration of many different and unique merchant categories will take place. When combined and strategically placed, the following tenant mix will enhance the overall ambiance of the development, and bring foot traffic and success to the project. Tenants similar to or like the enclosed are important in fulfilling what we call an Urban Community Town Center experience. The combined experience of Tolkin Group, Dembo Realty and NAI Capital Commercial Real Estate Services combined with our longstanding relationships, skill and retail knowledge will attract the most desirable tenants and bring about a quick lease up period. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 29 Tolkin*Please note: Tenants for the Ground Floor are organized by Suite number and tenant names are organized alphabetically. Space 107 - Anchor Clothing • Urban Outfitters Electronics • Francine Tolkin Cooper, principal of Tolkin Group, has been in dialogue with a major national tenant who at this point does not want to be named but does want to be kept apprised by Francine of the RFP outcome. We respect this request and therefore, cannot issue it in the RFP since it is a public document Furniture • CB2 • Z Gallerie (8,000) Gourmet Markets • Bay Cities Type • Dean & Deluca • Eataly • Herban Market • Joan’s on Third • Market Gourmet • Mother’s Market and Kitchen • Santa Monica Seafood Jewelry/Watches • Westime Pharmacy • Pharmaca Space 106 - Women’s/Men’s/Children’s Clothing • Boca Men and Women • Brandy &Melville • Eggy • Elisa • Johnny Cupcakes • Koi • LF Sportswear • The Hundreds • Weathervane Space 105- Clothing, Jeans/Denim • Citizens for Humanity • Denim Bar • Levis • Lucky Brand Jeans Space 104A- Shoes • Aldo • David’s • K.Swiss • Kicks • London Sole • Pretty Ballerinas • Sketchers • Toms Sports Footwear • FrontRunners • Top to Top Space 104B- Clothing, Active • Becker Surf • FrontRunners • Lucy • Lululemon Athletic Wear • Patagonia Space 103- Beauty • Bare Escentuals • Benefit • Kiels • Lather • MAC • Ora Gold • Pure Beauty • Senna Makeup Studio Space 102A- Flowers • Empty Vase • Floral Art • Jacob Maarse • White Lilac Space 102B - Optical • Dan Deutch Optical Outlook • Old Focals • Look! Optical Space 101- Café • Bread Bar • Lovebirds Café • Mini Bay Cities • Porta Via- Pasadena • Market City Caffe Hospitality Group ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 30 Tolkin*Please note: Tenants for the Ground Floor are organized by Suite number and tenant names are organized alphabetically. Space 116- Café/Bakery • Boudin • Café Almadine • Coral Tree • D’Angelo • Huckleberry • La Boulange • Le Pain Quotidien • Lemonade • Literari Café • Novel Café • Pierre la Fond • Silvergreens • Urth Café • Petros Space 114- Ice Cream/Chocolatier • 21 Choices • Bennett’s • Milk • Bulgarini Gelato • Sweet Rose • Swenson’s • Temptations Space 113- Jewelry/Gifts/Boutique • Calleen Cordero • D.L Rhein • Em & Co. • Moondance Jewelry • Platt Boutique Jewelry • Zina Space 112- Home Furnishings • Bookstore • Home furnishings • Jonathan Adler • Rooms and Gardens • Sur la Table • Williams Sonoma • Pom Pom Space 111- Stationary • Carmody and Co. • Paper Source • Papyrus Art Galleries/Music • Gallery Capital Art • Old Town Music Second Level • Blow Dry Bar • Chiropractor • Dentist/Orthodontist • Educational Center • Gameworks • Insurance Company • Real Estate Office • Salon • Spinning • Travel Agency • Trilogy Day Spa • Yoga • Bowling/Billiards (alternative use) • Fine Arts Movie Theatre (alternative use) Non-Proposed Alternative Use • Hotel (Four Sisters Inns) Prepared by: Chuck Dembo, Dembo Realty September 6, 2011 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 31 Tolkin 9300 Culver LEED Certification We are confident that this project will achieve LEED Silver under LEED 2009 Core and Shell. Core and Shell is the most appropriate LEED category because the project will be completed before some or all of the tenants will have their plans ready for plan check. Among the highlights of the LEED checklist: Site (14 points): The project site maximizes pedestrian and bike access from the surrounding amenities and residential neighborhood. Landscaping will use low water- consuming planting. Open space is maximized with an emphasis on reducing heat island effect. Exterior lighting is minimized while providing optimal security. Water (6 points): Potable water use is minimized by the introduction of drought tolerant plants and a highly efficient irrigation system. Domestic water use is minimized using low-flow fixtures, and the project will achieve an innovation point for 40% water use reduction. Energy (12 points): Our team will design the 9300 Culver project to achieve energy use reduction of at least 26% over the baseline building standard. Our focus is to develop passive design strategies, including massing, orientation and building envelope design to: · Minimize solar heat gain and glare · Maximize natural daylight · Maximize natural ventilation · Create usable/ programmable outdoor space Materials (4 points): 9300 Culver will be designed to minimize the impact of materials use and installation. Construction waste will be recycled; we will achieve a 75% diversion rate. Recycled content and locally sourced materials will be used in construction, with a target of achieving 10% in both categories. Indoor Environmental Quality (8 points): Occupant health, comfort, and productivity are of paramount importance in office and retail buildings. The 9300 Culver project will emphasize air quality by providing large amounts of fresh outdoor air, monitoring air quality in the building and increasing ventilation when needed, providing filters and walk-off mats to reduce contaminants, and using low-emitting materials in interior finishes. During construction, systems and materials will be protected, and air quality testing will be undertaken to ensure that there are no contaminants. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 32 Tolkin Innovation and Design Process (5 points): The project ID credits will be determined during the design phase, but some ideas include an Exterior Site Management Plan, a Waste Management Master Plan, efficient use of structural material, and an Integrated Pest Management Control Program. Regional Priority Credits (3 points): one of the key advancements of the LEED 2009 Rating System is the introduction of Regional Priority credits. For a project’s specific locations, six LEED credits have been prioritized because they address the specific environmental issues. The project may be awarded up to four extra points (one point per credit) for earning the priority credits. The Regional Priority credits that are currently marked as a “Yes” for this project (zip code 90232) include: · SSc5.2: Site Development, Maximize Open Space · IEQc8.1: Daylight and Views, Daylight · WEc3: Water Efficiency, Water Use Reduction ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 33 TolkinLEED 2009 for Core and Shell Development 9300 Culver Blvd Project Checklist Aug-11 14 2 3 Possible Points: 28 43 Possible Points: 13 Y? N Y? N Y Prereq 1 Y Prereq 1 1 Credit 1 1 1 Credit 1 1 to 5 5 Credit 2 5 2 Credit 2 1 to 2 1 Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment 1 1 Credit 3 1 1 Credit 4.1 6 1 Credit 4 1 to 2 1 Credit 4.2 2 1 Credit 5 1 to 2 1 Credit 4.3 Alternative Transportation—Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles 3 1 Credit 6 1 1 Credit 4.4 2 1 Credit 5.1 Site Development—Protect or Restore Habitat 1 831 Possible Points: 12 1 Credit 5.2 Site Development—Maximize Open Space 1 1 Credit 6.1 Stormwater Design—Quantity Control 1 Y Prereq 1 1 Credit 6.2 Stormwater Design—Quality Control 1 Y Prereq 2 1 Credit 7.1 Heat Island Effect—Non-roof 1 1 Credit 1 1 1 Credit 7.2 1 1 Credit 2 1 1 Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction 1 1 Credit 3 1 1 Credit 9 1 1 Credit 4.1 1 1 Credit 4.2 1 62 Possible Points: 10 1 Credit 4.3 1 1 Cdi 1 Alternative Transportation—Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms Construction Waste Management Tenant Design and Construction Guidelines Water Efficiency Alternative Transportation—Parking Capacity Heat Island Effect—Roof Certified Wood Regional Materials Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring Indoor Environmental Quality Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control Sustainable Sites Alternative Transportation—Public Transportation Access Site Selection Development Density and Community Connectivity Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Construction IAQ Management Plan—During Construction Low-Emitting Materials—Flooring Systems LE itti M t i l C it W d d A ifib P d t Materials and Resources Materials Reuse Recycled Content Low-Emitting Materials—Adhesives and Sealants Low-Emitting Materials—Paints and Coatings Increased Ventilation Building Reuse—Maintain Existing Walls, Floors, and Roof Storage and Collection of Recyclables 1 Credit 4.4 1 Y Prereq 1 1 Credit 5 1 2 Credit 1 Water Efficient Landscaping 2 to 4 1 Credit 6 1 2 Credit 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies 2 1 Credit 7 1 4 Credit 3 2 to 4 1 Credit 8.1 1 1 Credit 8.2 1 12 3 1 Possible Points: 37 51 Possible Points: 6 Y Prereq 1 Y Prereq 2 1 Credit 1.1 1 Y Prereq 3 1 Credit 1.2 1 10 Credit 1 3 to 21 1 Credit 1.3 1 1 Credit 2 4 1 Credit 1.4 1 1 Credit 3 2 1 Credit 1.5 1 1 Credit 4 2 1 Credit 2 1 1 Credit 5.1 3 1 Credit 5.2 3 3 Possible Points: 4 1 Credit 6 2 1 Credit 1.1 1 1 Credit 1.2 1 1 Credit 1.3 1 Credit 1.4 1 52 11 8 Possible Points: 110 Regional Priority: Specific Credit Regional Priority: Specific Credit Innovation in Design: Specific Title Innovation in Design: Specific Title Innovation in Design: Specific Title Innovation in Design: Specific Title Innovation in