Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Master Development Services for the Former Walter Reed Army Medical Center

1.
Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for
Master Development Services
Former Walter Reed Army Medical Center
Washington, DC
Project Location:
Former Walter Reed Army Medical Center
6900 Georgia Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20012 Issued by the District of Columbia Office of the
Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic
Issuance Date: Development, Walter Reed Local Redevelopment
January 31, 2013 Authority
Pre-proposal Conference/Site Visit:
February 19, 2013
RFQ Submission Date:
March 15, 2013
For more Information:
www.walterreedlra.com

2.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 2
2. DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY ......................................................................................... 4
3. WRAMC DEVELOPMENT SITE ............................................................................................. 6
4. WRAMC REUSE PLAN SUMMARY ................................................................................... 10
5. UTILITIES, ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND DEMOLITION .............. 15
6. FEDERAL CONVEYANCE PROCESS ................................................................................ 17
7. MASTER DEVELOPER RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................. 20
8. KNOWLEDGE OF RFQ AND SITE INVESTIGATION .............................................. 22
9. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA POLICY GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS ............... 22
10. SELECTION PROCESS & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS – RFQ PHASE .... 27
.
1

3. 1. INTRODUCTION
The Government of the District of Columbia (the “District”), through the Office of the
Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (“DMPED”), seeks Statements of
Qualifications (“SOQs”) from qualified real estate development teams (“Respondents”) to
respond to this Request for Qualifications (“RFQ”) for the disposition and development of
66.57 acres (“Site”) located on the property formerly known as the Walter Reed Army
Medical Center (“WRAMC”) upon the District’s planned acquisition of the Site from the
United States Government.
DMPED invites qualified “Master Developers” to respond to this RFQ for the redevelopment
the Site in northwest Washington, D.C., through the adaptive reuse of existing historical
structures and new construction. Through this RFQ, the District is seeking to prequalify a
limited number of Respondents (“Prequalified Respondents”) who will be invited to
participate in a subsequent Request for Proposals (“RFP”) process that is expected to
commence in the second quarter of the 2013 calendar year.
A comprehensive and thorough reuse Figure 1: 13th Street Vignette
planning process for the Walter Reed
property created a vision that considered
the input and concerns of the community,
the characteristics of the local and regional
real estate market, and the historical legacy
of WRAMC. The vision that emerged from
this extensive reuse planning process was
an active, synergistic mix of uses that is
integrated with the community, is
economically self-sustaining, creates new
employment opportunities for DC
residents, and honors the legacy of Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
WRAMC as a center for innovation and
excellence. The images to the right illustrate
the vision for a redeveloped Site. Figure 2: WRAMC Market Place
The District, the Department of Defense
(DOD) recognized Local Redevelopment
Authority (“LRA”), commissioned a
comprehensive planning effort to prepare a
redevelopment or “Reuse Plan” for the
WRAMC site in July, 2012. “Reuse Plan” as
used herein refers to a series of documents
which were submitted by the District
including: (i) a Homeless Assistance
Submission to the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
2

4. (“HUD”); (ii) a Reuse Plan; and (iii) other documents required by HUD. The Reuse Plan
addresses the goals of the community and development opportunities on the Site. The Reuse
Plan was drafted under the guidance of the Planning Local Redevelopment Authority, which is
administered through DMPED and Planning LRA Committee, and coordination from other
District agencies, which recommended the establishment of an Implementation LRA.
The following are key documents generated through the reuse planning process:
As the Planning LRA fulfills its role with the approval by HUD of the Reuse Plan, the District
upon HUD approval will be recognized by DOD as the Implementation LRA to oversee the
implementation of the Reuse Plan. The LRA, through DMPED, will proceed with the selection
of a Master Developer for the Site to implement the Reuse Plan. The goal of the LRA is to
acquire the Site from the Army and then transfer control of the Site to the selected Master
Developer.
 Reuse Plan - The Reuse Plan can be accessed at the following online link:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/reuse-plan/
 Draft Small Area Plan (“SAP”) - The Small Area Draft Plan can be accessed at the
following link: http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/small-area-
plan/
 Market Study – The 2011 Market Study can be accessed at the following link:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/supporting-documents/
 Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis – The 2012 Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
can be accessed at the following link: http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-
documents/supporting-documents/
 Transportation Impact Study – The 2012 Transportation Impact Study can be accessed
at the following link: http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-
documents/supporting-documents/
The District proposes the following timetable as shown below (Figure 3) for the selection of the
Master Developer. However, the activities and timetable represented here are only a guide and
are subject to change under the District’s sole discretion and without prior notice.
Figure 3 – Tentative Selection Process Timeline
Issuance of RFQ for the Redevelopment of the Site January 31, 2013
 Pre-proposal Conference and Site Visit at the Site February 19, 2013
 Deadline for Questions February 26, 2013
 Posted Responses to Questions March 5, 2013
SOQ Submission Deadline (Due by 3:00 PM) March 15, 2013
Announcement of Prequalified Respondents April 2013
Release of RFP to Prequalified Respondents April 2013
 Schedule Additional Site Visits Upon Request April 2013
 Deadline for Questions May 2013
 Posted Responses to Questions May 2013
 Proposal Submission Deadline (Due by 3:00 PM) June 2013
 Community and District Presentations by Prequalified Respondents July 2013
Begin Negotiations with Top Selected Master Developer Candidate July 2013
3

5. 2. DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this RFQ is to initiate the process to solicit and select a Master Developer
capable of comprehensive redevelopment of the Site. The resulting development should be a
vibrant, mixed-use community that is financially self-sustaining. As used in this RFQ, the term
“Master Developer” indicates a development entity or team with the capacity and
demonstrated experience to acquire the Site from the District and successfully handle all aspects
of the development process including planning, design, structuring of financing, permitting,
construction, sales and leasing, and ongoing management. The image below (Figure 4) shows
an aerial view of the Site with a conceptual building overlay.
Figure 4 – Conceptual Building Layout Overlay
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
The District intends to select a Master Developer with a demonstrated record of
accomplishment developing the desired land uses sought by the community, and the District.
The Master Developer must assemble resources and a team that can design, secure permits,
finance, construct and market a mixed-use development that is substantially compatible with
the Reuse Plan and the final Small Area Plan (“SAP”). The Master Developer must understand
development in the District and the unique aspects of redeveloping a former military facility.
4

