Post navigation

Prev: (01/19/14) | Next: (01/19/14)

With developer selection process for Capitol Hill Station properties impending, group shifts focus of its advocacy

(Image: Capitol Hill Champion)

(Image: Capitol Hill Champion)

Change is about to accelerate on Broadway’s central strip. After several years of planning and negotiation, all eyes are about to turn to potential developers for the land around Sound Transit’s Link Light Rail Capitol Hill Station, and the Capitol Hill Champion group, a player in the development process since 2010, is wasting no time preparing to shift its focus.

Champion steering committee member John Akamatsu presented an update of the Champion group’s most recent efforts—the group advocates to secure the inclusion of what they have identified as features beneficial to the community in future developments on the land—at the January Capitol Hill Community Council meeting last Thursday night. Akamatsu is also vice president of the Community Council.

“We want Sound Transit to hear the community,” Akamatsu said about the Champion group’s planned efforts to influence Sound Transit’s developer selection process. The group — a joint venture between the Capitol Hill Community Council and the Capitol Hill Chamber of Commerce — will also be working to influence the developers making a bid for a parcel of Sound Transit’s prime real estate.

With the Development Agreement unanimously signed by Sound Transit and the City of Seattle in September of 2013, and approved by the Champion group, Sound Transit is now expected to release a “request for qualifications” (RFQ) for developers interested in one or more of the parcels above the Station within two to six weeks. The RFQ is expected to be followed by a ‘request for proposals’ (RFP) sometime in the fall spring. In total, more than 100,000 square feet of some of the most central Capitol Hill real estate imaginable, split in to six parcels or “sites,” will be offered at determined market value by Sound Transit, and will eventually go to the developers deemed mostly suitable through the selection committee’s application process.

The Champion group will not be able to play a direct role in the developer selection process, but Sound Transit has agreed to allow Champion occasions of special access to both members of the developer selection committee and to potential developers, Akamatsu said. “The Champion will be able to brief the selection committee members and say why the Farmer’s Market is so important, why the whole retail element is important,” he said. The group is pushing to secure a “permanent home” for the Broadway Farmer’s Market in a public plaza that the Development Agreement stipulates will be included in the development of Site A-South. “We want them to understand the importance of the affordable housing element,” he offered as another example, “Not just to always look at plain accounting numbers.”

Last summer, CHS reported on the Champion’s push to gain support from Seattle’s City Council in making sure community priorities were met in the development of the land surrounding the station.

Akamatsu notes that the influence of conversations the Champion group has with selection committee members will be tempered by the fact that the developer selections will be at least in part determined by a weighted point system that apparently already incorporates many of the Champion group’s recommendations in to the equation. Developers will be rewarded a various number of points for certain community benefit elements they might include in their plan — the criteria may vary by the specific requirements of the parcel the developer is applying for — and the points will influence which developers are chosen.

In addition to talking with selection committee members, Sound Transit has also agreed to allow the Champion group to hold a meeting between potential developers and the public, Akamatsu said. This meeting would happen later this year sometime between the release of the RFQ and the RFP, Cathy Hillenbrand, chair of the Champion group’s steering committee, said. Hillenbrand says the Champion group would moderate the discussion at the meeting, and says she hopes at least one of the forums will happen. “Hopefully the interaction will be instructive to Sound Transit in their selection of the developer,” she said. “We don’t want to co-host a big public meeting if it’s just for window dressing,” she said.

The Champion group is also trying to reach out to developers through a “Developer Portal” on its website, added last week, where the group will post more information soon. “We are making sure prospective developers understand some of the key things the community has impending,” Hillenbrand said of the Developer Portal. At the community council meeting last week, Akamatsu said that Champion members are putting together one page clarifications of community priorities that were not addressed in the development agreement, and that the group will post these “clarifications” to the Developer Portal. The priorities to be clarified for developers include provisions for programming in the plaza that will connect to Cal Anderson Park, a “permanent home” for the Broadway Farmer’s Market in the plaza and guidelines for the kind of retail outlets that buildings in the developments will lease to.

