University Ridge Development

Downtown Greenville, SC
RFP# 45-03/31/2017
April 2017
 University Ridge | 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Armada Hoffler Properties / CitiSculpt team is pleased to provide our response to the Request for Proposals for
the County’s University Ridge Development project. Within the following response, we provide detailed information as
to our team’s local and national experience and expertise, our background, qualifications and financial capacity to execute
the proposed plan. Beyond our resumes and portfolios, our team is committed to being your partner in providing modern
and efficient facilities for County Staff and your constituents and a continuation of the economic development of the
region through the redevelopment of the County Square site.
In summary, we believe our team is the right partner for Greenville County based upon the following:
1. Our development team has a resume that includes several vertically inte-
grated mixed-use developments ranging in size up to $600 million. Armada
Hoffler has been involved in dense urban mixed-use for nearly two decades and
knows first-hand the complexities of large-scale development and the long-term
horizons required to complete these projects. Collectively, we have successfully
developed and constructed 26 public-private partnership projects.
2. Our team includes the nationally recognized design firms Gensler and
LandDesign as well as local firms McMillan Pazdan Smith and Thomas & Hutton.
McMillan Pazdan Smith has detailed knowledge of the County Square site
and first-hand experience with the County as the programmers and space
planners for the new County facility. They also have experience working with
County Staff on a recently completed Summary Court facility, the Main County
Courthouse Building, the County Library system and various other feasibility
studies. This unique combination of national design talent and local knowledge
and expertise will result in a dynamic project that provides the County with
a home for the next 50 years and is the catalyst for the next chapter in the
development of Greenville.
3. As a publicly-traded REIT, Armada Hoffler brings nearly four decades of
experience coupled with the financial strength that comes with access to
capital markets. As a NYSE listed company, we provide transparency and corpo-
rate controls as required by the Federal Government. Additionally, we have the
reliability and experience to develop each of the proposed product types required
to create an extension of Greenville’s vibrant downtown.
4. Our team also has the in-house capability of providing construction services
through our subsidiary, Armada Hoffler Construction Company, which has
experience successfully designing and building a replacement County
Administrative Complex for the City of Suffolk, as well as currently providing
the same design-build services to Dinwiddie County, Virginia. This allows us to
control costs and schedule, as well as provide delivery of financial commit-
ments earlier than other developers.

$2B+ 26 10M+ AHH

of Development Combined Square Feet
Listed NYSE
in Nearly Four Public-Private Developed for
Since 2013
Decades Partnerships Public Partners
2 | University Ridge
 University Ridge | 3

TABLE of CONTENTS
Section 1: Letter of Transmittal
Section 2: Development Team
a. Joint Team Overview
b. Organizational Chart
c. Key Personnel
d. Points of Contact

Section 3: Market Plan & Feasibility

Section 4: Developer Feasibility Study
a. Vision
b. Design Principles
c. Conceptual Site Plan
d. Development Statistics
e. Massing Strategy
f. Phasing Approach
g. Infrastructure

Section 5: Public/Private Partnership Experience

a. PPP Experience Chart

Section 6: Qualifications
a. Municipal Center Experience
b. Project-Related Experience
c. Letters of Reference

Section 7: Capability & Capacity

a. Financial Capacity
b. Summary of Outstanding Debt
c. Reference Letter

Section 8: Infrastructure & Parking

a. Parking Garage Analysis & Estimated Cost
b. Public Infrastructure Estimate
c. Public Infrastructure and Garage Financing
d. Estimated Parking Income
e. Estimated Private Real Estate Tax Assessments
f. Total Development Value

Section 9: Land Valuation & Offer to Purchase

Section 10: County Administrative Complex Proposal
a. County Administrative Complex Proposed Transaction
b. County Administrative Complex Design Narrative
c. County Administrative Complex Proposed Schedule

Section 11: Scope of Work

a. Project Design and Construction Schedule
b. Demonstration of Community Impact
c. Communications Plan
d. MBE/WBE Involvement

Section 12: Appendix

a. County Administrative Complex Proposed Schedule
b. County Administrative Complex Program Study
c. Town Center of Virginia Beach Parking Study
d. Low Income Housing Proposal: Homes for Hope
4
 University Ridge: Section 1 | 5

SECTION 1:
LETTER of
TRANSMITTAL
6
University Ridge Development
301 University Ridge, Suite 2400
Greenville, SC 29601

Dear Selection Committee,

The joint venture of Armada Hoffler Properties and CitiSculpt is pleased to submit this response to your Request
for Proposals (RFP) for the University Ridge Development. Our response demonstrates that our development
expertise, along with our supporting team members consisting of Gensler Design, McMillan Pazdan Smith
Architects, LandDesign, Thomas and Hutton Engineers, and CBRE Real Estate Brokerage possess the capability,
track record, expertise, integrity, and local market knowledge to create a destination development. We believe
these attributes make us the ideal partner for Greenville County and the City of Greenville for the redevelopment
of the University Ridge property.
As Greenville County and the City of Greenville continue to grow and develop into a prospering metropol-
itan hub, the changes to the urban core and fabric have already begun, as evidenced by the re-population
of the downtown. Trends and studies continue to show that there is a renewed desire to socialize and live
in a more urban environment. This desire stretches beyond millennials, all the way to the empty nesters and
retirees. Live, Work, Play is the new neighborhood.
Our team's capability and experience with innovative and creative large-scale, public-private urban
development, coupled with our commitment to deliver a first class, economically thriving business and
residential community are unmatched. A few examples of previous experience from our team members
include the following:
• Town Center of Virginia Beach – The multi-phase, $600 million mixed-use, public-private
development spans 25 acres and 17 city blocks and includes office space, retail, restaurants,
hotels, and multifamily dwelling units.
• Inner Harbor, Baltimore – Harbor Point is a multi-phase, $560 million mixed-use, multi-asset
development located on 27 acres between the historic Fell's Point neighborhood and the
dynamic Inner Harbor East area.
• Durham Gateway – A multi-phase, urban, mixed-use project encompassing over one million
square feet of office, residential, retail and hospitality in downtown Durham, North Carolina.
Our team has the passion, capabilities, and resources to execute a project of this magnitude. As such, we
are very excited about the opportunity to partner with Greenville County and the City of Greenville, the
community, and other stakeholders to urbanize the University Ridge site. As Master Developers for this
project, and representatives of the joint venture between Armada Hoffler Properties and CitiSculpt, we are
both authorized to execute binding legal documents and personally attest to the accuracy of the enclosed
response.
Sincerely,

Christopher J. Odle Charles Lindsey McAlpine

Managing Partner of the Joint Venture, Managing Partner of the Joint Venture,
Armada Hoffler Properties CitiSculpt
222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 2100 10 Academy Street, Suite 395
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 Greenville, SC 29601
P: 757.366.4000 | F: 757.424.2513 P: 704.361.3758
codle@armadahoffler.com lmcalpine@CitiSculpt.com
8
 University Ridge: Section 2 | 9

SECTION 2:
DEVELOPMENT
TEAM
a. Joint Team Overview
b. Organizational Chart
c. Key Personnel
d. Points of Contact
10 | University Ridge: Section 2A
DEVELOPMENT TEAM
Joint Team Overview
MASTER DEVELOPER
Armada Hoffler Properties, Inc. (NYSE: AHH) and
CitiSculpt, LLC, will form a joint venture to serve as master
developer for redevelopment of the University Ridge site.
The joint venture brings an unsurpassed record of tackling
difficult, large-scale, public-private mixed-use projects of
enduring success and landmark status. A description of the
master developer members is below.
TEAM MEMBER DESCRIPTIONS
LEAD DEVELOPMENT FIRM
Armada Hoffler Properties
Founded in 1979, Armada Hoffler Properties is a full service
real estate company that develops, constructs, acquires and
manages institutional-grade office, retail, and multifamily
properties in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern United
States. The Company also provides general contracting
and development services to third-party clients throughout
these regions and beyond.
For nearly four decades the Company has developed in
excess of $2 billion of diverse product types for its own
portfolio as well as its clients, making it one of the premier
developers on the East Coast. While the Company’s
development experience spans almost every product type
including office, retail, multifamily, hospitality, and industrial,
Armada Hoffler Properties now predominately focuses
on developing and acquiring office, retail, and multifamily
assets for placement in its own stabilized portfolio.
Among the Company’s unique development capabilities
are public-private partnerships with municipalities, states,
public and private universities, the federal government,
and other sovereign nations. This capability has been the
catalyst for over two dozen transformational projects with
public partners throughout the Company's history. Armada
Hoffler’s experience and success are evidenced by the Town
Center of Virginia Beach, a $600 million mixed-use project
the Company developed in partnership with the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia. This project successfully created a
vibrant central business district for the City since breaking
ground in 2000 and is a cornerstone of the Company’s
stable portfolio.
Partnerships can take many forms – the important
point being that solutions can be tailored to meet
the needs of our partners based on Armada Hoffler
Properties/CitiSculpt's unique capabilities and wide
range of experience.
JV DEVELOPMENT PARTNER
CitiSculpt
CitiSculpt seeks to shape cities by creating real estate
developments that will improve lives. Its primary focus
is on place-making of dynamic spaces that both adapt to
and enhance their environments. The CitiSculpt team has
managed over $5 billion in all aspects of development
and redevelopment of real estate projects. The company
brings a proven history of successful development
throughout the southeast in retail, multifamily, office, and
mixed-use projects, including medical offices, senior-care
facilities, hospitality complexes, and student housing.
Essential skills CitiSculpt offers include creative design,
asset recovery, financial structuring, and comprehensive
site planning. Most importantly, through the expertise
of its principals and key team members, CitiSculpt uses
its unique vision to shape a vision of the capabilities of
the project, in order to deliver both immediate and long-
term positive impacts to its community.
Notable projects include an interconnected and active
mixed-use property in downtown Durham featuring over
1,000,000 square feet of office, retail, hotel, and multifamily
space and the revitalization of an historic business district in
Charlotte into a mixed-use center of residential, retail, and
commercial activity.
CONSULTING PARNTER
The Furman Co.
The Furman Co. has provided comprehensive solutions
in real estate for over 125 years. In 1888, the founders
of our company paved the way for local development,

education, and growth in commerce. Today, we continue
the tradition of local expertise while offering a network
of services.
Our areas of expertise include development, investment
advisory services, and insurance and risk management
The Furman Co.’s mission is to deliver sophisticated
advisory services with integrity and quality assurance,
creating sustainable value for our clients, employees and
community.
Every day we apply our insight, experience, intelligence
and resources to help clients make informed real estate
decisions. Our mission is to deliver superior results to
you by collaborating across markets and service lines,
thinking collaboratively, but acting practically, and
keeping our clients first.
DESIGN CONSULTANTS
Gensler
Leveraging the power of design, Gensler works everyday
to create a better world. For more than 50 years, Gensler
has been a leading global architecture, interiors, planning,
and strategic consulting firm that partners with clients
to achieve measurable business and organizational goals
through design.
Led collaboratively across our 46 offices and 31practices by
an exceptional team of designers, every client benefits from
the range of our experience, the breadth of our market
coverage, and the depth and diversity of our knowledge and
expertise. Simply put, Gensler is its people. A firstperson
quality pervades our one-firm firm. Clients are the first
to know it, because they can quickly put faces to names.
They recognize teamwork when they see it, too, but most
important, they recognize commitment—a collaborative,
can-do attitude that takes every challenge seriously and can
draw on design research and a deep bench of talent and
expertise to get the job done. Our people are the heart of
the Gensler difference.
Gensler supports the development of innovative places
with a philosophy of value-based design and comprehensive
services that allow clients to collaborate with a continuous,
dedicated team from planning through construction. We
have organized and integrated our services to support
clients at every stage of the real estate and facilities cycle,
from initial strategy and design through implementation
and management. We focus on understanding our clients’
goals and strategies and seek to add substantial value to
their enterprises through our work and services.
McMillan Pazdan Smith
McMillan Pazdan Smith is a regional, studio-based
architecture, planning and interior design firm whose
mission is to help clients create environments that embody
their personalities, enrich their lives and enhance the quality
of their community.
University Ridge: Section 2A | 11
At McMillan Pazdan Smith, Good Design is integral to all of
our services, creating functional, beautiful, cost-effective, and
well-designed buildings that are long lasting and contribute
to the success of our clients and the quality of life for our
community. Good Design is client focused, service oriented,
value driven, and award winning.
Through our collaborative culture, creativity and innovative
design solutions, McMillan Pazdan Smith enjoys a premier
clientele and diverse portfolio of complex, sophisticated
projects that have received local, regional and national
recognition.
Practicing since 1955, McMillan Pazdan Smith currently has
offices throughout the Southeast in Charleston, Greenville and
Spartanburg, SC; Asheville and Charlotte, NC; and Atlanta,
GA.
LandDesign
Founded in Charlotte, North Carolina, LandDesign has evolved
into a multidiscipline firm offering urban design, planning,
landscape architecture, civil engineering, and branding. Their
organizations of over 120 professionals are located across
the nation in the firm’s offices in Charlotte, NC; Washington,
DC; Dallas, TX; Orlando, FL; and, San Francisco, CA. All
offices are fully linked to foster collaborative efforts that take
advantage of the firm’s combined expertise and experience to
meet each client’s individual needs through reasoned solutions.
LandDesign believes strongly in the need to protect the
environment and enhance the lives of those touched by their
projects. Their awareness of best management practices
serves to incorporate creative design, proven construction
practices, and proper materials into each project to help clients
reduce or eliminate the negative impact on the environment
and community. In projects around the world, their team has
demonstrated its commitment to providing environmentally
sensitive solutions that can be designed and implemented while
maximizing quality or desired economic results.
12 | University Ridge: Section 2A

Team Overview (CONT.)

CIVIL & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MARKET DATA/LEASING & BROKERAGE

Thomas & Hutton
Founded in 1946, Thomas & Hutton firmly believes that it's
our responsibility to design infrastructure for public health
and safety, as well as provide for a high quality environment.
Our staff designs facilities that ultimately form the essential
framework of healthy and thriving communities - whether
it's the roads on which you drive, the parks in which your
children play, or the clean drinking water you consume
daily. Continuing a 70-year history, Thomas & Hutton is
designing our communities for future generations. A multi-
disciplinary firm, Thomas & Hutton continues to learn,
improve, design, and implement processes and practices
that grow healthy communities. We work collaboratively
in designing solutions to the key challenges that affect
everyone's quality of life.
CBRE
With broader and deeper capabilities than any other
company, CBRE is the leading full-service real estate
services and investment organization in the world.
CBRE Group, Inc. is the world’s largest commercial real
estate services and investment firm, with 2016 revenues of
$13.1 billion and more than 75,000 employees (excluding
affiliate offices). CBRE has been included in the Fortune
500 since 2008, ranking #259 in 2016. It also has been
voted the industry’s top brand by the Lipsey Company for
16 consecutive years, and has been named one of Fortune’s
“Most Admired Companies” in the real estate sector for
five years in a row. Its shares trade on the New York Stock
Exchange under the symbol “CBG.”

Thomas & Hutton has a rich history of building strong CBRE offers a broad range of integrated services, including
client relationships and designing award-winning projects. facilities, transaction and project management; property
Our passion continues to be creating the highest quality management; investment management; appraisal and
designs and making client needs our foremost priority. valuation; property leasing; strategic consulting; property
sales; mortgage services and development services.
With diverse and talented employees, Thomas & Hutton
has the unique ability to take your project from concept
through construction approval and beyond. With offices in
Georgia and South Carolina, we have intimate knowledge
of specific design and permitting requirements of the
Southeast. In addition, our expertise allows us to design
projects across the globe.
LEGAL
Wyche Firm
Wyche has a rare sense of collegiality among our attorneys.
We have a unique structure that ensures we are focused on
the best result for the client. We are not focused on the
billable hour, and our model fosters collaboration. Because
of this, we do not operate like most law firms where
attorneys work in silos and adopt an "eat-what-you-kill"
mentality. Instead, our attorneys are rewarded for teamwork,
finding innovative solutions, and service to our clients and
the community.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT
Hart & Hickman
Hart & Hickman, PC is an environmental engineering and
consulting firm established in 1995 and headquartered
in Charlotte, NC. Hart & Hickman’s tag line Smarter
Environmental Solutions describes the innovative, project-
specific solutions we provide. We are particularly expert
in Brownfields redevelopment where making the site
environmentally safe for re-use is truly unique for every
project. Our goal is to ensure the solutions we derive for
your environmental challenges fit your specific needs,
objectives, and cost considerations.

ORGANIZATION of the TEAM
The proposed team for the redevelopment of County
Square is unmatched in it’s blend of national strength and
local knowledge. The Master Developer entity will be a
joint venture of Armada Hoffler Properties, a NYSE listed
Real Estate Investment Trust, and CitiSculpt, a regional
developer with current projects throughout the Carolinas as
well as a current landowner of property within the City of
Greenville. Armada Hoffler Properties is the lead partner
on the joint venture team, with local support and guidance
from CitiSculpt. The contacts for Armada Hoffler and
CitiSculpt will be Christopher Odle and Charles Lindsey
McAlpine, respectively.
Our team also includes design professionals with national
experience as well as local and regional firms with intrinsic
knowledge of the site and adjoining properties. Our design
team has the unique benefit of having McMillan Pazdan
Smith, a local design firm which has performed design
services for the County on numerous occasions. McMillan
Pazdan Smith is the only design firm on any team which
has the knowledge of the County Administrative Complex
program needs and initial design requirements. As you will
see later in our response, this has allowed our team to provide
a conceptual design for the municipal complex based on real
data in addition to our other municipal center experience.
Our Land Planning and Architectural Master-Planning
is to be performed by LandDesign, a nationally renowned
land planning firm, and Gensler, an architectural and design
firm also with national recognition. These two design firms
have created a sensitive and thoughtful master concept
plan, which addresses all the requirements listed in the RFP.
The sense of place and connectivity, combined with a scale
of urban density, appropriate for this site and market, are
evident in our plan.
Civil Design services will be shared by Thomas & Hutton
(Greenville office) and LandDesign (Charlotte office).
Thomas & Hutton is a regional firm with local presence and
employees who work regularly on projects in the city and
county, thus providing an understanding of design consid-
erations, planning and utility department expectations, and
relationships with all levels of permitting reviewers and staff.
Architectural services will be provided by Gensler and
McMillan Pazdan Smith, with the final selection of which
firm will provide services on each block, based upon the
project requirements of each block.
Mechanical, Electrical, Structural, and other sub consul-
tants will be selected in the future based on project-specific
needs.
Market Research and Leasing / Brokerage will be
provided by CBRE/Furman Development. Steve Navarro
and his team will continually provide guidance on market
demand and changes in the marketplace that will affect
leasing and construction sequences and timelines. While we
University Ridge: Section 2B | 13
have created a master plan and proforma based on what we
believe demand will be in the short term, this project and it’s
12- to 15-year time horizon will go through multiple market
shifts and national economic cycles. Therefore, having a
nationally recognized brokerage and marketing firm that can
reach deep into their wide range of tenants and relationships
will be important to maintain momentum on this project.
Asset Management services will be provided in house
by Armada Hoffler Properties. Property Management
services will be provided by a local or regional manage-
ment company based upon selection criteria established by
Armada Hoffler Properties. We find that hiring third-party,
local property management provides the best level of service
to the property and it’s tenants.
Construction services will be provided by Armada Hoffler
Construction Company, a taxable REIT subsidiary of
Armada Hoffler Properties. Armada Hoffler Construction
Company is a formidable construction company, building
projects throughout the Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern
United States for Armada Hoffler Properties, as well as third-
party clients such as Harris Teeter, Legg Mason, Marriott, and
others. Armada Hoffler Construction Company constructs
projects at a pace of $250 million per year, and will provide
construction and pre-construction services throughout the
course of our development. Early budgeting, scheduling,
constructability reviews, subcontractor and MBE/DBE
engagement are all services provided by Armada Hoffler
Construction Company. By having this “in-house” capa-
bility, we have the ability to test concepts in real time and
provide early cost or rent commitments to the County or
potential commercial tenants. For nearly four decades,
this has proven invaluable in working with the Economic
Development departments of other municipalities when we
are performing public-private developments and trying to
attract new tenants.
The following two organizational charts reflect the overall
team structure and a specialized organizational chart for
the design and construction of the County Administrative
Complex, which we propose to perform as a develop/
design-build service to the County. This is the form of orga-
nization we have used for the replacement of the Suffolk
Municipal Center as well as the new government complex
for Dinwiddie County that is currently in design.
While we recognize our primary relationship will be with
Greenville County, we are also aware that the property
will have direct impact on the downtown street and
utility grid as well as require zoning and permit approvals
through the City of Greenville, as illustrated in the adja-
cent organizational structure.
14 | University Ridge: Section 2B

OWNERSHIP &
ORGANIZATIONAL
STRUCTURE
Private Development
MASTER DEVELOPERS

MARKET DATA DESIGN DESIGN

CONSTRUCTION CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN

Local Subcontractors Wyche Hart & Hickman

and Suppliers
 University Ridge: Section 2B | 15

OWNERSHIP &
ORGANIZATIONAL
STRUCTURE
Greenville County Administrative Complex

CONSTRUCTION

Interior Design

DESIGN
Landscape/
Hardscape

Structural

CIVIL ENGINEERING
M/E/P + F/P
16 | University Ridge: Section 2C
Key Personnel
CHRISTOPHER ODLE
Executive Vice President
of Development,
Armada Hoffler Properties
Mr. Odle joined Armada Hoffler in
1995 as a Senior Pre-Construction
Manager. With over 25 years of
experience in planning, estimating
and construction, his well-rounded
resume allows him the ability to
tackle problems from all angles. In his present capacity as
Executive Vice President of Development, Mr. Odle oversees
activities that relate to company and entity ownership of
development projects and supervises property acquisitions.
He works closely with management to ensure that project
development is economically feasible, financially viable and
completed within the stated objectives.
SHELLY HAMPTON
President of Asset
Management,
Armada Hoffler Properties
Ms. Hampton started her career
with Armada Hoffler in 1999 as the
Director of Asset Management. Ms.
Hampton was promoted to Vice
President in 2009 and has served
as President of Asset Management
since 2011. Under her guidance, the Asset Management
division focuses on the long-term financial health of the orga-
nization by overseeing property performance, maximizing
returns and aiding in the decision-making process regarding
potential acquisitions and dispositions.
Ms. Hampton has worked in a number of capacities throughout
her career having over 25 years experience in accounting,
finance, administration, operations and management.
ERIC APPERSON
President, Armada Hoffler
Construction
Mr. Apperson began his career with
Armada Hoffler in 1987 and held
various positions prior to becoming
President of Goodman Segar Hogan
Hoffler Construction (a subsidiary
of Armada Hoffler) in 1997. Due
to his wide range of experience
in management, he was appointed President of Armada
Hoffler Construction Company in 2000. In addition to being
responsible for the overall management, strategic growth and
financial health of the Construction Company, he focuses on
developing and cultivating relationships with new and existing
clients, subcontractors and employees.
ERIC SMITH
Chief Investment Officer,
Armada Hoffler Properties
Since joining Armada Hoffler
in 2005, Mr. Smith’s roles have
spanned finance, asset manage-
ment, development and operations.
Named Chief Investment Officer
in 2015, he focuses on evaluating
and managing the investments of
Armada Hoffler’s capital and resources across the compa-
ny’s portfolio of existing assets, acquisitions and develop-
ment projects.
His experience prior to joining Armada Hoffler includes
providing quantitative-based strategic solutions to the
executive management teams of Fortune 100 corporations
as a management consultant with Booz Allen Hamilton,
international corporate finance and pricing for Federal
Express, and financial derivative trading on the New York
Futures Exchange.
 University Ridge: Section 2C | 17

Key Personnel (CONT.)

CHARLES L. MCALPINE STEPHEN P. NAVARRO,

Managing Partner,
CitiSculpt
With a passion for real estate devel-
opment, McAlpine started his first
multi-million dollar business at age
19. Since then, his experience and
determination have grown, even
in difficult times for the real estate
market. No matter the obstacles,
quitting has never been an option for
McAlpine, and he has enjoyed working on projects large and
small, complicated and simple. His focus has always remained
on getting the best possible end results.
McAlpine brings a number of roles to each development,
including site planning, collaborating with neighborhood leaders,
putting a solid financial structure in place, and assembling the
best team to successfully complete the project. Perhaps most
important, he creates an overall vision for the project based on
input from all stakeholders that will meet shared goals, enhance
the current environment, and foster future growth.
DAN STERNS
Vice President of
Construction, CitiSculpt
Dan Sterns, Vice President of
Construction for CitiSculpt, brings
more than 30 years of retail and
hospitality development experience.
He is skilled at implementing effi-
ciencies and best practice strategies
based on his history of developing
pipelines, constructing, renovating,
managing and maintaining hundreds of properties.
With each development, Sterns strives to meet design and
construction objectives while delivering fiscally responsible
leadership.
CRE®, CCIM
President, CEO,
The Furman Co.
Steve Navarro represents and
advises corporate, institutional, and
high net worth individuals. His
advisory services extend to over 23
states and four countries, ranging
from development projects, built to
suit transactions, highest and best use analysis/implementation
and acquisition and disposition of both leasehold and fee
title. Public sector experience includes advisory services for
multiple municipalities and the federal government. Until 2014
Steve Navarro was owner, president, and Broker-in-Charge of
CBRE | The Furman Co., the leading brokerage and manage-
ment firm in the state of South Carolina. In 2014 CBRE, Inc.
acquired CBRE | The Furman Co. and Steve transitioned
to his role as Executive Vice President of CBRE’s Greenville,
South Carolina office.
In addition, Steve is President and CEO of The Furman Co., Inc.
based in Greenville, South Carolina. Steve oversees Furman’s
three operating companies that specialize in Development,
Investment Advisory Services, and Risk Management.
Founded in 1888, The Furman Co., Inc. has a long history of
being instrumental in the recruitment and development of new
business and industry to the region. Through Steve’s leader-
ship, and collaboration in both the public and private sectors,
Furman has helped facilitate major changes to the real estate
landscape across the Upstate.

ERIC APPLEFIELD
Counsel, CitiSculpt
As the Counsel-Development Associate
for CitiSculpt, Eric Applefield is
responsible for drafting and reviewing
operating agreements, purchase and
sale agreements, leases, master decla-
rations, titles, and other legal docu-
ments. He is also involved in research,
due diligence, and management for
developments, from acquisition to
entitlement to debt and equity financing.
Applefield brings analytical and problem solving skills to each
project and has the ability to decipher complex legal processes.
18 | University Ridge: Section 2C
CAROLYN SPONZA,
AIA, LEED® AP
Senior Planner,
Gensler
Carolyn is planner, architect, and
project manager with great expertise
in creating memorable, contextually
relevant, and sustainable places.
Trained in both social science and
design, Carolyn has a unique back-
ground in which she approaches her work. Her past experi-
ence includes a diverse collection of planning and architectural
assignments, encompassing community revitalization, vibrant
cultural destinations, and extensive stakeholder participation.
She is known for her collaborative problem solving, which
she employs to exceed client goals while meeting budgets
and schedules. An expert in all things urban, she recently
published a short guide entitled Conceptualizing Temporary
Uses on pop-up design and its impact on local communities.
DUNCAN LYONS,
RIBA, LEED® AP
Design Director,
Gensler
Duncan serves as a Firmwide Leader
of Gensler’s Commercial Office
Building Developers Practice Area
and as a Design Director for architec-
ture in our Washington, D.C. office.
In a career spanning more than
three decades, he has designed buildings for a variety of insti-
tutional and commercial clients in the U.S. Mid-Atlantic region,
Europe, Asia and Australia, earning recognition from the AIA,
NAIOP, U.S. Air Force and Arlington County, among others, for
award-winning work. Duncan’s passion for high-performance
buildings and sustainable design has led to LEED® certifica-
tion for many of his projects, including three at the Platinum
level. He’s been a featured speaker at conferences for the Urban
Land Institute, the AIA Academy of Architecture for Justice
and Bisnow Washington, D.C. Duncan earned a Bachelor of
Architecture from the University of Bath in England and is a
member of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA).
DAQUAN ZHOU,
AICP, LEED® GA
Senior Planner,
Gensler
Daquan brings technical exper-
tise and global project experience
in the multilayered discipline of
master planning.
Daquan’s experience includes a
variety of planning projects for
both public and private sector clients, including downtown
redevelopment, urban mixed-use development, new town
planning, corporate office campuses, industrial parks,
residential subdivisions, streetscapes and waterfront devel-
opments. Daquan’s extensive experience and knowledge,
along with excellent free hand graphic skills, make him an
invaluable asset.
ALLISON PALMADESSO,
LEED® GA
Technical Designer,
Gensler
Allison’s passion for architecture
combined with her creativity enables
her to contribute innovative solu-
tions to all of her projects.
Allison is a technical designer in
Gensler Washington, D.C., where
she collaborates with team members, consultants, and clients
to develop successful results throughout each project phase.
Through her knowledge of architecture, Allison contributes to
many projects in varying industries including sports, airports,
and education. She is passionate about community involve-
ment and ethnographic research as it pertains to design deci-
sions, adaptive reuse, urban design, and the environment. She
received her Bachelors and Master’s degrees in Architecture
from the University of Maryland. Her thesis titled, “Waterfront
Regeneration: Mediating Boundaries of Abandonment Along
the Hudson River,” depicts an example of how she used
Yonkers, NY and the abandoned Glenwood Power Plant to
explore environmental, cultural, and adaptive reuse opportuni-
ties to rethink an urban waterfront.

Key Personnel (CONT.)
RICHARD PETERSHEIM
PLA, Leed GA, Partner,
LandDesign
Richard is a Partner and Senior
Landscape Architect. Committed
to creative and sustainable urban
design, he is responsible for project
development through construction,
and directs a passionate urban design
studio with focus on strategic urban
planning, infill development, transit
planning and station area design, higher education master
planning, and retail development. Richard always looks beyond
the borders of the project to identify ways in which the improve-
ments to the landscape add value to the adjoining context
and reinforce the community goals. His role is often building
a constituency and bridging gaps in divergent development,
community, and political voices to create an executable strategy.
A few of Richard’s notable projects are Duke Kunshan
University Global Campus, Brightwalk’s mixed-use devel-
opment, Alpha Mill Redevelopment, Charlotte Rail Trail
and North Carolina Research Campus. He has been able to
speak on numerous topics including the Arc of Abundance in
Charlotte, NC, A Strategy for Global Success - Duke Kunshan
University at Georgetown University and TOD Development
in The New Economy at UNC Charlotte.
Richard earned a Bachelor of Landscape Architecture
from West Virginia University and has his Real Estate
License in the state of North Carolina. He is a registered
landscape architect in North Carolina and South Carolina,
as well as a certified LEED Green Associate. He is also a member
of several professional organizations such as the Urban Land
Institute and the International Council of Shopping Centers.
DAVID PEARSON
PLA, Associate,
LandDesign
David’s professional interest and expe-
rience has consistently operated at the
intersection of landscape architecture,
urbanism, and planning. He has 15 years
of experience collaborating with public
entities, private clients and institutions
on large scale master plans, small area
plans, landscapes, gardens and public
spaces that integrate and merge the complex elements of urban
place-making and ecological systems. His collaborative work with
the Riverside Drive Development Plan in Asheville, as well as in
larger public projects such as the Birmingham’s Railroad Park brings
special strengths to large complex projects. David is an urban-
minded designer who understands that high-quality design and
successful placemaking is cultivated in partnership with stakeholders
through creative thinking and pragmatic implementation strategies.
University Ridge: Section 2C | 19
As a former Assistant Professor for Auburn University and a
former Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of
Landscape Architecture for Clemson University, David is able to
bring a different perspective to his designs.
A few of David’s notable projects include Latta Plantation
Nature Preserve, Asheville River Arts District Streetscape and the
International Transportation Innovation Center that he completed
prior to working at LandDesign. David has won a number of
awards for his projects including 2015 North Carolina ASLA
Merit Award for Lake Junaluska Canoe Launch & Fishing Pier,
2014 Tri-State ASLA Certificate of Recognition for Northside
Park, and 2014 Tri-State ASLA Certificate of Recognition for the
International Transportation Innovation Center.
David has earned a Master in Design Studies, Urbanization
and Housing degree from Harvard University Graduate School
of Design, as well as a Master of Landscape Architecture and
Bachelor of Landscape Architecture degree from Auburn
University. He is a licensed landscape architect in North and
South Carolina and an active member in the American Society
of Landscape Architects (ASLA).
KEVIN SHOEMAKE, PE
Upstate Regional Director/
Principal-in-Charge,
Thomas & Hutton
Kevin Shoemake has 20 years
of experience that includes site
development projects for educa-
tional, healthcare, commercial,
industrial, and residential develop-
ments serving in various capacities
including Principal-in-Charge, Project Manager, Project
Designer and Project Field Representative. These projects
include planning, entitlement, grading and paving design for
roads and parking lots, water distribution systems, sanitary
sewer collection systems, and storm drainage systems.
JACK REEL, PE
Civil Engineer,
Thomas & Hutton
Jack Reel has 19 years of experi-
ence in design and construction
observation for site development
projects for various commercial
and residential developments, as
well as utility and recreational
projects. Jack has managed various
site development projects that include water distribution
systems, sanitary sewer collection systems, storm drainage
systems, and grading and paving design for roads. His
background also includes management of environmental
projects including water and sewer extensions.
20 | University Ridge: Section 2C
JEFF HALLIBURTON,
PE, LEED® AP BD+C
Civil Engineer,
Thomas & Hutton
Jeff Halliburton has 29 years
of design and project manage-
ment experience throughout the
Southeast. Typical projects include
higher educational, K-12 education,
criminal justice, healthcare facil-
ities, institutional, residential housing, commercial, DOD
MILCON, and roadway transportation design for public and
private clients. Specific project design tasks have included
land planning and layout, erosion control, water distribution
systems, sanitary sewer collection and transportation systems,
stormwater management systems, grading and paving design
for roadways, parking facilities, athletic fields, structural system
design including timber and concrete bridges, retaining walls,
marinas, tanks and various other structures associated with
site development. Jeff is a LEED accredited professional
and was recognized as a participant in developing the initial
EarthCraft Community Guidelines and is a past member of
the EarthCraft Communities Regional Council.
DOYLE KELLEY, PE
Transportation Engineer,
Thomas & Hutton
Doyle Kelley has 23 years of
experience in project manage-
ment and design of transpor-
tation and drainage projects in
South Carolina and Georgia. His
design experience is multi-disci-
plined and includes all aspects
of roadway design, pathway planning and design, and
drainage evaluation and design including large-scale flood
plain analysis.
MICHAEL L. BREARLEY
Associate, Wyche
Michael concentrates his practice
at Wyche on transactional matters,
with an emphasis on commercial real
estate and economic incentives. As
a Greenville native, Michael enjoys
helping clients navigate a wide-range
of real estate transactions as they
further their business objectives in
South Carolina.
Michael graduated cum laude with a B.A. in Political Science from
Furman University, where he was a recipient of the prestigious
John D. Hollingsworth Scholarship. After Furman, he attended
Vanderbilt University Law School as a Dean’s Scholar. While at
Vanderbilt, Michael engaged his interest regarding the effect of
new technologies on the delivery of legal services. He co-founded
the Vanderbilt Legal Technology Society and actively participated
in Vanderbilt’s Program on Law and Innovation. Michael strives
to utilize his passion in these emerging fields as a tool to maximize
efficient solutions for his clients.
MAURIE LAWRENCE
Member, Wyche
Maurie enjoys working as a strategic
partner with a diverse set of clients
on sophisticated real estate transac-
tions. She represents private compa-
nies across many industries, including
manufacturing, healthcare, and trans-
portation. She also represents signif-
icant non-profits and governmental
entities.
Maurie primarily works on large-scale mergers and acquisi-
tions and significant leasing projects including ground leases
and build-to-suit leases. She enjoys working on emerging real
property legal matters such as solar farms and the evolution
of brownfield developments. Maurie incorporates into her
practice work with sustainable real estate practices, including
green leasing, land preservation and conservation easements.