6. B. PROJECT GOALS
The District, in collaboration with neighborhood stakeholders, has developed the following
goals for the Site:
 Integrate the Site with the community — Establish a reuse, preservation and development
strategy that integrates the Site with its local neighborhoods, supports the
redevelopment of the Georgia Avenue corridor, and provides public benefits for the
surrounding community;
 Provide a mix of uses — Create a plan that accommodates a mix of uses, including retail,
diverse housing options, institutional and cultural uses;
 Create new jobs and revenue for DC — Mitigate the potential impact of lost jobs and
revenues from the vacated Site on the adjacent commercial corridor by creating new
employment opportunities for DC residents and increased revenue from property and
sales taxes for the District that can, in turn, help support neighborhood services, as well
as create business opportunities for DC-based small and local businesses; and
 Activate the Site — Develop a realistic implementation and phasing strategy that
addresses environmental issues, maximizes market viability, minimizes site vacancy,
and competitively attracts qualified and quality development partners.
C. MARKET DEMAND DRIVERS
The District expects the Master Developer to undertake the following efforts to support an
accelerated redevelopment of the Site:
 The District seeks a Master Developer that will actively market the Site to destination
retail anchors in an early phase of development. A destination retailer will catalyze the
attraction of additional in-line retailers. To date, The District has actively marketed the
site to potential retail tenants, and will support the Master Developer in its marketing
efforts. Through the efforts of both DMPED and the Washington, DC Economic
Development Partnership, the District has conducted several tours of the Upper Georgia
Avenue Corridor with potential destination retailers who have expressed interest in the
site. In addition, the District has also marketed the Site at the 2011 and 2012 International
Council of Shopping Centers’ “RECON” conferences, perennially the largest global retail
real estate convention in the world.
 The District seeks a Master Developer that will make substantial efforts to attract a
significant corporate, academic, medical, government, or other institutional tenants in an
early phase of development. This will catalyze the creation of complementary office
uses and enhance the Site’s competitiveness with Downtown and regional suburban
submarkets.
 The District of Columbia Department of Transportation (“DDOT”) is considering
installing a streetcar line along Georgia Avenue running adjacent to the Site with a
connection to the Takoma Metro Station via Butternut Street. The LRA will continue to
support the proposed Georgia Ave Streetcar line to provide service to the Site.
5

7. 3. WRAMC DEVELOPMENT SITE
T SITE
A. SITE DESCRIPTION
The LRA portion of the campus is comprised of 66.57 acres situated on the eastern half and
southernmost area of the 110.1-acre enclosed WRAMC located in Northwest Washington, DC
(Figure 5).
Figure 5 – Site Location
The Site is bounded by Fern Street and
Alaska Avenue to the north, 16th Street to
the west, Aspen Street to the south and
Georgia Avenue to the east.
The Site includes approximately 4.1
million gross square feet of existing
building space, of which roughly 1.0
million gross square feet has some historic
significance and will be subject to
renovation or possible removal. The
development program contained in the
Reuse Plan recommends retaining
approximately 500,000 square feet of
historic building space.
The balance of the WRAMC, 43.53 acres,
is planned to be conveyed to the U.S.
“Department of State” (“DoS”), and is not
a subject of this RFQ. DoS is expected to
use its site for a Foreign Missions Center
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
(“FMC”). Figure 6 below shows the Site
shaded in green and designated “LRA:
66.25 AC”. The 0.32 acres on the “LRA
Bldg 18” site is the subject of separate
negotiations with the District of
Columbia, and would not be subject to
redevelopment by the Master Developer
under those circumstances.
6

8. Figure 6 – WRAMC Redevelopment Site
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
B. SURROUNDING AREA & NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT
The neighborhood surrounding the Site is characterized by low to medium density residential,
mainly comprised of single family residences. The Site is bounded on its eastern edge by
Georgia Avenue, a major commuter artery in this part of the District. The Site is also bordered
on its western edge by Rock Creek Park, a federally preserved park and recreation area. The
surrounding neighborhoods of Shepherd Park, Takoma, Brightwood and Manor Park are
shown in Figure 7.
C. ACCESS TO TRANSIT
The Red Line of the Metrorail system runs north-south through the area, with the closest stop at
Takoma Station, approximately three-quarters of a mile from the Site. The Site is serviced by
eight Metrobus lines, all connecting to the Metrorail system. The Georgia Avenue and 16th
Street bus lines serve nearly 38,257 people each weekday. The Site may eventually enjoy fixed
guideway service in the form of a streetcar. The District of Columbia is preparing to initiate a
study in the summer of 2013 for a North-South route potentially connecting Silver Spring or
Takoma Metro Stations to the Southwest Waterfront, servicing this site. Once the study is
7

9. completed and environmental documents are finalized, the service could become operational at
the Site in approximately 2020. Figure 7 shows surrounding neighborhoods and walking times
from the Takoma Metro station and the center of the WRAMC campus.
Figure 7 – Site Context, Neighborhoods and Transit
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
D. SITE HISTORY
During the nineteenth century, the area that currently encompasses the WRAMC was rural and
isolated from the District. To the south of the site was a Civil War fort named Fort Stevens. On
July 11, 1864, Confederate troops led by General Jubal Early attempted to enter the city, but
were turned back by Union troops on what later became the WRAMC site. In the 1880s, 131
acres of land between Seventh Street and Rock Creek was purchased by J. D. Cameron, which
included the 110.1 acres WRAMC occupies today.
For over 100 years, the former WRAMC housed the main U.S. Army General Hospital that
served wounded soldiers and veterans. In keeping with Surgeon General William Hammond’s
recommendation for a medical reservation and museum in the District of Columbia, the land
was purchased for an Army hospital in 1905. During the twentieth century the campus
8