Sound Transit is not looking for a “master planner” to develop all the real estate on top of the station together, which would have been the Champion group’s preference, Hillenbrand said. However, developers can apply for more than one parcel, and a project could feasibly be designed to span multiple parcels as long as it meets the requirements stipulated for each site individually, she said. Hillenbrand is also on the board of Capitol Hill Housing.

Seattle Central Community College will have ‘right of first refusal’ to purchase and develop Site-D, on the west side of Broadway adjacent to the campus. However, Hillenbrand says it is not clear if the school will be able to come up with funding to take advantage of the opportunity. Site-D allows for structures of up to 105 feet tall, while the other sites have height restrictions of 75 to 85 feet.

Through tactics have included, above all, “talking to people,” including Sound Transit and City of Seattle staff, and elected officials who have been able to put pressure on people and organizations involved in the development process—including especially in the past Richard Conlin and Sally Clarke, among many others—Hillenbrand said, the Champion group has been able to secure the inclusion of several their identified community priorities in any developments that go up on top of the station. This was perhaps mostly powerfully accomplished by influencing stipulations that were included in the Development Agreement.

Community priorities in the agreement include provisions for low-income housing, including the stipulation that all of the housing in an entire parcel, Site B-North, must be priced for low-income residents, and that 20% of the units in developments on the rest of the parcels must be priced for low-income residents for at least twelve years. Other ‘gets’ the Champion has racked up include the inclusion of the publicly-accessible, but privately-owned, plaza behind Site A-South that will connect to the north-west corner of Cal Anderson Park, and in which the Group wants to guarantee a home for the Capitol Hill Farmer’s Market, as previously mentioned; parking stalls for 266 bicycles; residential “stoops/courtyards” along 10th Avenue and the guarantee that a sidewalk awning will be included on buildings running along Broadway.

“How do you balance community benefits and the dollar value of the land?” Hillenbrand asked rhetorically in a conversation with CHS. The sometimes fine line between financial and social or cultural vitality is just one complexity the group has traversed as it has used research, surveys and other methods to come up with the “community priorities” it advocates to see included at the Capitol Hill “Transit Oriented Development” (TOD) site. Hillenbrand says she keeps in mind that developers will still have to be able maintain a healthy revenue as they implement any of the recommendations. She also notes that the recommendations will not be found acceptable if they render the property to be worth less than market value, as Sound Transit legally must receive that amount for the properties.

Nobody outside of Sound Transit, including the Champion group, has access to specifics about the weighted point system that will be used in the selection process and that was apparently heavily influenced by the Champion group’s research and recommendations, Akamatsu said. He says the idea behind keeping the system under wraps probably involves reducing the odds a developer might attain details about the point system and use the information to skew their chances of being selected. Though Hillenbrand says she wishes the Champion group could review the point system, she still expressed optimism about the rubric. “Hopefully it’s going be structured in such a way to that the real divider is going to be the community benefits the developer is going to bring,” she said.

At the meeting, Akamatsu also announced the results of a recent survey conducted by the Champion group and said the survey showed the community is ‘consistent’ in its prioritization of goals identified and also prioritized by the Champion group. The survey results will be posted on the Champion group’s website soon, Akamatsu said. Akamatsu also mentioned a recent meeting between some members of the Champion group and Seattle City Council member Mike O’Brien, who now has a seat on the Sound Transit Board.

The Capitol Hill Champion group takes its unique name from a line in a report on the TOD process that included community recommendations, and that acted the catalyst for the group’s formation, Hillenbrand said. “You have to ‘champion the vision. Take your seat at the table,’” Hillenbrand said, quoting the document.

Subscribe and support CHS Contributors -- $1/$5/$10 per month

8 thoughts on “With developer selection process for Capitol Hill Station properties impending, group shifts focus of its advocacy

  1. Why is the SCCC plaza not a suitable permanent location for the Broadway Sunday Farmer’s Market? I love the farmer’s market and want it to always be a fixture, and think the SCCC plaza makes a great location and double use of existing community plaza space, and it seems that we don’t necessarily need additional plaza space where we could have another building. So is there a reason why SCCC isn’t being considered for a permanent site for the farmer’s market?