Key Personnel (CONT.)
MATT BRAMBLETT, PE
Principal and
Project Manager,
Hart & Hickman
Matt is a principal engineer with over
20 years of experience providing
Brownfields consulting, environ-
mental engineering, environmental
due diligence, soil and groundwater
assessment, and remediation with a
focus on redevelopment of industrial
and commercial sites. Matt has worked in a variety of contami-
nation scenarios involving petroleum, coal residuals, heavy metal,
chlorinated pesticides, PCBs, and solvents. When managing
Brownfields projects, he seeks to safely reuse impacted soils to
the maximum extent possible. He is expert in evaluating vapor
intrusion risks from chlorinated solvents for Brownfields projects.
K.J. JACOBS,
AIA, LEED® AP
Principal/Corporate
Studio Director,
McMillan Pazdan Smith
K.J. is a Principal and Director of
the firm’s Corporate Studio. K.J.’s
professional experience in a broad
range of project types has resulted
in a distinctive collaborative style.
He works closely with both public
and private sector clients throughout South Carolina and North
Carolina, with a primary emphasis on developer-led projects. K.J.
has overseen some of the firm’s most significant projects and
continues to manage all office, retail, restaurant, adaptive re-use,
hospitality and industrial manufacturing design work. His strong
client relationships and focus on delivering projects on-time and
under budget are instrumental in the continued growth of the
firm’s Corporate Studio. Relevant project experience includes
serving as Project Manager for the Aiken County Government
Complex and leading the firm’s programming and space planning
efforts for Greenville County’s redevelopment of County Square.
University Ridge: Section 2C | 21
JOE PAZDAN II, AIA
Managing Principal,
McMillan Pazdan Smith
As one of the firm’s three Managing
Principals, Joe directs firm operations,
including oversight of project manage-
ment, project delivery and fiscal
performance. A practicing architect
for 30+ years, with experience in 41
states and 100’s of municipalities —
Joe specializes in optimizing the capital
investments of owners and developers across retail, commercial
and industrial sectors. Recent projects include the Volvo Training
Center, Boeing Hub, and the Main + Stone Mixed-Use building.
Joe is an avid community supporter with service on numerous,
local boards and committees. His particular interest is in sustainable
land use and design principles. In addition to serving as Principal-
in-Charge of the programming and space needs assessment for
Greenville County’s new facility, Joe has been involved in planning
the redevelopment of the County Square site for nearly a decade.
EARLE HUNGERFORD,
AIA
Programmer/Project
Architect,
McMillan Pazdan Smith
Earle is a Senior Project Architect with
more than 30 years of professional
experience. His expertise is large-scale
government, commercial and indus-
trial projects. His unique skillset enables
him to lead advanced planning and programming efforts as well as
follow projects through detailed design and construction obser-
vation. He is skilled in client communication, overseeing quality
control and collaborating with owners from start to finish on all
projects. Related project experience includes the programming and
space needs analysis for the new Greenville County office building,
a new Summary Court for Greenville County in Travelers Rest and
the renovation of the Greenville County Courthouse.
22 | University Ridge: Section 2C
BEN CLAYTON,
ASSOC. AIA, NCARB
Intern Architect,
McMillan Pazdan Smith
Ben has nearly 5 years of profes-
sional experience, specializing in
new construction and renovation
projects within the Corporate Studio.
He is proficient in many programs
including Revit, SketchUp, Rhino,
AutoCad and Adobe Suite. Ben also has experience with general
management and construction administration. In his short time
with our firm, he has worked across a wide range of project
sectors, designing industrial, office and municipal facilities.
TOMMY MOLIN,
CCIM
Senior Associate
Retail Services, CBRE
Tommy Molin serves as a Senior
Associate with CBRE’s Advisory
and Transaction Services team in
the Greenville-Spartanburg market,
specializing in retail properties.
Tommy focuses on the leasing,
acquisition, and disposition of retail and investment proper-
ties in order to create value for property owners and occu-
piers. He is a native to South Carolina and has worked in the
commercial real estate industry since 2001.
Tommy knows retail and has executed over 224 lease and
sales transactions totaling over $121 million across 35 markets
in the United States. He has represented numerous regional
and institutional owners including CBL & Associates, DDR,
Fortress Investment Group, Kimco Realty Corp., Kite Realty,
Pacolet Milliken, Ramco Gershenson, RealOp Investments,
Realty Income, The Beach Company, and Sears Holding
Management Group. Tommy has utilized his experience
in the restaurant industry by completing over 52 restaurant
transactions with a total transaction volume over $36 million.
Prior to rejoining CBRE in 2006, Tommy worked as a Property
Manager with Ryan’s Restaurant Group Inc. where he was
responsible for managing a portfolio of over three hundred
Ryan’s Family Steak Houses and Fire Mountain Restaurants
in 23 states. Tommy began his career as a Property Manager
with The Furman Co. overseeing a portfolio of 32 office,
retail, and industrial properties totaling 1.8 million square feet.
BRIAN REED, AICP
Research Manager, CBRE
As a CBRE Research Manager in South
Carolina, Brian Reed is responsible for
overseeing all research operations in
the state. Brian aligns knowledge and
experience in the fields of planning and
economics to assist our internal and
external clients in solving demanding
real estate challenges. Brian transforms
thoughtful, forward-looking insight
into real estate trends, strategies and opportunities across the state
to guide our clients in achieving distinctive and substantial perfor-
mance. As part of CBRE Research, Brian is fortified with indus-
try-leading econometric forecasting and proprietary databases,
and collaborates across geographic borders and service lines to
offer significant value to our clients. Brian has been involved in
tracking real estate trends in South Carolina since 2001. Prior to
joining CBRE in 2005, he was the Demographic and Economic
Planner for the Greenville County Planning Commission. An
expert in local real estate trends, Brian maintains a calendar of
public and private speaking engagements covering commercial
real estate, demographics and economics.
CHARLES D. GOUCH,
CCIM, SIOR
Senior Vice President
Brokerage Services, CBRE
Charles Gouch, Senior Vice President in
CBRE’s Office Services team, delivers
innovative corporate real estate solutions
to suit the specific needs of both occu-
piers/tenants and owners/investors in
the Greenville-Spartanburg market.
Charles mobilizes CBRE’s scale and reach, solving clients’ unique
real estate challenges during the alignment of strategic real estate
plans with core business objectives.
He builds advantage through result-driven execution and
superior client service. Charles and his team are responsible
for the leasing and marketing efforts of over 4.5 million square
feet of office space in the Greenville-Spartanburg market. In
the past thirteen years, Charles has consistently ranked a top
producer in market and has proven his expertise through more
than six hundred office lease or sale transactions.
Prior to joining CBRE in 2003, Charles built his real estate and
leadership experience within the field of property management
for five years.
 University Ridge: Section 2D | 23

POINTS of CONTACT
Christopher Odle Richard Petersheim
Armada Hoffler Properties LandDesign
222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 2100 223 North Graham St.
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 Charlotte, NC 28202
codle@armadahoffler.com rpetersheim@landdesign.com
757.366.4000 704.333.0325
Charles L. McAlpine Kevin Shoemake
CitiSculpt Thomas & Hutton
10 Academy St., Suite 395 304 N Church St.
Greenville, SC 29601 Greenville, SC 29601
lmcalpine@CitiSculpt.com shoemake.k@thomasandhutton.com
864.940.0705 843.708.7908
Steve Navarro Michael Brearley
The Furman Co. Wyche Firm
703 East North St., Suite A 44 E. Camperdown Way
Greenville, SC 29601 Greenville, SC 29601
snavarro@furmanco.com mbrearley@wyche.com
864.242.5151 864.242.8320
KJ Jacobs Matt Bramblett
McMillan Pazdan Smith Hart & Hickman
400 Augusta St. #200 2923 South Tryon St., Suite 100
Greenville, SC 29601 Charlotte, NC 28203
kjjacobs@McMillanpazdansmith.com mbramblett@harthickman.com
864.978.4399 704.586.0373
Carolyn Sponza
Gensler
214 N Tryon St., Suite 2320
Charlotte, NC 28202
carolyn_sponza@gensler.com
202.263.5442
24
 University Ridge: Section 3 | 25

SECTION 3:
MARKET PLAN
& FEASIBILITY
26 | University Ridge: Section 3

COUNTY SQUARE ANALYSIS

In Greenville’s history, there has never been a greater start construction. This belies the actual viability of specula-
opportunity to add to the quality of life and dynamism tive development though as the market has a legacy of filling
of downtown than the redevelopment of County Square. large vacancy spaces relatively quickly.
With approximately 40 acres of space for development, the Three examples of this include Project ONE, 1200
outcome of this site presents both a huge opportunity and Brookfield and Patewood Office Park.
threat to the market.
Project ONE consists of two buildings providing a total of
If successful, the redevelopment of County Square could 338,000 sq. ft. of office space. The driver of the develop-
be a new anchor of vibrancy in what is already a dynamic ment was the agreement of CertusBank to occupy 160,000
downtown. If the project fails to respond to market demand sq. ft of the property. Unfortunately shortly after delivery,
appropriately, the site would ultimately become an albatross CertusBank vacated the project leaving behind a void in
that will present long-term challenges to those interested in the market. Despite the unique buildout of the tenant, the
building and financing new developments in the market. As project has absorbed several tenants into space originally
such, careful consideration of market conditions is critical. intended for CertusBank including Wynit, BB&T, UCB and
In an urban setting, there are four likely products to be Endeavor Greenville.
developed: office, retail, multifamily and hospitality. This The property at 1200 Brookfield was originally owned and
evaluation does not specifically cover the hotel component, occupied by Ahold Services, who announced their intention
although understanding what we know about the dynamics to vacate the facility and downsize. The property consists
of downtown as well as the anecdotal success of hotels in of 216,000 sq. ft. of Class A office space, 50% of which
downtown, the inclusion of a hotel is a likely scenario. As the company began formally marketing at the start of 2012.
such, this evaluation is limited to the office, retail and multi- Within three years, Ahold had relocated to a new facility and
family sectors. the office space was backfilled by Esurance, Global Lending
GREENVILLE MARKET CONSIDERATIONS Solutions and Bon Secours – St. Francis.
Before we can get into evaluating each market sector, it is The Greenville market has a disproportionate number of
important to understand the unique drivers of the Greenville engineers in the market. Because the engineering industry
market. While the City of Greenville has a population of expands and contracts heavily with the economic cycle, the
roughly 60,000 people, it serves as the largest development amount of office space that is absorbed and given back by
cluster of the region’s 1.2 million people. This is compa- engineering tenants is significant. The best example of this
rable to markets with stronger name recognition such as is Fluor Corp. and their presence at Patewood Office Park,
New Orleans, Salt Lake City and Buffalo. which is a Class A Greenville Suburban office park that
Because population in the Greenville market is spread out
amongst a series of economic clusters – significant others
include Spartanburg, Anderson and Greer – the market
“feels” smaller. This is important because the population
has the capacity to support a disproportionate share of retail
and entertainment options and the labor force to support
significant office development.
One of the biggest challenges of developing in a market like
Greenville is that of financing. There is a general under-
standing that smaller markets present greater amounts of
risk than larger markets. This is due to the fact that in a
small market the departure of a single tenant can have nega-
tive consequences on market vacancy and as a result, the rate
of return on new development. It is important in a market
like Greenville to undertake strategic steps to increase the
ability to finance new development.
OFFICE
Historically, developers have had little success in securing
financing for true speculative office development in
Greenville. Anecdotally, new office development has typi-
cally required approximately 60% pre-leasing in order to

consists of over 440,000 sq. ft. At its height, Fluor occupied
almost 30% of the property. They completely vacated the
property in Q4 2014. Five quarters later, tenants eagerly
absorbed space at the property stabilizing the vacancy of
the property. New tenants at the property include Gordian
Group, Level One, Patriot and Raytheon.
These three properties demonstrate a trend of leasing large
amounts of Class A space in the Greenville office market.
For landlords, that filling of space has been coupled with
a remarkable rise in asking rents. In 2015, Greenville was
one of six markets in the country that exhibited rent growth
higher than 10%. In 2016, the rate of rent growth was
sustained. What makes the growth exceptional is that for
the previous ten years, rental rates had remained stable.
In the last seven years, the Greenville CBD has had an
average vacancy rate of 13.7% and an annual absorption
rate of 99,000 sq. ft. Given that vacancy is currently
11.1% amid a period of rapid growth, landlords are able to
leverage market conditions at the negotiation table which
helps provide context for the dramatic rise in rents. Simply
put, it is a difficult market for tenants to secure space and a
lack of product will limit the opportunities for the market’s
economic growth in the future. To help balance the health
of the office market and bring the market back to its historic
vacancy rate of 13.7%, there is an immediate need for an
additional 95,000 sq. ft. of space.
Despite strong growth and rising rents, there is minimal new
product under development. Slated to begin construction
soon is Camperdown, a project that will bring with it 110,000
sq. ft of office space by Q1 2019 at the earliest. Until then,
tenants will be forced to work with what is available in the
market. Upon completion, we expect the market to absorb
office space at Camperdown in a similar fashion to previous
large Class A availabilities.
This raises the question as to what is possible at County
Square. Given the site’s size, it is possible for a development
to usher in multiple large office buildings to the market.
If we assume the presence of a captive tenant in existing
governmental offices, which will account for approximately
220,000 sq. ft. of space, coupled with existing growth trends
and lack of competing product, we believe it is not unrea-
sonable to expect the project to absorb 90,000 to 100,000
sq. ft. of additional space annually. Given that a develop-
ment timeframe of new office space is approximately two
years, we would recommend leveraging the 220,000 sq. ft. of
government offices to accommodate two years of market
growth, or up to an additional 200,000 sq. ft. of speculative
office space in an initial development phase.
RETAIL
Downtown Greenville is home to over 3 million sq. ft. of
office space and over 15,000 residents. While the area lacks
of the density of similar downtown environments in larger
markets, the area is growing rapidly, which opens the door
to new retail opportunities.
University Ridge: Section 3 | 27
Historically, downtown Greenville has experienced success
with three types of retail: ground-level, market demand, and
destination. The scope of this project can facilitate all three.
Ground-level retail is the easiest type to strategize. In order
to help attract and sustain vibrancy, it is common practice
to provide ground-level retail in urban settings. The lack
of ground-level activity is a significant reason why active
development on Main Street has not migrated north beyond
Beattie Place. As such, in order to maximize the potential
of this development, ground-level retail should be actively
encouraged.
The provision of ground-level retail is a delicate strategy
that should not be undertaken lightly, as without ancillary
development to ensure its success, an over-supply of ground
level retail can lead to a series of empty storefronts, which
can negatively impact the brand of the larger development.
To help address this concern, it is important to understand
market demand. Currently, the office tenants in the area are
underserved from a retail perspective. Unlike the majority
of downtown, the area surrounding County Square has few
pedestrian-oriented dining options, forcing tenants in the
area to drive to nearby restaurants. Nearby office tenants
as well as new government office space could accommodate
retail on an immediate basis.
CBRE tracks 3.7 million sq. ft. of leasable office space in
downtown Greenville which includes all properties 20,000
sq. ft. of greater. If you include owned-offices as well as
smaller office projects, there is a total of 5.3 million sq. ft.
of office space in Greenville’s downtown. Conversely there
is 1.3 million sq. ft. of retail space in the same area. This
roughly equates to a 4 to 1 ratio of office to retail space, all
other things being equal. This suggests an initial phase of
development which includes up to 420,000 sq. ft. of office
space could also include an additional 87,000 sq. ft. of retail
space. It is worth noting that retail is undergoing a revolu-
tion so a simple straight-line parallel between historic and
future performance is not sufficient.
The provision of retail space should be carefully considered.
There are types of retail better suited to do well than others.
The grocery and restaurant sectors as a whole appears to be
somewhat insulated from the e-commerce trends that are
slowing down development for most retail sectors.
Downtown Greenville has a regional grocery chain in
Publix operating in the market. The store is perfomring
very well and after evaluating the market, it is easy to see
why. Nationally, the ratio of population to grocery store
is approximately 8,000 to 1. Geographically, the Publix in
downtown Greenville is the closest grocery store for over
19,000 residents in the market as well as the closest store to
the work location of over 39,000 employees. Additionally,
while there is little office development underway, over 2,500
multifamily units in various stages of the development pipe-
line are likely to prompt additional demand.
28 | University Ridge: Section 3
As such, there is currently enough demand to sustain an addi-
tional grocery store at the site. With traffic counts on Church
Street exceeding 25,000 vehicles per day, the site would prove
to be an attractive draw. It is important to understand the
nuances of the incorporation of a grocery store though. Due
to the lack of density, a dense urban concept is unrealistic
at this time. However, a smaller footprint grocery store
incorporated into a larger development oriented with surface
parking towards Church Street would do well.
It is important to note the dynamics of retail demand.
Grocery stores are most active on the weekends and during
the evening. This is a usage pattern that mirrors many
other retailers. Given the current state of retailers trying to
figure out how to succeed in an e-commerce environment,
successful retail development will have to carefully balance
the competing needs of different retailers.
A specific retail sector that would perform well at the site
would be a movie theater, specifically a higher-end movie
theater. If the development is expected to incorporate both
a grocery store and a movie theater, the similar parking
demands of both should be carefully considered. It is worth
noting that easy access to parking is more important for a
grocery operator than a movie theater.
Downtown Greenville has a reputation, particularly when
it comes to retail, of being largely clustered around a single
corridor: Main Street. Although there is a successful Publix
grocery store downtown located off Main Street, there is
some truth to the criticism.
Putting that criticism aside, owners of retail space on Main
Street are faring very well. Asking rates along Main Street
have increased by 80% in the last seven years. While the
success is evident with the number of diversity of restau-
rants that line the streets, the presence and performance of
chain retailers cannot go ignored.
To the city’s dismay, the success of Main Street retail has
not been consistently replicated on other streets. Asking
rents along Main Street exceed $20 per sq. ft. on a triple net
basis. Asking rents on off-Main locations come at a 40%
discount. Replicating the aesthetics of Main Street during
the redevelopment of County Square represents a large gain
in value at the site. If successful, the project could represent
a paradigm shift in drawing additional higher-end retailers
to build off the success of retailers like Brooks Brothers
and Anthropologie, which are anecdotally beating internal
performance metrics.
MULTIFAMILY
In the early 2000s, the city leaders in Greenville pushed
for more multifamily development, determining that the
downtown market needed the additional vibrancy that
multifamily development would provide. McBee Station
was constructed in 2007 and has been a resounding success
with high occupancy rates and rapidly rising rents. The
popularity and financial performance of the asset prompted
others to follow suit.
According to the City of Greenville, over 1,000 new housing
units have been constructed since 2010 and over 1,400 are
under construction. An additional 550 are planned. This
amount of multifamily development is historically unprece-
dented in Greenville. Thus far, each new multifamily devel-
opment has been successfully absorbed into the market
although the steady rise in rental rates of the last five years
is beginning to slow and vacancies are starting to rise.
Given the lack of historical precedent, there has been some
concern expressed for the ability of the market to successfully
absorb all of the housing units under construction. To help
understand the potential concern and whether it is warranted,
we evaluated a variety of comparable housing markets.
We compared the housing market within three miles of the
city center of Greenville to that of Charlotte, Columbia,
Jacksonville and Raleigh. Of the five, Greenville is woefully
underserved from a multifamily standpoint. Based on this
evaluation, we estimate that Greenville’s downtown could
accommodate somewhere between 2,000 to 6,000 additional
multifamily housing units while maintaining healthy market
conditions. There are approximately 2,000 housing units in
the downtown Greenville development pipeline. As such, we
recommend a careful evaluation of multifamily product types
before proceeding with substantial multifamily development.
Our team is aware of an interest in the region for affordable
housing and we have provided a stand alone proposal in the
appendix to develop the future parcels across University Ridge
for this use.
 University Ridge: Section 3 | 29

Here is a list of multifamily developments in downtown Greenville:

PROJECT YEAR BUILT HOUSING UNITS STUDIO 1-BDRM 2-BDRM 3-BDRM RENT/SF
COMPLETED
McBee Station 2007 197 0 63 129 5 $1.35
100 East 2012 48 0 30 18 0 $1.75
Riverwalk 2012 44 0 0 4 40 $0.86
98 E McBee 2014 55 9 35 11 0 $1.74
400 Rhett 2014 150 0 75 75 0 $1.61
Rivers Edge 2015 141 6 72 58 4 $1.70
Ridgeland 39 0 0 0 0 Condos
Southridge 2015 375 90 147 79 34 $1.44
Main at Stone 2016 226 12 69 88 44 $1.59
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
District West 365 237 128 $1.77
M West 18 Condos
Link West End 215 58 111 46 $1.75
121 Rhett 36 Condos
Ellison on Broad 201 57 66 78 $1.84
Alta Vista Place 15 Condos
Stone and Rowley 51 3 16 26 6
Overbrook Lofts 31 2 14 13
Trailside 215
West End Apartments 270
Park Place 23 Condos
Courtview 16 Condos
PLANNED
North Point 282
River at Main 24
Camperdown Square 18 Condos
Camperdown Square 245
The Traverse 24 Condos
30 | University Ridge: Section 3

While we believe there is opportunity for multifamily devel-

opment in conjunction with the redevelopment of County
Square, we believe it is critical to evaluate the trends associ-
ated with specific unit types to identify gaps in the market.
Specifically, it appears as though there may be an opportunity
at the smaller end of the spectrum, as smaller studio apart-
ments are often larger than 500 sq. ft. in this market, unlike
larger markets which often feature smaller units.
It is worth noting that the Greenville multifamily market
receives minimal traction from students due to the lack of a
major collegiate presence in downtown. As such the market
has a limited appetite for lower-end multifamily housing.
It is our recommendation to provide multifamily housing to
help promote the “live, work, play” concept as part of the
development’s brand with an eye towards evolving market
conditions. Depending on market conditions, senior housing
and or workforce housing may be incorporated into the final
development.
SUMMARY
The scope of the redevelopment of County Square is so
large that it can handle a wide variety of development options
and scenarios in a series of phases, each of which should be
adapted to changing market conditions. In the first phase, we
have recommendations for each sector:
• Office – leverage the office demand associated with
governmental offices to construct 200,000 sq. ft. of specu-
lative office space
• Retail – leverage access to Church Street for a strategi-
cally positioned grocery store, ground-level retail for other
non-retail development and a movie theater positioned so
as not to interfere with the parking demand of the grocer
tenant
• Multifamily – plan for initial development of multifamily
units but keep an eye on the highly active development
pipeline and be prepared to alter the plan as market condi-
tions dictate

To the right is a sampling of tenants in our other develop-

ments as an idication of the quality of tenants we would seek
for this development.
 University Ridge: Section 4 | 31

SECTION 4:
DEVELOPER
FEASIBILITY STUDY
a. Vision
b. Design Principles
c. Site Context
d. Conceptual Site Plan
1. Zoning & Design Guidelines
2. Land Uses
3. Roadway Network
4. Parking Strategy
5. Other Modes of Transit
6. Green Space/Open Space
7. Retail and Shopping Experience
e. Development Statistics
f. Massing Strategy
g. Phasing Approach
h. Infrastructure
1. Preliminary Traffic Review
1. Existing Conditions
2. Redevelopment
3. Background (No-Build) Conditions
4. Future (Build) Conditions
5. Proposed Improvements
2. Proposed Roadway Infrastructure Improvements
3. Existing Utility Infrastructure
4. Proposed Utility Infrastructure
32 | University Ridge: Section 4A

VISION
University Ridge is a brilliant addition to Greenville’s
already great assemblage of places. Continuing the street
grid and pedestrian experience of Downtown’s Main Street,
University Ridge will provide an anchor at the south end
of town, one that extends space for Greenville’s festivals,
celebrates the culinary culture of the city and region, and
expands connections to the green and blue network of the
Reedy River.
34 | University Ridge: Section 4B
DESIGN PRINCIPLES
At the outset of the RFP process, the development and design
team conducted a charrette to define a shared vision for
University Ridge. The team established a series of placemaking
principles that guided development of the conceptual site plan.
These included a series of statements about what University
Ridge should aspire to in the future.
UNIVERSITY RIDGE…
acts as an engine of economic development
for the City and region.
Office, hotel, and retail facilities will provide an expanded
and diverse employment base that will help to grow regional
talent. The lively streets and convenient mix of uses will
establish University Ridge as an attractive environment that
will attract new employers to the City.
UNIVERSITY RIDGE…
establishes the County’s new Administrative
Complex as a landmark for Greenville.
Located to evoke the position and prominence of the
bell tower at the historic Furman campus, the County
Adminstrative Complex will have excellent views to and
from downtown, and will be the hub around which retail
and entertainment uses on the site begin to take shape.

UNIVERSITY RIDGE…
provides a new civic node in Greenville’s
constellation of already great landmarks.
It will act as an extension of downtown activity and provide
space for festivals, fun runs, and other outdoor events. Master
plan provides opportunity for cultural events and potential
venues.
UNIVERSITY RIDGE…
expands Greenville’s current retail options.
Incorporating a combination of larger- and smaller-format
shops in a lively, street-focused retail environment, University
Ridge will provide grocery, entertainment, and fashion retail
options not currently available downtown.
University Ridge: Section 4B | 35
UNIVERSITY RIDGE…
has an urban environment that is inviting to all of
Greenville’s residents and visitors.
Comfortable and welcoming public spaces, and places to
relax and connect to nature will encourage a wide variety
of users from all demographics to engage in a friendly and
walkable environment.
UNIVERSITY RIDGE…
extends the story of river development in
Greenville.
Providing a connection to the water at its east and west ends,
University Ridge links to the established natural network of
Greenville while creating a new urban fabric that continues
the connection to recent downtown developments.
36 | University Ridge: Section 4C

SITE CONTEXT
The design principles developed for the future of University Based on aerial imagery, it appears that much of the
Ridge are anchored in regional, local and neighborhood campus's original grade was filled to create a level elevation
context. The University Ridge site is at a unique location, for the one-story shopping mall, movie theater and surface
between the bustle of Downtown and quieter low-density parking that was constructed once the Furman Campus was
neighborhoods to the south of town. In many ways, relocated.
development of the the University Ridge site will need to Currently the University Ridge campus is home to County
address this transition, while providing additional connections Administrative Offices, Family Court, Health Department,
to Greenville's natural network along the Reedy River. and some State government social services. Referred to
today as County Square, the site has the advantage of being
UNIVERSITY RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT the highest elevation overlooking the Reedy River, and has
the potential to act as the southern bookend for the Main
To the north, the University Ridge site is bordered by the Street promenade.
South Carolina Governor’s School for Arts and Humanities
and the natural retreat of the Reedy River. Swamp Rabbit
Trail, Liberty Bridge, and the soon-to-be Cancer Survivors'
Park are all located to the site's north and east. One goal
of the development plan for University Ridge is to provide
enhanced connections to the natural amenities located along
the Reedy River, both for users of the site and for neighbors
to the south.
To the east of the University Ridge site is well-traveled Church
Street. Most recently, a number of five-story, multifamily
developments have been planned or constructed along this
thoroughfare. Residents of these new developments will
look to the University Ridge site for shopping and dining
options, as well as a way to conveniently access Main Street
by foot.
To the south of the site is the Haynie-Sirrine neighborhood.
There is an existing master plan for Haynie-Sirrine which
includes the University Ridge site as part of its boundaries.
Given the unique nature of the University Ridge site, it is
understood that new development controls will be required
in the future to address the context and scale of the Haynie-
Sirrine neighborhood, while allowing for office, retail and
other uses on the University Ridge site.
Lastly, to the immediate west is a small neighbohood with
existing low-density construction. A number of buildings
in this neighborhood have been been converted to business
uses. This two-block area is at the immediate edge of
Downtown.

UNIVERSITY RIDGE SITE CONTEXT

The University Ridge site was the original home of Furman
University, prior to the school's relocation in 1961. Furman's
original campus included a large quad and a historic bell
tower. The bell tower was located at a natural high point on
the site, which would have been a landmark when viewed
from Main Street.