10. transformed as the city grew around it and new functions were brought to the campus, which
became a necessary destination for high profile visitors.
The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (“BRAC”) Final Report to the President
recommendation #169 stated that the former WRAMC was to be realigned with several other
installations and that the main post was to be closed. By mid-September 2011, all of the
recommendations from the 2005 BRAC Final Report were implemented and the former
WRAMC was decommissioned as an Army medical facility.
The historic nature of WRAMC was a key driving factor in the creation of the Reuse Plan. The
preservation of buildings and landscape on the Site is considered integral to maintaining the
legacy of the important people and events associated with this historic property.
E. BRAC AND AREA PLANS
Pursuant to the “Base Closure Law” (Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as
amended (10 U.S.C. §2687 note)), the District acting as the LRA prepared the Reuse Plan to
identify the future use of the Site for economic development purposes. As part of this process,
the LRA initiated a coordinated planning process in conjunction with neighborhood residents,
other community stakeholders, the District of Columbia’s Office of Planning (“OP”) and other
District agencies.
Currently, the District’s Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (“Comprehensive Plan”)
designates the Site as “Federal”. In order for new development to be facilitated, OP
recommends a Comprehensive Plan land use designation change, from a “Federal” use to
designations that can accommodate a mix of uses, as recommended in the Reuse Plan. Zoning
must not be inconsistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The SAP builds from
the Reuse Plan and conforms to it by recommending the following for the Site:
 Comprehensive Plan land use designation changes;
 Transportation recommendations; and
 Urban design guidelines.
The SAP is required to establish land use designations so that District zoning can be established
for the site for future redevelopment. While the SAP does not recommend any specific zoning
designations, it focuses on characteristics that a zone should have, such as building form,
setbacks, height and stories. The SAP also includes design guidelines for future development, a
transportation analysis and market analysis based on the Reuse Plan’s development program.
Zoning will be established through a Zoning Map amendment, which will be initiated and
executed by the District and occur after the SAP is approved by the DC Council. The SAP
anticipates that all proposed development will occur as matter of right projects, which would be
entirely consistent with the new zoning regulations, and not require any relief from zoning
provisions.
9

11. F. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE - FOREIGN MISSION CENTER
DoS is currently in negotiations with the Army for the transfer of a 43.53-acre portion of the
former WRAMC, which is the subject of a master planning process for the long-term
development of a Foreign Missions Center (“FMC”). Under DoS’ master plan, parcels on the
FMC will be assigned to foreign governments, under long-term lease agreements, for the
construction of new embassy buildings (known as chanceries). DoS currently anticipates that
the FMC could accommodate approximately 20-30 chanceries, with an estimated 1 million
square feet.
Information on the Office of Foreign Missions can be obtained through the following link:
www.state.gov/ofm.
4. WRAMC REUSE PLAN SUMMARY
A. REUSE PLANNING PROCESS
The Reuse Plan identifies a combination of rehabilitation and reactivation of historic buildings,
and new construction. To complete the Reuse Plan, the District acting as the LRA, conducted
the following activities:
 Identified community goals and objectives;
 Developed reuse planning concepts based on existing conditions and market and
economic conditions of the surrounding communities and the region;
 Evaluated Notices of Interest (“NOI”) applicant submissions and recommended
Homeless Assistance Providers (“HAP”) and Public Benefit Conveyance (“PBC”)
organizations; and
 Selected and refined the preferred plan to recommend densities, land use types,
building realignment, infrastructure and its privatization opportunities, landscape,
opens space, and phasing strategy.
Under Base Closure Law, HAP and PBC organizations were provided the opportunity to
submit NOI responses for the disposition of surplus land and buildings on the Site. Out of a
total of thirty (30) NOI responses, the LRA selected seven (7) applicants to acquire property
rights at the Site and the uses have been integrated into the Reuse Plan. More detailed
descriptions of the selected NOI applicants and conveyance process are contained in Section 6
of this RFQ.
The Proposed Land Use Plan graphic (Figure 8) shows the various elements identified in the
Reuse Plan including new development, reuse of historic structures, and open space. As
delineated in the Reuse Plan, the proposed development program provides a mix of uses within
the Site in order to create a place that is “activated” by a mix of quality open spaces and retail,
residential uses with diverse housing options, commercial office and/or institutional space,
medical care, and cultural and community uses.
10

12. Figure 4 – Proposed WRAMC Land Use Plan
8
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
11

13. B. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
The Site contains a number of historic buildings. In addition, portions of the landscape are
considered historic, such as Main Drive and the Great Lawn. A key element in the Reuse Plan is
the renovation and preservation of historic buildings. The historic buildings will require
further study and documentation, as well as plans developed for their maintenance, restoration,
and adaptive reuse. As a condition of the Section 106 Programmatic Agreement, an application
will be filed by the Army to the District to designate the entire campus as a listing on the
National Register. The period of historic significance proposed by the U.S. Army for the
campus is 1909-1956. The figure below shows site and building elements that are deemed
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (Figure 9).
Upon completion of the Section 106 Programmatic Agreement, historic preservation
requirements will be provided for the Master Developer Project Team.
The draft programmatic agreement and supporting material is available by visiting the
following website -
http://www.hqda.army.mil/acsimweb/brac/nhpa_wramc.html
Figure 9 – Potential National Historic Register Properties
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
12

14. C. DEVELOPMENT PHASING AND TIMELINE
The Reuse Plan defines four phases based on projections of market demand; each phase
includes a mix of uses and envisions a combination of adaptive reuse and new construction.
The proposed initial phases include uses for which there is currently latent local demand, such
as residential and retail uses. Other uses, such as office or institutional uses, may require more
time to develop as efforts are made to attract corporate or institutional anchors.
The District has reached out to potential private and institutional partners to become tenants of
the Site. The Master Developer will have the benefit of the LRA’s efforts to actively market these
development opportunities to potential partners.
The development phasing program reflects a recent assessment of existing site and market
conditions and is not intended to represent a rigid schedule. The date ranges shown on Figure
10 below are preliminary projections made at the time the Reuse Plan was developed. The
District fully understands the importance of maintaining flexibility in the phasing program in
order to capitalize on market demand and other opportunities as they arise.
The four proposed development phases are as follows (Figure 10):
 Phase I: The phasing strategy anticipates that the first phase will be focused on
providing space for NOI users and developing primarily residential uses on the Site’s
edges. This development is critical to support the funding of necessary infrastructure for
this and later phases.
 Phase II: Phase II focuses on the development of a mixed-use center on the northeast
corner of the Site and also includes the attraction of a corporate or institutional anchor
for Building 1. These phases are critical to place-making and value creation for the Site.
 Phase III: Phase III continues with the development in the northeastern portions of the
Site, mainly focusing on the buildings along Dahlia Street and 13th Street.
 Phase IV: The final phase assumes the development of uses in the center of the Site,
including further activation of the primary open space on the Site – Cameron Glen – and
infill residential opportunities.
13