    • I disagree, and think that the SCCC site has many shortcomings….the “linear” arrangement of the vendor’s booths is very awkward and not conducive to a sense of community. It’s been OK as a temporary site but should not become permanent, and I doubt SCCC would want it to be either.

      A plaza in the new development will ensure a somewhat open feel to the area, and it could be used for a variety of purposes as well as the farmer’s market.

      • FYI on the plaza: Sound Transit did not want to build on top of its station box, thus we have a plaza. If you go to and take a look at the graphic on our home page, you will see there is much of the station block that won’t have building on it due to the station entrances and the station box, as well as set-backs and pass-throughs called for by the Community during the 2009/2010 year of community forums, the 2009 Community Charrette and the 2010/2011 Urban Design Framework process. Sound Transit took the station and its entrances to 90% design under review by the Seattle Design Commission long before the Transit Oriented Development for the sites was fully considered.

      • Why does ST not want to build over the station? Everywhere in the world there are tall buildings over transit stations. How stupid not to capture some of the development potential of the station site for the benefit of all transit users.

        Not to mention that there is a limited 1/4 mile walkshed from any station, and the part closest to the center should be the tallest and most intensively developed.


      • No kidding, it’s crazy to waste this opportunity by building yet another “plaza”. I am already seeing similar ideas for the U-District station. Over the stations should be the highest possible building, with lots of space for people who want easy subway access!

  2. Thanks for the in-depth reporting Jacob. It has been a long and involved process, and it’s exciting to finally be at the point of developer selection.

    Some points of clarification –
    The community benefits for which the Champion is advocating were established through lengthy community input – a year of forums put on by Sound Transit in 2009, a Community Charrette put on by the Chamber of Commerce TOD Stakeholder Committee in the fall of 2009, Sound Transit’s Nagle Place Extension Workshop in August 2010, and the Urban Design Framework process in 2010/2011. In February of 2010, the Chamber’s Stakeholder Committee released the Transit Oriented Recommendations Report by Schemata Workshop + Makers Architects. This report summarized not only the 2009 workshops and charrette, but years of past work done by the Chamber, Sound Transit, the Neighborhood Plan Stewardship Committee and other community members, and made a number of development and design recommendations for the Sound Transit owned properties. This Report was the foundation for the City’s and the Champion’s work on the Capitol Hill Light Rail Station Urban Design Framework created in 2010/2011 through in-depth workshops and opportunities for public comment.
    All this information, with links to Sound Transit and DPD webpages on the work, can be found on the Champion’s website,

    Once the Urban Design Framework was finalized, Sound Transit and the City of Seattle began negotiating first a Term Sheet, then a Development Agreement to regulate development of the station, using the Urban Design Framework as a basis. Site-specific Design Guidelines were drawn from the Urban Design Framework and amended to the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Design Guidelines. The Champion and the community were not parties to these negotiations and we had no approval role, but we did support passage of the final result. Important wins through this process were mandatory inclusion of (36% total units) affordable housing on site, set-backs and pass-throughs desired by the community, the city’s first-ever mandated parking maximum, and some sustainability requirements, especially as expressed in the Site-Specific Design Guidelines. There will be bonus points awarded in the RFP process for other desired community benefits not regulated by the Development Agreement. The trade-off for the community benefits was increased height for the buildings on Sound Transit’s properties only.

    Regarding Sound Transit’s developer selection process – the Champion continues to advocate for the community priorities. However, we have no role in writing the selection criteria and no role in creating the point system for selection. We will not evaluate proposals, and we will not have any say in selection of the developer. The community’s role is through advocacy from outside. We believe we are going to be able to brief Sound Transit’s developer selection team on community priorities, but this is purely educational. The developer selection will be done entirely through Sound Transit’s point structure on the RFP. The selected development teams will be working with this community to realize their projects – our goal is to make sure prospective developers are well-educated about Capitol Hill and the community vision for the site.

    Sound Transit expects to release the RFP sometime later this spring (not in the fall), and hopes to have developer selection completed by the end of the year.

  3. Pingback: News Roundup: Not Really News

  4. Here’s the solution: remove height limits above the station, reserve ground floor for retail, reserve floors two and three for a sort of open air market place where the farmer’s market could be held, then stack dense residential on top.