IMAGE OF HISTORIC FURMAN CAMPUS

 University Ridge: Section 4C | 37

SITE LOCATION MAP

HERITAGE
GREEN
MCPHERSON
PARK

SPRINGWOOD
CEMETERY

BON SECOURS
WELLNESS ARENA
NOMA
SQUARE

RE
ED
Y ONE CITY
RI
VE

1M
MAYBERRY R PLAZA
PARK

ILE
G
R R
EE CO
N
RI

KROC PEACE CENTER

D

CENTER
O

GREENVILLE
R

ZOO
1/
2M
ILE

FALLS PARK CLEVELAND

PARK
1/
4M
ILE

SOUTH CAROLINA
FLUOR GOVERNOR'S SCHOOL
FIELD FOR THE ARTS & HUMANITIES
PROJECT
REEDY RIVER
SITE
CANCER SURVIVOR'S
GREENVILLE PARK
HIGH SCHOOL

KEY

HAYNIE-SIRRINE NEIGHBORHOOD

CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT

PARK / CEMETERY
CIVIC SPACES
MAIN STREET
38 | University Ridge: Section 4D
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
Our plan for University Ridge proposes breaking the site into
a series of smaller scaled development blocks, incorporating a
variety of mixed-uses. Each of these uses relates to the larger
context of the property as it mediates between Downtown, the
Governor’s School and Swamp Rabbit Trail, the Haynie-Sirrine
neighborhood, and the faster traffic of Church Street to the east.
The overall site plan will sensitively address the site’s edges, while
creating an interior “place” that will act as a unique destination,
extending the Downtown experience.
Along the site’s west side, the development plan will provide
an opportunity to connect with and extend the pattern
of Downtown Greenville. Located at the east side of this
extension is The Commons, a green gathering space that will be
programmed to provide an anchor at the south end of town.
University Street will continue through the site, via the existing
traffic circle at the entry to the Governor’s School. The uses
located along this extension of University Street and the town
green will include civic uses (including the County Adminstrative
Complex), hotel, entertainment and cultural venues, retail, and
office. This mix will ensure a lively, active street environment, and
destination for those walking from Main Street.
On the site's south side, the development plans for an upgraded
experience along University Ridge, establishing this edge as
an urban boulevard with improved traffic movement and
a safer environment for cyclists and pedestrians. This will
be accomplished by improvements to the actual roadway
ZONING & DESIGN GUIDELINES
Current Regulatory Controls
Current regulatory and zoning requirements for the University
Ridge site are set out in three locations:
Greenville Comprehensive Plan. In 2009’s Plan-It Greenville
(a 2-year update of the Comprehensive Plan), the University
Ridge site is identified as part of Greenville’s Urban Core area,
characterized by a pedestrian network, smaller parcel size, mixed
uses, and higher-density construction.
Zoning Code. In the Greenville, SC, Zoning Ordinance
(adopted February 2, 2017), University Ridge is indicated as
part of zoning district PD, Planned Development District. The
intent of the PD district is to include: mixed uses, traditional or
clustered neighborhood development lined by pedestrian-ways,
compact street networks, and a character of uses compatible with
surrounding development.
Neighborhood Master Plan. A 2002 Master Plan was completed
for the Haynie-Sirrine neighborhood. In this plan, University Ridge
was identified as a quarter-mile (or five-minute walking distance)
from the center of Haynie-Sirrine, located at the intersection
of Haynie/Pearl Street and Church Streets. The portion of the
site to the north of University Ridge was identified as an area of
“moderate redevelopment” with the parcels to the south side as
area of “minimal redevelopment.” Additional improvements are
infrastructure, by strengthening the urban realm and sidewalks
on either side of University Ridge, and by providing a more
consistent street edge with buildings lining both sides of the
street.
The north side of the site will be a zone where the grid of
development blocks will transition in the more natural landscapes
of the Reedy River and tie into the Swamp Rabbit Trail network.
A recreational trail, identified as the "Green Alley", will line the
north side of the property, providing access to Swamp Rabbit
Trail at the site’s northeast corner. Smaller blocks along the north
side of the site will provide ample opportunities for accessing
this new trail from other locations within the site. This zone will
also provide a green development buffer between University
Ridge and the Governor’s School.
At the site’s east edge, along Church Street, buildings will be
positioned to take advantage of the natural sloping grade.
Along this edge, parking, retail, office and multifamily residential
could be located. A series of grade transitions, which may
include landscaped stairs and berms, will provide ways to
access the improved edge of Church Street from the interior
of the development. This portion of the property provides
tremendous market visibility and exceptional views of the City
and surrounding.
Linking these components will be a lively and pedestrian-focused
street experience at the site’s interior.
itemized for roadway infrastructure and urban realm provision.
This master plan provides an illustrative overview of future
redevelopment parcels, including some infill development along
the north side of University Ridge. An appendix indicates that the
University Ridge sites are part of a neighborhood zone identified
as “URVC – University Ridge Village Center”.
Future Regulatory Considerations
Given the proposed development, we understand that the
University Ridge site will be delineated as part of a new
Neighborhood Master Plan separate from Haynie-Sirrine, with
its own infrastructure, urban realm, bulk, and architectural style
requirements. Upon further refinement of the conceptual master
plan, and following a process of community consultation, the
development and design team will be able to provide a more
nuanced itemization of variations between the existing underlying
regulatory controls, and those proposed as part of a new Master
Plan, specific to the University Ridge site.
University Ridge is outside of the limits established by the
Downtown Design Guidelines, a document that is currently in the
process of adoption. However, given the nature of the proposed
University Ridge development, consideration should be made for
inclusion of this development into the area of the guidelines, as the
University Ridge site will function as an extension of downtown.
 UN
IV
ER
SI T
FOOD AND CONNECTION TO
Y
ST CULTURE VENUE SWAMP RABBIT TRAIL
RE
E T

GREEN ALLEY

ENTERTAINMENT RE RESIDENTIAL
TA
VENUE IL
ST RESIDENTIAL
RE
ET
RESIDENTIAL
T

HOTEL
REE
ST

EET
ENTIA
WE

L
THE COMMONS

ENTIA
HO

IL STR
RE S I D

RE S I D
RETA
OFFICE

RETAIL STREET
OFFICE
BRADSH
AW
STREET

COUNTY

ET
PARKING COUNTY OFFICES

TRE
OFFICE RETAIL

HS
URC
H
S. C
UNIVERSITY RIDG
E

ET
S TRE
RR IS
HA
PRESIDENT
STREET
40 | University Ridge: Section 4D
LAND USES
The general strategy for use distribution across the site is
to provide more lively civic and business uses along the
new town green space, with retail and shopping extending
east, and residential uses located to the northeast corner
of the site.
Blocks 1A and 1B (at the southwest corner of the site)
will have the County Adminstrative Complex and parking
garage. This location was selected for the County office
building because of the direct access and visual prominence
afforded off University Ridge, and its prominent location
at the south side of The Commons. It also occupies a
primary location on a high point of the site, close to
where the original Furman Campus bell tower was located.
Functionally, this location is also outside of the footprint of
the current County building, which will allow development
of the new County Adminstrative Complex and garage to
proceed while the existing facilities are still operational. The
new County Adminstrative Complex will be a rock of the
University Ridge development, providing civic activity and
significance.
Block 1A will also have residential uses along the western
edge, facing Howe Street. This residential edge will help
provide a transition and provide a more attractive edge to
the parking garage. Where residential is not lining the edge
of the parking, the garage will be treated as an architectural
façade, and can incorporate artwork.
Block 2 will be a mixed-use block with a Class-A office
building above ground level retail. This block will have
integrated structured parking, either above-ground, or
below grade (market conditions and cost permitting).
Block 3 has been identified for a larger format retail use,
such as a supermarket or national retailer. This building
will be required to have transparent shop-fronts and entries
along all sides. Along the Church Street side of the building
(where the grade begins to drop), there will be lower-level
retail frontage, which will help define this corner as a major
entry to the site. There will also be parking located below
the building footprint, using the location of the current
curb cut along Church Street.
Block 4 will be a combined site for a performance/
entertainment venue and a hotel. The idea is that these
buildings will have ground level entries, and food and
beverage locations that will open to the green. This will help
establish the west side of the development as an anchor
location.
Block 5 is The Commons, a large outdoor gathering space
which is discussed in more detail as part of the Open Space/
Green Network section of this narrative.
Block 6 is a mixed-use block with Class A office,
multifamily residential, and ground-level retail. This block
will have integrated structured parking, either above-ground,
or below grade (market conditions and cost permitting).
Block 7 will also have multifamily residential and ground-
level retail with parking located below.
Blocks 8, 11A and 11B are shown as a combination
of office and multifamily residential. However, the idea is
that these blocks may be developed last, at which time, the
character and demand along Church Street may have also
changed. Therefore, these blocks have been identified
as potential “flexible blocks” that could accommodate
different market-driven uses, including a corporate
relocation or headquarters as may be generate by
economic development in the future.
Block 9 is envisioned as a site for a cuisine focused
cultural venue and market. This space could be a food hall
where a small stall layout with rotating pop-ups provide
entrepreneurial opportunities for upcoming chefs. Another
user could potentially be a culinary or hospitality-focused
training facility, aligned with a local university. This type
of locally-rooted, small-format cuisine experience has
exploded in other cities, such as Atlanta (Ponce City Market
Central Food Hall), DC (Union Market), and Baltimore (R.
House). Situated at the northwest corner of the site, the
culinary venue will act as a magnet connecting University
Ridge to the energy of Downtown.
Block 10 will be a multifamily residential block, with retail
uses located along the ground floor facing the new town green
(The Commons). Integrated above-ground parking will be
wrapped along the north side by single-loaded residential units.
Future development on Blocks B and C. Development
of the blocks along the south side of University Ridge will be
critical to completing improvements in the urban realm and
establishing the identity and entry to this development in the
future. At this time, this plan identifies Blocks B and C as
“flexible parcels” which could be planned to accommodate a
variety of mixed-uses in the future. One potential use for these
parcels is affordable housing, which could include multifamily
or townhouse construction. These types of lower-scale uses
could also help provide a transition to the existing Haynie-
Sirrine residential neighborhood to the south. See proposal in
the appendix.
 University Ridge: Section 4D | 41

LAND USE

UN
IV
ER
SI
TY
ST
RE
ET

BLOCK 9

BLOCK 10
BLOCK 11A

BLOCK 11B
EE T

BLOCK
STR

4
WE
HO

BLOCK 5
BLOCK 6
BLOCK 7 BLOCK 8

BR ADSH

EE T
AW
STRE E T

STR
CH
BLOCK 1A

HUR
BLOCK 1B
BLOCK 2 BLOCK 3

S. C
UN IVERSIT Y RID
T GE
EE
S STR
RR I
HA [FUTURE DEVELOPMENT]
PRESIDENT STREET

ET
S TRE
ON
UST
THR

KEY

OFFICE

RETAIL

HOTEL

ENTERTAINMENT

MULTIFAMILY

STRUCTURED PARKING

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

GROUND FLOOR RETAIL FRONTAGE

42 | University Ridge: Section 4D

ROADWAY NETWORK
A finer-grained internal street network has been planned
to facilitate movement of vehicles and bicycles through
and within the site. While this network will be sized to
effectively move cars to their destinations within the site,
the street sections will also be planned to be attractive to
pedestrians. By planning for a streetscape that encourages
walking, overall traffic volume within the site will decrease
as workers, residents, and shoppers will be more likely to
park their cars and walk to second destinations, like coffee
shops and lunch spots.
A conceptual street hierarchy has been identified, which
establishes the character and feel of primary and secondary
streets. All of the streets are anticipated to have two
traffic lanes, with one-way traffic in each direction. In
some locations, additional turn lanes will be provided at
intersections to provide additional network capacity and
improve movement.
Street type A connects Downtown with University Ridge,
acting as an extension of University Street. This street is the
major circulator through the site. It has two on-street bike
lanes (one in each direction) with an inboard parallel parking
lane, separated by a buffer zone. This street type is also used
at the eastern most curb cut along University Ridge, where
higher volumes of traffic are expected in and out of the
retail parking garage in Block 3.
Street type B1 characterizes the primary shopping
experience of the site. With diagonal parking similar to
downtown, this street has sidewalks that will accommodate
a higher volume of pedestrian movement and sidewalk
seating for restaurants and cafes.
Street type C is a series of shared-use streets, where
pedestrian and vehicular movements will blend more
seamlessly. These streets include drop-offs between blocks
at the north side of the site, as well as a retail street between
residential buildings on Blocks 6 and 7. These streets are
envisioned as having narrower lanes, featuring pavement
with zero curbs and potentially bollards to control traffic.
Street type D is University Ridge, which has been
re-envisioned as an urban boulevard with bike lanes and a
planted median. The existing curb lines of this road will be
maintained, with improvements occurring with the existing
right-of-ways.
Street type E is the green alleyway that will run on the
north end of the development. This alleyway will provide
access for emergency vehicles, in addition to providing a
shared-use path for bikes and pedestrians connecting to the
Swamp Rabbit Trail.
The street sections plan for an on-street, protected bike lane
network along street types A and D. The bike network will
continue from the traffic circle in the northwest corner of
the site across the site and down to University Ridge, where
it will continue east and west. The bike lane on University
Ridge reflects continuation of the City’s 2011 Bicycle
Master Plan and ties into overall planned bike route network
improvements.

Street type B2 is part of the secondary street network

that serves the parcels along the north and east portions
of the site. B2 has narrower sidewalks and a rain garden
network that will help collect and mitigate the impact of
storm water runoff on the site.
 University Ridge: Section 4D | 43

STREET NETWORK

UN
IV
ER
SI
TY
ST
RE
ET

BLOCK 9

BLOCK 10
BLOCK 11A

BLOCK 11B
EE T

BLOCK
STR

4
WE
HO

BLOCK 5
BLOCK 6
BLOCK 7
BLOCK 8
BR ADSH

EE T
AW
STRE E T

STR
CH
BLOCK 1A

HUR
BLOCK 1B
BLOCK 2 BLOCK 3

S. C
UN IVERSIT Y RID
T GE
EE
S STR
RR I
HA
PRESIDENT STREET

ET
S TRE
ON
UST
THR

KEY

A 2 WAY / PARALLEL PARKING / BIKE LANES C COMMERCIAL SHARED STREET

B1 2 WAY / DIAGONAL PARKING D THOROUGHFARE / BOULEVARD

B2 2 WAY / PARALLEL PARKING / E GREEN ALLEY

CURB-SIDE RAIN GARDEN
IMPROVEMENTS ALONG HOWE STREET
44 | University Ridge: Section 4D

STREET TYPE A: UNIVERSITY STREET EXTENSION

 University Ridge: Section 4D | 45

STREET TYPE D: UNIVERSITY RIDGE

46 | University Ridge: Section 4D

STREET TYPE B1

STREET TYPE B2
 University Ridge: Section 4D | 47

STREET TYPE C

STREET TYPE E: GREEN ALLEY

48 | University Ridge: Section 4D

PARKING STRATEGY OTHER MODES OF TRANSIT

The combination of pull-in and parallel street parking In addition to cars and bikes, two other means of public
shown on the roadway network diagrams will be provided transit have been considered for integration into the site.
largely for short-term, convenience uses. It will also provide
a slower barrier between pedestrians walking on the sidewalk
and the traffic lanes. Approximately 280 street parking Trolley Network. Currently, the City has an existing
spaces are anticipated. trolley network that brings people to and from locations
Downtown. Today, the trolley network services the site
Structured parking garages will provide the bulk of the for people using the surface parking for events. The
parking needs for users of the site. The general strategy development plan proposes retaining and expanding upon
behind parking provision is to provide shared structured this service, by providing designated trolley stops and
parking – where appropriate and realistic – to decrease enclosures within the site, near the County Adminstrative
the overall number of spaces required. This will help Complex. This will allow people who park in the garage
decrease provision of redundant and vacant spaces, and to circulate quickly to the trolley once they exit the garage.
reduce overall development costs related to parking. Recent With the increased volume of user traffic, increase in the
research has shown that the most successful shared parking number and frequency of trolleys should also be studied.
strategies pair uses that have discreet daytime/nighttime and
weekday/weekend uses. The development plan proposes
provision of approximately 4,000 spaces in seven different Personal Rapid Transit. In addition to the City's trolley
block locations. system, the County has recently endorsed research and
funding for changing rapid transit markets and entered into
a resolution supporting the County becoming a pilot site
County Parking Garage. The largest of these lots with the state of South Carolina and the federal government
will be the 1,200-space parking garage for the County. for the research, development, testing and deployment of
We understand that this garage will be designed to serve multimodal intelligent automates transportation systems.
various needs. On weekdays (and some evenings) it will A preliminary plan has been generated that explores the
provide parking for employees and visitors to the County routing of such vehicles and transportation lines.
Adminstrative Complex. It will also serve local downtown
workers who do not have convenient parking near their
businesses. In addition, it will serve as a weekend and
evening parking location for people attending baseball
games or other events at Fluor Field.
The overall development plan proposes locating the County
parking garage in Block 1A. This location will provide direct
access from University Ridge, is in close walking distance to
Downtown, and will be served by a future planned trolley
stop. A bridge will connect this garage with Block 4, where
it will serve hotel and entertainment uses (whose demands
will be more concentrated in the evenings and on weekends).
A strategy for providing preferential or zoned parking for
County workers and visitors during daytime hours will be
studied.

Shared Parking on Blocks 9 and 10. It is anticipated

that the residential lot planned for Block 10 can be sized
to provide excess capacity for Block 9’s cultural/culinary/
educational use, if required.

Other Parking. The other structured lots will be provided

on a block-by-block basis. For blocks 2 and 6 this could
include a combination of above- or below-grade parking.
For the remainder of the blocks, the parking is anticipated
to be above the existing grade, but below the proposed
grade, keeping in mind that the existing grade drops quickly
on the east side of the site.
 University Ridge: Section 4D | 49

TRANSIT MODES

UN
IV
ER
SI
TY
ST
RE
ET

BLOCK 9

BLOCK 10
BLOCK 11A

BLOCK 11B
EE T

BLOCK
STR

4
WE
HO

BLOCK 5
BLOCK 6
BLOCK 7
BLOCK 8
BR ADSH
AW

EE T
STRE E T TROLLEY

STR
STOP

CH
BLOCK 1A

HUR
BLOCK 1B
BLOCK 2 BLOCK 3

S. C
ET UN IVERSIT Y RID
SS TRE GE
RR I
HA
PRESIDENT STREET

ET
S TRE
ON
UST
THR

KEY

PERSONAL RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM

GREENLINK TROLLEY ROUTE

50 | University Ridge: Section 4D
GREEN SPACE/ OPEN SPACE
At the heart of the University Ridge plan is a series of new
public and open spaces that complement and connect to the
existing natural network of Greenville.
The Commons. At the southern extension of University
Street is The Commons, an open space of approximately
one acre. The Commons is envisioned as a gathering space
with a lawn and outdoor plaza. Bordered by trees at its east
and west sides, The Commons will be a welcome place for
individuals and small groups to lunch, and can also transform
to accommodate larger events on nights and weekends. By
closing the streets along the west and south sides of the
park, the plaza can increase in size and be reconfigured as a
place where parades and fun runs can start.
The design of The Commons incorporates anticipated
natural walking paths from Downtown and could include
a water feature, which ties back to the history of the Reedy
River and Greenville’s riverfront redevelopment. A shade
structure at the southern side of the plaza could provide a
backdrop for small performances.
Veterans Plaza. At the northeast corner of Block 1B,
immediately next to the County Adminstrative Complex,
will be Veteran’s Plaza. Existing monuments to the Armed
Forces, currently located at County Square, will be relocated
and highlighted here.
SIDEWALK SEATING
SHARED STREETS GREEN ALLEY
PRECEDENT IMAGES
The Green Alley. Along the north side of the site, a
green alleyway system will help provide a buffer between
new residential buildings and the Governor’s School. This
alley can be accessed from the turnaround between Blocks
9 and 10, and on foot between the buildings along the north
side of the side. This alley system will feature a narrow
impervious strip, which will provide access for fire trucks
and emergency vehicles. It will also include a pervious
paving strip that will serve as a mixed-use pedestrian bike
pathway, leading to the Swamp Rabbit Trail. Linear wetlands
will be created in this area with water retaining plantings and
bioswales to help with stormwater retention.
Green Streescapes. All of the new on-site roadways
will include street trees and planted tree pits. In addition, one
of the roadways will be designed as a green streetscape, with
curbside rain gardens that will retain stormwater runoff and
improve water quality
Pocket Parks. In addition, a series of pocket parks,
terraces and courtyards will be created along the eastern
edge of the site on Church Street.
GREEN STREETSCAPES
 University Ridge: Section 4D | 51

OPEN SPACE
UN
IV
ER
SI
TY DOG PARK
ST PLAYGROUND
RE GREEN ALLEY
ET
STORMWATER BMP
GARDEN TERRACE
OVERLOOK

TRAIL
PRIMARY CONNECTION
EE T

VEHICULAR SPINE
STR
WE
HO

THE
STORMWATER
COMMONS
BMP

SHARED STREET COURTYARD

GREEN EDGE
BR ADSH
AW
STRE E T DINING TERRACE

CENTRAL NODE

VETERANS'
PLAZA
UN IVERSIT Y RID
T GE
EE

EE T
S STR
RR I

STR
HA

CH
HUR
PRESIDENT STREET

S. C

PARK CONNECTIONS DIAGRAM

FALLS PARK

REE
DY
RIVE
RT
RA
IL

VETERANS PLAZA
52 | University Ridge: Section 4D

PLAZA ACTIVATION AND PROGRAMMING THE COMMONS

PRECEDENT IMAGES

UNIVERSITY RIDGE SITE

CONNECTION TO
CANCER SURVIVORS' PARK

SOUTH CAROLINA
GOVERNOR'S
SCHOOL FOR THE
ARTS & HUMANITIES
THE COMMONS
54 | University Ridge: Section 4D

RETAIL AND SHOPPING EXPERIENCE

University Ridge will complement Greenville’s established
dining and shopping locations by providing a mix of retail and
fashion shopping brands not currently located Downtown.
The main shopping experience will run east/west through
the site, as part of a lively corridor with sidewalk café seating,
street trees, and convenient diagonal parking. Running
north/south from this corridor will be a short pedestrian-
focused street with feature paving, and smaller cafes and
bars mixed with boutiques. Anchoring the street on both
ends will be larger-format entertainment and retail venues.
The intentional mix of large and small locations will help
amplify each other, creating both a reason for people to visit
University Ridge, and a reason to stay longer.

SECONDARY RETAIL
EXPERIENCE

ENTERTAINMENT
ANCHOR

PRIMARY RETA
IL EXPERIENCE

DINING GROCER/RETAIL
ANCHOR ANCHOR

RETAIL LOCATIONS
RETAIL STREET
56 | University Ridge: Section 4E

DEVELOPMENT
STATISTICS
Development statistics, including land uses and areas,
unit counts and parking statistics are shown below. Total
development (exclusive of parking) is anticipated at
approximately 2 million square feet.

Block Residential Residential Office Retail Hotel

Movies (gsf)
(gsf) (units) (gsf) (gsf) (gsf)
Block 1A 69,400 66 0 2,500 0 0
Block 1B 0 0 220,000 0 0 0
Block 2 0 0 211,000 45,700 0 0
Block 3 0 0 0 72,000 0 0
Block 4 0 0 0 0 158,200 44,500
Block 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
Block 6 117,300 115 138,500 24,350 0 0
Block 7 202,600 217 0 18,600 0 0
Block 8 0 0 149,000 0 0 0
Block 9 0 0 0 0 0 0
Block 10 225,000 214 0 200,000 0 0
Block 11A 120,000 114 0 0 0 0
Block 11B 117,000 111 0 0 0 0
158,200
Total 851,300 837 718,500 183,150 44,500
(250 keys)
 University Ridge: Section 4E | 57

Parking Phasing
Cultural Open Space Block Total Parking Parking
Phase
(gsf) (gsf) (gsf) (gsf) (# of spaces)
0 0 71,900 397,400 1,200 1
0 0 220,000 - - 1
0 0 256,700 224,500 748 2
0 0 72,000 135,900 453 2
0 0 202,700 - - 4
46,000 0 46,600 - - 4
0 0 280,150 205,900 686 4
0 0 221,200 43,200 144 4
0 0 149,000 - - 5
0 26,600 26,600 - - 3
0 0 245,000 118,400 395 3
0 0 120,000 - - 5
0 0 117,000 110,000 367 5

26,600 46,600 2,028,850 1,235,300 3,993

KEY PLAN
BLOCK
9
BLOCK
10 BLOCK
BLOCK
11A
BLOCK 11B
4
BLOCK 5 BLOCK 6 BLOCK 7
BLOCK 8
BLOCK BLOCK BLOCK BLOCK
1A 1B 2 3
58 | University Ridge: Section 4F

MASSING STRATEGY
Each block has been sized so that it may be reconfigured to Build-to-Lines and Architectural Controls. The
accommodate different building configurations or uses as University Ridge development is intended to extend the
the market may change over the duration of the buildout. urban fabric of downtown, so emphasis will be made on
providing a consistent street edge that defines the space
between buildings. Surface parking will not be allowed,
Building Heights. Building heights in University Ridge and the façades of structured parking will be treated with
will range from one to two stories (for retail, entertainment architectural treatments or artwork.
and cultural buildings) to nine or ten stories (for office). It
is anticipated that the site will have a variety of heights, with
lower-height residential anticipated to step down along the
site’s north side. It is expected that building heights will be
controlled by construction type and market demand; for
instance, stick-framed multifamily construction will not
exceed five stories over a podium base.

STR EET
H OWE

SC GOVERNOR'S
SCHOOL FOR THE
ARTS & HUMANITIES
UN
IV
ER
SI
TY
RI
D
G
E

H ST REET
S. C HURC

VIEW 1: MASSING VIEW LOOKING NORTHWEST

 University Ridge: Section 4F | 59

VIEW 2
KEY PLAN

VIEW 1

KEY
OFFICE

RETAIL

RESIDENTIAL

ENTERTAINMENT/CULTURAL

HOTEL

STREET
HU RCH
S. C
UNI
VER
SITY
RID
GE

SC GOVERNOR'S EET
SCHOOL FOR THE E STR
W
ARTS & HUMANITIES HO

VIEW 2: MASSING VIEW LOOKING SOUTHEAST

60 | University Ridge: Section 4G

PHASING APPROACH
A five phase approach to build-out of University Ridge Phase 3 will occur along the northern edge of the site,
is anticipated for Parcel A. The narrative below explains precisely in its northwest corner. It will consist of the
conceptual phasing strategy for development parcels. It cultural/food venue and residential with retail and parking
is intended that the infrastructure will be developed in a as accessory functions.
phased manner, similar to the parcels. As this plan becomes
more created, a detailed infrastructure phasing plan will be
developed to address roadway and utility required to service Phase 4 will connect development along the northern and
each phase. southern sides of the site and will include the entertainment
venue, hotel, office and residential.
Parcels B and C have been identified as "future phase" to be
determined.
Phase 5 of development will be along S. Church Street.
Since phase 5 will be the last to come online, these have
Phase 1 will consist of County Adminstrative Complex been identified as parcels that have the largest potential to
and County Parking, along with a small residential wrapper change use.
building. This phase will occur at the southwest corner of
the site at the intersection of Howe Street and University
Ridge. The location of phase 1 construction is outside of
the footprint of the existing County building. This will
allow the new facilities to be constructed while the existing
building is still in use, ensuring a continuity of services.

Phase 2 of development will be at the southeast corner of

the site, nearest to the intersection of University Ridge and
S. Church Street. This phase will consist of a combination
of retail, office buildings, and parking. These sites are also
outside of the existing County building, which will allow for
construction concurrent with demolition of the buildings
currently on site.
 University Ridge: Section 4G | 61

PHASING

UN
IV
ER
SI
TY
ST
RE
ET

BLOCK 9

BLOCK 10

BLOCK 11A
EE T

BLOCK 11B
STR

BLOCK
4
WE

BLOCK 5
BLOCK 6 BLOCK 7
HO

BLOCK 8

BR ADSH

EE T
AW
STRE E T
BLOCK 1A BLOCK 1B

STR
BLOCK 2 BLOCK 3

CH
HUR
S. C
UN IVERSIT Y RID
T GE
EE
S STR
RR I
HA
[FUTURE PHASE]
PRESIDENT STREET

EE T
STR
ON
UST
THR

KEY
PHASE 1

PHASE 2

PHASE 3

PHASE 4

PHASE 5

FUTURE PHASE

EXISTING COUNTY OFFICE FOOTPRINT

62 | University Ridge: Section 4H
INFRASTRUCTURE
PRELIMINARY TRAFFIC REVIEW
Existing Conditions
As stated in Proposal #45-03/31/2017, the existing 301
University Ridge – Parcel A currently occupies 30.443 acres
and is comprised of three buildings with approximately
400,000 square feet of space surrounded by 1,565 parking
spaces. The site is currently served by six existing access
points: three full accesses to the south along University
Ridge, a right-in/right-out access to the east on Church
Street just north of University Ridge, full access west on
Howe Street just north of University Ridge, and full access
via an existing roundabout in the northwest corner of the
site to University Street.
The existing land uses are 358,000 sq. ft. General Office
(710), 32,000 sq. ft. Government Office Complex (733) and
10,000 sq. ft. Automotive Service Center (942). These uses
generate approximately 4,410 trips per day, 900 trips per day,
and 100 trips per day respectively for a total of approximately
5,410 trips per day. There are approximately 700 morning
peak hour trips and 710 evening peak hour trips associated
with the existing development. Refer to Table 1: Pre- and
Post-Development Traffic Summary for a summary of
the existing traffic. Please note these existing conditions
do not include existing trips generated by 300 and 302
TABLE 1: PRE- AND POST- DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC SUMMARY
University Ridge (Parcels C and B). This preliminary analysis
is only a comparison between the existing and proposed
conditions for Parcel A. Existing traffic for Parcels B and C
are included in the existing traffic shown on the surrounding
roadways and grown for the no-build condition. As more
information becomes available, or a plan is developed for
these two parcels, additional evaluation will be needed.
Verification was performed, for the trip generation derived
above, utilizing the current personnel numbers and the
annual visitor numbers provided in the RFP. Based on
this evaluation, we calculated the trips per day to be
approximately 4,600. This seems to be consistent with the
calculations above, but again more information is needed
to complete the analysis once the project moves forward.
Figure 1: Current Traffic Volumes and LOS shows the
current traffic counts on some of the adjacent roads as
available from SCDOT for the area along with the current
lane configurations and corridor level-of-service (LOS).
Currently all roads function at acceptable levels-of-service
(LOS), that is LOS D or better, for the number lanes and
functional classification. It is important to note the analysis
only considers the corridor or roadway LOS and does
not consider the intersections’ LOS. More detailed traffic
counts and analysis will be needed to conduct this analysis
and would be performed as the project progresses.
FIGURE 1: CURRENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LOS
64 | University Ridge: Section 4H
Redevelopment
The proposed redevelopment of the 30.443 acre Parcel
A-301 University Plaza is proposed to be a mixed-use
development consisting of civic buildings, multifamily
residential, general office, retail, movie theater, hotel,
cultural center and a park. Trips generated by this type
of development occur at all times throughout the day and
do not necessarily coincide with the peak traffic on the
adjacent roadways. Also, this type of development typically
generates trips that would originate within the development
or generates trips already using the roadways and stop at the
development as they are on their normal commuter route.
This type of development would generally be serviced
with some type of public transportation as well as other
modes of transportation such as biking or walking. All of
these types of “other” trips would reduce the overall traffic
created by the redevelopment.
For the proposed development, the internal capture could
range from 5% to 25%, but the internal capture was
calculated at approximately 13%, resulting in a deduction
of approximately 3,060 trips per day. Pass-by trips can
be upwards of 30% of the shopping center volumes
and was assumed at a conservative 20% of the shopping
center trips for a reduction in 1,420 trips per day. With
the ability to access the development from alternative
modes of transportation, reductions to overall trips
generated could vary from 2% to 10%. For the proposed
development with public bus and proposed trolley routes
and pedestrian and bicycle facilities either currently in the
project vicinity or purposed for the future, a conservative
5% reduction in the overall trips to adjacent roads was
assumed, resulting in an approximate 1,170 trip reduction
per day due to the availability of alternative modes of
transportation. Considering the internal capture, pass-by
trip and alternative modes of transportation reductions,
the trips to the adjacent roadways would likely be reduced
to approximately 17,770 trips per day. Refer to Table 1:
Pre- and Post-Development Traffic Summary for the
proposed land uses, associated trips generated and the trip
reductions assumed for the redevelopment.
Land uses associated with a development can also
significantly impact the severity and the timing of the peak
traffic hours thus affecting conditions on the surrounding
roadways. For the morning peak hour, the development will
generate approximately 1,540 vehicles per hour; however,
with the internal capture, pass-by trip and alternative
transportation mode reductions the trips distributed to
adjacent roadways could be reduced to 950 vehicles for the
morning peak hour. Likewise, for the evening peak hour the
trips generated would be approximately 2,400 trips in the
evening peak; however, with the reductions discussed above
the evening peak traffic could be reduced to approximately
1,490 vehicles per hour. Refer Table 1: Pre- and Post-
Development Traffic Summary for a summary of this
proposed traffic. Although, the internal capture in the
morning is usually less than in the evening peak hour, a
uniform internal capture rate was used for the peak hour
traffic as well as the daily traffic. Internal capture rates,
pass-by rates and other reduction rate should be refined as
more in depth traffic studies are conducted as the project
moves forward. With that in mind, all the trips generated
here are not necessarily new trips but a portion would be
assumed to be a part of the future growth of traffic along
the existing roadways and that would be evaluated in more
detail as the project progresses.
Background (No-Build) Conditions
As discussed above, there will be some normal growth
of traffic along the corridors in a vibrant community like
Greenville. From the Greenville County’s website, the
anticipated twenty-year growth rate from 2010 to 2030 is
approximately 20.18%, which results in an approximate
annual growth rate of 0.924%. The current traffic volumes
in Figure 1 were grown-out to match the development
phasing over the following build year 2021, 2023, 2025,
2027, 2029, 2031, and full build-out in 2033. The 2033
No-Build traffic volumes and LOS are show in Figure 2.
As mentioned previously, the adjacent studied roadways
appear to currently function adequately and will continue
to adequately do so into 2025. Academy will likely begin
to operate at unacceptable LOS in 2025 with Church Street
south to Augusta following in 2027 and Church Street north
of the development following in 2031. All other studied
roadways will likely function adequately through the design
year 2033 without the development.
Again, the traffic analysis only considers the corridor LOS
and does not address the intersections. Intersections are
typically areas that see reduced levels of service first as
traffic increases. It is reasonable to assume as the corridors
operate at unacceptable LOS so would the intersections
(initially) along those roadways.
Future (Build) Conditions
The proposed development maintains 5 of the 6 existing
accesses, eliminating one of the accesses to University Ridge
to the south. Existing traffic patterns were evaluated by
looking at the overall traffic volumes for the major roadways
that access the project area. Based on these existing
volumes, approximately 35% access site from the north,
45% access from the south, 5% access from the east and
15% access from the west. These general traffic patterns
were then distributed to the roadway networks based on
the existing traffic volumes and patterns and the location
of the proposed accesses. The general traffic patterns are
expected to remain the same with the redevelopment even if
roadway improvements and/or new connections are made;
however specific traffic patterns may change as proposed
improvements are made to surrounding roadways and new
or improved connections are developed.
FIGURE 2: 2033 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LOS
66 | University Ridge: Section 4H
The proposed trips generated, less the internal capture,
pass-by trips and the trips via alternative modes of
transportation, were distributed to the adjacent roadways as
discussed above. The net trips generated were analyzed
for the following design years with the associated block
development as shown in the figure provided with the build
year for each block:
2020 Blocks 1A and 1B
2022 Blocks 2 and 3
2023 Blocks 9 and 10
2025 Blocks 4, 5,6 and 7
2028 Blocks 8, 11A and 11B
The generated trips were added to the background trips
for that design year to get the proposed future volumes for
each of the build years. The analysis results indicated most
of the roads will continue to function at acceptable LOS
into the design year 2028 with or without the project. It
also indicated Academy and Church Streets will operate
at unacceptable LOS with or without the project and
push the need for improvements of Church south of the
development up to 2021 from 2027, Academy to 2023 from
2025, and Church Street north of the development up to
2025 from 2031. Figure 3: 2028 Build Volumes and
LOS show the proposed volumes and LOS for the entire
build-out in the design year 2028. As mentioned previously,
this analysis does not consider the operational conditions
of the intersections, but as the roadways struggle to handle
the traffic so will the intersections.
Proposed Long-Term Improvements to Offsite
Road Network
Currently the site’s proposed main access points are to
University Ridge to the south. Anyone who would like to
travel to the County Administrative Complex from the west
or north must take a somewhat circuitous route to get there.
To better accommodate the travel from the north and west
to and from the site, more direct connectivity is needed.
University Ridge is still going to be the main access to and
from the south. Intersection and driveway spacing along
University Ridge needs to be planned carefully to maximize
efficiency in that section of roadway. Detailed analysis will
be needed to determine the appropriate configuration.
To help improve connectivity to the west and north,
consideration should be given to constructing some
new roadway connections or realign existing roadways.
Realigning Vardry Street with University Ridge could
provide a better connection to the west. Another option
may be to realign Vardry and University Ridge to the existing
Bradshaw. In the northwest area of the site, there may be
an opportunity to create better connectivity to the north as
well as access to Main Street all the way over to Academy
Street with the extension of University Street over to Main
Street at its intersection with Oneal Street. This connection
would allow for traffic to utilize either Academy, Main or
Church to travel south to the site and back north from the
site. It would also allow Academy to be utilized as a westerly
connection as well.
The roadways also need to be able to accommodate
other modes of transportation to take full advantage of
the reductions created by utilizing these other modes of
transportation. All of the connections would need to be
evaluated in more detail based on their benefit/cost to the
project as the project moves forward.
Below is a list of improvements to be considered and
approximate timing for the improvements. Many of these
improvements extend well beyond the site and would need
further study and coordination with the City and SCDOT
prior to determining the appropriate improvement needed
as well as the limits of the improvements. As such, our
economic model does not anticipate funding or financing
any of the improvements listed below:
• Improve University Ridge as the Boulevard section
shown in the proposal;
• Widen Church Street from August to University from
4 to 6 lanes in 2021 with development and 2027 without
development;
• Widen Academy from 4 to 6 lanes in 2023 with
development and 2025 without development;
• Widen Church Street north of development in 2025
with development and 2031 without development;
• Maintain dual lefts on eastbound University Ridge
onto Church St southbound;
• Add dual left for northbound Church Street onto
westbound University Ridge prior to build out;
• Realign Vardry Street with University Ridge;
• New connection from University Street to Main at Oneal;
• Other intersection improvements, such as left or right
turn lanes and signals, will be needed as the development
progresses.
Signal timings and coordination will also help extend
the life of intersections and corridors while other
improvements are implemented.
FIGURE 3: 2028 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LOS

Locations where we feel it would be important to discuss the

potential of improving the trafic flow in and around the site.