15. Figure 10 – Development Phasing Plan
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
14

16. 5. UTILITIES, ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND
DEMOLITION
A. UTILITIES
A key sustainability goal of the Reuse Plan is to create a flexible and innovative neighborhood
infrastructure that can easily evolve with technology and market demands, and is scalable and
adaptable in the future. The Site currently contains a power plant and an intricate network of
infrastructure systems which are operational, but near the end of their useful lives. After
conveyance the Master Developer will manage and maintain these existing systems until such
time as alternative utility solutions are put into service.
The Reuse Plan outlines aggressive sustainability goals for the Site. In order to achieve these
goals, the Reuse Plan explores the viability of a central tri-generation plant that could combine
the chiller and boiler plants to a single location and generate electricity, chilled water and steam
for the Site. The construction of this Combined Cooling, Heating & Power Plant (“CCHP”)
could be included in one of the initial phases to allow new buildings to be connected as they are
constructed and to avoid extensive reworking of the utilities in later phases. The CCHP could
potentially be operated by a third party utility provider and could potentially serve both the
Site and possibly some portion of the DoS parcel.
The following report was commissioned by the LRA to develop a framework to implement
sustainable energy technologies that would create a model development at the Site:
(Utility Upgrades Feasibility & Analysis Report, January, 2013) can be accessed at the
following link: http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/supporting-
documents/
B. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
The existing environmental conditions at WRAMC, which are documented in the Army’s 2006
Environmental Condition of Property (“ECP”) Report and the Army’s 2010 Update ECP Report,
have been divided into seven categories of issues: (1) Petroleum Product Storage and Releases,
(2) Other Chemicals Storage and Releases, (3) Radiological Conditions, (4) Utilities Impacted
with Contaminants, (5) Asbestos and Lead Paint in Buildings, (6) Hazardous Substances Storage
and General Use, and (7) Environmental Conditions of Adjacent and Nearby Properties. The
Army is expected to update the ECP in early 2013.
The general environmental considerations for the Reuse Plan are similar to other adaptive reuse
projects in the District, and can be broken down into the following four categories, each of
which is discussed in detail in the Reuse Plan:
 Building Remediation Prior to Demolition;
 Building Remediation During Renovation;
 Ongoing Maintenance; and
15

17.  Subsurface Contamination Remediation.
The 2006 and 2010 ECP and when complete, the 2013 ECP Update can be accessed at the
following link at the bottom of the webpage:
http://www.hqda.army.mil/acsimweb/brac/sites.html?state=DC?brac=2005?site=DC_WRAM
C_2005
Pursuant to CERLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
42 U.S.C. §9620(h)), the Army will remain responsible for the environmental contamination
remaining on the property after conveyance to the District as the LRA. In addition, the Army
will also provide the LRA with an indemnification for all environmental contamination caused
by the Army (§330, FY93 National Defense Authorization Act, Pub.L.No. 102-484, as amended).
C. DEMOLITION
The Reuse Plan proposes that a developer may demolish and remove fifteen (15) buildings
comprising approximately 2.8 million square feet. The largest single building subject to
demolition is Building 2, the primary medical building, comprising approximately 2.6 million
square feet. A significant amount of perimeter fence is also slated for removal. The Army has
performed surveys of its buildings and will likely perform additional survey work as needed to
comply with regulations at the time of property transfer. Figure 11 shows the demolition plan.
16

18. Figure 11 – Demolition Plan
6. FEDERAL CONVEYANCE PROCESS
A. FEDERAL LAND DISPOSAL PROCESS
Disposal and redevelopment planning requires the completion of numerous activities, most of
which are specified by the Base Closure Law. The graphic contained in Figure 12 illustrates the
conveyance process of the property from the Army to the District acting as the LRA, and the
lease between the District and the Master Developer.
Figure 12 – Federal Conveyance Process
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
The decision making process phase includes the specific military department’s (i.e. Army, Navy
or Air Force) disposal decisions and the local redevelopment authority’s redevelopment
planning. After redevelopment planning is completed, the local redevelopment authority
submits its reuse plan to the military department. The local redevelopment authority also
submits an application to HUD, in accordance with the Base Closure Law. HUD reviews the
local redevelopment authority’s plan and the homeless accommodation submission, and then
decides if the application is complete and whether the plan satisfies the review criteria. If it does
not, HUD will provide the local redevelopment authority with comments on deficiencies.
After applications have been submitted, reviewed and accepted, and the military department
has issued its final disposal decisions, the redevelopment process enters the implementation
phase. This phase includes the Army’s conveyance of installation property (or property
“disposal”).
Primarily two (2) statutes govern the disposal of base closure property: the Federal Property
and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended (“Federal Property Act”), and the Base
Closure Law which added the option of an Economic Development Conveyance(“EDC”). These
statutes provide a method to dispose of surplus federal property to non-federal recipients.
The LRA plans to acquire the Site through an EDC. An EDC is made to a local redevelopment
authority for purposes of generating new employment. An EDC permits the Army to convey
17