Design: Specific Title Regional Priority: Specific Credit Energy and Atmosphere Water Use Reduction—20% Reduction Water Use Reduction Minimum Energy Performance Fundamental Refrigerant Management Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems Enhanced Commissioning On-Site Renewable Energy Innovation and Design Process Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control Thermal Comfort—Design Daylight and Views—Daylight Controllability of Systems—Thermal Comfort Daylight and Views—Views Low-Emitting Materials—Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products LEED Accredited Professional Certified 40 to 49 points Silver 50 to 59 points Gold 60 to 79 points Platinum 80 to 110 Green Power Optimize Energy Performance Enhanced Refrigerant Management Measurement and Verification—Base Building Measurement and Verification—Tenant Submetering Regional Priority Credits Total Regional Priority: Specific Credit ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 34 Tolkin Parcel B Developer Questions 1. What is the tenant mix for the project and what design criteria was used to select them? We are creating a new hub for Downtown Culver City that is based on contextual design, curated tenancy and a social space. Parc + Main will be a remarkable mixed-use center with creative office on the upper floors, and retail, restaurant and entertainment on the first and second floors. We are very pleased that we have executed letters of interest from anchor tenants Urban Outfitters, one of the most sought after and popular retailers in America and Lucky Strike Lanes, a leader in its field. Our retail tenant mix will be built around Urban Outfitters and will include other unique, one-of-a-kind and first-to-market retailers of apparel, shoes, accessories and jewelry. We will also have a limited number of restaurants located in the courtyard area to provide excitement, encourage a festive atmosphere and keep the heart of our center beating throughout the day and the evening. We will be conscious of the already significant presence of restaurants Downtown and will select only those concepts that complement existing restaurants or provide a new type of cuisine or experience not currently available Downtown. Our office tenants will comes from a variety of fields, including high-tech, digital media, architecture, film production, and other industries that demand high quality, creative environments. We believe design is of paramount importance – gone are the days of office cubicles, white walls and white fluorescent lighting. We will strive to make our office space as appealing as possible, breaking the mold and introducing work environments that not only stimulate creativity but attract the best tenants to the project. Likewise, we will demand only the best design from our retail, entertainment and dining tenants. In Urban Outfitters and Lucky Strike, we arrive at the table with two of the most creative and influential tenants in terms of design. Our design architect, Pompei A.D. and its founder, Ron Pompei, are at the cutting edge of retail design. His unique approach earned him a spot in “Mavericks at Work”,” a book by William C. Taylor about the most original minds in business, and we have worked closely with his firm to make the space at Parc + Main another showpiece. Simply put, we won’t settle for bland. Suburban strip malls may try to appeal to the masses. Themed centers may try to provide a Disneyland feel. And modern architects may hope to create a design that sticks out and says “look at me.” But the design of Parc + Main will be decidedly different. We will be artistic, authentic and, maybe even a little eccentric. We will take design cues from the surrounding neighborhood, including the use of reclaimed brick, core-ten steel, metal, concrete and more. From the master sign program to tenant improvements, we will push our tenants to live up to our high standards, to think out of the box and to deliver a one-of-a-kind experience for Culver City. 2. How will cut-through traffic into the adjacent neighboring be minimized? ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 35 Cardiff/N3 While this is a largely a question for the City and its traffic engineers, it is an issue that has not gone unnoticed by us as we have designed this project. Cognizant that Parc + Main will serve many Culver City residents in the Rancho Higuera and Downtown areas, we have done everything possible to be open and inviting at the project’s southeast corner as we encourage people to use alternate forms of transportation to reach the site. Our project has dedicated a significant amount of on-site bicycle parking to encourage alternate forms of transportation. We are also anxious to explore the idea of changing the existing city ordinance to allow for the creation of a bicycle-sharing system at Parc + Main. Not only will this cut down on traffic through the local residential neighborhoods, but it will also provide some important connectivity between the new Exposition Line and Downtown Culver City. Furthermore, we have already had discussions with Westfield Culver City and would welcome the opportunity to work with Westfield and the City to develop a shuttle system that would connect key shopping and transportation nodes such as the Expo Line station, Parc + Main, Westfield Culver City and even the airport – another method of reducing cut-through traffic. 3. What is the square footage of the project and are you maximizing the current entitlement? If less, why? Parc + Main will have 96,550 square feet of gross leasable area and 102,800 gross square feet. We believe that sometimes less is more. Of utmost importance to us was to create a well-functioning and vibrant center as well as a wonderful public amenity in the form of our Roof Parc. The ground floor of our center is more like a European street, and we strove to create an open feel and flow to the space. Our connections to the street are very wide and inviting, and maximizing the square footage under the existing entitlements would keep us from providing the best possible “vibe” in the center. Our goal was to speak to people’s senses of touch, discovery and exploration, not confine them to a big retail box or create a massing that was stand-offish and uninviting. Think of good retail design like words on a page – sure you can cram more words on the page if you eliminate the margins and reduce the leading between the lines. But what you create is a page that is unreadable. By proposing a slight reduction in the square footage, we create a page that is readable and easy on the eyes – a space that will be comfortable for the shopper, appealing for tenants and successful in attracting the best office, entertainment, retail and restaurant tenants possible. In addition, the increased density is simply not required in order to get the financial return necessary to make this project a success and, frankly, would only hurt the ambiance of the Parc + Main experience. Interestingly, we found that adding more office space doesn’t generate significant revenue for the City and actually requires substantially more parking. We are somewhat surprised that some of the other proposals for Parcel B have advocated the development of far more square footage, but have recommended less parking than we propose to provide. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 36 Cardiff/N3Our belief is that we have proposed a project that maximizes the square footage without sacrificing the experience, cannibalizing the parking or negatively impacting the revenues for the Agency, the City or the developer. 4. Will the spaces be leased prior to construction of the building? We worked hand-in-glove with Rick Chancellor of the McDevitt Company, the exclusive leasing representative for Urban Outfitters, to create an environment that reinforced the Urban brand as well as the Culver City brand of quality and uniqueness. In addition to Urban Outfitters, we have secured Lucky Strike, a leader in its field, to act as a catalyst for leasing. At this time, we have letters of interest for an incredible 63% of the retail, restaurant and entertainment space. Upon entering an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement, we will interview and evaluate some of the many high-quality tenants that have already approached us about the site or who would fit in well with the tenant mix we are proposing. Of course, no developer can execute leases until it has control of the site. But we can and will execute leases after that time contingent upon execution of a development and disposition agreement with the City. Retail is unlike office space in that the anchor tenants execute leases far in advance of the actual issuance of permits or construction. The smaller tenants will then follow the lead of the anchor tenants. Our retail/restaurant/entertainment space will be substantially leased prior to construction. On the office front, we will certainly seek creative office users, however it is more common that office tenants wait until closer to the construction period before making their commitments, though we already have one iron-clad commitment – Cardiff Realty Holdings will relocate its headquarters to Parc + Main. 5. How is your proposal a human scale development and how does it compliment downtown in its scale and character? The Parc + Main experience is comprised of three independent structures surrounding an intimate and activated courtyard and alley reminiscent of European walking districts with sidewalk dining on the interior to create visual interest and human scale. The facades of the buildings have been broken into smaller elements with offsets and material changes. We have three large and inviting entry points into this courtyard. The courtyard will be active, alive, inviting and intimate. People can stroll, eat, or lounge in the public seating area around the fire pit. We will also have an easy-to-climb, terraced staircase that leads to our Roof Parc as well as a large, glass elevator for alternative access. The Roof Parc will have public seating, landscaped areas, a public garden for Linwood Howe students, a movie screen and views of the city. Both the courtyard and Roof Parc will be programmed to build community. We believe that people are comfortable with historical forms and materials, so our goal architecturally was to create buildings that had a contextual reference to Downtown buildings with progressive forms and expressions. Our north building is two stories high and the south and east buildings are four stories so they fit within the scale of downtown. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 37 Cardiff/N36. How many employees will work at one time in the building and how will they park? Will they park on-site for free and be required to park on-site? Until we determine the tenancy in the building, we cannot estimate accurately the number of employees that will be working at Parc + Main. However, we are well aware of the parking strategy that must be implemented to not only make the project successful but also to have the least possible impact on the surrounding community. Creating subterranean parking is very expensive, and for that reason, either the tenants or their employees will pay for the parking spaces for each employee. This is a typical model for office parking throughout Southern California. However, we believe it is critical to have enough parking for the retail first. Nothing is a quicker death knell for a retail project than lack of easy, accessible parking for its users. All it takes is one negative experience, and the customer is lost, sometimes for good. Depending on which parking option the city selects, we may limit the monthly parking in the structure so that sufficient parking remains for retail customers and is not monopolized by office tenants. Any overflow demand for monthly parking passes would go to the Ince parking structure, which would provide increased revenues for the city in that under-utilized lot and still be close enough to be convenient for office users. Again, we are mystified that some of the other proposals include far more square footage yet recommend less parking than we do. Easy, accessible parking is perhaps the most critical component to creating a successful center. It is the first tangible interaction with the customer and the one that, if it’s negative, has the most lasting impact. 7. How much space will be dedicated to the cars on the Culver Studios side of the project (if you have a ramp leading to the parking below)? As part of the RFP, we were instructed to provide access to the project from the strip of Washington Boulevard that runs in front of the The Culver Studios. Rather than use a driveway where drivers turn right and into the subterranean parks – a decision that would result in cues that back up into the intersection of Washington and Ince – we are advocating the creation of the ramp in the center of the street. While this will allow more cars to cue as they arrive and depart the project, it has the added benefit of allowing common usage for both Parc + Main and ultimately The Culver Studios, when it expands its subterranean parking garage. Tenants and customers that parked on our side of the street under Parc + Main would be governed by our rules and tariffs. Given the fact that the studio is currently on the market, we do not know the level of interest the studio has in creating its own subterranean garage, but we are ready to work with them once selected. In terms of pedestrian access in that area, we will create a pedestrian-friendly design along that frontage that encourages walkers to make their way from Town Plaza to Ince as well as for those who valet park their cars to stroll from the valet location to their final destination. During special events, fairs and other happenings, we will have the ability to close the traffic lanes at the ground level using bollards to create an even more pedestrian-friendly district. 8. How many square feet in the project is dedicated to dining? ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 38 Cardiff/N3 We realize Culver City has become somewhat of a dining mecca; however, we do not intend to create restaurant uses that compete with existing restaurants in Downtown. Nor is it our intention to use restaurants as magnets to draw shoppers. We believe our retail tenants will create that attention for themselves. Instead, we plan to use restaurants to invigorate the space along the frontage facing our courtyard and Town Plaza. We anticipate having just four restaurants, with a total square footage of no more than 10,350 square feet. In addition, because of high demand we expect for these locations, we will be exceedingly selective and will choose restaurant concepts that complement existing restaurants or provide a new type of cuisine or experience not currently available Downtown. 9. How will you secure quality retailers? We will be highly selective in seeking tenants that create synergy within the tenant mix and bring uniqueness to the community. These will be tenants where the customer feels an emotional connection beyond the transaction and where the experience is just as important as the product. We bring to the table an incredibly talented and well-connected team that has been involved in more than 200 retail, office and mixed-use development projects, representing more than 20 million square feet. Our team also includes members with international retail and mixed-use leasing experience, expanding the pool of tenants from which we can choose and allowing us to pursue unique tenants other developers might not even know exist. Furthermore, ours is the only project that arrives with letter of interest for a significant amount of the leasable space. While other may say they have spoken with Urban Outfitters, for example, we have been working with their exclusive leasing agent on a daily basis for nearly a year, and have the utmost confidence that we have proposed a project that Urban prefers over any other proposal. While others may have ideas about entertainment tenants they can bring to the site, we have likewise worked closely with Lucky Strike to provide a space that fits within its leasing needs. We believe we are the only one of the four projects that can provide a floorplate that will allow Lucky Strike to come to this site. Simply put, the answer to how we will secure quality retailers is that we already have. We have LOIs for 63% of our retail, entertainment and restaurant space! But more importantly, these are not just tenants with whom we have spoken on the phone or those that have been contacted by our leasing agent. These tenants have visited the site. They have seen our plans. And, in many cases, they have provided valuable input throughout the process. We are not an “if you build it, they will come” kind of project. We have instead crafted a project with specific tenants in mind, but with the flexibility to provide long-term adaptability for the next retail trend and the ones after that. 10. How is your building green? What is your carbon footprint? We believe in sustainability and do not just give it lip service. Andre Gide was right when he said, “We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.” ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 39 Cardiff/N3We are the only respondent that has proposed green roofs on all of our buildings. Parc + Main would be Southern California’s first retail development with green roofs and a rooftop Parc. And while green roofs are more aesthetically appealing for the office tenants and Culver Hotel guests who will be looking down upon them, they also have some incredible environmental advantages. Green roofs: o Reduce storm water runoff by 60% o Reduce the heat island effect in which rooftops made of impervious materials soak up energy and reradiate it as thermal infrared radiation, resulting in domes of higher temperatures in urban areas o Filter and bind dust particles and pollutants, naturally filtering airborne toxins o Reduce the amount of energy consumed within the buildings o Extend the live of the underlying roof The rooftop plant materials intercept and delay rainfall runoff and the peak flow rate, alleviating combined sewer overflows, and eventually return water to the surrounding atmosphere by evaporation and transpiration. We anticipate achieving LEED Silver certification and have already incorporated many energy-efficient and environmentally sensitive components into our design: o Electric vehicle charging stations in our parking structure o Significant amounts of landscaping throughout the project in addition to our green rooftops and roof Parc o More than twice the required bicycle parking on-site o Energy- and water-efficient design, including light sensors in tenant spaces o Photovoltaic arrays on our roofs to generate electricity o Creation of a tenant and building-wide recycling program In addition, we have some further ideas to reduce our carbon footprint. We are proposing the installation of an automated bike-sharing program. Though this system is not currently permitted Downtown, we are eager to work with the City to be among the first projects in L.A. County to create a program similar to those that already exist in Long Beach, Portland and, of course, throughout Europe. This facility would encourage: ? more people to use alternate forms of transportation ? connectivity between Downtown, the Expo Line station and the Ballona Creek bicycle path ? be the catalyst for more such facilities throughout the city 11. How much of your space is walkable? Building a community is of utmost importance to our project team, and having walkable areas and areas where people can congregate helps a great deal in that regard. Our ground floor area has 13,592 sq. ft of walkable space, and the roof decks have an additional 10,575 for a total of 24,167. This equates to 48% of the parcel size or more than a half an acre! This does not include the landings on the grand staircase leading to the roof Parc, which can be used as additional walking and gather spaces. 