Existing Streets
68 | University Ridge: Section 4H

Existing Utility Infrastructure

Water
Existing water mains are already present on the University Onsite sewer mains will be owned and maintained by the City
Ridge site but are aligned and sized accordingly for existing of Greenville and will convey collected sewer flows from
structures. It is expected that these onsite mains will need to the University Ridge site to an adjacent transmission sewer
be re-located throughout the site in order to accommodate main owned and maintained by Renewable Water Resources
the buildout condition of the University Ridge site. (ReWa). These flows will then ultimately be treated at
Greenville Water is the water provider for the City of the Mauldin Road Wastewater Recovery Facility (WWRF)
Greenville and will own and maintain future onsite water owned and maintained by ReWa. While the Mauldin Road
mains. Per our request, Greenville Water provided the WWRF is understood to have remaining treatment capacity
results of a hydrant flow test performed on February 21, to accommodate the increased flows from the University
2017 for a hydrant currently located on the University Ridge Ridge site, the transmission main to be utilized does not
property. Given the results of this test, we anticipate there currently have adequate conveyance capacity. However,
being adequate capacity in the water system to accommodate as stated by ReWa, this transmission main is expected to
the proposed University Ridge site layout, but further regain adequate capacity for the University Ridge site after
analysis using WaterCAD models or similar would need to completion of ReWa’s Dig Greenville project which will
be completed in order to verify. establish a large-diameter sewer tunnel underneath the City
of Greenville. Dig Greenville is currently in design and is
expected to be in service by 2020.
Sewer
Gravity sewer is the recommended means of sewer
service for the University Ridge site because of its low
required maintenance and lifecycle costs when compared
to pressurized systems including pump stations and force
mains. Existing gravity sewer mains are already present on
the site but are aligned and sized accordingly for existing
structures.
Current estimated sewer demands for the existing property
total approximately 21,000 gallons per day (gpd). Projecting
for the proposed development, future sewer demands
total approximately 302,000 gpd at buildout. In order to
accommodate this buildout condition, it is expected that onsite
sewer mains will need to be re-located, and in some locations
upsized from current diameters, throughout the site.
 University Ridge: Section 4H | 69

EXISTING WATER AND SEWER SERVICE

70 | University Ridge: Section 4H

Proposed Utility Infrastructure

Water and Sewer
Onsite water and sewer services are anticipated to be
relocated on site to accomodate new development block
patterns.
University Ridge: Section 4H | 71
72 | University Ridge: Section 4H

University Ridge In-Fill RFP Job:

City of Greenville Date: 3/20/17
Thomas & Hutton Engineering Co. Revised:
Wastewater Design Considerations By: LHB

Existing Site

Parcel A - County Offices 289,800 SF (bldg)

1,565 park sp
783 persons @ 19 gpd/pers = 14,868 gpd
Parcel A - Family Court 32,000 SF (bldg)
100 employees @ 19 gpd/pers = 1,900 gpd
Parcel A - Cobb Tire 8,500 SF (bldg)
15 employees @ 8 gpd/pers = 120 gpd
10 cars/day @ 8 gpd/car = 80 gpd
Parcel B 77,344 SF @
162 park sp
81 persons @ 19 gpd/pers = 1,539 gpd
Parcel C 48,596 SF
225 park sp
113 persons @ 19 gpd/pers = 2,138 gpd
20,644 gpd

Proposed Development

Residential - Multifamily Units 837 units @ 225 gpd/unit = 188,325 gpd

Office 718,500 SF @ 0.1 gpd/SF = 71,850 gpd
Retail 183,150 SF @ 0.1 gpd/SF = 18,315 gpd
Hotel 250 keys @ 75 gpd/bedroom = 18,750 gpd
Movies 44,500 SF
740 seats @ 4 gpd/person = 2,960 gpd
Cultural 26,600 SF @ 0.1 gpd/SF = 2,660 gpd
302,860 gpd

Summary
Existing - Total
Average Daily Flow = 20,644 gpd
14 gpm
Peaking Factor = 3
Peak Flow = 43 gpm

Proposed - Total
Average Daily Flow = 301,617 gpd
209 gpm
Peaking Factor = 3
Peak Flow = 628 gpm

Proposed - Additional Compared to Existing

Average Daily Flow = 280,973 gpd
195 gpm
Peaking Factor = 3
Peak Flow = 585 gpm

C:\Users\lhb_grn\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software34732227.xlsx Page 1 of 1

 University Ridge: Section 5 | 73

SECTION 5:
PUBLIC/PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIP
EXPERIENCE
a. PPP Experience Chart
74 | University Ridge: Section 5

PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIP EXPERIENCE
Public-Private Partnership CitiSculpt
The Development Team has had an extensive history of In spite of CitiSculpt’s relatively short history, the Company
working within a public-private partnership relationship. has embarked on a goal to create lasting communities and
Whether working within the economic development sphere, engaging spaces. In order to create these unique locals, it is
submitting and answering a request for proposal for a necessary to engage in a program and process of community
municipal site, or entering into a municipal development engagement. Through the community engagement and
agreement to construct infrastructure or vertical outreach process, the unifying stakeholder always turns out
construction, the Team is uniquely positioned to work in a to be the municipality representing the city, county, or state.
joint venture setting allowing all parties to deliver using their In that vein, CitiSculpt has formed a strong partnership with
areas of expertise. In our collective experience, the lessons the Cities of Charlotte, Davidson, Pineville, Huntersville,
learned have been centered upon patience and flexibility, Denver, and Durham. CitiSculpt has experience negotiating
and the following excerpts and projects highlight those and entering into environmental agreements and
central tenets. infrastructure agreements with these municipalities and is
currently in the process of negotiating an economic impact
Armada Hoffler Properties grant, a redevelopment proposal for an affordable housing
Among Armada Hoffler’s unique development capabilities structure wrapping a deck, and reimaging and redesigning
are public-private partnerships with municipalities, states, a downtown ward. The following are specific examples
public and private universities, the federal government, and of CitiSculpt’s willingness to work and engage in public
other public entities. By completing over 25 successful relationships:
public-private partnerships, Armada Hoffler has shown true
staying power and flexibility. The cornerstone of Armada • Environmental Investigation Grants (multiple sites)
Hoffler’s public-private portfolio is the $600+ million Town • North Carolina Brownfield Agreements
Center of Virginia Beach. This extremely successful public- (multiple sites)
private partnership currently contains over 800 residences,
two hotels, over 750,000 square feet of office space, over • Infrastructure Development Agreements
250,000 square feet of retail space, a regional performing arts (multiple sites)
theater, and various public gathering areas. Over the last 17 • Affordable Housing complex (Charlotte)
years, Armada Hoffler worked in a strategic alliance with the
• Economic Incentive Grant/ Synthetic TIF agreement
City of Virginia Beach to fund the public infrastructure and
(Durham)
parking needed to support this large private investment that
has generated millions of dollars in tax revenue for the City. • Affordable Housing/ Small Business development
The following are several more notable specific examples of
Armada Hoffler’s willingness to work and engage in public
relationships:
• Developed and Constructed over 2,000,000 square feet
of conference and hospitality space in Baltimore, MD
• Developed and Constructed a 527,000 square foot
shipbuilding apprentice school complex in Newport
News, VA
• Developed and Constructed a 200,000 square
foot, mixed-use government center and law office in
Richmond, VA
• Developed and Constructed over 230,000 square feet of
conference and hospitality space in Newport News, VA
• Developed and Constructed over 520,000 square feet of
conference and hospitality space in Washington, DC
 University Ridge: Section 5A | 75

Public-Private Partner
EXPERIENCE CHART
PROJECT LOCATION SQUARE FEET Cost of Project
Town Center of Virginia Beach
Virginia Beach, VA 3,857,500 sq. ft. $600 Million
6 Phases/Public-Private Agreements
Four Seasons Hotel & Residences/Legg
Baltimore, MD 1,000,000 sq. ft. $440 Million
Mason World HQ
Mandarin Oriental Hotel Washington, D.C. 520,000 sq. ft. $165 Million
Marriott Waterfront Hotel &
Baltimore, MD 1,100,000 sq. ft. $120 Million
Conference Center
Newport News Shipbuilding/
Newport News, VA 527,000 sq. ft. $70 Million
Apprentice School Complex
Williams Mullen Center Richmond, VA 200,000 sq. ft. $68 Million
Norfolk Waterside Marriott Hotel &
Norfolk, VA 390,000 sq. ft. $65 Million
Conference Center
Newport News Marriott Hotel &
Newport News, VA 220,050 sq. ft. $62 Million
Conference Center
Renaissance Portsmouth Hotel &
Portsmouth, VA 160,000 sq. ft. $48 Million
Conference Center
Harbor East Courtyard by Marriott Baltimore, MD 110,000 sq. ft. $41 Million
Norfolk Public Health Center Norfolk, VA 196,000 sq. ft. $29 Million
Emory Conference Center Hotel Atlanta, GA 180,000 sq. ft. $25 Million
Oceaneering Chesapeake, VA 160,000 sq. ft. $25 Million
Harbour Centre Hampton, VA 175,000 sq. ft. $22 Million
Brastown Valley Resort Young Harris, GA 60,000 sq. ft. $21 Million
Brooks Crossing - Phase 1 Portsmouth, VA 60,000 sq. ft. $12 Million
Chesapeake Conference Center Chesapeake, VA 48,000 sq. ft. $11 Million
Port Centre One Portsmouth, VA 100,000 sq. ft. $9 Million
House of Sweden Washington, D.C. 87,300 sq. ft. $36 Million
Durham Gateway Durham, NC 1,000,000 sq. ft. $400 Million
76
 University Ridge: Section 6 | 77

SECTION 6:
QUALIFICATIONS
a. Municipal Center Experience
b.Mixed-Use Development/Project-Related Experience
c. Letters of Reference
78 | University Ridge: Section 6A

CITY OF SNOQUALMIE CITY HALL

Snoqualmie, WA

By consolidating public services that were previously

located on five different sites, the City Hall of Snoqualmie
improves efficiency and delivery of necessary government
services while showing developers what’s possible in the
city’s burgeoning downtown area. The building’s form
and materials draw inspiration from the surrounding
countryside and recall traditional forms that are part of
the town’s architectural heritage.

From the Portfolio of:

Gensler

Services Provided:
Architectural Design
Interior Architectural Design
Site and Landscape Design

Completed In:
2009

Project Size:
14,000 Square Feet
 University Ridge: Section 6A | 79

MARICOPA CITY HALL

Maricopa, AZ

This new City Hall embodies transparency and connectivity.

Positioned on a highly visible site and raised on a plinth to
create a civic presence, the building is an outward-reaching
connection between the City’s programs and services and
the community. Besides a police station, new components
include community and team meeting rooms and offices.
Skylights flood the interior with natural light that an atrium
connecting the two floors filters more deeply through the
structure. To honor its past, materials symbolic to the
city’s history, such as stone, ground-face masonry and
metal panels are melded with concrete, steel and glass that
express the city’s future.

From the Portfolio of:

Gensler

Services Provided:
Architectural Design
Interior Architectural Design
Master Planning

Completed In:
2013

Project Size:
45,000 Square Feet
145 Acre Master Plan
80 | University Ridge: Section 6A

THE SUFFOLK MUNICIPAL CENTER

Suffolk, VA

Our partnership with the City of Suffolk consisted of
designing and building their new Municipal Center which
was completed in 2014. The $23.5 million project was a
combined Municipal Building and E-911 Call Center, which
consolidated many of the city’s departments previously
in other locations into one building. Some of the main
components include E-911 Call Center, City Manager’s
offices, Council Chambers, large public lobbies and meeting
spaces, and office space for municipal departments.
The facility is a two-story building located in the Suffolk
Historic & Cultural Conservation Overlay District.
The project complies with the Historic District Design
Guidelines and is LEED Silver “Certifiable”, incorporating
sustainable design features. Last year, the project won the
2015 Award of Merit in the category of Best Institutional /
Public Building, as well as the Hampton Roads Association
for Commercial Real Estate’s Excellence in Development
Design Award.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Services Provided:
Design/Build

Completed In:
2014

Project Size:
115,000 Square Feet
 University Ridge: Section 6A | 81

DINWIDDIE COUNTY
Dinwiddie County, VA

Currently under construction, the new $24 million

government complex for the County of Dinwiddie is
expected to transform the look of the current home to
county offices. The scope of work includes a pair of
buildings totaling 77,000 square feet to be built in the heart
of Dinwiddie, as well as renovations of the current facility.
The new county administration building will be two stories
tall, containing over 54,000 square feet within its walls,
and serve as the state-of-the-art home of social services,
Dinwiddie’s health department, the board of supervisor’s
boardroom, a training room along with “building support
and storage spaces” and children’s services on the first
floor. Offices for county administration, human resources,
finance, the county attorney, economic development,
planning and zoning, the commissioner of revenue,
treasurer would be located on the second floor, along
with access to the geographic information system, or GIS,
conference rooms and building support spaces.
The new public safety building will be a single story building
featuring 23,000 square feet of space, representative of the
community and architectural context of the Dinwiddie
County, and will house fire, emergency services, law
enforcement, communications and dispatch, along with
emergency management and the county’s operations center.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Services Provided:
Design/Build

Scheduled Groundbreaking:
April 2017

Project Size:
77,000 Square Feet
82 | University Ridge: Section #

AIKEN COUNTY
GOVERNMENT CENTER
Aiken County, SC

A year after a Space Utilization Survey and Needs Assessment

Analysis, Aiken County chose McMillan Pazdan Smith to
lead the building program for a new government center
that consolidated all leased county facilities and improved
customer service for the community. The design team
facilitated public forums for community input on building
location and aesthetics, and worked with the Citizen Advisory
Committee and individual administrative departments to
evaluate potential sites and properly prioritize a wide range
of needs. Once the County selected a 20-acre greenfield site,
McMillan Pazdan Smith began detailed design for the three-
story government complex.
The design of the new Government Center is reminiscent
of both traditional southern and equestrian architecture in
keeping with the Aiken region’s notable equine community.
Key visual elements include prominent columns, a cupola and
ample greenspace. In addition to housing 18 administrative
departments, the Magistrate Court, the Solicitor’s Offices, the
Victim Advocate Offices and Long Term Records Storage,
the new center also includes a 200-seat council chamber,
a 150-seat training room, and a state-of-the-art emergency
operations center. Amenities for county employees include a
private café and a nurse’s station, and the rear-entrance features
a drive-thru tax payment station for citizens’ convenience.

From the Portfolio of:

McMillan Pazdan Smith

Services Provided:
Design

Completed In:
??

Project Size:
134,000 Square Feet
 University Ridge: Section 6B | 83

MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT/
PROJECT-RELATED
EXPERIENCE
84 | University Ridge: Section 6B

THE TOWN CENTER OF VIRGINIA BEACH

Virginia Beach, VA

The Town Center of Virginia Beach is an on-going,
$600 million public-private partnership between the City
of Virginia Beach and Armada Hoffler Properties. The
multi-phase, mixed-use development, which had its first
groundbreaking in the summer of 2000, has become the
city’s emerging downtown core. Town Center spans 17
pedestrian-friendly blocks over 25 acres and features a
vibrant mix of upscale retail, Class A office space, luxury
residential, dining options and entertainment venues.
The sixth phase of development is currently underway
and, upon completion in 2018, will add to Town Center
38,000 square feet of retail space, more than 130 luxury
apartment homes, and a 17,000 square foot performing
arts theater. The new development will also feature an
open-air public plaza and a pedestrian bridge connecting
to the adjacent parking garage.

3
1
4

1. Future 2-Acre Development 3. Retail Center with Potential for 5-Acre Re-Development
2. $42M Development Currently Under Construction 4. Retail Center with Potential for 7-Acre Re-Development

ARMADA HOFFLER TOWER

Virginia Beach, VA

The Armada Hoffler Tower was the first phase of development

in Town Center. It is a 23-story office tower, which also features
an integrated nine-level parking structure and another mid-level
office building, home to Hampton University’s College of Virginia
Beach. In addition to 324,000 square feet of office space, the
property also includes 38,500 square feet of street-level retail with
nationally-recognized names such as P.F. Chang’s China Bistro,
California Pizza Kitchen, lululemon athletica, Paper Source, free
people and more.
From the Portfolio of: Completed In:
Armada Hoffler Properties 2002

Services Provided: Project Size:

Develop/Construct 362,500 Square Feet

Product Type:
Mixed-Used
 University Ridge: Section 6B | 85

4525 MAIN STREET

Virginia Beach, VA

The 4525 Main Street project was the fifth phase of the
public-private partnership between Armada Hoffler Properties
and the City of Virginia Beach. The mixed-use development
encompasses a 15-story office tower with 238,000 square feet
of Class A space, as well as 286 luxury apartment homes,
approximately 950 parking spaces in a structured garage, and
23,000 square feet of ground-level retail which is 100% leased
to Anthropologie, West Elm and Tupelo Honey Café.
4525 Main Street, currently the newest office tower in the
Town Center of Virginia Beach, was recently awarded LEED
Silver certification, while the Clark Nexsen office space within
the tower is LEED Gold certified per the standards established
by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC).

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Services Provided:
Develop/Construct

Product Type:
Mixed-Use

Completed In:
2014

Project Size:
238,000 Square Feet & 286 Units
86 | University Ridge: Section 6B

JAMES K. SPORE TOWN CENTER FOUNTAIN PLAZA

Virginia Beach, VA

The James K. Spore Town Center Fountain Plaza is the focal
point of the ongoing, public-private partnership between
Armada Hoffler Properties and the City of Virginia Beach.
Located in the Town Center, the Fountain Plaza is comprised
of 36,000 square feet of retail space as well as 13,000 square
feet of public space. It was renamed in 2016 to honor the City
Manager who helped shape the Town Center of Virginia Beach
over nearly 25 years of service, has become a central gathering
area for citizens and visitors who come to enjoy the events and
entertainment acts that are held there throughout the year.
The $1.7 million plaza, developed during the second phase of
Town Center, was made using white, Turkish marble and its
decorative centerpiece is a 14 foot wide fountain with a bronze
sculpture of three herons atop a round pedestal of dripping
water.
As for the retail component, major tenants include Ruth’s
Chris, Bravo! Cucina Italiana and Funny Bone Comedy Club &
Restaurant as well as retailers Ann Taylor Loft and IT’SUGAR.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Public Partner:
City of Virginia Beach

Services Provided:
Develop/Construct

Product Type:
Retail & Public Plaza

Completed In:
2004

Project Size:
49,000 Square Feet
 University Ridge: Section 6B | 87

249 CENTRAL PARK RETAIL

Virginia Beach, VA

The 249 Central Park Retail project was also included in the
second phase of development of Town Center. The 3-story
building features 91,000 square feet of street-level retail which
includes The Cheesecake Factory, Brooks Brothers, and
Gordon Biersch Brewery Restaurant, among others, as well
as two floors of Class A office space. Major tenants include
Strayer University, Armada Hoffler Construction Company,
HDR Engineering, Ameriprise Holdings, and more.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Services Provided:
Develop/Construct

Product Type:
Mixed-Use

Completed In:
2004

Project Size:
912,000 Square Feet
88 | University Ridge: Section 6B

HARBOR EAST
Baltimore, MD

Harbor East is the new and evolving Baltimore

neighborhood that is redefining city life and expanding the
notion of the urban experience. Situated on a spectacular
stretch of waterfront just east of Baltimore’s well-known
Inner Harbor, and west of historic Fell’s Point, Harbor
East has become one of Baltimore’s most visible, rapidly
emerging neighborhoods – one that has become a premier
destination for national employers, local residents and
visitors. Replacing a landscape once characterized by derelict
warehouses and factories, Harbor East is now defined by
modern amenities and luxuries, gleaming architecture and
high-rise towers.
Since 1996, H&S Properties Development Corp. has
completed more than 5.5 million square feet of office,
residential, hotel, retail, entertainment and parking space
over 12 city blocks. Armada Hoffler Properties has played
a key role in bringing this mixed-use development to life
by partnering with John Paterakis and Michael S. Beatty,
founders of H&S Properties Development Corp., to build
over $1 billion worth of commercial real estate in Baltimore’s
Harbor East area over the past 20 years.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Construction Co.

Services Provided:
Construct

Product Type:
Mixed-Use

Completed In:
2017

Project Size:
5.5 Million Square Feet
 University Ridge: Section 6B | 89

HARBOR POINT
Baltimore, MD

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Office:
1.6 Million Square Feet

Residential:
±1,000 Units

Retail:
±250,000 Square Feet

Hotel:
500+ Rooms

Parking:
±3,200 Spaces
Located between Harbor East and historic Fells Point,
Harbor Point will be a vibrant, highly integrated
neighborhood with a focus on sustainability and innovation.
As the City’s largest downtown, waterfront site yet to be
developed, Harbor Point will be composed of 3 million
square feet of mixed-use space on 27 acres and will be
the leading development showcasing Baltimore’s urban
renaissance. The neighborhood will feature thoughtfully
designed public space including 9.5 acres of waterfront
parks and a promenade along the water’s edge.
Beatty Development Group is the lead developer of the
site, which is currently slated for three million square feet
of mixed-use development, and Armada Hoffler Properties
acts as investment partner, co-developer, and general
contractor. Harbor Point will be strategically developed in
three phases, and with the second phase of development
currently underway, full build-out is projected by 2022.
 University Ridge: Section 6B | 89

HARBOR POINT
Baltimore, MD

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Office:
1.6 Million Square Feet

Residential:
±1,000 Units

Retail:
±250,000 Square Feet

Hotel:
500+ Rooms

Parking:
±3,200 Spaces
Located between Harbor East and historic Fells Point,
Harbor Point will be a vibrant, highly integrated
neighborhood with a focus on sustainability and innovation.
As the City’s largest downtown, waterfront site yet to be
developed, Harbor Point will be composed of 3 million
square feet of mixed-use space on 27 acres and will be
the leading development showcasing Baltimore’s urban
renaissance. The neighborhood will feature thoughtfully
designed public space including 9.5 acres of waterfront
parks and a promenade along the water’s edge.
Beatty Development Group is the lead developer of the
site, which is currently slated for three million square feet
of mixed-use development, and Armada Hoffler Properties
acts as investment partner, co-developer, and general
contractor. Harbor Point will be strategically developed in
three phases, and with the second phase of development
currently underway, full build-out is projected by 2022.
90 | University Ridge: Section 6B

WILLIAMS MULLEN CENTER

Richmond, VA

Located on the corner of 10th and Canal Streets in downtown
Richmond, this office tower features a precast and glass exterior
with 200,000 square feet of office space stacked atop 5,500
square feet of first-floor retail and a three-story, 49,000 square
foot parking garage. Within the tower, the Williams Mullen
Center comprises approximately 147,000 square feet of Class
A office space built for one of the Mid-Atlantic region’s most
prominent law firms.
Developing office space requires in-depth planning.
Understanding entitlements, utility requirements, and traffic
impacts are just the basis for approvals. When looking to
construct a top-of-the-line building in downtown Richmond,
Armada Hoffler worked with local partners with knowledge of
the site and entitled driveway connections between the existing
parking deck and the future office tower which facilitated
negotiations between Armada Hoffler, the parking deck owner,
and the City of Richmond. This enabled the development
agreements to be completed quickly and the building built
on-time. By delivering practical solutions to complex urban
development challenges, Armada Hoffler focused on what
they do best: enhancing the City's Central Business District
with a new office tower and keeping an important law firm
downtown.
The initial schedule for the project included approximately ten
months to complete tenant improvements after design and costs
were approved. Roughly two months after commencement
of interior construction work, the client placed three of their
floors on hold do accommodate a late change in spatial plan
requirements. This change ultimately caused the total redesign
of one floor as well as a partial redesign of the other two floors.
Armada Hoffler worked closely with the client to mitigate
cost and delay impacts to the overall schedule and a “work
around” plan was developed to facilitate the re-deployment of
construction efforts. Although revised design documents were
received four months into the original ten-month construction
schedule, Armada Hoffler delivered the tower in June 2010,
per the original schedule.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Services Provided:
Develop/Construct

Product Type:
Office

Completed In:
2010

Project Size:
254,500 Square Feet
 University Ridge: Section 6B | 91

HOUSE OF SWEDEN
Washington, D.C.

House of Sweden in Washington D.C. houses the Embassy

of Sweden, the Embassy of Iceland, 19 office suites and
an Event Center that features conference and exhibition
halls. Situated on the Potomac River, House of Sweden has
become the perfect place to meet and work in the heart of
Georgetown.
The Embassy of Sweden in Washington, D.C. is one of
the largest Swedish missions in the world. It is the official
communications link between the Swedish and American
governments and the flagship of Swedish public diplomacy
in the United States. The building is owned and managed
by the Kingdom of Sweden through the National Property
Board Sweden.
With its modern design, House of Sweden is a stunning
example of contemporary architecture and adds a
distinctively Scandinavian touch to Georgetown Harbor
and the waterfront. House of Sweden has been awarded
Sweden's most prestigious architecture award; the Kasper
Salin Prize for best building. The award is a testament to
the work and creativity that has gone into creating this
unique building. Designed to rest like a shimmering jewel
in the surrounding parkland, the blonde wood, stone, and
glass structure is suffused with light, floating at night like an
ethereal vision above its sparkling reflection in the Potomac
River. The building is light and airy, with large glass segments.
Light is a key element, both outside and in. All around the
body of the building is a belt of light, backlit wood, which
after dark gives the sense that the building is floating. The
House of Sweden stands on white pillars and is suffused
with Nordic light. The materials are blonde wood, glass and
stone, often in layers.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Services Provided:
Develop/Construct

Product Type:
Office

Completed In:
2006

Project Size:
87,300 Square Feet
92 | University Ridge: Section 6B

APPRENTICE SCHOOL COMPLEX

Newport News, VA

Newport News Shipbuilding – a division of Huntington Ingalls
Industries (NYSE:HII) – is the sole designer, builder and refueler
of U.S. Navy aircraft carriers and one of the two providers of
U.S. Navy Submarines. With approximately $4 billion in revenues
and more that 20,000 employees, Newport News Shipbuilding
is the largest industrial employer in Virginia and the largest
shipbuilding company in the United States.
The Apprentice School, which was founded in 1919 at Newport
News Shipbuilding, is the preeminent apprenticeship program in
the nation and offers four-, five-, and eight-year apprenticeships
in nineteen shipbuilding disciplines and eight advanced
programs of study. The school provides 13 percent of Newport
News Shipbuilding's 23,000 employees, and 44 percent of the
waterfront leadership.
The Apprentice School Complex is a $72 million mixed-use
development that was born out of a public-private partnership
between the City of Newport News, the Commonwealth
of Virginia and Armada Hoffler Properties. The complex in
anchored be the nearly 81,000 square-foot school and includes
approximately 200 apartments units, more that 28,000 square feet
of retail space and a 380-car parking garage on approximately 6
acres of land.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Services Provided:
Develop/Construct

Product Type:
Mixed-Use

Completed In:
2013

Project Size:
110,000 Square Feet
 University Ridge: Section 6B | 93

NEWPORT NEWS MARRIOTT AT CITY CENTER

Newport News, VA

The Newport News Marriott at City Center is an eleven-
story hotel and conference facility that includes 256 deluxe
guestrooms, a concierge guest level, and over 25,000 square
feet of elegant and dramatic meeting and banquet space. The
hotel was designed and built in partnership with the City of
Newport News and features a 12,000 square foot ballroom,
a 4,400 square foot junior ballroom, and a 6,500 square foot
rotunda, which is a glass encased atrium, offering a unique
setting for gatherings. There is extensive pre-function space
throughout the conference area. In addition, the 10th floor
Concierge Level features an executive Board Room with
sweeping views of the fountains in City Center. The guest
rooms are warm and welcoming, and there is a Presidential
Suite located on the 10th floor that offers breathtaking vistas.
Additional amenities include an on-site restaurant, an indoor
pool, sauna and whirlpool, fitness center, business center, as
well as a structured parking garage.
The Newport News Marriott at City Center is the focal
point of City Center at Oyster Point, a 52-acre, high-density
urbanist mixed-use development featuring 230,000 square feet
of retail shops and restaurants and 1,000,000 square feet of
Class A office space. It is inspired by the maritime history of
the city and has been touted as the new "downtown" because
of its geographic centrality on the Virginia Peninsula and its
proximity to the retail and business nucleus of the city.

From the Portfolio of:

Armada Hoffler Properties

Services Provided:
Develop/Construct

Product Type:
Hospitality

Completed In:
2006

Project Size:
200,000 Square Feet
94 | University Ridge: Section 6B

DURHAM GATEWAY
Durham, NC

CitiSculpt is currently developing a mixed-use project in
downtown Durham with over one million square feet of class
A office, retail, hotel, and multifamily housing space. The
development is also expected to include a park and public art.
The site sits on 12.1 acres near the Durham Bulls stadium and
the Durham Performing Arts Center.
The unprecedented mixed-use project in the heart of Durham
will be developed in phases over the next five to eight years. The
first phase will consist of 300 units of multifamily housing. The
second phase will showcase class A office facilities expected to
provide space for national and local tenants. Future plans also
include recruiting a corporate headquarters and the addition
of one or more hotels. The site will feature secured and public
parking, as well as public art, and a new park. This project is
being developed to fully integrate with public transit and future
light rail.

From the Portfolio of:

CitiSculpt

Services Provided:
Development

Product Type:
Mixed-Use

Scheduled Groundbreaking:
2006

Project Size:
1,000,000 Square Feet
 University Ridge: Section 6C | 95

LETTERS of
REFERENCE
96 | University Ridge: Section #
95 | University Ridge: Section #
98 | University Ridge: Section #

CITY OF SUFFOLK
P.O. BOX 1858, SUFFOL� VA 23439 (757) 514-4030 FACSIMILE (757) 514-4035

Capital Programs
and Buildings

To Whom it may Concern,

Annada Hoffler Construction Company designed and built our new E-911 / Municipal
Center building in Downtown Suffolk, which contains our state of the art E911 Dispatch
Center, and office space for key departments within the City, including the office of the
Mayor, City Manager, City Attorney, City Treasurer, Commissioner of the Revenue,
Capital Programs and Buildings, Public Utilities, Public Works, Human Resources,
Planning and Community Development, Economic Development, City Clerk, Media and
Community Relations, Information Technology, Finance and Budget, City Assessor, and
the City Council Chamber.

The project was complicated by the fact that the new building was built on the same
block as the existing Municipal Building, a building which had to remain open and fully
functional until the new E-911 / Municipal Center building was completed and occupied.
This scenario necessitated a two phased construction schedule. Phase 1 consisted of site
and utility work necessary to support the construction of the new building and all of its
many functions. Phase 2 consisted of moving all of our departments into the new
building, followed by the demolition of the old building, the old E911 communications
tower, and construction of a new parking lot and courtyard in the space previously
occupied by the old building. There were also major roadwork and utilities
improvements on three of the four streets surrounding the existing and new buildings.
Annada Hoffler maintained the safe flow of pedestrian traffic to the existing and new
buildings while this work proceeded, and kept vehicular traffic on the impacted streets
flowing smoothly throughout the entire process. At our request, the street improvements
spanned across both Phases of construction, installing street curbing and base surface in
Phase 1, with the final asphalt surface installation in Phase 2.

The E911 / Municipal Center project was a fixed price contract, and Annada Hoffler
completed the project with no claims for added costs other than responses to changes
requested by the City, and change orders issued for unforeseen underground conditions.
The overall project was completed on time, with some areas of the project actually
completed ahead of schedule. Annada Hoffler also coordinated with the many contractors
and vendors that we had under separate contract for HVAC equipment, security systems,
information technology, furniture, audio/video systems, etc., to prepare the new building
 University Ridge: Section # | 99

for our move into it. We provided Armada Hoffler with a schedule of move in dates for
the various departments within the City, and Armada Hoffler used that schedule to create
a plan for early phased turnover of the pertinent sections of the building, which allowed
our furniture vendor to get an early start on delivery and setup of the new office furniture.
This coordination and cooperation facilitated a very seamless move from the old building
to the new facility, allowing services for the public to continue uninterrupted.

Armada Hoffler set a very high standard in coordinating and constructing our E-911 /
Municipal Center building, which was a project that had many unique challenges. They
always handled these challenges with exceptional professionalism and competence, with
a project management team that's the best that I've ever had the opportunity to work
with. I can only wish that all of our projects went as smoothly and as efficiently as this
one did. Armada Hoffler Construction Company has delivered a high quality project to
the City of Suffolk that we're very proud of. They get my highest recommendation to
anyone seeking a high quality construction company!