19. the property to the LRA for consideration at or below market value. The law also provides
flexibility regarding the form of consideration.
As noted earlier, consistent with Base Closure Law and Federal Property Act, the LRA screened
the Site for both HAP and PBC uses (“NOI applicants”). The LRA selected the following NOI
Applicants to lease property on the Site for the uses identified below upon the LRA’s
acquisition of the Site through an EDC from the Army. Figure 13 shows the NOI users’ building
locations.
Homeless Assistance Providers (HAP):
 So Others Might Eat (SOME): This proposal calls for up to 40 units of Permanent
Supportive Housing for seniors. SOME is an interfaith, community based organization
established in 1970 that exists to help the poor and homeless in Washington, D.C. SOME
offers services such as affordable housing, job training and counseling to the poor,
elderly, and individuals with mental illness. The project is planned to occupy existing
Building 17, and is expected to cost approximately $2.1 million. SOME proposes to
finance the project through its own equity.
 H.E.L.P. Development Corporation (HELP USA): HELP USA proposes to construct up
to 75 units of Permanent Supportive Housing for families and military veterans. HELP
USA’s mission is to provide quality housing and on-site support services for the
homeless and people in need. HELP USA is one of the country’s largest builders and
operators of service-enriched transitional and low-income permanent housing. The
project is anticipated to consist of 75 one-bedroom units comprising 84,000 square feet in
existing Building 14 South, and is expected to cost approximately $6.5 million including
rehabilitation construction, soft costs and financing fees. HELP USA plans to fund the
project through a combination of grants, sponsor loans, and equity from the sale of Low
Income Housing Tax Credits and VASH vouchers for rent supplements.
 Transitional Housing Corporation (THC): THC proposes to construct 6,000 square feet
of program office space. Founded in 1990, THC is Washington, D.C.’s largest Episcopal
housing agency, offering transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, homeless
prevention and rapid re-housing programs, permanent affordable housing, and
supportive and resident services for all four housing programs. The project is
anticipated to occupy 6,000 square feet of Building 14 South. THC anticipates financing
the project through a combination of tax-exempt bonds, tax credit equity, and additional
sources such as foundation grants.
Public Benefit Conveyances (PBC):
 Washington Yu Ying (WYY): WYY is proposing a new 100,000 square foot charter
school. WYY is a public charter school established in 2008 offering immersion in
Mandarin Chinese. It is currently located at 4401 8th Street, NE. WYY is anticipating a
total development budget of $36.5 million to renovate space in existing Building 11.
Based on the projected value of the as-completed school building and WYY’s projected
enrollment, the project will support $29 million in construction and permanent debt.
18

20. WYY proposed to fund the remaining $7.5 million with equity, grants, and additional
debt.
 Latin American Montessori Bilingual (LAMB): LAMB is proposing the creation of a
new 35,000 square foot charter school. LAMB is a public charter school that received its
charter in 2001 and opened in 2003. Since its inception, LAMB has moved multiple times
in order to keep pace with the growing demand for services, completing four renovation
and new construction projects. LAMB intends to occupy the east wing of existing
Building 11, and anticipates a total cost of approximately $4.7 million. LAMB anticipates
funding the project through several sources, allocated between debt (85%), grant
proceeds (10%), and school equity (5%).
 Howard University Hospital (HUH): HUH is proposing a 115,000 square foot
ambulatory/specialty care facility. A private, nonprofit institution, the 145-year-old
HUH is the nation’s only teaching hospital located on the campus of a historically
African American university. The University proposes to develop a comprehensive
Academic Medical Center in existing Buildings 6 and 7.
 DC Fire and Emergency Services: Building 18 is the subject of separate negotiations
with the District of Columbia, and would not be subject to redevelopment by the Master
Developer. The District plans to construct a new emergency response facility and
potential inclusion of an area for community services.
Figure 13 – NOI Users
Source: 2012 Reuse Plan
19

21. The relationship between the NOI applicants, the LRA, and the Master Developer will be
subject to negotiation. Additional information on the NOI applicants can be found at the
following link:
http://dmped.dc.gov/DC/DMPED/Projects/Development+Projects/Notice+of+Interest
B. DISPOSITION OF THE SITE
The Master Developer will enter into an Exclusive Rights/Negotiation Agreement with the
District until EDC terms with the Army are finalized and can be incorporated into a Land
Disposition Agreement (“LDA”). It is the District’s preference to enter into a long-term ground
lease with the Master Developer for the Site.
7. MASTER DEVELOPER RESPONSIBILITIES
The responsibilities of the Master Developer will be defined and detailed in an LDA negotiated
between the District and the selected Master Developer. An overview of the anticipated
responsibilities of the Master Developer is described below and includes, but is not limited to:
 Property Acquisition: The Master Developer will be expected to coordinate with the
District for the acquisition of the property from the Army.
 Master Plan: The Master Developer will be responsible for conducting market and
financial feasibility research and analysis, designing and implementing a master plan
that exemplifies the overarching vision of the Reuse Plan and SAP and accomplishes the
community and sustainability goals for the Site.
 Commitment to Small & Local Businesses: The Master Developer will team with
qualified small & local Certified Business Enterprises (CBEs) in accordance with District
law and create opportunities for District-based employers and residents.
 Design: The Master Developer will define specific design standards and schemes based
on the urban design guidelines contained in the SAP, as well as those that require
approval from the Historic Preservation Review Board.
 Development Approvals: The Master Developer is responsible for procuring all
regulatory approvals, environmental documentation, building permits and other
approvals and permits necessary for the redevelopment of the Site. The SAP anticipates
that all proposed development will occur as matter of right projects, which would be
entirely consistent with the new zoning regulations. However, the ability to request a
planned unit development (PUD) is permissible only within targeted areas of the Site
where increased height and density would be compatible.
 Financing: The Master Developer is responsible for devising a financing structure and
obtaining the financing for the development. The Master Developer will be responsible
20