12. What experience do you have in building and leasing office properties? ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 40 Cardiff/N3Since the inception of this project, Jeff Stevens of N3 Real Estate and Brian Jones of BMJ Advisors have been intimately involved. Mr. Stevens has had substantial development experience developing office, mixed-use and retail properties as president of Crescent Operating Company, the development arm of Crescent Equities, a real estate investment trust listed on the NYSE prior to its sale to Morgan Stanley. In that role, he oversaw the operations and development of retail, office, mixed-use and residential properties in the world-renowned and award winning The Woodlands outside of Houston, Texas; and was involved in the development of over 3.1 million square feet of office for Crescent Mr. Brian Jones is the former CEO of Forest City Development, West. In that capacity, he was responsible for a number of mixed-use projects, including San Francisco Center and Victoria Gardens, which had an office component. Mr. Jones has been involved in the development of 270,000 square feet of office. From the outset, we have had Owen Fileti and Bob Pearson of L.A. Realty Partners on our office leasing team. L.A. Realty Partners is a commercial brokerage firm focused on the leasing and sale of office properties throughout Los Angeles. Known for their involvement in large, complex lease and sale transactions, the firm has more than 200 years of combined experience. In the last two years, alone, L.A. Realty Partners has completed 603 leases totaling 6,244,474 sq. ft., representing just under $2 billion in total consideration. Mr. Fileti and Mr. Pearson completed 137 of those leases for 1,196,079 square feet and $245 million in total consideration. The two have completed more than 1,400 lease transactions during their brokerage careers. In addition, prior to joining L.A. Realty Partners, Mr. Pearson was employed in a development and leasing capacity as a Senior Vice President at the Trammell Crow Company, where he was responsible for leasing the 2.2 million-square-foot Century Plaza Towers, the 1.1 million-square-foot Water Garden, as well as promoting the redevelopment of 2000 Avenue of the Stars (formerly the ABC Entertainment Center). 13. What experience do you have in building and leasing retail properties? We believe that our team has significantly more development experience than any other team leasing both office and retail space. We are pleased to say that our combined companies, the senior management within those companies and our team member, Brian Jones have been involved in the development of 256 projects totaling over 23 million square feet of retail space. Please note that the above totals do not include the experience of the two owners of N3, which, by itself, would be in excess of 20 million square feet. In short, our team is imminently qualified to build and lease this project. 14. How do you plan to finance this project? Do you have the equity available or will you need to partner with an equity provider? N3 Real Estate will secure the financing and provide the equity for the project. The equity will be provided by the Delton Fund – a $200 million fund raised by N3 within the last year. It is important to note that N3 is owned by Mr. Ton Van Dam and Mr. Alex Schnaider, who have a combined net worth in excess of $2 billion. Clearly, we could ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 41 Cardiff/N3build this project using 100% equity, but it makes significantly more sense to finance the project. There should be no concerns regarding our team’s ability to obtain financing. 15. Can you provide us with information about your experience procuring construction loans. The N3 team has vast experience securing construction loans in all real estate sectors and has financed more than $30 million for construction year-to-date and is on tap to double that by year-end. N3 has lenders that follow us throughout the country. In addition, we have local lenders that would like to be involved in this project once we enter into a development agreement. 16. How many retail leases have you or your organization negotiated and executed? Between the two companies, Brian Jones and senior management, we have executed thousands of retail leases representing every type and size of retailer. 17. How many development projects have you done previously? Our team has completed approximately 256 projects. 18. How many of your previous development projects do you still own? N3 Real Estate still owns all 36 properties it has developed since 2007. 19. Are you planning to own this project after it is built? Absolutely. We believe strongly that well-located properties should be held for the long term. Given its location and the demographics of the area, Parc + Main will be a long- term hold for us. To underscore this point, Cardiff Realty Holdings plans to relocate its headquarters to this location. 20. What does your project do in terms of sustainable development and what have you done to make your project “green? See the answer to question 10 above. 21. How does your project address the Agency’s request to add additional parking at the site? As we discuss in the answer to question 6 above, we believe having adequate parking is essential to the success of this project and believe, as the Agency does, that this is Culver City’s last and best opportunity to add parking for its Downtown area. We have incorporated the three scenarios that the Agency requested of each developer, but have also submitted a fourth option that generates more parking at a lower cost due to a more efficient parking layout. We would recommend developing the fourth option because it slightly lowers the land residual but increases the parking count by 55% over Scenario 1, which parks just under the Parcel B site. This scenario generates space for 66 more cars at a very low incremental cost per space. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 42 Cardiff/N3The question of whether to add a second level of subterranean parking is a public policy decision because construction of a second subterranean level would reduce the land residual. However, we are willing to work with the Agency to implement whatever it deems the most desirable parking scheme. Furthermore, by proposing a parking plan that allows for flexibility in integrating whatever subterranean garage The Culver Studios chooses to develop, our proposal would allow for shared parking agreements between the two garages that further enhance the availability of parking Downtown. 22. We know that tenants come and go over time. What consideration have you given to that reality and what have you done to ensure the long-term future of the project? How flexible will your project be if the tenants you propose today are gone in five, 10 or 20 years? Risk reduction is important to us, and it should be for the City as well. No one wants empty retail space because it degrades the quality of the overall project and reduces the taxable sales for the City. This is especially important for us since we intend to hold this property for the long-term. Because of that we believe in the following: Flexibility in design Anchor tenants Time-tested site plan design that creates synergy Our retail site plan was created to have maximum flexibility. In our north building, the spaces fronting Culver Boulevard are designed to be 60-feet deep, which is optimal for subdividing into larger and smaller spaces. This depth creates an excellent frontage-to- depth ratio. Spaces A1, A, B and C are deeper and do extend southward to the courtyard, however the rear of these spaces could just as easily be subdivided to provide space for smaller retailers fronting just along the courtyard. Space H, which is marked Urban Outfitters, is 50-feet wide and can be subdivided into two or more spaces with a demising line parallel to Culver Boulevard. The front space would have an entrance along Culver and the other spaces would have entrances along the courtyard. The interior spaces in the south building are approximately 50-feet deep and are, again, easy to subdivide. The second floor in the north building, which we have designated Lucky Strike, could be re-leased to another entertainment tenant or to creative office tenants. The creative office space would have a center aisle with 30-foot bays on either side. The second floor of Urban Outfitters could also be re-leased to another large tenant along with the first floor retail space or could become creative office as well. We will have elevator service to all four floors in that building. While it is important to note that we would sign long-term leases with Urban Outfitters and Lucky Strike, we have certainly thought about the future tenants who might occupy those spaces should our initial tenants ever leave. We have 32,700 square feet of ground floor space at Parc + Main. We believe strongly that with this much retail or restaurant square footage, the project must have an anchor tenant. This will provide the draw that will keep space leased and mitigate any early re- leasing efforts. Urban Outfitters will provide that retail draw by taking 10,000-12,000 square feet with both front and courtyard entrances on the ground floor. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 43 Cardiff/N3 In prior remarks to the Agency members, we mentioned that one of the projects that inspired us was The Lab in Costa Mesa. The retailers in this center have sales that average $1,200/sq. ft annually, which is greater than those at nearby South Coast Plaza, one of the most successful regional centers in the United States. This center is successful as a result of its site plan, complementary tenant mix, programming, and its efforts to create a community – all elements we are proposing at Parc + Main. When people want to spend hours at a venue, they tend to spend more money. Increase the dwell time, and you’ll increase the sales revenue. Of course, times change and trends change, so we have endeavored to make Parc + Main as adaptable and as flexible as possible. Second-floor entertainment uses can be converted into creative office space. Retail space can be easily expanded or divided to suit new tenants. Many spaces provide opportunities for entrances both on street frontages and courtyard frontages. But future flexibility is about more than the option to move interior walls, it is about creating a design that can adapt to what comes next. In this regard, we believe our proposal stands out. Instead of facing all of the retail outward from the site, a design that would necessitate shoppers walking around the entire building to get to the store at which they want to shop, we have provided a “short-cut” – an appealing walkway and courtyard that allows shoppers to get where they’re going quickly and easily. This courtyard area will also be populated with a variety of smaller retailers and restaurants that will benefit from the foot traffic created by this design. Large retail anchors that face outward onto the street can survive just fine because they are magnets for shoppers, but if, in the future, those spaces are divided to house smaller retailers that face the street, and only the street, it will be difficult for them to succeed. Small retailers need the critical mass of foot traffic that they simply will not get on frontages along Washington and in front of The Culver Studios. All of the tenant spaces at Parc + Main face either each other in the courtyard or Culver Boulevard, which experiences significant foot traffic. This design promotes synergy and allows future tenants to move into spaces they know will interact with the rest of the center instead of being trapped in the less desirable space “on the other side of the building.” Everyone has visited a center where on side of the center is doing well and the other is floundering. Our goal is to develop a design that assures that each tenant, now and in the future, is woven into the fabric of the project and the whole of Downtown. Rather than a single entrance to the project, we have created three signature entrances to pull in people regardless of the direction from which they arrive. Rather than a single large building with retailers just facing outward, we have created intersecting walkways and a courtyard that allow shoppers to criss-cross the project any number of ways. Rather than assuming the tenants who will be there on opening day will stay there forever, we have designed a project that is incredibly flexible to allow changes in uses and sizes. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 44 Cardiff/N3 Wha The m neigh optio office propo Agen These 13 un the o with devel that s   at is the tena merchandisin hborhood, I ns. What w es and a firs osing fill this ncy. e three goals nique, indepe ther respond us at Platfo loped and ea success conti ant mix for t ng mix at P understand we need is st class fitne s need while Paseo L Fo Main s are not just endent, and dent’s wish l orm. The c asy to under inues by tak   the project? aseo is infor that we alr clothing, ac ess destinati e achieving t o’s Merchan Limit the am ster unique, ntain a family t words on o exciting reta lists have w criteria that rstand. Culv ing a discipl Parce   ? rmed by Cu ready have ccessories, a ion. The te the three goa ndising Miss mount of cha one of a kin y and neighb on a piece of ailers. In fac ritten letters we use to c ver City is a lined approa el B Develo October 1 ulver City its great restau and unique r enants and ty als I laid out ion Stateme ain stores nd concepts borhood focu f paper. I ha ct, many of s of interest create Paseo a special pla ach to tenanti oper Quest 18, 2011 self. As a re urants and e retail as we ypes of uses in my prese ent us ave letters of the merchan for Paseo or o’s tenant m ace and Pase ing. tions |1010| esident of th entertainmen ll as creativ s that we ar entation to th f interest from nts that are o r are workin mix is clearl eo will ensur   he nt ve re he m on ng ly re ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 45 Wha We h signa How Our t bicyc riding Unfo every parki south ensur any o wants Wha entitl Paseo full a|1010|  at design cri have a strict age and store will cut-thr team has wo cle flow thro g my bike in rtunately, ca y effort to m ing lot going h) off of Wa re that cut th other tools w s of my neig at is the squa lement? If o is 94,989 s amount of fo . Any succ filter out frontage, without th the groun teria was us t set of tena efront merch rough traffi orked to ens ough the sit n town) I hav ars are part o make use of e g straight (e ashington. I hrough traffi we may have ghbors. My are feet of th less, why? square feet o otage allowa cessful retail t noise from and create a hese courtya nd floor. C   sed to select ant improve handising is i ic into the a sure that the te. As a re ve a unique u of our daily l existing traff east) on Was If selected, w fic is minimi . As a resid office on Du he project a of gross build able under th l project mu m the street a sense of pla ards and wal Community a   t them? ement criteri in harmony w djacent neig e design of P sident, (man understandin life. In orde fic patterns. shington or we would w ized through dent, I have a uquesne and and are you ding area. W he entitlemen ust have inte t, give reta ace and scale lkways is sim and sense o ia that will with the rest ghborhood Paseo will e ny of you h ng of this iss er to limit the Cars will en by making work with th h one-way s a firm unders Culver will maximizin We purposely nts for two r erior walkwa ailers the op e within the mply an offic f place are ensure that t of Downtow be minimiz encourage p have seen m ue. eir impact, w nter Paseo’s a right turn he DNA and treets, no tu standing of t always be o g the curren y decided no reasons. ays. These pportunity f urban conte ce building w created in t|1010|t our tenant’ wn. zed? edestrian an me walking o we have mad undergroun (when goin d City staff t urn signs, an the needs an open. nt ot to build th passageway for increase ext. A projec with retail o the spaces i   ’s nd or de nd ng to nd nd he ys ed ct on in ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 462   between b No amoun with the s lined, side . We heard Agency m “not be a be open w couldn’t a Clockwis buildings, no nt of elevate street. Paseo ewalks and i d Mayor O’L meeting, wh big box” an with less ma agree more. se from top lef   ot in large s ed open spa o intentional intimate cou Leary loud an hen he prom nd said one o assing.” As r B eft: Cardiff, To   tructures tha ce can comp lly steps bac urtyards. nd clear at th mised the com of his major residents an Big Boxes Tolkin, Rush/ at come all t pensate for a ck from the s he February mmunity tha concerns wa nd business o s /Pacifica 2 the way out a fortress-lik street to crea 14, 2011 Re at the new d as that the “d owners in Do 2007, Comb|1010|to the stree ke interactio ate wide, tre edevelopmen design woul design shoul owntown, w bined/Hudson   et. on ee nt ld ld we ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 47We u and s the n gain. gener space How Down Paseo dropp three Down love archit neigh   understand th stakeholders next 50 years This projec rations when e possible or is your pro ntown in its o is a village ping a glorif , and four ntown. As modern desi tecture and hbors such a hat more squ we also thin s than to ma ct is going to n considering r if we should oposal a hum s scale and c e-like collec fied box that story buildi you can tell ign. That sa Parcel B is s 9400 Wash Varied massi   uare footage nk that it is aximize the o be with us g whether w d build the a man scale de character? ction of buil t covers the ings that co l through bo aid, there is absolutely hington (192 ing, heights, a   e results in a much more square foota for a long tim we should bu absolute best evelopment dings aroun entire site w ompliment t oth my Culv an appropri not that pla 25), 9760 Cu and shapes. L a higher purc important to age today fo me and we n uild the absol t project pos t and how d d two centra we decided to the existing ver Centrale iate place an ace. Paseo ulver (1927) Less mass an chase price. o have a gre or a short te need to think lute maximu ssible. oes it comp al courtyard o craft a mix g scale and and Platfor nd setting fo design draw ), and the La d more open.