Gerry L. Jo , RA
Director, Capital Programs & Buildings
City of Suffolk
100
 University Ridge: Section 7 | 101

SECTION 7:
CAPABILITY
& CAPACITY
a. Financial Capacity
b. Summary of Outstanding Debt
c. Reference Letter
102 | University Ridge: Section 7A
FINANCIAL
CAPACITY
The Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt team brings
very strong financial capabilities to the University Ridge
project. As evidenced in our public filings, we have access
to a revolving line of credit and are currently listed on the
New York Stock Exchange (NYSE:AHH)) as a $767 million
market cap REIT. Our access to capital through the stock
market, along with our long standing relationships with
many traditional banks, allow for our team to capitalize and
finance the project development much quicker than most
traditional developers.
A. EQUITY DEPTH AND SOURCES
CitiSculpt and Armada Hoffler Properties have significant
relationships with many equity providers and sources.
Armada Hoffler Properties, Inc. is a publicly-traded Real
Estate Investment Trust (REIT) listed on the New York
Stock Exchange (NYSE: AHH) and as such is required to
make periodic public disclosure filings with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC). All of the Company’s
publicly available information since the Company's
IPO in May 2013 is available through the Investor
Relations portal of our website (www.ArmadaHoffler.
com) as well as with the SEC.
The Company’s publicly available information includes
information regarding our balance sheet at the end of each
fiscal quarter and year, including all outstanding loans and
corporate credit facilities. As represented by the various
asset-specific loans as well as the lender’s participating on
the credit facility, Armada Hoffler Properties works with
a number of lenders, just as we have done throughout the
firm’s four-decade history.
Armada Hoffler Properties manages our credit line and
capital on an ongoing basis as we forecast potential projects
and acquisitions and how they will be funded. As a public-
ly-traded REIT, Armada Hoffler Properties has the ability to
raise equity on the capital markets as dictated by project and
corporate metrics. Additionally, we maintain banking rela-
tionships with several large lenders such as Bank of America,
Regions Bank, M&T Bank, Wells Fargo, and others. We will
be able to provide competitive financing on all aspects of
this development through these relationships.
B. LENDER RELATIONSHIPS
The following page shows Armada Hoffler’s relationship
with lenders for construction and permanent financing with
information on project, amount, and status.
C. AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Financial Statements showing 2016 4Q results and 2016
Annual 10-K report are publicly available on the web on
Armada Hoffler’s website (www.ArmadaHoffler.com) under
Investor Relations or through the Federal Securities and
Exchange Commission's website (www.sec.gov).
D. LETTER FROM LENDER
Bank of America is one of many debt providers that has
an ongoing relationship with our group. A letter from
Bank of America is on the following page and will attest to
our group’s financial capacity to undertake and complete a
project of this scale.
 University Ridge: Section 7B | 103

SUMMARY OF OUTSTANDING DEBT

EFFECTIVE RATE MATURITY AMOUNT OUTSTANDING
DEBT LENDER STATED RATE AS OF 12/31/2016 DATE AS OF 12/31/2016

Secured Notes Payable - Core Debt (In Thousands, 000)

North Point Note 5 PNC L+2.00% 3.57% 2/1/2017 $643
Harrisonburg Regal Berkadia 6.06% 6.06% 6/8/2017 $3,256
Commonwealth of Virginia
Regions L+1.90% 2.67% 8/28/2017 $4,933
- Chesapeake
Hanbury Village Wells Fargo 6.67% 6.67% 10/11/2017 $20,709
Sandbridge Commons BB&T L+1.85% 2.62% 1/17/2018 $9,376
Columbus Village Note 1 Bank of Hampton Roads L+2.00% 3.05% 4/5/2018 $6,258
Columbus Village Note 2 Bank of Hampton Roads L+2.00% 2.77% 4/5/2018 $2,266
North Point Center Note 1 Prudential 6.45% 6.45% 2/5/2019 $9,776
Southgate Square BB&T L+2.00% 2.77% 4/29/2021 21,150
249 Central Park Retail Bank of America L+1.95% 2.72% 8/8/2021 17,076
South Retail Bank of America L+1.95% 2.72% 8/8/2021 7,493
Fountain Plaza Retail Bank of America L+1.95% 2.72% 8/8/2021 10,281
Encore Apartments NY Life 3.25% 3.25% 9/10/2021 24,966
Socastee Commons Wells Fargo 4.57% 4.57% 1/6/2023 4,866
Arrowood Indemnity
North Point Center Note 2 7.25% 7.25% 9/15/2025 2,564
Company
Smith's Landing Berkadia 4.05% 4.05% 6/1/2035 20,511
Liberty Apartments VHDA 5.66% 5.66% 11/1/2043 20,005
The Cosmopolitan M&T Reality Capital 3.75% 3.75% 7/1/2051 45,884
Total - Secured Core Debt $232,013
Secured Notes Payable - Development Pipeline
4525 Main Street NY Life 3.25% 3.25% 9/10/2021 32,034
Lightfoot Marketplace Regions L+1.90% 2.67% 11/14/2017 12,194
Johns Hopkins Village Bank of America L+1.90% 2.67% 7/30/2018 43,841
Total - Development Pipeline 88,069
Total Secured Notes Payable $320,082
Unsecured Core Debt
Bank of America, L+1.40%
Senior unsecured line of credit PNC, Regions 2.32% 2/20/2019 107,000
- 2.00%
Bank of America, PNC, L+1.35%
Senior unsecured term loan Regions, Raymond James, 2.27% 2/20/2020 50,000
Citizens Bank - 1.95%
Bank of America, PNC, L+1.35%
Senior unsecured term loan Regions, Raymond James, 3.50% 2/20/2020 50,000
Citizens Bank - 1.95%
Total - Unsecured Core Debt 207,000
Total Notes Payable excluding
$527,082
GAAP Adjustments
Weighted Average Interest Rate 3.3%
Balloon Payments 430,479
Principal amortization 96,603
Total Consolidated Debt $527,082
Fixed-rate Debt(2) 241,472
Variable-rate Debt(3) 285,610
Total Consolidated Debt $527,082
GAAP Adjustments (4,902)
Total Notes Payable $522,180
104 | University Ridge: Section #

CONFIDENTIAL

March 16, 2017

Mr. Joe Kernell

County Administrator
County Square, Suite 2400
Greenville, SC 29601
864-467-7105

RE: University Ridge Development, Greenville, SC

Proposal # 45-03/31/2017

Bank Reference for:

Armada Hoffler Properties
222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 2100
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462

Dear Mr. Kernell:

This letter will serve as a financial and bank reference for Armada Hoffler Properties.

Bank of America Merrill Lynch has a 20+ year relationship with Armada Hoffler Properties and its executive team.
The Bank has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in loans to the company over the years. Armada Hoffler
Properties has excellent credit and has always handled their obligations as agreed.

Bank of America Merrill Lynch is also Agent Bank for the Armada Hoffler Properties $275 million revolving line of
credit. We also serve as their primary treasury and depository bank. They maintain approximately $25 million in
liquid cash balances with Bank of America on an ongoing basis.

Armada Hoffler Properties is one of Bank of America's very best clients. We are actively seeking to expand and
grow our relationship with them. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at 703-761-
8134. We would ask you keep this letter confidential. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Paul Kinyon
Senior Vice President
703-761-8134
 University Ridge: Section 8 | 105

SECTION 8:
INFRASTRUCTURE
& PARKING
a. Parking Garage Analysis & Estimated Cost
b. Estimated Parking Income
c. Public Infrastructure Estimate
d. Estimated Private Real Estate Tax Assessments
e. Public Infrastructure and Garage Financing
106 |University Ridge: Section 8A
PARKING GARAGE ANALYSIS
& ESTIMATED COST
One of the largest challenges to successful urban mixed-use
development is the proper analysis and implementation of a
structured parking program. By densifying a site with buildings
that fill the block and provide urban context, street activity and
walkability, there is no room on the property for large surface
parking lots. A “sea of surface parking spaces” to support
1.5 to 2.0 million square feet of buildings is not possible for a
multitude of reasons. The right answer from a land planning
and design context standpoint is to embed the parking within
the building footprints through strategically-placed parking
levels either above or below the street level facades. However,
simply incorporating the parking within the footprint of the
building does not solve all problems.
A challenge with structured parking is that it costs 6 to 10 times
more than a surface space to construct. Precast parking decks
and “cast in place” decks are significant structures in their own
right, and while they may generate some revenue from parking
fees, those fees are not enough to drive private equity invest-
ment into parking structures. However, there is a benefit to
the land seller. As discussed in the land valuation section, the
land price is increased as the amount of development placed
vertically upon the site is increased. More density equals more
real estate taxes and more sales and uses taxes. But it has been
our experience that the cost of “stacking” the property with
integrated parking should be borne by the seller as an equitable
offset for the added density.
Armada Hoffler Properties has lengthy experience working
with municipalities in mixed-use developments where shared
parking is critical to providing adequate parking counts at the
most effective cost basis to the project. There are several parking
consultants such as Walker Parking, Desman Engineering,
Kimley Horn, and SPS that will attest to the fact that tradi-
tional zoning ordinances and codes do not properly take
PARKING DEMAND SCHEDULE
Demand Use SF or Units
Office @ 498,500 3/1000 gsf
Retail @ 183,150 4/1000 gsf
Hotel @ 250 1/room
Residential @ 837 1.5 / unit 1,256
Entertainment 650 0.5 / seat
County Required 220,000 5.5/1000gsf
Cultural 26,600 3/1000
Day 314
Night/Weekend 1,256
into account the day versus night uses of a mixed-use
development. The inherent efficiencies that such off setting
uses can provide to the parking requirements as compared to
traditional calculations by code, an office building may bring
several hundred workers into a parking garage during the day
and then sit nearly empty at night.
Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt understands those
complimenting uses that maximize structured parking spaces
to provide the lowest car count possible without creating a
parking shortage. In the appendix is an example of the recent
update to the parking model used in the Town Center of
Virginia Beach. As you can see, there are individual garages
that may experience a full rating during certain hours of the
day or night, but overall, the entire parking supply within the
Town Center meets the needs of the total car count. We feel
very comfortable in this type of arrangement and fully support
a development-wide, shared parking arrangement to provide
more commercial density at a lower parking cost.
The table below lists the proposed parking structures within
the development and their associated car count. We assume
the following parking requirements by use group and their
primary use time:
• Office – 3 cars / 1,000 gross square feet – Day
• Retail & Restaurants – blended 4 cars / 1000 gross square
feet – Day and Night
• Hotels – 1 car per room – Night
• Multifamily – 1.5 cars per unit – Night
• Entertainment – 1 car per 2 seats – Night
Based on the above required parking densities, we have
calculated a total parking need using shared parking
structures as follows:
Total Cars
1,496
733
250
325
1,200
80
2,696 733 50 50 80 3,922
149.55 733 250 325 80 2,792
 University Ridge: Section 8A | 107

There is a safety factor of approximately 5% in our parking matrix due to the fact that we will provide “on-street” parking
within our infrastructure design, which for conservancy is not included in the supply required to meet demand.
Based upon our experience developing and constructing both Precast and Cast In Place garages, we believe the total cost
of the parking garage program needed here is $112,718,795. Removing the 1,200 car garage referenced as a part of the
new County Administration Complex, the net garage car cost is reduced to $89,556,925.

GROSS PARKING PROGRAM

Garage 1 Garage 2 Garage 3 Garage 6 Garage 7 Garage 10 Garage 11 Total Parking
Spaces 1200 748 453 686 144 395 367 3993

Description PRECAST/ CIP/ CIP/ CIP/ PRECAST/ CIP/

PODIUM
Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use

Total Land Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Total Hard Cost $20,010,000 $21,792,270 $14,157,854 $20,384,738 $5,267,960 $6,610,688 $11,102,819 $99,326,328
Total Soft Cost $2,282,870 $2,093,154 $1,478,313 $2,075,160 $624,525 $949,720 $1,302,217 $10,805,959
Total Interest $869,000 $567,717 $253,400 $493,667 $81,450 $162,900 $158,375 $2,586,508
Total Cost $23,161,870 $24,453,141 $15,889,567 $22,953,564 $5,973,935 $7,723,308 $12,563,411 $112,718,795

PARKING PROGRAM LESS NEW MUNICIPAL CENTER GARAGE

Garage 1 Garage 2 Garage 3 Garage 6 Garage 7 Garage 10 Garage 11 Total Parking
Spaces 0 748 453 686 144 395 367 2793

Description PRECAST/ CIP/ CIP/ CIP/ PRECAST/ CIP/

PODIUM
Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use

Total Land Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Total Hard Cost $0 $21,792,270 $14,157,854 $20,384,738 $5,267,960 $6,610,688 $11,102,819 $79,316,328
Total Soft Cost $0 $2,093,154 $1,478,313 $2,075,160 $624,525 $949,720 $1,302,217 $8,523,089
Total Interest $0 $567,717 $253,400 $493,667 $81,450 $162,900 $158,375 $1,717,508
Total Cost $0 $24,453,141 $15,889,567 $22,953,564 $5,973,935 $7,723,308 $12,563,411 $89,556,925
108 | University Ridge: Section 8B

ESTIMATED PARKING INCOME

Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt is proposing a parking
network within the University Ridge development based on
shared use in order to maximize parking. While we understand
that several city garages downtown as well as private garages are
paid parking, we believe the nature of this development and it’s
shared usage will limit the opportunity for paid parking.
In order to provide for the comfort and convenience of retail
and restaurant patrons, we need to provide free and convenient
parking for their visit. This would also apply to the County
Administration Complex garage for patrons to their facility.
It has been our experience that retail and restaurant patrons
will avoid visiting an establishment if there is a cost to park.
Similarly, apartment tenants will look at total monthly expense
as they evaluate at which property to sign a lease. Adding a
parking fee to their monthly rent will deter interest and hamper
lease up. Therefore we would expect to enter into a long term
agreement with the County to provide free parking to retail,
restaurant and apartment patrons and staff.
Please remember, the goal of this development is to drive
office use, retail patronage and resident life which will all
drive taxes back to the County and City at a much larger
volume than parking fees.
The two areas where paid parking is reasonable and expected
in Downtown Greenville is office and hotel parking. We are
assuming the County Administration garage will be free to
County employees and are thus excluding it from our discussion
and analysis. However, we do believe that, using the proper
parking controls and hours of operation, the garages in blocks
2, 6, and 8/11 could be set up for monthly office permits at
a cost of $85.00 per month. Additionally, the hotel patrons
could also be charged for valet parking.
Therefore, we estimate the potential parking income to be:
Garage 2 = 748 spaces
Garage 6 = 686 spaces
Garage 8/11 = 762 spaces
Total spaces in garages with office use = 2,196
Office demand = 3 spaces/1,000sq. ft. x 498,000 = 1,494 spaces
Assume 1,500 spaces required for office.
Rent = $85.00 x 1,500 =$127,500 gross per month income
x 12 months = $1,530,000 annual income
Less operating expenses of $30/month per space x 1,500
= $45,000 x 12 months = $540,000 annual expense
Thus, net operating income on parking for office on an initial
"stabalized basis" is $990,000. This estimate is based on the
expected opening rate of $85.00 per month and will undoubt-
edly escalate over time with the rest of the downtown market.
We assumed a rate increase in 2028 to $100 per month per
space for modeling purposes.
Additionally, we believe a 250-room, full-service hotel will
generate parking income of $15 dollars per valet ticket. Annual
income is estimated to be $15/ticket x 20 tickets per day x 365
days a year = $109,500 annually, on an initial "stabalized basis".
 University Ridge: Section 8C | 109

PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ESTIMATE

One of the main differences between a normal “single building”
site and a dense mixed-use development is the fact that most
single building sites are immediately adjacent to a public street
and the associated utilities. Most municipalities require a land
parcel to have “public frontage” in order to be subdivided,
accessed and served by public utilities. In a large site such as
County Square, we will need to subdivide the parcels into “city
blocks” to allow us to phase the development and provide for
bank financing on specific blocks (collateral). This means the
developer will need to design and construct what will become
public streets. We have looked into building private streets, but
zoning, plats, financing and access easements all make such an
endeavor too costly and complicated.
Based on our conceptual master plan as shown in Section 4, we have estimated the public infrastructure cost to be:
For our model, we have assumed the land under the public
Rights of Way within our new street system has no value as
there is no revenue being generated by it and the land and
improvements will ultimately become public property. The
cost of building the infrastructure includes a prorata share
of demolition and abatement plus all grading, and all public
utilities under the streets or sidewalks such as storm water
systems, domestic and fire water systems, and sanitary sewer
systems. Also included in the construction of public streets
will be streetlights, power conduits, communication conduits,
sidewalks, brick pavers, trees and planting beds, and fixtures
such as benches, planters, ash & trash cans and wayfinding
systems.

Public Infrastructure Investment

Phase 1 2 3 4 5 Total
Hard Costs $2,489,570 $4,941,519 $4,171,636 $1,993,453 $1,075,152 $14,671,330
Soft Costs $259,574 $411,647 $352,909 $187,813 $119,095 $1,331,039
Contingency $274,914 $535,317 $452,455 $218,127 $78,076 $1,558,888
Interest $120,000 $156,000 $120,000 $120,000 $75,000 $591,000
Total Infrastructure $3,144,059 $6,044,483 $5,097,000 $2,519,392 $1,347,323 $18,152,257

While we would like to see University Ridge re-defined into a more contemporary street design with landscaped medians and
bike paths and streetscape, we have not included that within our scope. Additionally we have not included the long-term road
improvements referenced in Section 4. We would hope that the City and/or County would work towards achieving our vision
for University Ridge and the surrounding road network.
110 | University Ridge: Section 8E
ESTIMATED PRIVATE REAL ESTATE
TAX ASSESSMENTS
In order to fund the public parking and infrastructure require-
ments of this development, we are proposing the County
create a Multi-County Business Park designation for the
County Square land. Under that facility, the County can use
real estate tax income to cover debt associated with public
improvements. It is therefore important to know what the
estimated tax bills generated for the development will be.
Estimated Tax Revenue
(in 2017 $ and Assessments)
Use 1 2 3 4 5 6
Office $932,847
Retail $11,495 $204,771 $283,089
Movie Theatre $155,472
Cultural Center
Hotel $810,240
Residential $192,513
Total $204,008 $1,137,619 $283,089 $965,712 $0 $1,135,988 $873,673 $652,155
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE &
GARAGE FINANCING
As previously demonstrated in our proposal, the strategy of
public-sector funding and ownership of the infrastructure
and public parking garages allows the private equity to maxi-
mize land use and densify a site to its highest potential. The
benefit to the municipality and the citizens is a new economic
engine added to the County and City tax base which will
accrue millions of dollars annually in new taxes, added jobs,
and an increased quality of life and leisure for County and
City residents.
The County Square property in its current state generates
no real estate taxes to the County or City, as the property is
currently owned by the County and thus tax exempt. Our
proposal for financing all public improvements is to request
the County establish a new “Multi-County Business Park”
(MCBP), which will allow the County to use City and County
real estate taxes paid by the developer on all new private-
ly-owned, on-site real estate for the benefit of the project.
Other states and municipalities refer to this concept as a TIF,
or Tax Increment Financing, which consists in using new real
As stated previously, we intend to deed back to the City or
County all streets, sidewalks, parks and trails and therefore
do not include any real estate tax payments for those lands.
Additionally, we assume no taxes will be paid for the public
garages owned by the County. The estimated taxes generated
by each block are as follows:
7 8 9 10 11 Total
$607,364 $652,155 $2,192,366
$109,325 $82,474 $84,370 $775,524
$155,472
$95,430 $95,430
$810,240
$419,299 $791,199 $644,875 $684,406 $2,732,292
$95,430 $729,244 $684,406 $6,761,324
estate taxes generated by a new development to pay for public
improvements. In both a MCBP and a TIF, the municipality
establishes a baseline tax assessment for the property, which
in this case is zero dollars since the property is currently tax
exempt. As buildings are completed over time, all new real
estate taxes paid by the developer are paid to the County who
then uses those proceeds to pay the debt service on bonds
which the County will issue to fund public improvements.
There are three major benefits to this approach.
First, the Armada Hoffler Properties / CitiSculpt team
is prepared to accept the development risk during
design and construction of all public improvements.
Based on our experience, and the security of having
an affiliated Construction Company (Armada Hoffler
Construction Company), we are prepared to provide a
fixed purchase price for each phase of infrastructure and
for each parking structure prior to the County committing
funds, thus providing the County a transaction free of the
normal development and construction risk.

Second, the County is purchasing assets, not just
giving away dollars to a private developer in hopes
that they will perform. Also, by purchasing the assets
and paying the debt off with new taxes not currently in
the County budget, the transaction is “budget neutral”. In
other words, no funds allocated in the County budget or
current sources of revenue are diverted to this property.
Finally, by using new real estate taxes generated by
this property to purchase parking garages, the County
will eventually own, debt free, parking structures that
have a revenue stream, which will continue to put
dollars back into the County revenue model or can
be used on Economic Development opportunities in
the future. We have worked with several municipalities
that use their revenue generated from parking structures
that are no longer encumbered by debt as a source for
Economic Development Incentives.
We have demonstrated in previous sections of this proposal the
estimated cost of public infrastructure and parking structures.
We have also provided an estimated timeline for development
of the property.
On the following page is a summary of the Total
Development Cost.
Excluding the County Administration Complex and asso-
ciated garage, the total development cost is $511,782,741.
The total public dollars being invested over the life of this
project is estimated to be $107,709,182. The total private
dollars being invested over the same period is $404,073,563.
The ratio of private to public investment is 4 to 1 (excluding
the Administration Complex which is a standalone trans-
action). This is similar to the ratios we have achieved in
Virginia Beach, Durham, and Baltimore, and considered a
solid investment by for the municipality.
Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt have drafted
a rough model to demonstrate the validity of this
approach to funding the public infrastructure and
garages. We are assuming the County will use land sale
proceeds from Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt to
pay down the debt on the new Administration Complex
and garage and therefore have excluded land sales from our
tax and revenue model. Please refer to the model at the end
of this section.
While we are confident in our ability to deliver a first-class,
quality development at University Ridge, we are making
several assumptions which will have been used to create a
public tax and revenue financing model for consideration
by the County.
The following are some of our assumptions:
• Schedule – as previously mentioned, we are assuming
a new phase delivering in approximately two year cycles;
• Cost – we are using cost estimates for both public and
private facilities based on cost histories and assumed
densities as shown in our master plan;
University Ridge: Section 8E | 111
• Inflation – we have not applied an inflation factor
to construction or income projections as we are
assuming rents will keep pace with cost increases. We
have allowed for a 10% contingency on costs to absorb
inflation of public component costs not offset by rent;
• Tax Rates – we have used currently published real
estate tax rates and assessment factors as shown on
the County website. We are using the 6% assessment
factor;
• Reassessments – we have assumed an average of one
percent (1%) annual assessment increases over the life of
the model;
• Parking Rate Increases – we have allowed for
parking net revenue (per Section 8D) and adjusted for
a one-time rate increase at year 2028 over the life of
the model;
• Bond Rate and Term – we have assumed the County
will secure bonds using a 20-year amortization and a
four and one half percent (4.5%) interest rate.
It should be noted that we have simplified the model to
show net income and debt service over a twenty-year
period. However, in reality, as each phase is delivered the
County will issue new 20-year bonds for that phase and thus
the total model is really a +/-35-year model. The key take-
away to be derived from our simplified model is that, while
some years show a net deficit in income, overall the model
does support and does provide more than enough revenue
to support the debt proposed.
We understand that every phase will need to be evaluated in
detail prior to County authorization of debt, and we stand
ready to work with Greenville County, just as we have with
other municipalities to provide that each phase of develop-
ment will be economically acceptable to all parties.
We also understand that the County may wish to incor-
porate land sale proceeds into the MCBP model and/or
sell-leaseback the land or other creative financing solutions.
We are ready to investigate any such alternatives the County
may deem beneficial and believe we are best qualified to
find the right model for all involved.
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT VALUE
University Ridge- Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Total
Project Summary Block 1 Blocks- 2,3 Block-9,10 Block- 4,5,6,7 Block- 8,11
Land
Office 0 5,275,000 0 3,462,500 3,725,000 12,462,500
Retail 112,500 5,296,500 1,432,000 2,822,750 0 9,663,750
Residential 1,320,000 0 4,280,000 4,915,000 4,500,000 15,015,000
Garage 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hotel 5,000,000 5,000,000
TOTAL LAND 1,432,500 10,571,500 5,712,000 16,200,250 8,225,000 42,141,250
Public Investment
Infrastructure (Acres) 5.29 7.89 9.09 4.09 2.31 28.67
Hard Costs 2,489,570 4,941,519 4,171,636 1,993,453 1,075,152 14,671,330
Soft Costs 259,574 411,647 352,909 187,813 119,095 1,331,039
Contingency 274,914 535,317 452,455 218,127 78,076 1,558,888
Interest 120,000 156,000 120,000 120,000 75,000 591,000
Total Infrastructure 3,144,059 6,044,483 5,097,000 2,519,392 1,347,323 18,152,257
Parking Garage (Spaces) 1201 395 830 367 2,793
Land 0 0 0 0 0
Hard Costs 34,229,799 6,289,438 24,424,048 10,568,194 75,511,478
Soft Costs 3,271,467 699,720 2,459,685 1,052,217 7,483,089
Contingency 2,020,325 571,250 1,468,650 784,625 4,844,850
Interest 821,117 162,900 575,117 158,375 1,717,508
Total Parking Garage 40,342,707 7,723,308 28,927,499 12,563,411 89,556,925
Total Public Investment 3,144,059 46,387,190 12,820,308 31,446,891 13,910,733 107,709,182
Private Investment
Residential (APTS) 66 214 332 225 837
Land 1,320,000 4280000 4,915,000 4500000 15,015,000
Hard Costs 8,184,000 27556226 54,845,000 29287813 119,873,039
Soft Costs 423,253 1274950 2,302,136 1361589 5,361,928
Contingency 901,225 2989667.6 5938713.6 3211740.2 13,041,347
Interest 405,000 1065500 2,240,000 1468000 5,178,500
Total Residential 11,233,479 37,166,344 70,240,850 39,829,142 158,469,814
Office (SF) 211,000 138,500 149,000 498,500
Land 5,275,000 3,462,500 3,725,000 12,462,500
Hard Costs 39,862,020 25,519,359 27,282,365 92,663,745
Soft Costs 9,504,393 6,174,850 6,957,470 22,636,714
Contingency 1,950,143 1,243,024 1,406,135 4,599,303
Interest 1,894,104 1,220,112 1,347,738 4,461,955
Total Office 58,485,661 37,619,846 40,718,709 136,824,216
Hotel 250
Land 5,000,000 5,000,000
Hard Costs 32,000,000
Soft Costs 4,300,000
Contingency 3,500,000
Interest 1,800,000
Total Office 46,600,000
Retail (SF) 2,500 117,700 46,600 87,450 254,250
Land 112,500 5,296,500 1,432,000 2,822,750 9,663,750
Hard Costs 455,000 17,374,016 7,201,356 13,735,621 38,765,993
Soft Costs 105,000 4,592,300 1,981,548 3,449,176 10,128,024
Contingency 22,065 916,258 107,520 696,034 1,741,877
Interest 21,250 878,998 332,573 647,068 1,879,889
Total Retail 715,815 29,058,072 11,054,997 21,350,649 62,179,533
Total Private Investment 11,949,294 87,543,733 48,221,340 175,811,345 80,547,851 404,073,563
Total Land Only 1,432,500 10,571,500 5,712,000 16,200,250 8,225,000 42,141,250
Without Municipal Building
and Garage
Total Public Investment/
3,144,059 46,387,190 12,820,308 31,446,891 13,910,733 107,709,182
Inc Land
Total Private Investment/
11,949,294 87,543,733 48,221,340 175,811,345 80,547,851 404,073,563
Inc Land
Total Development Cost 15,093,353 133,930,923 61,041,648 207,258,236 94,458,585 511,782,745
 INFRASTRUCTURE &
PARKING GARAGE
FINANCING MODEL

Total Tax Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5

Generated
Office/ Residential Hotel 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039
Retail
Block 1
(Municipal 11,495 192,513 204,008 204,008 206,048 208,109 210,190 212,292 214,415 216,559 218,725 220,912 223,121 225,352 227,606 229,882 232,180 234,502 236,847 239,216 241,608 244,024 246,464
Center)
Block 2 1,137,619 1,137,619 1,137,619 1,148,995 1,160,485 1,172,090 1,183,811 1,195,649 1,207,605 1,219,681 1,231,878 1,244,197 1,256,639 1,269,205 1,281,897 1,294,716 1,307,664 1,320,740 1,333,948 1,347,287
Block 3 283,089 283,089 283,089 285,919 288,779 291,666 294,583 297,529 300,504 303,509 306,544 309,610 312,706 315,833 318,991 322,181 325,403 328,657 331,944 335,263
Block 4 155,472 810,240 965,712 965,712 975,369 985,123 994,974 1,004,924 1,014,973 1,025,123 1,035,374 1,045,728 1,056,185 1,066,747 1,077,414 1,088,188 1,099,070 1,110,061 1,121,162 1,132,373
Block 5
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
( Park )
Block 6 & 7 799,163 1,210,499 2,009,661 2,009,661 2,029,758 2,050,056 2,070,556 2,091,262 2,112,174 2,133,296 2,154,629 2,176,175 2,197,937 2,219,916 2,242,116 2,264,537 2,287,182 2,310,054 2,333,154 2,356,486
Block 8 652,155 652,155 652,155 658,676 652,155 658,676 665,263 671,916 678,635 685,421 692,276 699,198 706,190 713,252
Block 9 95,430 95,430 95,430 96,384 97,348 98,321 99,304 100,297 101,300 102,313 103,337 104,370 105,414 106,468 107,532 108,608 109,694
Block 10 84,370 644,875 729,244 729,244 736,537 743,902 751,341 758,855 766,443 774,108 781,849 789,667 797,564 805,540 813,595 821,731 829,948 838,248
Block 11 684,406 684,406 684,406 691,250 684,406 691,250 698,162 705,144 712,196 719,318 726,511 733,776 741,114 748,525
3,218,792 2,732,292 810,240 6,761,324

Tax Revenue $204,008 $206,048 $1,628,816 $4,620,478 $4,666,683 $5,538,023 $5,593,404 $5,649,338 $7,042,392 $7,112,816 $7,157,079 $7,228,650 $7,300,936 $7,373,946 $7,447,685 $7,522,162 $7,597,384 $7,673,358 $7,750,091 $7,827,592
Parking Income $402,000 $402,000 $402,000 $402,000 $804,000 $804,000 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500 $1,237,500
Hotel Income $109,500 $109,500 $109,500 $109,500 $109,500 $109,500 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690 $111,690
Total Revenue $204,008 $206,048 $2,030,816 $5,131,978 $5,178,183 $6,049,523 $6,506,904 $6,562,838 $8,389,392 $8,462,006 $8,506,269 $8,577,840 $8,650,126 $8,723,136 $8,796,875 $8,871,352 $8,946,574 $9,022,548 $9,099,281 $9,176,782
TIF Loan
$3,144,059 $3,144,059 $49,531,249 $62,351,557 $62,351,557 $93,798,448 $93,798,448 $93,798,448 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182 $107,709,182
Balance
Debt Service
$238,690 $238,690 $3,760,310 $4,733,601 $4,733,601 $7,120,984 $7,120,984 $7,120,984 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058 $8,177,058
Payment

($34,682.14) ($32,642.06) ($1,729,493.35) $398,376.93 $444,581.71 ($1,071,460.11) ($614,079.88) ($558,145.84) $212,334.36 $284,948.28 $329,211.57 $400,782.36 $473,068.86 $546,078.22 $619,817.68 $694,294.53 $769,516.15 $845,489.99 $922,223.57 $999,724.48
Cumulative ($34,682.14) ($67,324.19) ($1,796,817.55) ($1,398,440.62) ($953,858.91) ($2,025,319.02) ($2,639,398.90) ($3,197,544.74) ($2,985,210.37) ($2,700,262.09) ($2,371,050.53) ($1,970,268.17) ($1,497,199.31) ($951,121.09) ($331,303.41) $362,991.12 $1,132,507.27 $1,977,997.26 $2,900,220.83 $3,899,945.31
114 | University Ridge: Section #
 University Ridge: Section 9 | 115

SECTION 9:
LAND VALUATION
& OFFER TO PURCHASE
116 | University Ridge: Section 9
LAND VALUATION & OFFER TO PURCHASE
Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt are developing
projects throughout the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast.
Land values can vary widely from city to city and even
within a city based on zoning, proposed density, topog-
raphy, existing conditions, access to utilities and infra-
structure and other variables. While the County Square
property sits in a prime location well suited for re-devel-
opment, it does present challenges which will affect the
final land value.
Most land transactions are looked at in two ways: sales
price per acre or sales price per square foot of FAR
or allowable building area. As the County Square site
is not currently zoned for the high density mixed-use
development desired by the County, the developer must
spend time, dollars and assume the risk of achieving the
density through zoning and a public process that could
materially affect the final development density and uses.
Additionally, due to the size of the parcel, the need for
new public infrastructure such as roads, water, sewer, etc.
to create a street grid within the development – that one
would normally get when buying an existing parcel within
downtown – will affect value, as well as the cost of the
underlying land associated with a new road system.
First, one could look at city and county records and/or
order an appraisal of the existing property to gauge a fair
and equitable sales price for the property. This may yield
an artificially low land value based on final development
density. The current Fair Market Value per public
records is $16,230,380.
Second, an assumed value based on a comparable sales
on a cost per square foot of land could be used to estab-
lish a “market price” or offer. Based on our research,
recent sales of parcels within the downtown core are
yielding between $30.00 and $40.00 per square foot of
land. These numbers will further be tempered by costs
for any infrastructure, structured parking or demolition
and/or abatement that may be required to develop the
site. Based on the current gross acreage of +/-30
acres, using comparable sales, the land value may be
in the range of $39,204,000 to $52,272,000.
Finally, a developer can look at the proposed FAR, or
density of development that is contemplated to be put on
a parcel, and use returns on investment as a controlling
factor in the pricing of the land. As a REIT and developer,
our shareholders require a return on their investment, and
that return is driven by multiple factors. Those factors
include the amount of income a property will generate,
the expenses we will pay to own and operate a property,
and the cost to build the project, including the cost of the
underlying land. The market will dictate what a tenant will
pay in rent (income) where there is a risk at being “top
of the market”, the costs of operating a property are well
known and somewhat fixed (taxes, power, janitorial, etc.),
and the cost to build the project will be dictated by design
and market pricing from local trades and suppliers. If
the project does not hit the developer’s threshold return
rate, the developer has the choice to abandon the project,
redesign the project with the inherent risk that a design
change may affect the project's leasability, or find another
area to cut costs. Unfortunately, the only other area to
cut costs is in the amount a project can pay for land. This
is, in our opinion, the fairest and most accurate way to
value the land.
Using our conceptual site plan, we have established the
various uses and densities for each block on the proposed
site plan as seen in the chart below.
Using threshold Returns on Total Development Cost
(ROC) we have established what each product type of
development (office, multifamily, retail, etc.) can bear in
land purchase price in order to hit our required ROC.
The returns we are using to establish land values are
comparable to other projects we have completed and are
in the range of what other developers would expect as a
return on cost. The threshold returns by product type
are as follows:
Office 8.5% ROC
Retail 8.75 %ROC
Entertainment 8.75 % ROC
Multifamily 8.0% ROC
Based on the above returns as we evaluate each block
of development, we have established the following land
valuation multipliers:
LAND-BASED VALUATION FACTORS (2017 $)
Entity Rate
$20,000/unit (lowrise)
Apartments
$5,000/unit (highrise)
Office $25.00/GSF of bldg
Retail/Cultural Center $45.00/GSF
Cultural Center $20.00/GSF
Entertainment $20.00/GSF
Hotel $20,000/key
Parking $3,000/car
Public Streets/Open Space $0/row
 University Ridge: Section 9 | 117