22. for financing the entire cost of its project, including predevelopment costs, such as
design, engineering, legal, environmental and other professional expenses, and
entitlements, and development costs such as demolition, infrastructure, off-site
improvements, utilities and construction.
 Construction: The Master Developer will be responsible for the construction and
coordination of all necessary off-site and selected on-site improvements including
streetscapes, parks, utilities and roads, building cores and shells, tenant improvements,
fixtures and equipment, and on-site landscaping. The Master Developer will be required
to comply with all applicable District and federal regulations regulating prevailing wage
and other labor-related issues. The Master Developer will also be responsible for
packaging selected land parcels and/or buildings in the event of development by third
party developers or builders.
 Maintenance and Operation: The Master Developer will be responsible for the on-
going operation and maintenance of buildings, infrastructure, and grounds in the Site
throughout all phases of development.
 Sustainability: The Master Developer will develop a flexible and innovative
infrastructure that responds to the Reuse Plan Sustainability Goals and can easily evolve
with technology and market demand. This could be facilitated by working cooperatively
with the LRA to develop a competitive process to select a utility provider to phase in
and operate sustainable technology, such as a tri-generation plant.
 NOI Users: The Master Developer will coordinate development associated with
accommodating the HAP and PBC organizations on the Site. These independent users
should be incorporated into the overall redevelopment plan for the Site.
 Inclusionary Zoning and Affordable Housing: The Master Developer will ensure that
the residential development on the Site includes, at a minimum, levels of affordability
required by the District’s affordable housing policy.
 Development Schedule: The Master Developer will be responsible for developing
detailed schedules for the planning, design, financing, construction and maintenance
activities. This activity includes the coordination of all agencies, consultants, architects,
engineers, contractors and property management functions.
 Engage the Community: The Master Developer must commit to working cooperatively
with adjacent property owners, neighborhoods and stakeholders. This activity includes
conducting strategic community meetings, creating and maintaining comment processes
for community involvement in the overall planning, creating and maintaining channels
for public information and comment, and working with elected officials and the media.
 Coordinate with the LRA and District Agencies: The Master Developer will need to
work with the District to implement the Reuse Plan, accommodate the to-be approved
Small Area Plan by coordinating with OP, ensure site zoning, coordinate street
21

23. improvements and timing with DDOT, and leverage the expertise of DDOE for site
remediation and sustainable infrastructure.
 Coordinate with DoS: The Master Developer will need to coordinate with DoS,
specifically if it relates to an integrated utilities approach for both sites.
 Transportation: The Master Developer will need to coordinate with DDOT on all new
road designs and public space improvements, as well as implementing the
recommending transportation demand management plan from the SAP.
8. KNOWLEDGE OF RFQ AND SITE INVESTIGATION
Respondents who submit a SOQ are responsible for becoming fully informed regarding all
circumstances, information, laws and any other matters that might in any way affect the
Respondent’s roles and responsibilities in the project. Any failure to become fully
knowledgeable of any other matters that might, in any way, affect the project will be at the
Respondent’s sole risk. The District and DMPED assume no responsibility made by
Respondents on the basis of information provided in this RFQ or through any other sources.
There will be a Pre-Response Conference and Site Visit held at the Site on Tuesday, February
19, 2013. A specific time and place will be posted on the LRA website at:
(http://www.walterreedlra.com/).
9. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA POLICY GOALS AND
REQUIREMENTS
A. INCLUSIONARY ZONING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The District will introduce zoning revisions for the Site to the Zoning Commission that will
align with the SAP for matter-of-right development. As such, there will be requirements related
to the creation of either Site-wide or building-specific affordable housing that is currently in
development. The range of units and the location will depend upon the economic feasibility of
their creation. The District is willing to negotiate a certain degree of flexibility in this regard.
B. GREEN BUILDING REQUIREMENT
The Entire Parcel shall be developed in compliance with the District of Columbia’s Green
Building Act of 2006, D.C. Official Code § 6‐1451.01 et seq. (2008 Repl.), as the same may be
amended. In addition, the Master Developer and any third party developers of the Site must
submit with their building permit applications a LEED checklist indicating that the
improvements are designed to include sustainable design features such that the improvements
meet the standards for certification as a “LEED-Certified” building. The Master Developer and
any third party developers of the Site will be required to register the building with the U.S.
22

24. Green Building Council, construct the improvements in accordance with the building permit,
and use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain LEED certification at the “Certified” level for
the improvements once construction has been completed.
C. LOCAL HIRING AND OPPORTUNITIES
 Certified Business Enterprises: The Master Developer selected by the District to enter
into a development agreement shall enter into a Certified Business Enterprise (“CBE”)
Agreement with the District’s Department of Small and Local Business Development
(“DSLBD”). Pursuant to D.C. Official Code §10‐801(b)(6), the selected Respondent will
enter into an agreement that shall require the Master Developer and any third party
developer of the Site to contract with Certified Business Enterprises for at least 35% of
the contract dollar volume of the project, and shall require at least 20% equity and 20%
development participation of Certified Business Enterprises. Respondents are
encouraged to exceed the District’s CBE participation requirements. Please contact
Tabitha McQueen at DSLBD at 202.727.3900 for more information.
 First Source: Pursuant to the Mayor’s Order 83-265, D.C. Law 5-93, as amended, and
D.C. Law 14-24, as codified in D.C. Official Code §2-219-.01 et seq., Respondents
recognize that one of the primary goals of the District of Columbia government is the
creation of job opportunities for District of Columbia residents. Accordingly, the
Respondent selected by the District to enter into an LDA shall enter into a First Source
Employment Agreement with the District’s Department of Employment Services
(“DOES”), pursuant to D.C. Official Code §10‐801(b)(7). Please refer to the following
website to find a form of the First Source Agreement:
http://ocp.dc.gov/DC/OCP/Vendor+Support+Center/Solicitation+Attachments/First
+Source+Agreement+-+Department+of+Employment+Services+(DOES).
Please contact Anetta Graham at DOES at 202.724.7000 for more information.
D. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
DMPED reserves the right, in its sole discretion and as it may deem necessary, appropriate,
or beneficial to the District with respect to the RFQ, to:
 Cancel, withdraw or modify the RFQ prior to or after the response deadline;
 Modify or issue clarifications to the RFQ prior to the response deadline;
 After review of one or more responses, request submission of additional information
from some or all Respondents;
 Reject any responses it deems incomplete or unresponsive to the RFQ requirements;
 Reject all responses that are submitted under the RFQ;
 Modify the deadline for responses or other actions; and
 Reissue the RFQ, issue a modified RFQ, or issue a new RFQ, whether or not any
responses have been received in response to this initial RFQ.
23