|1010| As resident eat project fo erm economi k about futur um amount o liment ds. Instead o x of one, two character o rm projects, r that kind o ws on histori afayette Plac   ts or ic re of of o, of I of ic ce ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 48Histo City archit mode In a r previ O’Le Every in co mode How Will Until work subje prem   oric District Hall, and tectural lang ern building recent post iously appro eary tore up yone agreed omplimentin ern boxes sim many empl they park o l the leasing king in the bu ect to a coll mature to spe Rush Pa (1925) as w the Downto guage, maki in the middl describing t ved design f a picture o it was bette g our Down milar to the p loyees will w on site for fr g is comple uildings at o laborative d culate on th acifica Propos   well as more own Fire S ing Downto le of our Dow the RFP pro for Parcel B of it during er that that p ntown’s sca previous des work at one ree and be r ete, it is di one time. On iscussion w he results of sal 2007    contempora Station. Al wn feel coh wntown is th cess, Culver B (dubbed th a previous articular mo ale and char sign. e time in the required to fficult to d n site parkin with the Red those discu ary neighbor l of these hesive and c he exact opp r City Cross he Red Box) council ses onster was no racter while e building an park on site determine th ng will be pr development ssions. In g rs such as M buildings s complimente posite of wha sroads repor was so disl ssion, to mu ot built.” Pa the other p nd how will e? he amount o ovided but t Agency so general term Combined/H|1010|Meralta Plaza hare Paseo’ ery. A box at we need. rted that, “th liked, Mehau uch applause aseo succeed proposals ar l they park? of employee the details ar o it would b ms, we will d Hudson Propo   a, ’s xy he ul e. ds re ? es re be do osal 2011  ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 49every site o Will In ge is wh letter appro simpl of the know The p that t I will and th How proje The collab specu that t discu floor Studi have Pedes   ything we ca or in a City o the spaces b eneral, we lik hat we are d rs of interes oximately 45 ly speaking e site or bui w that we alw problem isn’ the tenants a l make sure hat the tenan much spac ect (if you h amount of borative dis ulate on the there be at le ussed in our p retail has ios as beauti a ramp, it w strians from an to make operated gara be leased pr ke to have 5 doing at Pla st for appro 5% of the pr to our frien ilding permi ways keep ou ’t going to b re of the qua that we neve nts are of the e will be de have a subte space dedic cussion with results of th east a 12 fo presentation double side ful as all of will be disgui the light rai   sure that ou age and not i rior to const 0% of our p atform curre oximately 4 roject’s leasa ds in the ret its because o ur word and e leasing the ality that the er compromi e quality our dicated to t rranean ram cated to car h the Redev hose discuss ot walkway n, Paseo does ed frontage, the other wa ised by a tre il station, He   ur tenants m in our reside tructing the projects lease ently. In ou 40,000 squa able square tail commun our tenants k follow throu e space. The e project dese ise on Paseo r community he cars on T mp leading rs on the C velopment A sions. That along the C s not have a so we mus alkways. As llis structure elms, The H mandate that ential neighb e building? ed before sta ur RFQ resp are feet of footage. W nity. We did know the qu ugh on our c e problem is erves. As a o’s Merchand y deserves. The Culver to parking Culver Stud Agency so it said, it is e Culver Studi front or back st make the s we detail in e that will su Hayden Tract their emplo borhoods. arting constr ponse, we h space. Th We were able dn’t need to uality of wor commitments s going to be resident and dising Missi Studios sid below)? dios side is t would be xtremely im os facing fa k side. All o e walkway a n our plans, upport vines t, and Culver|1010|oyees park o ruction. Tha have include his represent to do this b have contro rk we do an s. e making sur d stakeholde ion Statemen de of the subject to premature t mportant to u açade. As w of our groun along Culve if we have t and planting r Studios wi   on at ed ts by ol nd re r, nt a to us we nd er to g. ill ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 50all be walkw How We d amou Down in Do ensur some Culve not a How For th indep with with rent w they on ten we w not s Their their The 1 kinds   e approachin ways are equ many squa don’t have a unt of sit d ntown alread owntown is re that our ewhere to go er City, I un flood of new will you sec he past year pendent retai successful in chain retaile works – the will make a nants who d work with car simply a ma r Culver City landlord und 13 retailers a s of relation ng Paseo from ually as lush are feet in th set number down restau dy. We exp unique retai current bus o in between nderstand wh w restaurant cure quality , my team an ilers to Culv ndependent ers. For cha deal works deal with w do not simply re deeply ab atter of satis y store may derstands the and restaurat ships we ha   m the east an h, beautiful, a he project is r of square f urants as we ect one or tw il, best in cla sinesses are n breakfast, hat we need s. y retailers? nd I have be ver City for retailers tak ains like Urb . If a nation whomever en y look at the out the place sfying a Wa be their seco em and their teurs who su ave made ov   nd it is extre and inviting s dedicated feet dedicate e have a gr wo sit down ass fitness, a complemen lunch and d d to be a bal een working our Platfor kes much mo ban Outfitter nal retailer w nds up build e location, d es they do b all Street an ond or third r business. ubmitted lett ver the past emely impor as all of the to dining? d to dining, reat commu concepts at and creative nted properl dinner. As lanced comm exclusively rm project. ore time than rs or The Ga wants to be ding the proj demographic usiness. For nalyst’s proj location, so ters of intent year. We h rtant that the e other parts but we wan unity of res the most. W offices. Th ly and that a resident o munity and y on bringing Cultivating n cultivating ap, if the loc in a project ect. Our tea s, and rent. r them, open jection for s they need to t are just exa have gotten |1010|e south facin of Paseo. nt to limit th staurateurs i What we nee hese uses wi people hav of Downtow it is certainl g best in clas relationship relationship cation and th t at Parcel B am is focuse The retailer ning a store i store growth o be sure tha amples of th these best i   ng he in ed ill ve wn ly ss ps ps he B, ed rs is h. at he in ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 51breed our v At m legall If a d they l four comm have as de conse Cons renew   d merchants vision and ou my presentati ly binding. developer sub lack those re of the propo munity, our r put into plac emonstrated ervation, ene servation: In wable and no • Using (simu soffits facade excited abo ur team. The ion I told th What the le bmits a list o elationships osals share t relationships ce over the p in the list ergy efficien n an effort to on-renewabl g non-wood lated wood s and Tresp es of some o   out Culver C e proof is in he Agency an etters do sho of desired te and are rely those factors s with high q past year. below, wh ncy, and carb o promote the e resources, alternatives manufacture a (a Phoene of the store fr   City but more the relations nd the comm ow are the ty enants witho ying on the l s. What set quality retail How you Ener integ thro the inco hich is categ bon emission e conservati Paseo is: s for expos ed from rice elic resin pa fronts. e importantl ships. munity that ypes of relati ut any letter ocation, rent s us apart is lers, and the w is your bu r carbon fo rgy saving a gral to the p ughout the choice of orporates gre gorized into n reduction. on, reductio ed wood pr e husks) in th anel made to ly, they are e a letter of i ionships a d rs of interest t, and demog s our commi leasing infr uilding green otprint? and sustaina project. It is building sy materials. een design in o three mai n, reuse, and roducts such he wood det o look like |1010|excited abou interest is no developer ha t it shows tha graphics. A itment to thi rastructure w n? What is able design i incorporate ystems and i The projec n many way n categories d recycling o h as Resyst tails, benche wood) in th   ut ot s. at All is we is ed in ct ys s: of ta es he ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 52Energ have Carb have   • Using • Storm • Highe • Opera • Perme possib rgy Efficienc been incorp • Photo • Low f • Lands • Green • Irrigat • LED l • Dual l • Façad • Roof o • High e on emission been incorp • Bicyc safe lo • Partic the Ha • Prefer g local manu m Water Filtr est rated buil able window eable exterio ble. cy: Below is porated into P ovoltaic elect flow fixtures scape with d n-screen wall tion timers w lighting whe low emissivi de shading el overhangs to efficiency he n reduction: porated into P cle racks spre ockable area cipation and ayden track rred parking   factured pro ration system lding insulat ws in all retai or paving su s a list of en Paseo: tricity genera s and low co rought tolera ls systems in with rain sen erever possib ity Glazing lements to re o shade glas eating and a : Below is Paseo: ead out thro as. support of a to the Expo for low emi   oducts where ms. tion. l and office urfaces to re nergy efficie ation nsumption u ant vegetatio ncorporated nsors ble to reduce educe solar h s and walls t air conditioni a list of C ughout the s a start up of Station to D ission vehicl e possible. spaces. educe storm nt and susta urinals on into the cou e energy con heat gain. to reduce the ing systems arbon emiss site and bicy f a shuttle se Downtown C les and carpo water run-o ainable speci urtyard lands nsumption ermal heat g sion reductio ycle facilitie ervice that w Culver City. ools vehicles|10 10|off, whereve ifications tha cape design ain. on items tha s that includ will loop from s.   er at at de m ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 53 How On th there stron and w neigh differ these the ri encou back feet comm   • Sourc much of th he ground le is approxim gly that the walkable roo hborhoods (a rent areas (a e elements ca isk of being urage people under a colo of landscap munity has th cing products he space is w evel approxim mately 5,000 best space ofs are great as the High L as the Span an be succe g underutiliz e to meande onnade to en ped public s he best chan   s from local walkable? mately 20,00 square feet for gatherin t ideas in the Line connec nish Steps co ssful. When zed. Paseo er through it ncourage out space are lo nce to use the   manufacture 00 square fe of walkable ng is program e right place cts Chelsea a onnect Piazz n they simp opens at gro ts courtyard tdoor dining ocated on th e space. ers wherever eet are walka e outdoor sp med space o es. When th and the Mea za di Spagn ly exist for ound level i s. The stree and relaxing he ground r possible. able. On the ace. Our tea on the street hey connect atpacking Di na and the V their own s in six differ et façade at g. Paseo’s 2 floor to ens 10 e upper floor am feels ver level. Stair two differen istrict) or tw Villa Medic ake, they ru rent places t Culver step 20,000 squar sure that th   rs ry rs nt wo i) un to ps re he ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 54 Wha Our f real (www on c comp Bruck Studi have and t exper create neigh Wha The M and c Calif A com How partn We p busin under provi execu   at experience family has bu expertise co w.industrypa creative wor panies such kheimer Film ios, James P successfully the Blackwe rtise and pro e jobs in o hborhood. at experience Miller family currently own fornia and Ar mplete listin do you plan ner with an plan to finan ness in Culv rwriting pro ider. Throug ute to the Ag e do you ha uilt and leas omes from artners.com) rk environm as Disney, ms, Michae Perse, Hans y leased the L elder projec oven track r our Downto e do you ha y’s main foc n, manage, a rizona. We ng and break n to finance equity prov nce this proj ver City. W ocess, and w gh difficult gency and th   ave in buildi sed tens of th our partner . Industry P ments in W Dream Wo l Bay Films Zimmer, an Lantana proj ct on La Ci record to en wn and wi ave in buildi cus is retail p and lease app do all of our down of cas e this projec vider? ect with equ We don’t hav we don’t ne economic ti his communi   ing and leas housands of rship with J Partners, is a West Los A orks, Fox, U s, NASCAR nd Ridley S ject on Olym ienega (www sure that Pa ill add to th ing and leas property. W proximately r manageme se studies is l ct? Do you uity that our ve an invest eed to partn imes, we ha ty. sing office p square feet o Jim Jacobso a leading rea Angeles. In Universal Pi R, Ford Mod cott Product mpic (www.l w.blackweld aseo is lease he vibrant sing retail p We have built y $80,000,00 nt and much listed in our have the eq r family has tment comm ner with any ve shown ou roperties? of office pro on and Indu al estate firm ndustry has ictures, Acti dels, JJ Abr tions. Jim lantanasanta derla.com). ed to compan economic f roperties? several reta 0 of retail ce h of our leasi RFQ. quity or will earned ove mittee, we d y kind of o ur strength a 11 ojects, but ou ustry Partner m with a focu s represente ivision, Jerr rams, Pier 5 and his team amonica.com Jim has th nies that wi fabric of ou il projects enters in ing in house you need to er 57 years o don’t have a utside equit and ability t   ur rs us ed ry 59 m m) he ill ur . o of an ty to ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 55 It is opera the k comp work decis Can const As de mark $50,0 to pr Centr The p get lo those How On av multi How We o list is Are y   also import ating partner kitchen. Tw panies who king togethe ively, and w you please p truction loa etailed in ou kets. Our pr 000,000 in lo rocure a con rale. In the previous dev oans. We s e provided in many retai verage, we n iplied by 50 many of yo own all of th s included in you plannin tant to poin r. Partnershi wo of the ot have never er for decad with financial provide us w ans? ur financial s eferred lend oans over th nstruction lo fall of 200 velopers of P secured a co n our RFQ ca il leases hav negotiate and years in bus our previous he developme n our RFQ. ng to own th   nt out that w ips can be g ther respond built a pro des and has l strength. with inform statement, w der is Wells he past five y oan is the $ 8 the marke Parcel B, W onstruction an be provid ve you or yo d execute be siness, that e s developme ent projects his project a   we don’t ne great, but ofte dents are pa oject togethe s proven ov mation about we have very Fargo, with years. The m $12,000,000 ets were in f Washington / loan and bu ded upon req ur organiza tween 10 an quates to be ent projects we have bu after it is bu eed to bring en times the artnerships m er in the pa ver time th t your exper y strong relat h whom we h most pertine 0 loan we to free fall and Centinela, a uilt our proj quest. ation done p nd 20 leases e tween 500 a s do you stil ilt over the p ilt? g in any kin ere are too m made up of ast. Our te hat we can rience proc tionships wi have done a ent example ook out to d no banks w and Baldwin ject. Refere previously? every year. and 1,000 lea ll own? past 57 year 12 nd of outsid many cooks i two separat am has bee act quickly uring ith the capita approximatel of our abilit build Culve were lending n all failed t ences beyon When ases. rs. A detaile   de in te en y, al ly ty er g. to nd ed ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 56We p Centr will m How the si We a site. be ha explo going shuttl Wha the lo you p Deve proje novel build   plan on ow rale. If we a maintain an i does your p ite? are prepared We have su appy to buil ore other op g undergroun le service, or at considerat ong-term fu propose tod elopers may p ects in a com lty of those p dings around wning Paseo are given the investment o project add d to explore ubmitted pro d. We are ptions such a nd more than r any other g tion have yo uture of the day are gone propose larg mpetition, but proposals. W it. The ima   after it is e chance to p of approxim ress the Age every possi oposals for th also excited as working n two levels good idea tha ou given to project? H e in five, 10, ge modern bu t we all know What we nee ages above an   built as we partner with ately $65,00 ency’s requ ble opportun hree differen d to work wi with Culver , working w at my come that reality How flexible , or 20 years uildings or u w that the bu ed at Parcel B nd below are ell as ownin the commun 00,000 in Cu uest to add a nity to add nt scenarios ith our neigh r Studios to with Platform out of collab and what h will your p s? use gimmick uilding will l B is a projec e of Meralta ng Platform nity in buildi ulver City. additional p additional p , any of whi hbors and th o build unde m and the stat borative disc have you do project be if ky features to last far longe ct that fits in a Plaza, City 13 m and Culve ing Paseo, w parking at parking at th ich we woul he Agency t er their lawn tion area on cussions. one to ensur the tenants o sell their er than the with the Hall, and th   er we he ld to n, a e s he ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 57Ivy S surro not. friend space in ou desig persp comm   Substation. P undings. Re Retailers wi dly layout. O e, and great n ur design. Ou gned the proj pective. We munity to bu Paseo is a pr etail tenants ill always wa Office tenan natural light ur family pla ject to stand remain extr uild Paseo, th   roject that wi may change ant great fron nts will alway . These are ans on ownin the test of ti emely excite he project ou   ill stand the e, but basic t ntage, visibl ys want a ce the basic ele ng Paseo for ime both fro ed to partner ur Downtown test of time truths about r le storefronts entral locatio ements that w r the next 50 m a function r with the Ag n deserves. because it fi retail archite s, and a pede on, easy park we made sur 0 years. We nal and an ae gency and th 14 its in with its ecture will estrian king, outdoor re to address have esthetic he   s r s ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 58DRAFT Regular Meeting of the October 6, 2011 Advisory Committee on Redevelopment 6:30 P.M. Patio Room, Culver City City Hall, 9770 Culver Boulevard, Culver City California 90232 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Items 1 and 2 The regular meeting of the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment was called to order at 6:45 P.M. Present: Scott Voelz Meghan Sahli Wells Joel Forman Goran Eriksson Catherine Yanda Vernon Taylor, Jr David Voncannon Kevin Lachoff . Absent: None Vacancy: One position ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Item 3 Mr. Vernon Taylor, Jr. was nominated (Yanda), seconded (Eriksson) and voted unanimously to be the Chairman. Joel Forman was nominated (Sahli-Wells), seconded (Yanda) and voted unanimously to be the Vice-Chairman. The Chairman asked each member to give a short introduction about him/herself. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item 4 Ms. Yanda offered one correction to the Minutes of December 2, 2010, which added reference that the Transportation Department would be contacted to see if a bus stop local to the project could be added on La Cienega Boulevard. It was moved (Yanda) and seconded (Forman) to approve the Minutes as corrected by Ms. Yanda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes and 4 abstentions. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Item 5 No audience participation. ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Page 59Minutes of the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment Page 2 of 6 October 6, 2011 SELECTION OF A DELEGATE AND AN ALTERNATE TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Item 7 (taken out of order) Mr. Taylor and Redevelopment Project Manager, Mr. John Fisanotti gave a summary of the duties of the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee (CDBGAC). It was moved (Yanda) and seconded (Sahli-Wells) and approved unanimously to name Mr. Scott Voelz as the new delegate to the CDBGAC. It was moved (Yanda) and seconded (Forman) and approved unanimously to name Mr. Goran Eriksson as the new alternate delegate to the CDBGAC. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSALS FOR PARCEL B IN DOWNTOWN Item 6 Mr. Fisanotti gave a brief introduction as to the format for this agenda item. The committee members were asked to provide what they liked and disliked about each of the four proposals for Parcel B. Redevelopment Project Manager, Mr. Joe Susca led the Parcel B discussion with a summary of the recent history of the Agency’s efforts to develop the site. Mr. Susca then described each project proposal which was followed by a discussion of likes, dislikes and recommendations of the committee members, before moving on to the next proposal. Proposal from Combined Properties Committee Members Liked: The openness of the design The site orientation The “Grand Stair” and restaurants Good color palate Activity takes place on the outside, not inward facing courtyards Good views from the upper floors Respects Culver Studios front yard well Committee Members Disliked: Lack of shade Wall of video screens not suited for Culver City downtown Office building ‘s use of reflective glass may create glare, resulting in visibility problems for drivers Office building is too tall Suggestions from Members: ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Page 60Minutes of the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment Page 3 of 6 October 6, 2011 Step back the office building glass wall on the north-east side (facing Trader Joe’s) Replace video screens with living green wall Stage in adjacent public plaza expansion area needs a rear wall to reflect sound out toward the audience (applies to all projects) The City Council evaluation of the proposals should place an emphasis on selecting a proposal option that maximizes the amount of public parking to be provided (applies to all projects) Proposal from Cardiff Realty (Parc + Main) Committee Members Liked: The green roof The color palate The public viewing decks The living green wall It’s like a small pedestrian street in Europe Grey water recycling It’s relationship to the corner of Culver Boulevard and Washington Boulevard across from Trader Joe’s The roof top outdoor movie theater The bowling alley, though 8 lanes are too few. Three buildings are better than one large building Committee Members Disliked: The “canyon” effect in the center of the three buildings creating shadows. Too much pavement Blocks views of The Culver Studios The fire pit is too difficult to maintain and is a safety liability Too much water may potentially be needed to sustain green roof Garden for school kids is better located at the school, not on the roof in downtown Poor use of the space in front of The Culver Studios Too cubic in form Exterior facades look like re-purposed factory buildings Suggestions from Members: Reverse the orientation of the outdoor staircase to face toward the plaza Turn the fire pit into a fountain Proposal from The Runyon Group (The Paseo) Committee Members Liked: The courtyard The color palette The art pavilion Preservation of the sight lines to the Culver Hotel and Culver Studios ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Page 61Minutes of the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment Page 4 of 6 October 6, 2011 Articulation of the interior courtyard Committee Members Disliked: The architectural style doesn’t fit in with its surroundings, it more appropriate for Santa Barbara or Olvera Street The second and third floors aren’t open enough – too much stucco Art pavilion is too small to be useful It’s a nice project but in the wrong place Suggestions from Members: None Proposal from The Tolkin Group (Culver X) Committee Members Liked: Nicely stepped back at the upper levels Good transition from the Culver Hotel Good footprint and layout Good treatment of the area in front of The Culver Studios Good use of the historic Culver neon script sign Design activates the exterior facades of the project The hanging green wall Committee Members Disliked: Bright, white color scheme The materials and color palette Entrance points don’t line up with pedestrian cross walks Too much glass Courtyard graphics can become dated soon Entrance to interior passage near Culver Hotel is a choke point Suggestions from Members: Needs better finish details to mirror the other downtown buildings. It was recommended that any period detailing be done with attention to the quality of the design and appropriateness/context and avoid a cheesy faux imitation. Include an electronic sign indicating the number of parking spaces available by parking level (applies to all projects) Concluding Remarks from the Members: Mr. Voelz: I prefer the proposals from either Combined Properties the Tolkin Group. Combined does need to reduce the office building size and Tolkin could work with a few minor changes. I’m less favorable to the proposals from the Runyon Group and Cardiff Realty. ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Page 62Minutes of the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment Page 5 of 6 October 6, 2011 Mr. Eriksson: I like how Cardiff Realty split the site into three sections instead of one large building. Mr. Taylor, Jr.: I like the bowling alley as a suggested tenant. I prefer the proposal from Combined Properties. I also like the way the Tolkin Group transitions its site design from the Culver Hotel, but they need to choose better materials. Mr. Voncannon: Prefers the proposal from Combined Properties if it would reduce the glass and video wall. The proposal from Cardiff Realty is okay, the meandering interior walkway and the green roof is good, but needs a softer look at ground level. The Paseo (the Runyon Group) is my second favorite but the Spanish style is overdone, despite its good entryways and color palette. Although I like the living green wall in the proposal from the Tolkin Group is my least favorite because it is too angular. Mr. Forman: I like the way the Tolkin Group proposal as it conforms to the local geography, has lower heights, multiple entrances and a good color scheme. The proposal from Combined Properties is a close second but it has too much glass. The proposal from Cardiff Realty doesn’t have any eye appeal to me. The proposal from the Runyon Group looks great but it is not well suited for this site. Ms. Sahli-Wells: We need places for teens to hang out. I would prefer a living green wall in place of the video screens in the proposal from Combined Properties, which has too much glass. I like the open seating spaces in the Combined Properties proposal because successful public spaces allow people to see each other. In the proposal from Cardiff Realty, the corridors are too narrow and there would be too much shade, a shade and shadow study is needed. However I do like their use of the roofs as public space and the gray water recycling. In the proposal from the Runyon Group, I like the multiple access points and the articulation on the interior. Mr. Lachoff: There is a lot to like in the proposal from Combined Properties, but I would turn the digital wall into a living green wall. Also, the upper floors of the office building need to be stepped back. The proposal from the Runyon Group is good, but not for this site. The proposal from Cardiff Realty should convert at least one of its green roofs into a place for solar panels. I like the way the proposal from the Tolkin Group treats the Culver Boulevard streetscape. Ms. Yanda: I love the steps in the proposal from Combined Properties but am disappointed at the big massing, especially at the back side of the project. Also, there isn’t enough greenery and seating on the Plaza side. The steps don’t invite people to wander, instead all one can do is to either go up or down, I do not see it as an inclusionary design. In the proposal from Cardiff Realty, the interior courtyard creates a quiet buffer from street noise. The stairs in this project should face the same was as in the Combined Properties proposal and needs work. I do like the extra parking, the opening on a central courtyard and the way it breaks up visually. The proposal from the Runyon Group, while bold went too far with the Spanish style. Regarding the proposal ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Page 63Minutes of the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment Page 6 of 6 October 6, 2011 from the Tolkin Group, I like the street openness, the articulation across from Trader Joe’s, the green wall and it works well with the Ince Parking Structure. However it has the worst courtyard execution. They should do a shade and heat study because there is too much empty concrete. Also there isn’t enough outdoor seating. In the end, I’m probably most comfortable with the proposal from Cardiff Realty. ITEMS FROM STAFF OR THE COMMITTEE Item 8 Mr. Fisanotti announced that the Redevelopment Agency Board is scheduled to make an appointment to fill the remaining vacant position on ACOR, at next Monday night’s Agency meeting. ADJOURNMENT Item 9 There being no further business, at 9:42p.m., it was moved (Forman) and seconded (Lachoff) to adjourn the Committee meeting to its next regular meeting on Thursday, November 3, 2011. John Fisanotti Secretary of the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment APPROVED: Vernon L. Taylor, Jr. Chairman, of the Advisory Committee on Redevelopment ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Page 64