As mentioned earlier, there are other factors that can while this is real value to the County, the net land value for
reduce value of land such as existing structures that the private development components is:
need to be demolished, environmental contamination,
unusable or unbuildable land. In the case of County Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt will purchase the
Square, we have allocated land for public streets, trails, land for private use at a 2017 value of $40,141,250. Note:
and parks (unbuildable land). Additionally, we will have the value is based upon a building density we believe will
to demolish the existing County Municipal Complex,
as well as deal with what we expect will be hazardous NET LAND-BASED VALUATION TABLE (2017 $)
materials within the existing structure. Also, the auto
Entity Units Rate Total
service center site in the front corner of the site will
certainly have contaminated soils to deal with. Based on 722 $20,000/unit $14,440,000
all these factors we are using density (FAR) rather than (lowrise)
Apartments
acreage to establish price but have offset the land value 115 $5,000/unit $575,000
$2.0 million dollars as an allowance for demolition and (highrise)
hazardous materials removal. We have not reduced the Office 718,500 $25.00/GSF $17,962,500
land value for any soils conditions which may affect the of bldg
cost of construction such as soft materials, buried debris, Retail/Cultural
Center 183,150 $45.00/GSF $8,241,750
rock, etc. Once we perform Geotechnical Studies, any
new factors will be discussed with the County. Thus, our Cultural Center 26,600 $20.00/GSF $532,000
current land value is :
Entertainment 44,500 $20.00/GSF $890,000
LAND-BASED VALUATION TABLE (2017 $) Hotel 250 $20,000/key $5,000,000
Entity Units Rate Total Parking 3,993 $3,000/car $11,979,000
$20,000/unit Public Streets/
722 $14,440,000 Open Space $0/row $0
(lowrise)
Apartments
$5,000/unit $59,620,250
115 $575,000
(highrise)
County &
Office 718,500
$25.00/GSF
$17,962,500 Garage Land ($17,479,000)
of bldg
Demo and ($2,000,000)
Retail/Cultural Abatement
183,150 $45.00/GSF $8,241,750
Center Public Streets/
Open Space $0
Cultural Center 26,600 $20.00/GSF $532,000
Land in $40,141,250
Entertainment 44,500 $20.00/GSF $890,000 2017 Dollars

Hotel 250 $20,000/key $5,000,000 be accepted at a rezoning and absorbed into the market. A
Parking 3,993 $3,000/car $11,979,000 higher density could provide for increased proceeds.
Public Streets/ We would expect the County to “land bank” the property,
$0/row $0 and participate in a rezoning to allow for the planned
Open Space
development. Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt
$59,620,250 would purchase each block as the development plan
Less Demo and schedule progress, with streets, greenspace and
($2,000,000) trails being dedicated back to the City of Greenville for
and Abate
ownership and maintenance.
Gross Value: $57,620,250
Since the County is "land banking" the property, Armada
Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt will pay an adjusted land
This includes the land associated with the new County price for each block based on the initial 2017 valuation
Administrative Complex and associated Shared Use Garages. for each block multiplied by a Concumer Price Index
It does not make sense for Armada Hoffler Properties/ adjustment, not to exceed three percent (3%) per year.
CitiSculpt to purchase land for the County Complex and The maximum adjusted sale price for the land is
public garages just to sell it back to the County. Therefore, $48,839,840.
118
 University Ridge: Section 10 | 119

SECTION 10:
COUNTY
ADMINISTRATIVE
COMPLEX
PROPOSAL
a. County Administrative Complex Proposed Transaction
b.County Administrative Complex Design Narrative
1. Project Background
2. Proposed Master Plan and Building Siting
3. Building Design Features
4. Interaction With Constituents
5. Phasing and Site Logistics
c. County Administrative Complex Proposed Schedule
120 | University Ridge: Section 10A

COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX

PROPOSED TRANSACTION
As described in our design narrative, we have suggested
that the new County Administrative Complex should
be retained on the University Ridge site and be located
prominently at the “front door” to the development with
a location that is on the corner of University Ridge and
the main entrance to the development. Additionally, the
County Administrative Complex should front on The
Commons green space that will be used for both develop-
ment and community events. The County Administrative
Complex will be adjacent to a 1,200-car garage, which will be
a multi-use garage providing parking for office and patrons
during the day as well as night time uses such as hotel and
entertainment venue parking.
As a fully-integrated real estate company, the Armada
Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt team is fully prepared
to design, build and if necessary, finance the new
County Administrative Complex and Parking Garage.
We believe based on our recent experience and following the
programming provided by McMillan Pazdan Smith, that we
can deliver a new turn-key Administrative Complex. in the
most cost efficient manner possible. Additionally, we esti-
mate that we can deliver such a building within 34 months of
being given a notice to proceed with design.
We can provide construction financing if necessary for
the County Administrative Complex, but suspect that the
County’s cost of funds are lower than ours.
We would be happy to entertain a lease arrangement with
the County should they not desire to own their building
and garage. Additionally we would be willing to consider a
purchase/lease back on the underlying land, or a long-term
building lease with the County. However, we are not prepared
to provide lease rates at this time.
In summary, we have the expertise, experience and creativity
to work with the County to develop and construct a new
Administrative Complex on the University Ridge site.
 University Ridge: Section 10B | 121

COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX

DESIGN NARRATIVE
PROJECT BACKGROUND Phase II focused on creating tools for the County’s
Management Team to communicate the project’s true
In the summer of 2016, Greenville County engaged the context, the entire site’s potential capacity and the potential
planning team of McMillan Pazdan Smith and Chinn for connectivity to surrounding development. Based on
Planning to conduct a comprehensive Space Needs the Phase I collocation recommendations, the proposed
Assessment study. The County’s six-person internal Project building program for the Phase II study included the
Advisory Committee charged the team with determining following groups:
personnel projections, associated physical space needs
including on- and off-site records retention and storage, and • County Administration
parking requirements for the following: • Auditor
• 19 County Divisions • Community Development and Planning
• Seven Third-Party Tenant Agencies • Financial Operations
• Portions of the County Sherriff ’s Office • Geographic Information Systems
• Family Court • Human Relations
• Probate Court • Human Resources
• Health Department • Information Systems
• Department of Social Services and Department of • Procurement Services
Health and Human Services • Register of Deeds
• Probation, Pardon and Parole • Treasurer
The team conducted walk-throughs of each group’s space • Tax Services
and held detailed programming interviews with their key • Voter Registration and Elections
stakeholders. In all, the team conducted nearly 50 in-person
interviews and covered in excess of 375,000 square feet • Veterans Affairs
of space. The planning team used a blend of five different • Soil and Water
forecasting methodologies and input from the Advisory
Committee to project staffing needs for each group • Emergency Operations Center
through 2035. In association with those projections, the • E911
team also established uniform space and office standards • Third Party Tenant Agencies:
across the organization. Final personnel forecasts, space
needs and parking requirements for the entire scope of the ◦ AARP
study can be found in the Phase I project deliverable dated ◦ Alzheimer’s Association
September 2016. The planning team also made collocation ◦ Clemson Extension
recommendations for the departments studied in support of
a potential redevelopment of the County Square property. ◦ USDA
In addition to the quantitative recommendations on space ◦ Greenville County Redevelopment Authority
needs, personnel projections and parking requirements, the ◦ Credit Union
County engaged the planning team for a second phase of work.
◦ Worker’s Compensation Hearing Room
◦ Probate Court
 122 | University Ridge: Section 10B

The planning team created preliminary blocking and stacking PROPOSED MASTER PLAN AND
diagrams for the proposed building to provide the County
with information regarding possible building location(s) as
BUILDING SITING
well as to identify any site constraints. The final diagram In the master planning process, the development team used
includes: an iterative design process to determine the optimal location
for all proposed uses. In every version of the plan, the
• Six-story building with a minimum of 212,000 square feet location of the County Administrative Complex was a driving
of space; factor. The design team’s initial concept placed the complex
• Structured parking (parking deck) for approximately 1,200 at the corner ofCOMPENSATION,
University and Church Street. As the design
parking spaces; evolved, however, the team considered several alternate
RISK, INSURANCE,
EMPLOYEE
• MinimalCOMMUNITY
surface
LAND parking
PLANNING,
DEVELOPMENT & and loading space to maximize locations. While SERVICES
the University COUNTY and Church intersection
ATTORNEY
amount of developable land.
CODE ENFORCEMENT provides obvious visibility, that location made vehicular
COMPENSATION,
RISK, INSURANCE,
ingress and egress challenging. Because ease of accessWORKERS
FINANCIAL
OPERATIONS and ROOM
HEARING
COMP.

This blocking and stacking diagram and associated

EMPLOYEE space visibility of the building and its associated parking
PROCUREMENT
SERVICES
CLEMSON
EXTEN.
are such
SERVICES
ATTORNEYdriving factors in the County’s criteria, the team determined
COUNTY
and parking needs, formed the basis of the County’s COMPENSATION,
COUNTY AARP
W
H
requirements for their new facility inFINANCIAL
this Request forEMPLOYEE that both the building and parking structure should CLEMSON
RISK, INSURANCE,
ADMINISTRATOR be
USDA
EXTEN.
Proposals.
MUNITY PLANNING,
D DEVELOPMENT & ADMIN.
SOIL &
WATER
OPERATIONS
PROCUREMENT locatedATTORNEY
SERVICES
along University
COUNTY HUMAN where the majority of constituent
RELATIONS AARP
DE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
FINANCIAL
vehicular traffic will arrive. The proposed building location
GREENVILLE
OPERATIONSCOUNTY on the site is also reflective of the heritage
PROCUREMENT
ADMINISTRATOR
COUNTY
of theALZHEIMER'S
REDEVELOPMENT
former
ASSOC.
& HUMAN
Furman
SERVICES Campus and the Falls Mills. As Furman’s
AUTHORITY Old
GREENVILLE
ER RELATIONS Main andCOUNTY
Bell Tower were positioned for prominence and ALZHEI
CREDITCOUNTY
REDEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATOR UNION ASSO
SOIL &
3RD LEVEL: 4TH LEVEL: AUTHORITY
HUMAN
ADMIN. WATER 27,117 SF RELATIONS 24,840 CREDIT
LOWERUNION
LEVEL DE
COMPENSATION,
RISK, INSURANCE, 8.0 -
4TH LEVEL: EMPLOYEE 5TH LEVEL: WORKERSTOT
CO
COMMUNITY PLANNING, SERVICES COUNTY
LAND DEVELOPMENT & 24,840
COMPENSATION,
RISK, INSURANCE, ATTORNEY 24,036 HEARING ROO
DEP
AARP
CODE ENFORCEMENT CLEMSON REQ
EMPLOYEE
RD LEVEL:
NING, SERVICES 4TH LEVEL:
COUNTY FINANCIAL
EXTEN.
5TH LEVEL:
16.0
ENT & ATTORNEY
,117 SF
MENT 24,840 OPERATIONS
PROCUREMENT AARP 24,036
USDA
TOT
SERVICES DEP
FINANCIAL WORKERS COMP. REQ
COMPENSATION, OPERATIONS HEARING ROOM
RISK, INSURANCE, PROCUREMENT COUNTY 13.0
SERVICES CLEMSON
ADMINISTRATOR RE
EMPLOYEE TOT
EXTEN. GREENVILLE
SOIL & SERVICES COUNTY DEP
ATTORNEY HUMAN COUNTY ALZHEIMER'S
ADMIN. WATER COUNTY AARP
RELATIONS REQ
ADMINISTRATOR REDEVELOPMENT ASSOC.
USDA
AUTHORITY II. 3.
SOIL & FINANCIAL
HUMAN
WATER OPERATIONS TOT
PROCUREMENT RELATIONS CREDIT
DEP
SERVICES UNION
REQ
GREENVILLE
COUNTY COUNTY ALZHEIMER'S 1ST LEVEL DEPA
ADMINISTRATOR REDEVELOPMENT ASSOC.
2.0 -
3RD LEVEL: HUMAN
4TH LEVEL:AUTHORITY
TOT
27,117 SF RELATIONS 24,840
REAL PROPERTY CREDIT DEP
SERVICES UNION
L: 4TH LEVEL: AUDITOR 5TH LEVEL: REQ
INFORMATION 24,840 TREASURER
24,036 14.0
SYSTEMS TOT
GIS DEP
REAL PROPERTY ONE STOP REQ
EMERGENCY SHOP
OPERATIONSSERVICES VETERANS 12.0
4TH LEVEL:
CENTER AUDITOR 5TH LEVEL:
AFFAIRS FITNESS
CENTER TOT
MATION TAX
TEMS PROBATE COURT / 24,840 REAL PROPERTYTREASURER COLLECTOR 24,036 DEP
RECORDS / REQ
GIS SERVICES REGISTER
ADMIN / AUDITOR HEALTH
MARRIAGE LIC. ONE STOP CLINIC
LEGIS. OF DEEDS
INFORMATION
EMERGENCY 24.0
ANNEX SHOP VETERANS TREASURER 1ST LEVEL DELEG.
SYSTEMS
OPERATIONS TOT
VOTER AFFAIRS FITNESS SUPPORT SPACES
CENTER GIS DEP
REGISTE
REGISTRATION & TAX CENTER
ELECTIONS COLLECTOR ONE STOP OF REQ
DEED
LEGIS.
EMERGENCY SHOP VETERANS DELEG. 5.0 -
OPERATIONS HEALTH
AFFAIRS FITNESS
CENTER CLINIC TOT
TAX CENTER
OURT / 1ST LEVEL
COLLECTOR COUNTY COUNCIL & DEP
S / VOTER SUPPORT SPACES CLERK TO COUNCIL REQ
GISTRATION & HEALTH
ELECTIONS
LIC. CLINIC 11.0
1ST LEVEL TOT
LOWER LEVEL:
VOTER SUPPORT SPACES 1ST LEVEL: COUNTY COUNCIL &
CLERK TO COUNCIL DEP
56,118 SF
REGISTRATION &
ELECTIONS
56,001 SF REQ
REAL PROPERTY 2ND LEVEL DEPA
SERVICES
AUDITOR 1.0 -
INFORMATION REAL PROPERTY
SYSTEMS 1STSERVICES
LEVEL: TREASURER
2ND LEVEL: TOT

INFORMATION
SYSTEMS
PROGRAMMING DIAGRAM EMERGENCY
56,001 SF GIS
AUDITOR

TREASURER
ONE STOP
SHOP
23,843 SF NEW BUIL DEP
REQ
L
10.0D
WER LEVEL: OPERATIONS GIS 1ST LEVEL: VETERANS
AFFAIRS FITNESS 2ND
TOTAL LEVEL:
GROSS
REGISTER SF TOT
CENTER
18 SF EMERGENCY
PROBATE COURT / REAL PROPERTY
56,001 SF
ONE STOP TAX CENTER
LEGIS. 23,843
TOTAL
OF DEEDS SF
PERSONNE DEP
SHOP COLLECTOR REQ

NEW BUILDING TOTALS:

VETERANS DELEG.
RECORDS / OPERATIONS SERVICES
AFFAIRS FITNESS TOTAL PARKING SP
ADMIN / CENTER AUDITOR HEALTH 3RD LEVEL DEPA
TAX CENTER
MARRIAGE LIC. CLINIC
COLLECTOR
TREASURER
ANNEX 1ST LEVEL
VOTER
GIS HEALTH
TOTAL GROSS
SUPPORT SFREGISTER
SPACES - 211,955 SF CO-
3.0
CL
REGISTRATION & TOT
 University Ridge: Section 10B | 123

visibility signifying its importance in the community, the neighborhoods, roads and the Swamp Rabbit Trail. With
County’s new home will establish a prominence for the next the redevelopment of County Square, County staff will also
chapter in the City’s evolution. have access to a wide range of amenities including:
Upon arrival to the site, the County Administrative Complex • Shopping, dining and other entertainment;
will be immediately visible. The primary parking entrance • Passive green space (The Commons);
willLEVEL
LOWER be adjacent
DEPARTMENTS to the building for simple ingress to the site.
Once in the 1,200-space parking structure, constituents will • Multiple connection points to the Swamp Rabbit Trail,
8.0 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS (IS)
be directed to a major vertical
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: 13,672 circulation
X 1.2 = 16,407tower
SF that leads bike lanes and Falls Park;
them down to the
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL:
street
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: on The Commons and
60 PERSONNEL
68 SPACES into the • Views of the City and Blue Ridge Mountains.
main entrance to the building.
16.0 - EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC)
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (9,893 X 1.2) = 11,872 SF
In addition
DEPARTMENTto visibility and ease 6 PERSONNEL of access from
PERSONNEL:

constituents coming from different parts

REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:
of the County,
6 SPACES BUILDING DESIGN FEATURES
13.0 - VOTER REGISTRATION
it is also important that the County’s new facility have
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (10,949 X 1.2) = 13,139 SF
The new County Administrative Complex is proposed to
civic importance,
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: presence and enhance
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:
the pedestrian
13 PERSONNEL
63 SPACES
be a seven-story, 212,000 square feet facility with six of
experience that COURT
II. 3.0 - PROBATE is uniquely Greenville. Our siting of the seven stories above grade. The first and second floors
the building
TOTAL GROSS makes
SQUARE it prominent
FOOTAGE: on= the
(12,250 X 1.2) 14,700new
SF park, The occupy a larger footprint than the upper floors and house
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 36 PERSONNEL
Commons REQUIRED and maximizes
PARKING SPACES: visibility from the northwest as
76 SPACES the majority of public spaces. The design features a single
cars
1ST LEVELand pedestrians leave Main Street and Augusta Road
DEPARTMENTS point of public entry for the greatest possible security
to explore this part of the City.
2.0 - AUDITOR and control of the facility. Visitors would be greeted by a
The new
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (5,644 X 1.2) = 6,773 SF
facility is an integral component
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL:
of a unique infill
24 PERSONNEL concierge located in a broad entry hall. The adjacent One
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:
project14.0adjacent
49 SPACES
to Greenville’s Central Business District. Stop Shop is conveniently located to allow most visitors to
- VETERANS AFFAIRS
The proposed
TOTAL GROSS master plan provides
SQUARE FOOTAGE: (1,753 X 1.2)connections
= 2,104 SF to adjacent conduct their business on the ground floor. Support spaces
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL:
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:
7 PERSONNEL
12 SPACES
for key departments are located beyond the One Stop Shop’s
12.0 - TAX SERVICES
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (14,559 X 1.2) = 17,471 SF
UN
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL:
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:
63 PERSONNEL
135 SPACES
ST I
R E VE R
24.0 - PUBLIC LOBBY / BUILDING SUPPORT / SECURITY
ET SQUARE
TOTAL GROSS SIT FOOTAGE: (12,313 X 1.2) = 14,776 SF
Y
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 0 PERSONNEL
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 0 SPACES
5.0 - GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS)
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: 2,229 X 1.2 = 2,675 SF
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 9 PERSONNEL
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 13 SPACES
11.0 - TREASURER
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (2,843 X 1.2) = 3,412 SF
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 8 PERSONNEL
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 18 SPACES
2ND LEVEL DEPARTMENTS

1.0 - ADMINISTRATION (EX. COUNTY ATTORNEY & COUNTY ADMIN.)

TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (19,687 X 1.2) = 14,021 SF
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 29 PERSONNEL
EE T

REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 157 SPACES

STR

10.0 - REGISTER OF DEEDS

WE

TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (8,185 X 1.2) = 9,822 SF

HO

DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 23 PERSONNEL

REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 53 SPACES

3RD LEVEL DEPARTMENTS

3.0 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING

TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (20,679 X 1.2) = 24,815 SF
EE T

BRADSHDEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 104 PERSONNEL

AW
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 182 SPACES
COUNTY COUNTY
STR

STREE T 15.0 - SOIL & WATER

PARKING
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE:
1,918 X 1.2
OFFICES
= 2,302 SF
CH

DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 7 PERSONNEL

REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 10 SPACES
HUR

4TH LEVEL DEPARTMENTS

S. C

1.0 - ADMINISTRATION (EX. COUNTY ATTORNEY & COUNTY ADMIN.)

TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: (19,687 X 1.2) = 9,604 SF
T
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 29 PERSONNEL
RE E
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:
T
157 SPACES
UNIVERSITY RID
R IS S6.0 - HUMAN RELATIONS GE
PRESIDENT

H AR TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE:

DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL:
3,234 X 1.2 = 3,881 SF
18 PERSONNEL
23 SPACES
STREET

REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:

SITE PLAN7.0 - HUMAN RESOURCES

TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE:
6,531 X 1.2 = 7,838 SF
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 16 PERSONNEL
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 28 SPACES
4.0 - FINANCIAL OPERATIONS
TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: 3,484 X 1.2 = 4,181 SF
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL: 16 PERSONNEL
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 21 SPACES

9.0 - PROCUREMENT SERVICES

124 | University Ridge: Section 10B
counters to minimize additional staffing needs. Visitors and
staff alike can enjoy the café and adjacent courtyard space.
A Fitness Center and other staff spaces are conveniently
located nearby.
In the main lobby, a monumental stair and nearby elevator
bank provide easy access to the second floor. A formal
Council Chambers is prominently located on this upper floor
as are several conference rooms available for both staff and
community use. Also located on this floor are the Probate
Courtrooms. Both Council Chambers and the Courtrooms
will have a dignified level of finish reflecting their civic
stature. A pre-function space near the monumental stair
provides adequate waiting and event space.
The lowest level of the building is reserved for the most
secure of the County’s spaces. The new Emergency
Operations Center, Main Server Room and Elections and
Voter Registration spaces will have access to a loading
dock through a tunnel connecting to the adjacent parking
deck. This subterranean space will also provide service to
the entire building with a freight elevator that allows easy
transport of materials throughout the building.
The upper floors are designed as efficient, light-filled floor
plates with an efficient central core. These upper floors are
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS
FLEET VEHICLE/ CENTER
ADMINISTRATION
PARKING
LOADING
DOCK/
STAGING
VOTER REGISTRATION AND
ELECTIONS STORAGE
DEPARTMENT PLAN:
LEVEL L
accessed by an elevator bank and would have less public use.
Locating the building’s core on the interior of the footprint
allows all employees to have access to natural light and views
to the exterior. Glass front offices located adjacent to the
core provide maximum access to daylight, even in private
offices.
Architecturally, the building design reflects durable materials
that are contemporary in nature but have clear references
to the heritage and civic stature of the facility and the
site. A masonry base blends with contemporary glass and
metal, while a tall, broad-columned entry invites and offers
orientation to visitors. A cost-effective, high-performance
glass and masonry skin would offer mechanical efficiency.
Although our team has intimate knowledge of the
building’s space program and facility needs, we have
not yet worked with the County on the desired aesthetics
for the building. The design concepts included in our
proposal are suggestions of possible design concepts
to offer ideas and a starting point for a detailed design
process that would involve a great deal of input from key
stakeholders. Regardless of the design aesthetic, our
team understands that this building should be dignified,
use quality materials and have civic prominence while
demonstrating a prudent trust in County tax payer assets.
MAIN ELEC/
MECH ROOM
 University Ridge: Section 10B | 125

VESTIBULE/SECURITY

PUBLIC LOBBY
ONE STOP SERVICES ONE STOP SERVICES

TREASURER AUDITOR

PATIO CAFE

GIS TAX SERVICES VETERANS

AFFAIRS

DEPARTMENT PLAN:
LEVEL 1

COUNTY PROBATE
COUNCIL COURT/
AND CLERK RECORDS
TO COUNCIL
CONF/MEETING/
TRAINING

LARGE CONF/
MEETING/
TRAINING

DEPARTMENT PLAN:
LEVEL 2
126 | University Ridge: Section 10B

INFORMATION SYSTEMS REGISTER OF DEEDS

DEPARTMENT PLAN:
LEVEL 3

COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

SOIL AND
WATER

DEPARTMENT PLAN:
LEVEL 4
 University Ridge: Section 10B | 127

FITNESS HEALTH
CENTER CLINIC

3RD PARTY SERVICES

DEPARTMENT PLAN:
LEVEL 5

HUMAN COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR/ATTORNEY

RESOURCES

HUMAN
RELATIONS PROCUREMENT FINANCIAL
SERVICES OPERATIONS

DEPARTMENT PLAN:
LEVEL 6
128 | University Ridge: Section 10B

VIEW FROM UNIVERSITY RIDGE

 University Ridge: Section 10B | 129

VIEW FROM THE COMMONS

NOTE: All of the images presented here for the County Administrative Complex are conceptual in nature and only intended to show scale and
context for the proposed facility. Final design will be subject to county input of design and approval.
130 | University Ridge: Section 10B
INTERACTION WITH CONSTITUENTS
Throughout the programming process, the planning team
heard time and again of the need for the new facility to
be easy to navigate and user-friendly. While signage and
wayfinding are of critical importance to simplifying the user
experience, the layout of the building will set the tone for
the efficiency of operations. The new building has been
designed around the constituents, with spaces requiring the
most public interaction being located closest to the main
entrance. In an effort to streamline operations, the team
is proposing a One-Stop Shop to be located on the main
floor near the entry. This collocation of services will allow a
reduction in total required square footage and will enhance
the public’s experience. Probate Court, County Council
Chambers, Veterans Affairs and other groups with a high
level of public interaction, will also be located on the ground
floor or nearby up a monumental stair leading to the second
floor. Departments with little to no public interaction will
INTERIOR VIEW
be located in the office tower that is designed to be efficient,
flexible, and filled with natural light. Specialized functions
such as the Emergency Operations Center, Server Room
and Voter Registration will be located in the basement for
maximum security and safety.
Due to the site’s natural topography, the County’s parking
structure will have a single level of parking that is mostly
below grade. This level could be restricted to County-only
use and house such things as Council Member Secure and
senior administrative staff parking, loading/service and/or
fleet vehicle parking. A tunnel connecting this below-grade
parking level with the building’s basement would allow a
safe route for key individuals, such as Council members,
the County Administrator and the Treasurer or others with
large amounts of cash. This subterranean passage could
also allow to service the building without a large amount of
unsightly services on grade.
 University Ridge: Section 10B | 131

PHASING AND SITE LOGISTICS

Our prior experience with the County enabled our team to
create a master plan that allows the County to transition
to their new facility with minimal disruption. Our team
has positioned the new building to allow maximum
continued use of County Square with the least disruption
to constituents and staff. McMillan Pazdan Smith also has
intimate knowledge of the functions that will be relocating
off site, -uch as Family Courts, DSS, Probation, Pardon and
Parole, EMS, the Health Department and other tenants and
can assist the County in planning their relocations.

STREET VIEW
132 | University Ridge: Section 10C
COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE
COMPLEX PROPOSED SCHEDULE
The schedule for the County Administrative Complex
Located in the Appendix, starting on page 147. The Armada
Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt stand ready to develop and
deliver a turn-key facility for the County. Our references and
experience sets us apart and uniquely qualifies us to stand
behind our promise to meet the County’s design and cost
expectations.
The promise to deliver commences upon a notice to proceed
with design. The design of the Administration Complex
can be somewhat concurrent with infrastructure design
and re-zoning. We are experienced in fast-track project
delivery methods and routinely design and construct using
this philosophy. The schedule presented here assumes a
fairly traditional design and construction sequence, but, as
the design user requirements become clearer, we can always
incorporate fast track methods should it be needed.
As a summary, we anticipate the design and permitting
phase taking eleven (11) month, and the construction phase
taking twenty three (23) months with owner furniture and
fixturing starting approximately in August 2020. By the time
the County Administration Complex and associate garage
are ready for occupancy permits, we will have completed
phase one of the infrastructure improvements.
 University Ridge: Section 11 | 133

SECTION 11:
SCOPE of WORK
a. Project Design and Construction Schedule
b. Demonstration of Community Impact
1. Tax Revenue Generation
2. Expected Job Production
c. Communications Plan
1. Public Communications Strategy with County/City PIO
2. Support Letters
d. MBE/WBE Involvement
134 | University Ridge: Section 11A

PROJECT DESIGN &

CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Having been involved in multiple, dense, urban mixed-use
projects; Armada Hoffler Properties and CitiSculpt under-
stand the long time horizon that such undertakings present
to the team. Armada Hoffler Properties has been continu-
ally working on the Virginia Beach Town Center for over 17
years and at the Inner Harbor of Baltimore for more than 20
years. A mid-market mixed-use project like University Ridge
will most likely be a 10- to 15-year development and will go
through multiple economic cycles, which will affect its final
design and content. Because Armada Hoffler Properties/
CitiSculpt is an experienced developer in all product types
from retail to multifamily to office to hospitality and enter-
tainment, we can adjust our plan and design “on the fly”
with confidence based on almost 40 years of experience.
So, while the project schedule and milestones presented here
are reflective of our proposed master plan, we fully recog-
nize that the only sure thing about our master plan is that it
will evolve over time until the last bit of concrete is placed.
In this section, you will find our outline schedule for the
overall development. Some key dates or “milestones” that
will dictate the pace of initially starting on construction will
be the completion of our community engagement phase
which will coincide with our design of the final master plan.
The master plan will be presented as part of our re-zoning
application. Concurrent with the re-zoning, we anticipate
working with the County to establish a Multi-County
Industrial (or Business) Park designation for the develop-
ment to fund all of the infrastructure and parking garages
required for such a dense development. We anticipate the
above tasks taking approximately six (6) months.
At a point where the rezoning and master plan process
appear to be approaching a successful conclusion, the
County may wish to proceed with authorization of design
on the new Administration Complex. Due to the location
of the existing County facilities, no other large scale develop-
ment can take place on the site until the new Administration
Complex is complete and the old facility is demolished.
Our overall schedule estimates that each of five phases will
deliver on approximately two year cycles. Some phases such
as the first phase may take longer, and other phases may be
slightly shorter. Another factor that will affect the schedule
is tenant interest and leasing. We believe the tenant interest
in this site will be strong, and that interest may allow us to
accelerate our schedule on certain phases.
In summary, we have tried to provide a reasonable estimate
of time for the entire build out of the development, but
economic cycles and tenant interest will both weigh into the
actual timeline after we are selected.
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
0 Project Master Schedule for RFP 3031 days Thu 3/30/17 Thu 11/9/28
1 Master Plan Stage 166 days Thu 3/30/17 Thu 11/16/17
2 RFP Submission Due 1 day Thu 3/30/17 Thu 3/30/17
3 County Selection of Developer 45 days Fri 3/31/17 Thu 6/1/17 2
4 Final Public/Private/Partnership Agreement 40 days Fri 6/2/17 Thu 7/27/17 3
5 Master Plan Design 60 days Fri 7/28/17 Thu 10/19/17 4
6 Infrastructure Design for Overall Development 80 days Fri 7/28/17 Thu 11/16/17 4
7 New County Adminstration Building 815 days Fri 10/20/17 Thu 12/3/20
8 Demolish Existing Outparcel Buildings 60 days Fri 11/17/17 Thu 2/8/18 6
9 Phase 1 Site Plan / Civil Design 60 days Fri 12/15/17 Thu 3/8/18 10
10 Phase 1 Building Schematic Design 40 days Fri 10/20/17 Thu 12/14/17 5
11 Phase 1 Building Design Development 80 days Fri 12/15/17 Thu 4/5/18 10
12 Phase 1 Building Construction Documents 80 days Fri 4/6/18 Thu 7/26/18 11
13 Phase 1 Permitting 45 days Fri 7/27/18 Thu 9/27/18 12
14 Phase 1 Construction 490 days Fri 9/28/18 Thu 8/13/20 13
15 Move into New County Admin Building 20 days Fri 8/14/20 Thu 9/10/20 14
16 Demolish Existing County Admin Building 60 days Fri 9/11/20 Thu 12/3/20 15
17 University Ridge Retail and Office Development 1050 days Fri 9/28/18 Thu 10/6/22
18 Secure Office and Retail Tenants Phase 2 260 days Fri 9/28/18 Thu 9/26/19 13
19 Phase 2 Site Plan / Civil Design 60 days Fri 12/20/19 Thu 3/12/20 20
20 Phase 2 Building Schematic Design 60 days Fri 9/27/19 Thu 12/19/19 18
21 Phase 2 Building Design Development 80 days Fri 12/20/19 Thu 4/9/20 20
22 Phase 2 Building Construction Documents 80 days Fri 4/10/20 Thu 7/30/20 21
23 Phase 2 Permitting 40 days Fri 7/31/20 Thu 9/24/20 22
24 Phase 2 Construction 480 days Fri 12/4/20 Thu 10/6/22 16,23
25 Cultural and Multi-Family Development 920 days Fri 9/27/19 Thu 4/6/23
26 Secure Cultural Tenants Phase 3 260 days Fri 9/27/19 Thu 9/24/20 18
27 Phase 3 Site Plan / Civil Design 60 days Fri 12/18/20 Thu 3/11/21 28
28 Phase 3 Building Schematic Design 60 days Fri 9/25/20 Thu 12/17/20 26
29 Phase 3 Building Design Development 80 days Fri 12/18/20 Thu 4/8/21 28
30 Phase 3 Building Construction Documents 80 days Fri 4/9/21 Thu 7/29/21 29
31 Phase 3 Permitting 40 days Fri 7/30/21 Thu 9/23/21 30
32 Phase 3 Construction 400 days Fri 9/24/21 Thu 4/6/23 31,16
33 Hotel, Office, and Retail Development in The Commons 1240 days Fri 9/25/20 Thu 6/26/25
34 Secure Hotel, Office, and Retail Tenants Phase 4 480 days Fri 9/25/20 Thu 7/28/22 26
35 Phase 4 Site Plan / Civil Design 60 days Fri 10/21/22 Thu 1/12/23 36
36 Phase 4 Building Schematic Design 60 days Fri 7/29/22 Thu 10/20/22 34
37 Phase 4 Building Design Development 80 days Fri 10/21/22 Thu 2/9/23 36
38 Phase 4 Building Construction Documents 80 days Fri 2/10/23 Thu 6/1/23 37
39 Phase 4 Permitting 40 days Fri 6/2/23 Thu 7/27/23 38
40 Phase 4 Construction 500 days Fri 7/28/23 Thu 6/26/25 39
41 Office and Multi-Family at Green Alley 880 days Fri 6/27/25 Thu 11/9/28
42 Secure Office and Apt Demand Phase 5 120 days Fri 6/27/25 Thu 12/11/25 40
43 Phase 5 Site Plan / Civil Design 60 days Fri 3/6/26 Thu 5/28/26 44
44 Phase 5 Building Schematic Design 60 days Fri 12/12/25 Thu 3/5/26 42
45 Phase 5 Building Design Development 80 days Fri 3/6/26 Thu 6/25/26 44
46 Phase 5 Building Construction Documents 80 days Fri 6/26/26 Thu 10/15/26 45
47 Phase 5 Permitting 40 days Fri 10/16/26 Thu 12/10/26 46
48 Phase 5 Construction 500 days Fri 12/11/26 Thu 11/9/28 47