25. E. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE
By submission of a SOQ, Respondents shall be deemed to represent and warrant the
following to the District:
i. No person or entity employed by the District or otherwise involved in preparing
this RFQ on behalf of the District: (i) has provided any information to
Respondents that was not also available to all entities responding to the RFQ; (ii)
is affiliated with or employed by Respondents or has any financial interest in
Respondents; (iii) has provided any assistance to Respondents in responding to
the RFQ; or (iv) will benefit financially if Respondents are selected in response to
the RFQ; and
ii. Respondents have not offered or given to any District officer or employee any
gratuity or anything of value intended to obtain favorable treatment under the
RFQ or any other solicitation or other contract, and Respondents have not taken
any action to induce any District officer or employee to violate the rules of ethics
governing the District and its employees. Respondents have not and shall not
offer, give, or agree to give anything of value either to the District or any of its
employees, agents, job shoppers, consultants, managers, or other person or firm
representing the District, or to a member of the immediate family (i.e., a spouse,
child, parent, brother, or sister) of any of the foregoing. Any such conduct shall
be deemed a violation of this RFQ. As used herein, “anything of value” shall
include but not be limited to any (a) favors, such as meals, entertainment, and
transportation (other than that contemplated by this RFQ, if any, or any other
contract with the District) which might tend to obligate a District employee to
Respondent, and (b) gift, gratuity, money, goods, equipment, services, lodging,
discounts not available to the general public, offers or promises of employment,
loans or the cancellation thereof, preferential treatment, or business opportunity.
Such term shall not include work or services rendered pursuant to any other
valid District contract.
F. ONGOING REPORTING
Respondents shall report to the District directly and without undue delay any information
concerning conduct which may involve: (a) corruption, criminal activity, conflict of interest,
gross mismanagement or abuse of authority; or (b) any solicitation of money, goods,
requests for future employment or benefit of thing of value, by or on behalf of any
government employee, officer or public official, any Respondent’s employee, officer, agent,
subcontractor, labor official, or other person for any purpose which may be related to the
procurement of the RFQ by Respondents, or which may affect performance in response to
the RFQ in any way.
G. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
 Notice of Modifications
DMPED will post on the LRA’s website (http://www.walterreedlra.com/) any notices
or information regarding cancellations, withdrawals, modifications to deadlines, and
other modifications to this RFQ. Respondents shall have an obligation to check the
24

26. website for any such notices and information, and the District shall have no duty to
provide direct notice to Respondents.
 Change in Respondents’ Information
If after Respondent has submitted a SOQ, information provided in that SOQ changes,
Respondents must notify DMPED in writing and provide updated information.
DMPED reserves the right to evaluate the modified response, eliminate Respondents
from further consideration, or take other action as the District may deem appropriate.
DMPED will require similar notification and approval rights of any change to
Respondents’ response or Project Team following selection, if any.
 Restricted Communications
Upon release of this RFQ and until final selection, Respondents shall not communicate
with DMPED or District staff about the RFQ or issues related to the RFQ except as
permitted under this RFQ.
 Selection Non-Binding
The selection by the District of Prequalified Respondents indicates only the District’s
intent to permit the Prequalified Respondents to continue with the process outlined
herein, and the selection does not constitute a commitment by the District to execute a
final agreement or contract with the Prequalified Respondents. Respondents therefore
agree and acknowledge that they are barred from claiming to have detrimentally relied
on the District for any costs or liabilities incurred as a result of responding to this RFQ.
 Confidentiality
SOQ’s and all other information and documents submitted in response to this RFQ are
subject to the District’s Freedom of Information Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-531 et seq.)
(“FOIA”), which generally mandates the disclosure of documents in the possession of
the District upon the request of any person, unless the content of the document falls
within a specific exemption category (e.g., trade secrets and commercial or financial
information obtained from outside the government, to the extent that disclosure would
result in substantial harm to the competitive position of the person from whom the
information was obtained).
If Respondents provide information that they believe is exempt from mandatory
disclosure under FOIA (“exempt information”), Respondents shall include the following
legend on the title page of the SOQ:
“THIS SOQ CONTAINS INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM MANDATORY
DISCLOSURE UNDER THE DISTRICT’S FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.”
In addition, on each page that contains information that Respondents believe is exempt
from mandatory disclosure under FOIA, Respondents shall include the following
separate legend:
25

27. “THIS PAGE CONTAINS INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM
MANDATORY DISCLOSURE UNDER THE DISTRICT’S FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION ACT.”
On each such page, Respondents shall also specify the exempt information and shall
state the exemption category within which it is believed the information falls.
Although DMPED will generally endeavor not to disclose information designated by
Respondents as exempt information, DMPED will independently determine whether the
information designated by Respondents is exempt from mandatory disclosure.
Moreover, exempt information may be disclosed by DMPED, at its discretion, unless
otherwise prohibited by law, and the District shall have no liability related to such
disclosure.
 Non-Liability
By participating in the RFQ process, each Respondent agrees to hold the District, its
officers, employees, agents, representatives, and consultants harmless from all claims,
liabilities, and costs related to all aspects of this RFQ.
 Restrictions
The District is subject to various laws, rules, policies and agreements that impose legal
and ethical constraints upon current and former District employees and consultants with
regard to post-employment restrictions vis-a-vis such employee’s or consultant’s
involvement in District-led projects. In particular, restrictions include but are not
limited to the following guidelines:
i. All Respondents, their members, agents, or employees, are prohibited from: (i)
making offers of employment, (ii) conducting any negotiations for employment,
(iii) employing or, (iv) entering into contracts of any sort, with current
employees, consultants, or contractors to the District who are personally and
substantially involved in any aspect of this RFQ;
ii. Respondents must disclose in their SOQ’s the names of any member, employee,
or agent who within three (3) years prior to the publication of this RFQ were
District employees, consultants, or contractors to the District. On a continuing
basis, Respondents will be required to provide the District with regular and
periodic notices of any and all new hires of employees, contracted agents, or
consultants within five (5) days of any such hire;
iii. This provision shall apply to all Respondents during the conduct of this
competition, and will subsequently apply to the selected Respondent until such
time as final completion of the development of the project; and
iv. Required disclosures and notices notwithstanding, failure to comply with any
obligation described in this provision may result, in the District’s sole and
absolute discretion, in Respondents’ disqualification from consideration under
this RFQ, the rescission of Respondent’s selection, and/or termination of any
agreement between a Respondent and the District.
26

28. 10. SELECTION PROCESS & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS –
RFQ PHASE
A. MASTER DEVELOPER SOLICITATION PROCESS
A three-phase process has been established by the District for soliciting a Master Developer for
the Site. Phase I involves this RFQ. The intent of this phase is to identify candidates who have
the proven capacity, track record, and interest to develop the Site. The intent of this first phase
is to obtain substantiated evidence of performance capacity and the capability to complete an
undertaking of this magnitude, along with verification of prior or present involvement in
projects similar to the redevelopment of the Site. Prequalified Respondents will be identified in
this phase, and will be invited to respond to a subsequent RFP.
Phase II, the RFP phase, will require preparation and submission of detailed project and
participant information that will provide sufficient basis for the District to assess the
responsiveness to the RFP, adherence to the vision set forth in the Reuse Plan and Small Area
Plan, market feasibility, innovative ideas, strength of community benefits, and strength of the
financial response (the “Proposal”). Prequalified Respondents who intend to submit Proposals
will be required to present their qualifications and redevelopment concepts to a Selection
Recommendation Panel (“Panel”) and at a public meeting prior to final selection.
Phase III will involve the negotiation of terms and conditions with the selected Master
Developer.
The Submission Requirements and Selection Criteria sections of the RFQ only address the RFQ
phase and do not address the future RFP requirements. Requirements for the subsequent RFP
phase will be made available at the appropriate time to the Prequalified Respondents.
B. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
SOQs must include the following to be deemed responsive for evaluation in Phase I:
1. Transmittal Letter
The SOQ must include a cover letter transmitting the submission and acknowledging receipt of
any and all amendments to the RFQ issued. The letter should be addressed to:
Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development
Attn: Martine Combal, Walter Reed LRA Director
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 317
Washington, DC 20004
2. Project Team
The Respondent’s Project Team should be introduced and described. The “Project Team” is
defined as the lead developer plus any other developers and key team members, such as
architects, engineers, contractors, lenders, attorneys, historians, etc. who are critical for
consideration by the District. Respondents should provide information that explains the
27

29. relationship among team members, Certified Business Enterprise entities, their respective roles
and contributions to the project, and the overall management of the team.
3. Experience and Background
Given the unique nature of the Site redevelopment and its utmost importance to the District, it
is essential to fully understand the accomplishments, experience and capabilities of all key
members of the Project Team. The following must be included in this order:
a. Provide a summary of the lead developer’s experience in managing large, complex projects
that required interaction with a broad range of interested parties from both the public and
private sectors.
b. The following information is required for each key member of the Project Team and
respondents are requested to highlight projects in which members of the Project Team have
previously collaborated:
i. Description of experience within the most recent ten-year period related to:
major mixed-use and mixed-income redevelopment projects that are similar in
nature to Walter Reed; adaptive reuse of historic buildings; and, Washington, DC
Metro Area projects.
ii. Demonstrated experience in completing projects of the scale and complexity
envisioned in the Reuse Plan and Small Area Plan on budget and on schedule.
iii. Demonstrated experience with redevelopment of former military and other
federally owned properties.
iv. Extent of the experience of specific individuals on the Respondent’s proposed
Project Team in public/private development projects.
v. Demonstrated ability to structure public/private development projects to
minimize the public partner’s capital investment and associated risk, particularly
for infrastructure improvements.
vi. Resumes of all key Project Team members to be involved in the project are
required and should include: education and professional licensing qualifications;
and relevant experience.
vii. Respondents should identify any other relevant organizational, consultant or
other available resources that could be committed to the project.
4. Financial Capability
The Respondent must also describe and list in their submission the following information:
a. The team’s ability to arrange financing for large scale redevelopment projects;
b. Two examples of projects in the last five years similar in scope and scale to WRAMC, with
brief descriptions of such projects and their financing structure; as well as
c. Two financial references.
Respondents may receive a stronger evaluation in the evaluation process depending on the
level of detail and commitment relative to the project financing. More financing details will be
required as part of the RFP submission.
28

30. C. SHORT LIST EVALUATION AND SELECTION CRITERIA
Each SOQ will be thoroughly evaluated on the basis of Project Team experience and
demonstrated ability to manage and complete a project of the scale and complexity envisioned
for the Site. The basis upon which Respondents will be measured includes, but is not limited to,
the following:
a. Experience and background of the Project Team with an emphasis on experience in
completing successful similar projects;
b. Understanding and acknowledgement of Master Developer responsibilities as set forth in
this RFQ;
c. Financial capability and level of financial commitment.; and
d. Completeness of Project Team with regard to the project elements described herein,
including, but not limited to, mixed-use development, redevelopment, adaptive reuse of
buildings, design, and historic preservation.
D. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
Ten (10) hard copies and one (1) electronic version on CD-ROM in .pdf format, of the SOQ with
the envelope marked with the statement of “Walter Reed Redevelopment Statement of
Qualifications” and the name of the Respondent, must be submitted to and received by 3:00 PM
on Friday, March 15, 2013.
Responses must be delivered to the following address:
Ms. Martine Combal, Walter Reed LRA Director
Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 317
Washington, DC 20004
Tel: 202-727-6365
Fax: 202-727-6703
E. QUESTIONS
All questions about this RFQ must be submitted via email only to walterreed.lra@dc.gov by
February 26, 2013. Respondents shall not direct questions to any other person within the
District. Any questions discussed at the pre-conference meeting or received via email to the
above-listed address will be posted on the website (walterreed.lra@dc.gov).
G. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION LINKS
Main Walter Reed LRA website:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/
Reuse Plan:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/reuse-plan/
29

31. Small Area Plan:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/small-area-plan/
Market Study:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/supporting-documents/
Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/supporting-documents/
Transportation Impact Study:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/supporting-documents/
LRA Utilities Report:
http://www.walterreedlra.com/publications-documents/supporting-documents/
ECP Reports Reports and Section 106 Programmatic Agreement:
http://www.hqda.army.mil/acsimweb/brac/sites.html?state=DC?brac=2005?site=DC_WRAM
C_2005
NOI Information:
http://dmped.dc.gov/DC/DMPED/Projects/Development+Projects/Notice+of+Interest
First Source Agreement:
http://ocp.dc.gov/DC/OCP/Vendor+Support+Center/Solicitation+Attachments/First+Sourc
e+Agreement+-+Department+of+Employment+Services+(DOES)
DoS OFM:
www.state.gov/ofm
30