Task Summary Inactive Milestone Duration-only Start-only External Milestone Manual Progress
Project: Project Master Schedul
Split Project Summary Inactive Summary Manual Summary Rollup Finish-only Deadline
Date: Mon 4/3/17
Milestone Inactive Task Manual Task Manual Summary External Tasks Progress

Page 1
136 | University Ridge: Section 11B

DEMONSTRATION of
COMMUNITY IMPACT
1. A large-scale development such as the one contemplated for University Ridge is a significant driver of dollars back into
the County and City coffers. Not only do the new real estate investments go onto the tax assessor’s books, but also sales
and use taxes, meals taxes, hotel taxes, and personal property taxes are generated in a development of this scale. While one
could argue that some of the sales and meals taxes are being reallocated from existing businesses and restaurants, a properly
designed and tenanted mixed-use development becomes a destination which draws visitors and patrons from outside the
normal trade area. Additionally, office tenants that may have been outside of downtown or even outside of Greenville
County will want to relocate to a location such as this, bringing new customers & employees with them.
We have not conducted a financial impact analysis due to the short timeframe allotted for the RFP, but we have obtained
actual data from the City of Virginia Beach showing the taxes generated by our Town Center of Virginia Beach develop-
ment (excluding Real Estate Taxes). In Table 11.1, on page 144, you can see, as it nears completion, the Town Center of
Virginia Beach generates over $7.0 million dollars of taxes back into the City annually. We believe at completion
University Ridge will generate millions of dollars in new tax revenue.
2. Regarding job growth, University Ridge will generate significant employment opportunities through construction and
operation. There are typically 150 to 200 construction workers employed on a large project. With 11 blocks, the total
number could exceed 1,500 jobs. With about 1,000,000 square feet of commercial space and 900 residential units, new
permanent full-time jobs and part-time retail jobs will also be significant. Table 11.2, on page 145, from the General
Services Adminstration shows average square footage per employee by building type.
Based on this schedule we have derived the estimated employee counts as follows:
Retail/Entertainment
(75 % of total Retail sq. ft.)/Cultural = 208,463 sq. ft. / 500 sq. ft. per employee avg. = 417 employees
Office
718,000 less the existing County employees at 220,000 sq. ft. = Net 498,000 sq. ft. / 250 sq. ft. per employee = 1,992 employees
Hotel
1 employee per 10 rooms = 250 rooms / 10 = 25 employees plus conference and kitchen @ 15 = 40 total employees
Residential
Management staff on site plus maintenance staff on site = 1 employee per 50 units = 837 units / 50 = 17 employees
Total estimated employee count on site = 2,466 employees or jobs

3. The preliminary analysis performed by Thomas & Hutton indicates that during the early stages of development the
existing road grid will perform at a satisfactory level to accommodate the increase car counts. But as the project approaches
peak development density, Armada Hoffler Properties/CitiSculpt and the City and County will need to work together to
properly analyze traffic flow and volumes and establish road network expansion off-site to accommodate proper traffic
flow. Please refer to Section 4 for further details on current and future traffic demand
137 | University Ridge: Section 11C
COMMUNICATION PLAN
“A city is not an accident, but the result of coherent visions
and aims.” This quote sums the joint venture team submis-
sion of Armada Hoffler Properties, CitiSculpt, and the
Furman Company (“Team”). Our Team knows that what
makes real estate memorable, is the connection and collabo-
ration between the space and the people who live, work, and
visit those spaces. Collaboration is only achieved through
insights and opinions taken from multiple experiences and
viewpoints. To accomplish this aim, the Team seeks to add
rich and varied experiences to share a true vision.
Our Team have led dozens of community engagement
processes in the past, and the strategy to shape this commu-
nity vision will be achieved through similar ends. In order to
remain concise and orderly for the University Ridge Request
for Proposal (“RFP”), we offer the following engagement
and outreach strategy.
Step 1: Stakeholder Identification
In order to achieve this goal we have identified the key
leaders, prioritized key discussions, and categorized those
discussions as to their appropriateness per each phase of
redevelopment. For the purposes of this strategy insert we
will use the term stakeholders synonymously with commu-
nity groups. In no particular order, the list of major stake-
holders we have or will conduct discussions with include:
1. Greenville County Real Estate Department
2. Greenville County Parks and Recreation
3. City of Greenville
4. City of Greenville Planning
5. Greenville Department of Transportation
6. South Carolina Department of Transportation
7. Greenlink Trolley
8. Greenville Housing Authority
9. Homes for Hope
10. South Carolina Governor’s School
for the Arts & Humanities
11. Haynie-Sirrine Neighborhood Association
12. Sterling Neighborhood
13. Furman University
14. Greenville Area Development Corporation
15. South Carolina Children’s Theater
16. Warehouse Theater
17. Greenville Council of Garden Clubs
18. Greenville Drive
19. Potential Tenants
20. Key Land Holders
a. Tony Harper
b. Western Landholders (road connections)
Each of those stakeholders listed above have been identified
as core community groups who should be welcomed into
the discussion for the redevelopment of University Ridge.
Most groups have their own unified agenda, experience, and
vision for the future. Others do not. Yet, all groups identi-
fied remain crucial to the overarching vision for the redevel-
opment. Therefore, when evaluating these stakeholders, it is
necessary to understand the primary needs of the groups,
the leaders within the groups, and influencers of the groups.
Step 2: Define the Process
Following group identification and prioritization, the Team
will define the appropriate process, schedule and forum,
to fully understand each group, leaders, and influencers'
desires. Each group shall be considered both as an individual
and then considered as part of a whole. In order to achieve
this goal, we will first meet with the leaders and influencers,
whereby the group’s underlying message should be fully
articulated when conducting the Town Hall forum meetings.
By conducting the process in this part and parcel manner,
the Team will fully understand how the group, leaders, and
influencers' messages have gained their voices. This process
shall run concurrently with the master planning of the site
and will be especially applicable to Phases II, III, and IV.
Describing our process and redevelopment plans to all stake-
holders in advance is absolutely critical to the development.
The Team is so convinced of this matter that we have already
begun to meet and discuss the potential redevelopment with
a few select groups, leaders, and influencers. The Team will
continue to educate and provide an open line of communi-
cation about the redevelopment for the community, in that
we are only able to construct a true community if all groups
desire to become a part of that new community.
Step 3: Implement the Outreach Channels
Even though there will be some overlap as to the importance
of core issues, it is obvious that not all core issues will overlap
and might possibly conflict. This being said, it is the Team’s
job to bring all input together and then discuss appropriate
solutions and compromises. Below is a preliminary list of
potential communication channels, with the caveat that all
will require sensitivity and adaptation to accommodate all
community groups, leaders, and influencers. We will rely on
the following methodologies to ensure the channels are as
effective and inclusive as possible:
• One-on-One Meetings
◦ These meetings have already begun and are the first
rung of the eventual collation building which will
occur through our outreach efforts.
• Information Sessions
◦ The Team will solicit and provide information
regarding various aspects of the redevelopment.
• Town Hall Style Forums
◦ The Team will schedule and moderate public
forum sessions for selected groups to voice their
thoughts and desires in both recreating and building
138 | University Ridge: Section 11c

a new community. This channel will allow those

more passionate members an outlet for open public
discourse.
• Project Website
◦ The Team will provide a central repository and line
of communication for redevelopment information
and contacts.
• Surveys and Focus Groups
◦ The surveys can appear online or can be passed
out at the Town Hall forums. From these surveys the
Team can form more concise focus groups in order
to drill down to understand how to champion the
community.
• Coalition Building
◦ At this point, the Team will have a greater under-
standing of the needs, wants, and desires of the
community and it is at this juncture that the Team
will invite the leaders and influencers of the commu-
nity to assist and provide input in the design or
programming of the space.
Step 4: Document Findings; Demonstrate
Decision-Making Process
Each conversation and outreach effort will yield new data,
opinions, ideas, preferences, concerns, excitement, desires, “A city is not an accident, but the
fears, frustrations, and other expressions of emotion. It is result of coherent visions and aims.”
critical to aggregate, document and disseminate these find-
ings in a deliberate way that demonstrates how we are incor-
porating feedback into the planning process. Ultimately the
Team will formulate the finalized concepts to construct.
The Team must remain careful as to how the concepts are
translated and effectively communicate how we arrived at
our final concepts and site plans.
Realizing that not all stakeholders will be satisfied with
the end result, a successful community is an ever evolving
and rotating target. Successful community engagement is a
complex process for a redevelopment of this size and scale
and the Team will measure success by the approval and the
range of population who ultimately lives, works, and visits
the University Ridge redevelopment.
Step 5: Maintain Ongoing Dialogue
through Outreach
As everyone knows effective community engagement does
not cease following private one on one conversations. The
long-term success of the redevelopment of University Ridge
depends upon wide support and input from the community
at large, hence the desire for coalition building. Therefore if
awarded the RFP, during project master planning, construc-
tion through the Phases, and operations, the Team remains
committed to an enduring methodology of outreach and
community engagement. The following are letters from
community groups that we have already made contact with.
 University Ridge: Section 11c | 139

SUPPORT LETTERS
140 | University Ridge: Section 11C
University Ridge: Section 11C | 141
142 | University Ridge: Section 11D
MINORITY/WOMEN BUSINESS
ENTERPRISES PARTICIPATION
OVERVIEW
The Team plans to put together an extensive M/WBE Plan
which includes an aspirational goal of 20% participation as a
percentage of subcontracted work of the General Contracts.
Our plan is to stress implementation strategies that maxi-
mize participation and help grow stronger firms. We will
review the strengths of the firms in the Greenville area and
develop bid packages that capitalize on these strengths. Our
Team has over 30 years of experience in successfully imple-
menting M/WBE contracting plans in municipalities such
as Baltimore, Norfolk, Durham and others area and we will
strive to utilize all facets of our diversity program here. This
commitment is our first step in achieving our goals.
OUTREACH
Our Team will utilize any City and County M/WBE data-
bases or lists, as well as our internal sources to develop an
inclusive list of potential minority- and women-owned busi-
nesses that are headquartered in the South Carolina HUD
Metro FMR Area. This will include bidders at the prime
level and lower tier levels. Our intent is to get a diverse and
inclusive mix of M/WBE participants.
In addition, the team will:
• Target firms in the SC HUD Metro FMR Area with
the qualifications to perform on the project.
• Utilize organizations representing the local community,
the minority communities, and minority contractors/
suppliers;
• Meet with the South Carolina Division of Small
and Minority Business Contracting, the Hispanic
Contractors Association of the Carolinas, the North
and South Carolina Indian Economic Development
Initiative, and the South Carolina Minority Business
Enterprise Center to inform them about the project and
contract opportunities;
• Identify firms with the potential to become capable
qualified firms and provide direct assistance or assis-
tance through the prime bidders when possible.
Businesses from all of these sources will be invited to a
kick-off Information and Networking Forum. This is a
positive way to spur interest, review the project, and answer
questions. All firms must be certified for their participation
to count toward the goals. Our Team will provide assistance
with certification if needed.
BID INFORMATION SUPPORT
In many cases a lack of participation can be attributed to
the lack of complete information on the bid process by the
prime or subcontract bidders. The Team will seek to bridge
this gap by contacting the M/WBE firms to address any
issues. This may include bidding procedures, payment time
frames, insurance requirements, bonding resources, or other
issues.
TAILORED PACKAGES
The Team will review the capabilities of the M/WBE firms
in the area and use this information in an attempt to develop
reduced barrier packages ($300,000 or less) that do not have
stringent bonding requirements. These can be very effec-
tive when three or more bidders are identified to increase
participation.
We will encourage Prime Contractor and M/WBE firm
partnerships or working in association agreements. This can
be an effective method to attain participation at the prime
level.
PRE-QUALIFICATION ACTIVITIES
The Team will provide a path of communication for M/
WBE firms, inform them about the project, and its scope.
Upon interest, we will inquire about their ability to bid at the
first tier level and identify barriers that may prevent them
from bidding. Questions such as contract scope, payment
time frames, insurance requirements, bonding and sched-
uling will be answered. We may also be able to address many
of these issues through our Tailored Bid Package process
(listed above) or through the packaging of the prime
contracts.
BID/BUY-OUT ACTIVITIES
Significant effort must be made to assure positive M/WBE
firm bid activity. The Team proposes to utilize the minority
media and internet to advertise opportunities. Also, the
Team will seek to actively identify M/WBE firms that the
prime bidders can solicit. This identification includes the list
of interested firms developed with our outreach efforts and
firms in the master databases. Notification will be made by
the prime bidders and directly by theTeam.
Digital copies of the plans and specifications will be made
available on our website. Our objective is to help grow
stronger M/WBE firms. The key to achieve this growth is
continued contract opportunity.
 University Ridge: Section 11D | 143

DOCUMENTATION AND REPORTING

The Team will produce a M/WBE utilization report. This
report will include outreach efforts, original participation
commitments and changes, actual utilization, construction
issues, construction issue resolution, and any noteworthy
events that have taken place. We will provide a detailed list
of each M/WBE firm on the project, their contract commit-
ments and payments monthly. By addressing these areas, we
believe we will maximize M/WBE participation.
 Table 11.1
Business Taxes Generated Within the Core Area of the CBD South TIF District
Type of Tax FY-2005 FY-2006 FY-2007 FY-2008 FY-2009 FY-2010 FY-2011 FY-2012 FY-2013 FY-2014 FY-2015 FY-2016 Total
Business License 735,204 840,825 922,049 1,531,582 1,233,412 1,031,408 1,017,683 1,145,026 1,101,228 1,273,972 1,302,397 1,523,180 13,657,966
Business Property 233,634 346,107 396,849 459,920 488,441 512,452 543,806 606,636 592,553 582,047 696,728 721,687 6,180,860
Trustee Taxes 1,653,635 2,436,041 2,722,755 3,409,303 3,787,405 3,653,831 3,942,810 4,331,820 4,431,275 4,060,647 4,698,700 4,912,979 $44,041,201
General Sales Taxes 440,202 536,114 567,921 601,962 676,243 645,569 654,584 798,863 756,119 696,605 789,641 1,050,213 8,214,036
Total $3,062,675 $4,159,087 $4,609,574 $6,002,767 $6,185,501 $5,843,260 $6,158,883 $6,882,345 $6,881,175 $6,613,271 $7,487,466 $8,208,059 $72,094,063
144 | University Ridge: Section 11 Table 11.1
 University Ridge: Section 11 Table 11.2 | 145

Table 11.2

BUILDING AREA PER EMPLOYEE BY BUSINESS TYPE

ITE USDOE SANDAG

Land-Use Sq.Ft./ Sq.Ft./ Sq.Ft./
Land-Use Code Employee Employee Employee
Commercial Airport 21 224
General Aviation Airport 22 392
Truck Terminal 30 427
General Light Industrial 110 463
Heavy Industrial 120 549
Industrial Park 130 500
Manufacturing 140 535
Warehousing 150 781 2114
Elementary School 520 1250 1131
High School 530 1587
Hospital 610 372 486
General Office - Suburbs 710 304
Corporate HQ - Suburbs 714 260
Single Tenant Office 715 295
Medical-Dental
M di l D t l B Building
ildi 720 207
U.S. Post Office 732 230
Office Park 750 278
Research & Development Center 760 405
Business Park 770 332 249
Building Material - Lumber Store 812 806
Specialty Retail Store 814 549
Discount Store 815 654
Hardware Store 816 1042
Nursery-Garden Center 817 529
Quality Restaurant (Sit Down) 831 134
High Turnover (Sit Down) 832 100
Fast Food w/o drive-thru 833 70
Fast Food w/ drive-thru 834 92
Grocery 938
Lodging 1124 917
Bank 317
Office under 100,000 sq.ft. 228
Office over 100,000 sq.ft. 221
Neighborhood Retail 588
Community Retail 383

Sources:
ITE -- Institute of Transportation Engineers
USDOE -- U.S. Department of Energy
SANDAG -- San Diego Assn of Governments

5/13/2008
146
 University Ridge: Section 12 | 147

SECTION 12:
APPENDIX
a. County Administrative Complex Proposed Schedule
b. County Administrative Complex Program Study
c. Town Center of Virginia Beach Parking Study
d. Low Income Housing Proposal: Homes for Hope
148
 University Ridge: Section 12A | 149

COUNTY
ADMINISTRATIVE
COMPLEX PROPOSED
SCHEDULE
 Greenville Municipal Town Center - Phase 1 Detailed Schedule
4/3/2017
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2
26 Phase 1 31.91 mons 1/1/2018 8/15/2020
27 Phase 1 Block 1A Design 5 mons 1/1/2018 5/31/2018
28 Phase 1 Block 1A County Complex Garage Design 5 mons 1/1/2018 5/31/2018 Phase 1 Block 1A County Complex Garage Design
29 Soil Borings 1 mon 1/1/2018 1/31/2018 Soil Borings
30 Franchise Utility Coordination 3 mons 1/1/2018 4/1/2018 Franchise Utility Coordination
31 Test Pile Operation 1 mon 2/1/2018 3/3/2018 Test Pile Operation
32 Pre‐Existing Conditions & Utility Survey 1 mon 1/1/2018 1/31/2018 Pre-Existing Conditions & Utility Survey
33 Phase 1 Block 1A Permitting 4.03 mons 6/1/2018 9/30/2018
34 Phase 1 Block 1A County Complex Garage Permitting 2 mons 6/1/2018 7/31/2018 Phase 1 Block 1A County Complex Garage Permitting
35 Phase 1 Block 1A E&S ‐ Site Permitting Complex Garage 2 mons 8/1/2018 9/30/2018 Phase 1 Block 1A E&S - Site Permitting Complex Garage
36 Phase 1 Block 1A County Complex Garage Construction 17.01 mons 10/1/2018 2/23/2020
37 Armada Hoffler Mobilization 1 mon 10/1/2018 10/31/2018 Armada Hoffler Mobilization
38 E&S ‐ Demo & Clearing & Grubbing 1 mon 10/1/2018 10/31/2018 E&S - Demo & Clearing & Grubbing
39 Install Site & ROW Utilities 1 mon 10/1/2018 10/31/2018 Install Site & ROW Utilities
40 Install Perimeter Crane Road 1 mon 10/1/2018 10/31/2018 Install Perimeter Crane Road
41 Building Pad 2 mons 10/1/2018 11/30/2018 Building Pad
42 Pile Operation 2 mons 10/31/2018 12/30/2018 Pile Operation
43 Concrete Pile Caps & Grade Beams 3 mons 11/30/2018 2/28/2019 Concrete Pile Caps & Grade Beams
44 Erect Precast Garage 7 mons 12/30/2018 7/28/2019 Erect Precast Garage
45 MEP Rough‐In Garage Concrete Slab On Grade 2 mons 3/30/2019 5/29/2019 MEP Rough-In Garage Concrete Slab On Grade
46 Prep‐Place and Finish Concrete Slab on Grade 2 mons 4/29/2019 6/28/2019 Prep-Place and Finish Concrete Slab on Grade
47 Erect Stair Towers 3 mons 3/30/2019 6/28/2019 Erect Stair Towers
48 MEP & Emergency Rough‐In Garage Elevated Floors 2‐7 7 mons 2/28/2019 9/26/2019 MEP & Emergency Rough-In Garage Elevated Floors 2-7
49 Low Voltage Access Controls & First Responder Systems Rough‐In 3 mons 5/29/2019 8/27/2019 Low Voltage Access Controls & First Responder Systems Rough-In
50 Prep‐Place and Finish Concrete Slabs Floors 2‐7 7 mons 3/30/2019 10/26/2019 Prep-Place and Finish Concrete Slabs Floors 2-7
51 Install Elevators 4 mons 6/28/2019 10/26/2019 Install Elevators
52 Exteror Decorative Metal Openings 2 mons 8/27/2019 10/26/2019 Exteror Decorative Metal Openings
53 Trim Out Light Fixtures Floors 1‐6 4 mons 7/28/2019 11/25/2019 Trim Out Light Fixtures Floors 1-6
54 Stand Light Poles Floor 7 2 mons 10/26/2019 12/25/2019 Stand Light Poles Floor 7
55 Trim Out & Finalize Low Voltage and First Responder Systems 5 mons 6/28/2019 11/25/2019 Trim Out & Finalize Low Voltage and First Responder Systems
56 Set Fire Extinguisher & Cabinets Floors 1‐7 1 mon 10/26/2019 11/25/2019 Set Fire Extinguisher & Cabinets Floors 1-7
57 Set Garage Directional Signage Floors 1‐7 1 mon 11/25/2019 12/25/2019 Set Garage Directional Signage Floors 1-7
58 Stripe Spaces Floors 1‐7 2 mons 11/25/2019 1/24/2020 Stripe Spaces Floors 1-7
59 Exterior Hardscape & Landscaping 2 mons 11/25/2019 1/24/2020 Exterior Hardscape & Landscaping
60 Final Inspections 2.01 mons 12/25/2019 2/23/2020 Final Inspections
61 Garage Substantially Complete 0 mons 2/23/2020 2/23/2020 2/23
62 Phase 1 Block 1B Design 7 mons 1/1/2018 7/30/2018

Page 1 of 3
 Greenville Municipal Town Center - Phase 1 Detailed Schedule
4/3/2017
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2
63 Phase 1 Block 1B Country Complex Garage Design 7 mons 1/1/2018 7/30/2018 Phase 1 Block 1B Country Complex Garage Design
64 Soil Borings 1 mon 1/1/2018 1/31/2018 Soil Borings
65 Test Piles 1 mon 2/1/2018 3/3/2018 Test Piles
66 Franchise Utility Coordination 3 mons 2/1/2018 5/2/2018 Franchise Utility Coordination
67 Pre‐Existing Conditions & Utility Survey 1 mon 2/1/2018 3/3/2018 Pre-Existing Conditions & Utility Survey
68 Phase 1 Block 1B Permitting 2 mons 8/1/2018 9/30/2018
69 Phase 1 Block 1B County Admin. Building Permitting 2 mons 8/1/2018 9/30/2018 Phase 1 Block 1B County Admin. Building Permitting
70 Phase 1 Block 1B E&S ‐ Site Permitting Admin Building 1 mon 8/1/2018 8/31/2018 Phase 1 Block 1B E&S - Site Permitting Admin Building
71 Phase 1 Block 1B County Admin. Building Construction 20.78 mons 12/1/2018 8/15/2020
72 Armada Hoffler Mobilization 1 mon 12/1/2018 12/31/2018 Armada Hoffler Mobilization
73 E&S ‐ Demo & Clearing & Grubbing 1 mon 12/1/2018 12/31/2018 E&S - Demo & Clearing & Grubbing
74 Install Site & ROW Utilities 1 mon 12/1/2018 12/31/2018 Install Site & ROW Utilities
75 Install Perimeter Crane Road 1 mon 12/1/2018 12/31/2018 Install Perimeter Crane Road
76 Building Pad 2 mons 1/1/2019 3/2/2019 Building Pad
77 Pile Operation 2 mons 2/1/2019 4/2/2019 Pile Operation
78 Concrete Pile Caps & Grade Beams 3 mons 3/1/2019 5/30/2019 Concrete Pile Caps & Grade Beams
79 Erect CMU Shafts 2 mons 3/1/2019 4/30/2019 Erect CMU Shafts
80 Erect Building Shell Frame 5 mons 4/1/2019 8/29/2019 Erect Building Shell Frame
81 Erect Stairs 3 mons 5/1/2019 7/30/2019 Erect Stairs
82 Prep‐Place and Finish Concrete Slab on Decks 3 mons 5/1/2019 7/30/2019 Prep-Place and Finish Concrete Slab on Decks
83 MEP Rough‐In Slab on Grade 2 mons 6/1/2019 7/31/2019 MEP Rough-In Slab on Grade
84 Prep‐Place and Finish Concrete Slab on Grade 2 mons 7/1/2019 8/30/2019 Prep-Place and Finish Concrete Slab on Grade
85 Structural Light Gauge Steel Stud Framing 4 mons 7/1/2019 10/29/2019 Structural Light Gauge Steel Stud Framing
86 Exterior Sheathing 3 mons 8/1/2019 10/30/2019 Exterior Sheathing
87 Roof Dry‐In 3 mons 8/1/2019 10/30/2019 Roof Dry-In
88 Roof Detailing & Trim Out 2 mons 10/1/2019 11/30/2019 Roof Detailing & Trim Out
89 Roof Trim Out 1 mon 12/1/2019 12/31/2019 Roof Trim Out
90 Exterior Skin Veneer 4 mons 9/1/2019 12/30/2019 Exterior Skin Veneer
91 Exterior Aluminum / Glass Openings 4 mons 10/1/2019 1/29/2020 Exterior Aluminum / Glass Openings
92 Equip and Build Electrical Rooms 2 mons 10/1/2019 11/30/2019 Equip and Build Electrical Rooms
93 Equip and Build Mech Room 3 mons 10/1/2019 12/30/2019 Equip and Build Mech Room
94 Equip and Build Fire Sprinkler Room 2 mons 10/1/2019 11/30/2019 Equip and Build Fire Sprinkler Room
95 Erect Elevators 7 mons 9/1/2019 3/29/2020 Erect Elevators
96 MEP Rough‐In 7 mons 7/1/2019 1/27/2020 MEP Rough-In
97 Low Voltage Systems, Access Controls & Life Safety Systems Rough‐In 5 mons 10/1/2019 2/28/2020 Low Voltage Systems, Access Controls & Life Safety Systems Rough-In
98 Hang & Finish Drywall 3 mons 11/1/2019 1/30/2020 Hang & Finish Drywall
99 Frame & Hang Drywall Drop Ceilings 1 mon 12/1/2019 12/31/2019 Frame & Hang Drywall Drop Ceilings

Page 2 of 3
 Greenville Municipal Town Center - Phase 1 Detailed Schedule
4/3/2017
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2
100 Paint Walls & Ceilings 3 mons 12/1/2019 2/29/2020 Paint Walls & Ceilings
101 Install Tile & Terrazzo 3 mons 1/1/2020 3/31/2020 Install Tile & Terrazzo
102 Install Carpet Tile & Vinyl 3 mons 1/1/2020 3/31/2020 Install Carpet Tile & Vinyl
103 Set Electrical Fixtures and Trim Out 3 mons 2/1/2020 5/1/2020 Set Electrical Fixtures and Trim Out
104 Set Plumbing Fixtures 2 mons 2/1/2020 4/1/2020 Set Plumbing Fixtures
105 Set Doors & Hardware 4 mons 2/1/2020 5/31/2020 Set Doors & Hardware
106 Above Ceiling MEP & Fire Inspections 2 mons 3/1/2020 4/30/2020 Above Ceiling MEP & Fire Inspections
107 Set Acoustical Ceiling Tiles 2 mons 4/1/2020 5/31/2020 Set Acoustical Ceiling Tiles
108 Set Fire Extinguisher Cabinets 1 mon 5/1/2020 5/31/2020 Set Fire Extinguisher Cabinets
109 Final Millwork Completion 3 mons 4/1/2020 6/30/2020 Final Millwork Completion
110 Low Voltage Systems & Life Safety Systems Complete 3 mons 5/17/2020 8/15/2020 Low Voltage Systems & Life Safety Systems Complete
111 Exterior Hardscape & Landscaping 3 mons 5/17/2020 8/15/2020 Exterior Hardscape & Landscaping
112 Final Inspections 2 mons 6/16/2020 8/15/2020 Final Inspections
113 Admin Building Substantially Complete 0.01 mons 8/15/2020 8/15/2020 Admin Building Substantially Complete
114 County FF&E and Move‐In 2 mons 8/17/2020 10/16/2020 County FF&E and Move-In

Page 3 of 3
 Greenville County, SC
Space Needs Assessment
Study Final Review

FINAL REPORT

September 2016
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION TITLE

I. INTRODUCTION

II. COUNTY ORGANIZATION, GROWTH TRENDS, AND CURRENT

SPACE ALLOCATION

III. PERSONNEL FORECASTS

IV. RECOMMENDED SPACE STANDARDS AND RECORDS/STORAGE

ANALYSIS

V. SPACE ALLOCATION FORECASTS

VI. ESTIMATED PARKING REQUIREMENTS

VII. APPENDICES

APPENDIX A INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

APPENDIX B OFFICE SPACE STANDARDS
APPENDIX C EXISTING BUILDINGS DEPARTMENTAL PLANS

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. i

 Section I

INTRODUCTION
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY I. INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

In April 2016, Greenville County, South Carolina contracted with McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture
and Chinn Planning, Inc. to develop a Space Needs Assessment Study and Report. The County wanted to
look comprehensively at their space needs over a twenty year period and begin the planning process to
replace outdated and overcrowded facilities. All of the County Departments and 3rd Party/Tenant
agencies currently located in the County Square Building were included in the study process. In
addition, other County and State agencies located at the government complex on University Ridge Road
were included in the study. The Sheriff’s Administrative functions located at the Law Enforcement
Center were also included in the space needs assessment. Table 1-1 shows the County Departments
and other agencies included in the study.

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 1

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY I. INTRODUCTION

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 2

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY I. INTRODUCTION

The study process included the projection of future personnel for all of the Departments and agencies
shown above; the establishment of space standards for office, meeting and conference space; the
development of space forecasts based on future personnel and space standards; and an estimate of
parking requirements. After space forecasts and parking requirements were completed, concepts for
department adjacencies and site blocking and stacking diagrams were developed.

Departments and agencies that were included in the study completed a space needs assessment survey,
and then were interviewed by the Consultant to determine operational and space needs and to tour the
existing office areas. Based on all of the information that was prepared and reviewed during Project
Advisory Committee meetings, a DRAFT Report was issued for review. A FINAL Report was issued after
the review of the DRAFT Report.

PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE

A Project Review Committee was established to oversee the study process. The Project Review
Committee met four times during the study process. Project Advisory Committee members include:

Project Advisory Committee Members

1. Mr. Jim Burns, Greenville County Council

2. Mr. Joe Kernell, County Administrator
3. Mr. John Hansley, Deputy County Administrator
4. Ms. Shannon Herman, Assistant to the Greenville County Administrator
5. Mr. Rick Brookey, Facility Project Manager, Capital Projects Office
6. Mr. Scott Case, Auditor, Greenville County

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 3

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY I. INTRODUCTION

REPORT SECTIONS

The report which follows summarizes the study process. Report sections include:

Section I ........................................................................................................................ Introduction

Section II ............................... County Organization, Growth Trends, and Current Space Allocation

Section III ....................................................................................................... Personnel Projections

Section IV...................................... Recommended Space Standards and Records Storage Analysis

Section V................................................................................................ Space Allocation Forecasts

Section VI..................................................................................... Estimated Parking Requirements

Section VII................................ Department Adjacencies and Site Blocking and Stacking Concepts

Section VIII..................................................................................................................... Appendices

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 4

 Section II

COUNTY ORGANIZATION,
GROWTH TRENDS, AND
CURRENT SPACE ALLOCATION
FINAL REPORT II. COUNTY ORGANIZATION,
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA GROWTH TRENDS, AND
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY CURRENT SPACE ALLOCATION

COUNTY ORGANIZATION, GROWTH TRENDS, AND CURRENT SPACE ALLOCTION

In this Section County organization and growth trends will be presented. The growth trends in total
County population and personnel were used in the development of personnel forecasts. The current
square footage occupied by the Departments and agencies included in the study is also presented in this
Section.

COUNTY ORGANIZATION

Figure 2-1 shows the

organizational structure
of Greenville County.
Departments and
agencies not included in
the study are dashed in
red. In addition, several
3rd Party/Tenant
agencies that occupy
space in County Square
were included in the
study. The list of these
agencies is included in
the comprehensive list
of all Department and
agencies included in the
study that was
presented in the Section
I Introduction.

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 6

FINAL REPORT II. COUNTY ORGANIZATION,
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA GROWTH TRENDS, AND
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY CURRENT SPACE ALLOCATION

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 9

FINAL REPORT II. COUNTY ORGANIZATION,
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA GROWTH TRENDS, AND
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY CURRENT SPACE ALLOCATION

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 10

FINAL REPORT II. COUNTY ORGANIZATION,
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA GROWTH TRENDS, AND
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY CURRENT SPACE ALLOCATION

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 11

 Section III

PERSONNEL PROJECTIONS
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY III. Personnel Projections

PERSONNEL FORECAST METHODOLOGY

The forecast models described below were utilized to develop personnel projections. The first three
models were completed for each Department or agency included in the study. Model 4 was used for
Departments that support total County employees (examples: Human Resources, Information
Technology). The final model was the Department or agency estimate of future staff growth. The
personnel forecast recommended by Chinn Planning, Inc. is shown at the bottom of each individual
personnel forecast projection Table.

Model 1 – Historic Staff Actual Number Growth Model

This model is the estimate of future growth based on the average actual number increase in
staff per year for the Department. The average staff increase was calculated for the period of
time from 2006 to 2015 in which data was available.

Model 2 – Historic Staff Percent Growth Model

This model is the rate of future growth based on the average percent increase in staff per
year for the Department. The average staff percentage increase was calculated for the period
of time from 2006 to 2016 in which data was available.

Model 3 – Ratio to County Population Model

Model 3A uses the average ratio of staff per 10,000 County population for the period of time
from 2006 to 2016 in which data was available. Model 3B uses the high ratio of staff per
10,000 County population to project future personnel growth.

Model 4 – Ratio to County Total Staff Model

This model is used for internal support units where the workload driver is the increase in
total County staff. Model 4A uses the average ratio of Department staff per total County staff
for the period 2006 to 2016. Model 4B uses the high ratio of Department staff per total
County staff for the period to project future staff.

Model 4 or 5 – Department Growth Estimates Model

This model is the Department estimate of employee growth.

Summary of Personnel Forecasts

Table 3-1 shows the recommended personnel forecast for each Department and agency included in the
study. The recommended total personnel forecast projects 1.5 % per year growth in employees from
2016 to 2035.

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 13

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY III. Personnel Projections

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 14

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY III. Personnel Projections

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 15

 Section IV

RECOMMENDED SPACE
STANDARDS AND RECORDS
STORAGE ANALYSIS
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA IV. RECOMMENDED SPACE STANDARDS
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY AND RECORDS STORAGE ANALYSIS

RECOMMENDED SPACE STANDARDS AND RECORDS STORAGE ANALYSIS

SPACE STANDARDS

Table 4-1 presents the recommended office space standards for Greenville County. This is based on an
assessment of Greenville County operations, staffing, and facilities developed for various categories of
personnel. The space standards are based on the functional requirements for each category of
personnel. Currently, due to multiple office types, office space allocation varies within personnel
categories. The space standards shown on the following page were used to develop future space
projections in Section V and do not reflect (in all cases) current space allocation.

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 47

 Section V

SPACE ALLOCATION FORECASTS

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY V. SPACE ALLOCATION FORECASTS

SPACE ALLOCATION FORECASTS

Space Forecast Methodology

In this Section a space allocation table is presented for each Department or agency included in the
study. Each Department space allocation table shows the following:

Net Square Feet

This is the net usable space (inside wall to inside wall) for each component space shown in the
space tables. This is shown for personnel (current and projected), as well as all support space for
each Department or agency.

Circulation Factor
A factor of 30% is added to the total net square feet to account for circulation between spaces
within each component (varies between components). The current circulation factor in County
buildings is lower at roughly 20%.

Departmental Gross Square Feet

This is the total square feet for all usable areas and circulation within each Department or
agency. This is the total square footage shown by Department on the recommended space
forecast summary table in five-year increments through 2035.

Building Gross Square Feet

A factor of 20% is added to the Departmental Gross Square Feet when planning for new
construction. This Building Gross Square Feet factor accounts for major mechanical and building
systems, wall thickness, elevator shafts, rest rooms, and major circulation corridors in a building.
If an existing building is renovated a building gross would not necessarily be added because
many of the components listed above would be in place.

Building circulation and gross factors may be reduced based on a selected site and final design,
but at the Master Plan Level these grossing factors ensure that the designed building square feet
does not exceed the Master Plan square footage.

Summary Space Forecast

Table 5-1 presents a summary of the recommended space forecast for the Departments and adjacencies
included in the study. The summary table shows the space need by Department in five year increments
through 2035. The recommended space forecast uses the personnel projections presented in Section III
along with the space standards presented in Section IV. The projected space requirement for
Departments and agencies shown in Table 5-1 by 2035 is 575,433 Building Gross
Square Feet (BGSF).

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 56

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY V. SPACE ALLOCATION FORECASTS

SUMMARY SPACE ALLOCATION FORECAST

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 57

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY V. SPACE ALLOCATION FORECASTS

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 58

FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY V. SPACE ALLOCATION FORECASTS

Department Space Allocation Tables

Tables 5-2 to 5-71 present the space allocation table for each Department or agency included in the
study. The bottom line of each table highlights the total Departmental Gross Square Feet requirement
in five year increments through 2035 shown in Table 5-1.

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 59

 Section VI

ESTIMATED PARKING
REQUIREMENTS
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY VI. ESTIMATED PARKING REQUIREMENTS

ESTIMATED PARKING REQUIREMENTS

Table 6-1 shows the estimated parking requirements for each Department or agency included in the
study. These parking requirements are estimates of staff, visitor, and assigned vehicles for each
Department or agency. The first column shows projected staff. During the interview process
Department and agency heads indicated that the majority of staff drive their own vehicle to work, so for
planning purposes the projected staff numbers should guide staff parking requirements.

Visitor parking is shown in the second column. This is an estimate of an “average” number of visitors in
each Department or agency at a given time, based on recent and projected trends in the number
visitors/clients that visit each Department or agency. It allows for some growth in the future and is
based on the best estimate given by each Department included in the study. The number of vehicles
assigned to Departments is also shown in Table 6-1. Parking space for most of these vehicles will be
needed in close proximity to the office location.

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 134
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY VI. ESTIMATED PARKING REQUIREMENTS

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 135
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY VI. ESTIMATED PARKING REQUIREMENTS

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 136
 Appendix A

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY APPENDIX A – INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 138
FINAL REPORT
GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY APPENDIX A – INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. 139
 Appendix C

EXISTING BUILDINGS
DEPARTMENTAL PLANS
 STAND-
PIPE

TOILET
DEPARTMENT LEGEND NETWORK PAST & NEW
JUDGE MICROFILMSTORAGE
RACK UP RMC KITCHEN
700 - TAX COLLECTOR VENDING
FILES 1300 - REGISTER OF
800 - AUDITOR BREAK DEEDS
ROOM 1,048 SF
TOILET 1200 - PROBATE COURT
1000 - GIS 1,137 SF
BREAK PROBATE
OFFICE BREAK
TELE. BREAK
1000 - REAL PROPERTY SERVICES / MOBILE HOME SERVICE BUNKS SUITE 1400 SUITE 1425
ROOM
ROOM
(4) STORAGE SUITE 1450
1100 - EMS FILES
LOCKERS
1200 - PROBATE COURT
CAGE
1300 - REGISTER OF DEEDS

BIOMED
1100 - EMS
6,034 SF PASSPORT
REFURBISH

9 COMPUTERS
CAGE

LOCKERS 1200 - PROBATE COURT

5,067 SF
DEPARTMENT AREAS (SECTION A)

LOCKERS
Name Area EMS

700 - TAX COLLECTOR 3805 SF

1300 - REGISTER OF
800 - AUDITOR 4552 SF DEEDS

COUNTER
1000 - GIS 2340 SF 6,144 SF

FILES
LOCKERS
DISP.
1000 - REAL PROPERTY SERVICES / MOBILE 10427 SF
HOME SERVICE MOVEABLE
JUDGE FILE
1100 - EMS 6034 SF CANS OFFICE SYSTEM
1200 - PROBATE COURT 6204 SF
1300 - REGISTER OF DEEDS 7193 SF FILES
OFFICE

OFFICE

ACCT OFFICE

FILES
BUILDING SF TOTALS
OFFICE
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 250,254 SF OFFICE
BUILDING GROSS SF: 304,530 SF

OFFICE STORAGE SKYLIGHT

WAIT OFFICE

QUEUE
COFFEE FILES
OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE
1000 - REAL PROPERTY WAIT
SERVICES / MOBILE HOME OFFICE
SERVICE
10,427 SF

BREAK ROOM
OFFICE

800 - AUDITOR
4,257 SF

COPY
OFFICE

BREAK ROOM
OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE
STORAGE
OFFICE

SECTION A SECTION B SECTION C SECTION D SECTION E WAIT

UP OFFICE OFFICE
OFFICE OFFICE 700A

PLOTTER
UP UP
OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE BREAK ROOM OFFICE

1000 - GIS
2,064 SF OFFICE
MOVEABLE FILES FILES
1000 - GIS OFFICE
2,064 SF
700 - TAX COLLECTOR
3,805 SF
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE
OFFICE OFFICE

OFFICE

1000 - GIS
276 SF
OFFICE SERVER SERVER OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE TAX SALE
1000 - GIS
276 SF

FIRST FLOOR KEY PLAN

COUNTY SQUARE FIRST FLOOR SECTION A

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 DEPARTMENT LEGEND
STAGING
100 - PURCHASING FOR DOCK DOCK

200 - FINANCIAL OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT & BUDGET

GAS MECHANICAL COOLING TOWER
400 - GROUP MEETING CAGE 2,404 SF

500 - HUMAN RESOURCES AND RELATIONS

1800 - INFORMATION MECH
SYSTEMS UP
600 - TREASURER OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE

STORAGE RACK
699 SF
OFF. JAN.
750 - ONE STOP CENTER / JOB LINK EMS SUPPLIES
1100 - EMS
2,082 SF 2150 - E911 - ADDRESS ELECTION SUITE
1100 - EMS ASIGN OFFICE
LOGISTICS 2,098 SF
1500 - WORK FORCE DEVELOPMENT - WIA
TOILETS
CONFERENCE OFFICE
1600 - HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISIONS 884 SF E911

1800 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS

1900 - REGISTRATION AND ELECTION
MAILBOXES SLED RACK ON RAISED FLOOR
2100 - CREDIT UNION 2300 - HOT SITE(EMS)
NETWORK TAPE STOR.
1900 - REGISTRATION AND
791 SF WORK 2100 - CREDIT UNION ELECTION
OPERATIONS
AREA AC UNIT - 20 TON 7,817 SF
2150 - E911 - ADDRESS ASIGN RACK MANAGER OFFICE 420 SF

RAMP
WITH PRINTER
UPS
2300 - HOT SITE(EMS) RAISED FLOOR 1800 - INFORMATION
DISK
SYSTEMS
7,957 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM A

PC TECH LAB

RAMP
HELPDESK
1500 - WORK FORCE UPS CONSOLE
CONFERENCE ROOM B WATER
DEVELOPMENT - WIA DESK OFFICE
BOARD
1,877 SF SYSTEM NETWORK LAB
MECHANICAL F.P.
SERVER RACKS
STEP
TOILETS
OFFICE
OFFICE OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE
DEPARTMENT AREAS (SECTION B)
OFFICE
Name Area OFFICE
OFFICE
REGISTRATION
ELECTIONS
100 - PURCHASING 3622 SF OFFICE

200 - FINANCIAL OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT & BUDGET 4737 SF 1600 - HUMAN RELATIONS OFFICE
COMMISIONS OFFICE
400 - GROUP MEETING 6349 SF 1,700 SF

500 - HUMAN RESOURCES AND RELATIONS 3167 SF

600 - TREASURER 2714 SF
750 - ONE STOP CENTER / JOB LINK 956 SF
1100 - EMS 2082 SF
1500 - WORK FORCE DEVELOPMENT - WIA 1877 SF STORAGE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE
FILE
1600 - HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISIONS 1700 SF ROOM

1800 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS 8656 SF SKYLIGHT

1900 - REGISTRATION AND ELECTION 7817 SF

2100 - CREDIT UNION 420 SF 600 - TREASURER
2,714 SF
2150 - E911 - ADDRESS ASIGN 2098 SF COPY OFFICE
OPEN OFFICE OFFICE
2300 - HOT SITE(EMS) 791 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM A 1291 SF 400 - GROUP MEETING
CONFERENCE ROOM B 926 SF 6,349 SF
OFFICE
MECHANICAL 2404 SF BREAK ROOM
FILE ROOM
TOILETS 1574 SF
OFFICE
INFO.
DESK
BUILDING SF TOTALS FILES
WAIT
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 250,254 SF CONFERENCE
BUILDING GROSS SF: 304,530 SF CONFERENCE ROOM 100 - PURCHASING
BREAK ROOM 3,622 SF

SECTION A SECTION B SECTION C SECTION D SECTION E

UP TOILETS
635 SF OFFICE
OFFICE FILES OFFICE RECEP. 200 - FINANCIALLOBBY
UP UP OFFICE OPERATIONS
MANAGEMENT & BUDGET
OFFICE 4,737 SF
OFFICE WATER CONFERENCE ROOM B
CONF. 926 SF
OFFICE STORAGE

BREAK
CONF. OFFICE
OFFICE

FILES
MED OFFICE

COPY
FILES OFFICE
OFFICE
FILES FILES
OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE
CL.
750 - ONE STOP CENTER / OFFICE OFFICE
500 - HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE
JOB LINK
AND RELATIONS
956 SF
3,167 SF OFFICE CONFERENCE ROOM A
COPY 1,291 SF
CONF.

OFFICE
LOBBY OFFICE
FIRST FLOOR KEY PLAN
OFFICE FILE ROOM BREAK
ROOM

COUNTY SQUARE FIRST FLOOR SECTION B

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 SECTION A SECTION B SECTION C SECTION D SECTION E
UP

CAFE SEATING UP UP

COUNTER

KITCHEN 3775 - CAFE CAFE SEATING

2,631 SF
3750A - U.S. MARSHALL
851 SF

3750 - CAD/RMS TRAINING

(E911)
2,062 SF

FIRST FLOOR KEY PLAN

OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE

BREAK
OFFICE
ROOM

COPY

OFFICE
OFFICE 3800 - PUBLIC SERVICES
OFFICE OFFICE

FILE
ENGINEERING ROAD &
BRIDGE SOLID WASTE
5,600 SF
OFFICE DEPARTMENT LEGEND
OFFICE

2400 - ADMINISTRATION COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COUNTY ATTORNEY

OFFICE WAIT
COUNTY COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION
2500 - REDEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OFFICE
2450 - SHERIFF'S SECURITY
AUTHORITY
7,987 SF
2500 - REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
3750 - CAD/RMS TRAINING (E911)
TOILETS
787 SF 3750A - U.S. MARSHALL
CONFERENCE ROOM C
OFFICE
354 SF 3775 - CAFE
2450 - SHERIFF'S SKYLIGHT
SECURITY CONFERENCE ROOM D
162 SF 2,175 SF 3800 - PUBLIC SERVICES ENGINEERING ROAD & BRIDGE SOLID WASTE
4100 - CODE ENFORCEMENT / ZONING
OFFICE FILES / STORAGE
TOILETS
FILES / 64 SF 4200 - BUILDING PERMITS
STORAGE
CONFERENCE
4400 - HEALTH CLINIC
OFFICE
RAMP STORAGE STORAGE
OFFICE
CONFERENCE ROOM C
OFFICE
CONFERENCE ROOM D
TRAINING ROOM
CONF.
745 SF ROOM TOILETS
CLERK CLERK
OFFICE OFFICE TRAINING ROOM
STORAGE
COPY
COUNCIL CHAIR
OFFICE INSPECTORSINSPECTORSINSPECTORSINSPECTORS

TOILETS
119 SF GOV. OFFICIAL 4100 - CODE
DEPARTMENT AREAS (SECTION C)
TOILET OFFICE ENFORCEMENT / ZONING Name Area
6,905 SF

CONFERENCE TOILET PLAN

STOR. OFFICE CHIEF CHIEF CHIEF CHIEF OFFICE REVIEW GIS
2400 - ADMINISTRATION COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COUNTY ATTORNEY 11431 SF
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
BREAK ROOM OFFICE COUNTY COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION
OFFICE
2450 - SHERIFF'S SECURITY 162 SF
STOR. ZONING OFFICE
2400 - ADMINISTRATION 2500 - REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 7987 SF
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WORKROOM OFFICE
COUNTY ATTORNEY STORAGE PERMIT OFFICE 4400 - HEALTH CLINIC 3750 - CAD/RMS TRAINING (E911) 2062 SF
611 SF
COUNTY COUNCIL ATTORNEY ATTORNEY CLERKS
LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION OFFICE OFFICE
3750A - U.S. MARSHALL 851 SF
FLOOD OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE
11,431 SF
EXIST. ADMIN. PLAIN 3775 - CAFE 2631 SF
OFFICE
ELECT. ASSIST. OFFICE
VAULT
3800 - PUBLIC SERVICES ENGINEERING ROAD & BRIDGE SOLID WASTE 5600 SF
ATTORNEY ATTORNEY 4100 - CODE ENFORCEMENT / ZONING 6905 SF
OFFICE OFFICE
ASSISTANT
OFFICE 4200 - BUILDING PERMITS 2349 SF
CONF. OFFICE
OFFICE DEPT. HEAD ADMIN. OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE SWITCH OFFICE 4400 - HEALTH CLINIC 611 SF
ASSIST. BOARD
OFFICE 4200 - BUILDING PERMITS CONFERENCE ROOM C 354 SF
2,349 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM D 2175 SF
VESTIBLE
TOILETS 969 SF
TRAINING ROOM 745 SF

BUILDING SF TOTALS
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 250,254 SF
BUILDING GROSS SF: 304,530 SF

COUNTY SQUARE FIRST FLOOR SECTION C

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 DEPARTMENT LEGEND
PROBATE & PAROLE
EYE WASH DELIVERIES
MAIN ENTRY
3900 - LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
3910 - MAIL ROOM ICE TOILETS
WOMEN TOILET
66 SFTOILET
MAKER

3920 - PROPERTY MANAGEMENT PUBLIC BLDS

TOILETS
629 SF
3925 - FITNESS CENTER ELEC /
WELDING
4000 - PROBATION AND PAROLE MEN

LOCKERS
4300 - CLEMSON EXT. SERVICES SUPPLY ROOM

4600 - SUBDIVISION
TOILETS
4700 - USDA FARM SERVICE AGENCY 126 SF

4800 - SOIL AND WATER / USDA-NRCS

4900 - STORAGE GOLFCARTS /
WORKSHOP
CONFERENCE ROOM E
CONFERENCE ROOM F
MECHANICAL
TOILETS SMALL TOOLS / SUPPLIES

WORKSTATION
4000 - PROBATION AND
PAROLE
4,761 SF

OFFICE

CONF.
CONFERENCE OFFICE OFFICE
DEPARTMENT AREAS (SECTION D)
Name Area 3900 - LAND
DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
2,876 SF BREAK
OFFICE
3900 - LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION 3396 SF
OFFICE CONFERENCE ROOM F
OFFICE
3910 - MAIL ROOM 91 SF 603 SF

3920 - PROPERTY MANAGEMENT PUBLIC BLDS 10349 SF SKYLIGHT 3920 - PROPERTY

OFFICE
3925 - FITNESS CENTER
656 SF
3925 - FITNESS CENTER 656 SF 3910 - MAIL ROOM
MANAGEMENT PUBLIC
FILES BLDS
4000 - PROBATION AND PAROLE 4761 SF 91 SF 10,349 SF

4300 - CLEMSON EXT. SERVICES 4226 SF

4600 - SUBDIVISION 660 SF
4700 - USDA FARM SERVICE AGENCY 1030 SF
WOMEN
4800 - SOIL AND WATER / USDA-NRCS 1961 SF WAITING FILES 4800 - SOIL AND WATER / OFFICE 3900 - LAND
USDA-NRCS CONF. DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
4900 - STORAGE 719 SF 144 SF TOILETS
4700 - USDA FARM 1,961 SF 520 SF 382 SF
266 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM E 423 SF SERVICE AGENCY
1,030 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM F 603 SF L.D. FILE ROOM MEN
OFFICE
MECHANICAL 940 SF MECHANICAL OFFICE OFFICE
940 SF 172 SF
TOILETS 1203 SF STORAGE
4600 - SUBDIVISION 4900 - STORAGE
174 SF
660 SF 719 SF

FILES
CONFERENCE ROOM E
BUILDING SF TOTALS OFFICE RECEPTION OFFICE
423 SF
USDA -
BREAK 231 SF 161 SF
NRCS STORAGE
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 250,254 SF STORAGE
BUILDING GROSS SF: 304,530 SF BREAK

4300 - CLEMSON EXT.

SERVICES WAITING
OFFICE KITCHEN
4,226 SF
SECTION A SECTION B SECTION C SECTION D SECTION E SERVER
UP RACK &
STORAGE
UP UP
CONF.

OFFICE CLASSROOM
OFFICE

OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE

FIRST FLOOR KEY PLAN

COUNTY SQUARE FIRST FLOOR SECTION D

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 UP

DOCK DOORS

DEPARTMENT LEGEND MECHANICAL

5800 - DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL
HEALTH & 821 SF
4300 - DSS ATTORNEYS ENVIRONMENTAL
TRASH LAB CONTROL
5000 - USC CHILDREN LAW CENTER 5,004 SF

5100 - WORKERS COMPENSATION

5850 - ALZHEIMER
5200 - SHERIFF'S CID 1,477 SF

5300 - JUVENILE DIVERSION SERVICES & JUVENILE DRUG COURT

5400 - DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS)
MECHANICAL
5550 - AARP 2,025 SF

5600 - PROBATE COURT ANNEX

5700 - DSS
ENVIRONMENTAL
LAB 5550 - AARP
5800 - DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL ELECTRICAL /
993 SF
MECHANICAL
5850 - ALZHEIMER OFFICE
COPY OFFICE OFFICE BREAK ROOM
OFFICE
5900 - VETERAN AFFAIRS 79 SF 79 SF 78 SF 79 SF 77 SF
134 SF SUPPLY
MEN CLOSET
5950 - DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS) 5900 - VETERAN AFFAIRS
1,596 SF
129 SF

CONFERENCE ROOM G 5950 - DEPARTMENT OF

SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS)
WAITING RECEPTION OFFICE 732 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM H
TOILETS 207 SF 218 SF 241 SF IFCCS
891 SF INTENSIVE FOSTER
MECHANICAL WOMEN SKY CARE AND CLINICAL
LIGHT SERVICES
(IFCCS)
TOILETS

DEPARTMENT AREAS (SECTION E)

Name Area

5000 - USC CHILDREN LAW

4300 - DSS ATTORNEYS 3553 SF CENTER
777 SF
5000 - USC CHILDREN LAW CENTER 777 SF
5100 - WORKERS COMPENSATION 2238 SF 5400 - DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS)
5200 - SHERIFF'S CID 448 SF 5,734 SF
5300 - JUVENILE DIVERSION SERVICES & JUVENILE DRUG COURT 8869 SF
5400 - DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS) 5734 SF
5550 - AARP 1868 SF
5600 - PROBATE COURT ANNEX 2026 SF
5700 - DSS 1075 SF
5800 - DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL 5004 SF 5200 - SHERIFF'S CID
CONFERENCE ROOM H 448 SF
5850 - ALZHEIMER 1477 SF 1,128 SF
5300 - JUVENILE
5900 - VETERAN AFFAIRS 1747 SF DIVERSION SERVICES &
JUVENILE DRUG COURT
5950 - DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS) 732 SF 8,869 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM G 713 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM H 1128 SF
MECHANICAL 2846 SF QUEUE
TOILETS 1563 SF

BUILDING SF TOTALS
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 250,254 SF
BUILDING GROSS SF: 304,530 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM G
713 SF

SECTION A SECTION B SECTION C SECTION D SECTION E

WAITING
UP SKY
LIGHT
MEN
UP UP TOILETS
671 SF 5550 - AARP
5100 - WORKERS
876 SF
COMPENSATION
2,238 SF

JUDGE COURT SUITE

WOMEN
OFFICE
BREAK ROOM

OFFICE 5600 - PROBATE COURT 4300 - DSS ATTORNEYS

ANNEX 3,553 SF
2,026 SF COURT ROOM
OFFICE
OFFICE
MENTAL HEALTH /
MARRIAGE LICENSE
MENTAL HEALTH
MARRIAGE LICENSE WAIT FILES
GUARDIANSHIP AND STORAGE
CONSERVATORSHIP
5700 - DSS
1,075 SF
OFFICE
FIRST FLOOR KEY PLAN OFFICE
COPY

STORAGE

COUNTY SQUARE FIRST FLOOR SECTION E

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 MECHANICAL
357 SF

DEPARTMENT LEGEND
6500 - PROBATION PAROLE AND PARDON MECHANICAL
671 SF
6600 - DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS)
6700 - DHHS 6500 - PROBATION
PAROLE AND PARDON
MECHANICAL 8,681 SF

MEZZANINE STORAGE BREAK ROOM

306 SF
TOILETS

DEPARTMENT AREAS (LOWER LEVEL AND MEZZANINE) BREAK ROOM

Name Area 154 SF

6500 - PROBATION PAROLE AND PARDON 8681 SF

6600 - DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS) 29559 SF TOILETS
6700 - DHHS 4802 SF 440 SF

MECHANICAL 8660 SF
MEZZANINE STORAGE 7325 SF
TOILETS 1656 SF

BUILDING SF TOTALS
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 250,254 SF
BUILDING GROSS SF: 304,530 SF

TOILETS
393 SF
6700 - DHHS
CENTRAL 334 SF
RECORDS

1404 SF

CASHIER

54 SF
TOILETS
485 SF

MECHANICAL
5,394 SF
MEZZANINE STORAGE
7,325 SF
6600 - DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS)
STORAGE 29,559 SF

787 SF

MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN

6700 - DHHS
4,468 SF

MECHANICAL
2,238 SF

TOILETS
338 SF

LOWER FLOOR AND MEZANINE KEY PLAN BREAK ROOM

364 SF

COUNTY SQUARE LOWER LEVEL AND MEZZANINE

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 DEPARTMENT LEGEND
BREAK ROOM

CHILD SUPPORT / ALIMONY ENFORCEMENT

COURTROOM WAITING

COURTROOMS AND SUPPORT SPACE

DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE

DOCKET AREA

GUARDIAN AD LITEM

PAYMENTS

RECORDS / FILE SERVICES

DASHED LINE INDICATES AREA OF
STORAGE MEZZANINE ABOVE
SECURITY

SOLICITORS OFFICE RECORDS / FILE

SERVICES
TOILETS 3,734 SF

GUARDIAN AD LITUM
473 SF

DEPARTMENT AREAS DEPARTMENT OF

JUVENILE JUSTICE
DOCKET AREA
325 SF
Name Area 3,003 SF

TOILETS
BREAK ROOM 534 SF 100 SF
CHILD SUPPORT / ALIMONY ENFORCEMENT 654 SF
CONFERENCE ROOM 819 SF
PAYMENTS
COURTROOM WAITING 3687 SF 1,478 SF
COURTROOMS AND SUPPORT SPACES 8862 SF TOILETS
124 SF
DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE 3003 SF
DOCKET AREA 325 SF
GUARDIAN AD LITUM 473 SF
PAYMENTS 1478 SF
RECORDS / FILE SERVICES 7745 SF
SECURITY 382 SF BREAK ROOM
TOILETS
388 SF
534 SF COURTROOMS AND
SOLICITORS OFFICE 1642 SF SUPPORT SPACES
TOILETS 1137 SF SOLICITORS OFFICE 8,862 SF
1,642 SF
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 30,740 SF CHILD SUPPORT /
ALIMONY ENFORCEMENT
BUILDING GROSS SF: 37,300 SF TOILETS
654 SF
389 SF

NOTE:
RECORDS / FILE SERVICES INCLUDES
4011 SF MEZZANINE STORAGE SPACE SECURITY
122 SF

CONFERENCE ROOM SECURITY

819 SF 140 SF

SECURITY
121 SF
COURTROOM WAITING
3,687 SF

TOILETS
135 SF

FAMILY COURT FIRST FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
DEPARTMENT LEGEND
BASEMENT FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
THIRD FLOOR
FOURTH FLOOR
MECHANICAL
TOILET

DEPARTMENT AREA LEGEND

Name Area

BASEMENT FLOOR 4253 SF

FIRST FLOOR 20154 SF
SECOND FLOOR 20355 SF
THIRD FLOOR 4938 SF
FOURTH FLOOR 4951 SF
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 54,650 SF
BUILDING GROSS SF: 73,050 SF

BASEMENT

HEALTH DEPARTMENT BUILDING BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
DEPARTMENT LEGEND
BASEMENT FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
THIRD FLOOR
FOURTH FLOOR
MECHANICAL
TOILET

DEPARTMENT AREA LEGEND

Name Area

BASEMENT FLOOR 4253 SF

FIRST FLOOR 20154 SF
SECOND FLOOR 20355 SF
THIRD FLOOR 4938 SF
FOURTH FLOOR 4951 SF
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 54,650 SF
BUILDING GROSS SF: 73,050 SF

FIRST FLOOR

HEALTH DEPARTMENT BUILDING FIRST FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
DEPARTMENT LEGEND
BASEMENT FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
THIRD FLOOR
FOURTH FLOOR
MECHANICAL
TOILET

DEPARTMENT AREA LEGEND

Name Area

BASEMENT FLOOR 4253 SF

FIRST FLOOR 20154 SF
SECOND FLOOR 20355 SF
THIRD FLOOR 4938 SF
FOURTH FLOOR 4951 SF
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 54,650 SF
BUILDING GROSS SF: 73,050 SF

SECOND FLOOR LIFE SAFETY

HEALTH DEPARTMENT BUILDING SECOND FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
DEPARTMENT LEGEND DEPARTMENT AREA LEGEND
BASEMENT FLOOR Name Area

FIRST FLOOR BASEMENT FLOOR 4253 SF

SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 20154 SF
SECOND FLOOR 20355 SF
THIRD FLOOR
THIRD FLOOR 4938 SF
FOURTH FLOOR FOURTH FLOOR 4951 SF
MECHANICAL DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 54,650 SF
BUILDING GROSS SF: 73,050 SF
TOILET

MECHANICAL
1,732 SF

THIRD FLOOR FOURTH FLOOR PENTHOUSE

HEALTH DEPARTMENT BUILDING THIRD, FOURTH AND PENTHOUSE FLOOR PLANS

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 OFFICE STORAGE
(3 PERSONS) 125 SF
274 SF
OFFICE
(2 PERSONS)
179 SF

OFFICE COMMUNICATIONS
(2 PERSONS) CENTER
112 SF 2006 SF
BREAK
ROOM
429 SF
OFFICE OPEN OFFICE
12 PERSONS
(4 PERSONS) ACOUSTICAL
OFFICE 158 SF 2 PERSONS WALLS

104 SF 156 SF

SERVER
ROOM
1094 SF

LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER AREAS

Level Area
EVIDENCE
BASEMENT 12342 SF
422 SF
FIRST FLOOR 4388 SF
SECOND FLOOR 8114 SF
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF 24844 SF

CRIME LAB
CHIEF OF MUSTER
CANTEEN PROF. 508 SF
ROOM
757 SF STANDARDS COLD CASE 906 SF
COLD CASE
495 SF 423 SF
110 SF

ENTRY DEPUTY
SUITE
66 SF FITNESS LOCKER
615 SF ARSENAL
ROOM / ROOM
TOILETS 398 SF
TECHNICAL 1642 SF
SERVICE 2593 SF
ROOM
251 SF

LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 OFFICE
252 SF

INCIDENT
REPORT
RECORD
REQUEST
337 SF
OFFICE
(3 PERSONS)
191 SF

SHERIFF OFFICE LONG TERM

INFORMATION (2 PERSONS) STORAGE
189 SF OFFICE 173 SF 106 SF
140 SF

LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER AREAS

Level Area

BASEMENT 12342 SF OFFICE

FIRST FLOOR 4388 SF 159 SF
SECOND FLOOR 8114 SF RECEPTION /
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF 24844 SF WAITING / FILES /
OFFICE
MAIL JUD. ACTIVE
(4 PERSONS)
SUPPORT WARRANTS
OFFICE 356 SF
399 SF 570 SF
SEX 77 SF
OFFENDER
REGISTRATION
OFFICE OFFICE
237 SF SOLICITOR
115 SF 123 SF
203 SF
JUD.
SUPPORT
342 SF

JUD.
SUPPORT
125 SF

LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER FIRST FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER AREAS
Level Area

BASEMENT 12342 SF
FIRST FLOOR 4388 SF
SECOND FLOOR 8114 SF
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF 24844 SF

JACKIE MAJOR CID

SHERIFF'S 3 CUBE OFFICE 2 PERSON OFFICE CID OPEN
COOPER BRAD HOMICIDE W/
OFFICE WORKSTATION 143 SF WORKSTATION 173 SF OFFICE
SHERIFF STEPP. LC ADD
388 SF ADMIN. 293 SF 218 SF (12 PEOPLE) (6 PEOPLE)
143 SF
1246 SF 443 SF
257 SF OFFICE REPORT
SUPPLIES (3 PERSONS)
/ FILES 100 SF LT. OFFICE LT. OFFICE
50 SF OFFICE
412 SF 106 SF 102 SF 118 SF
JOHN'S
OFFICE
SHARED 153 SF OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE
CONF. ROOM BULL PEN
78 SF 78 SF 80 SF 80 SF 80 SF
25 PERSONS
442 SF
606 SF RECEPTION
RECEPTION,
WAITING 249 SF
FOR 5-10
PEOPLE
690 SF LT. OFFICE LT. OFFICE
OFFICE
358 SF 102 SF 118 SF

2 PERSON
OFFICE OFFICE
180 SF 118 SF

OFFICE MJR. CPT. WEST

172 SF OFFICE OFFICE
115 SF 178 SF

LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER SECOND FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 EXERCISE COORDINATOR'S OFFICE
DEPARTMENT LEGEND SUPPLY
OFFICE STORAGE ROOM
100 - EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) SUPPLY
ROOM
MECHANICAL
KITCHEN
TOILET

EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE AREA

DEPARTMENT AREAS WOMEN'S

Name Area
DIRECTOR'S
OFFICE CLEANING
SUPPLIES
100 - EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER 4193 SF
(EOC)
MECHANICAL 416 SF SLEEP AREA AMATEUR
RADIO ROOM
TOILET 153 SF
TOILET
DEPARTMENTAL GROSS SF: 4,193 SF 153 SF
RECEPTION AREA PROGRAM
BUILDING GROSS SF: 4,762 SF PUBLIC RELATIONS COORDINATOR'S OFFICE
MEN'S
COORDINATOR

CITY HALL
ACCESS DOOR
100 - EMERGENCY
OPERATIONS CENTER
(EOC)
4,193 SF

DEPUTY DIRECTOR'S
OFFICE

OPERATIONS ROOM
KEY CASHIER

MECHANICAL ROOM

NOT USABLE SPACE

MECHANICAL
416 SF

CITY HALL BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
DEPARTMENT LEGEND
SHERIFF NORTHERN COMMAND PAWN SHOP CLERK & COMPUTER ROOM
DATA ENTRY CLERK
BOILER ROOM GANG INVESTIGATOR INTERVIEW ROOM LIEUTENANT

TOILET

DEPARTMENT AREAS STORAGE

Name Area

SHERIFF NORTHERN COMMAND 4033 SF

TOILET 151 SF PAWNSHOP CLERK
DATA ENTRY
FILE ROOM WOMENS RESTROOM MENS RESTROOM
DEPARTMENT GROSS SF: 4,033 SF TOILET TOILET
BREAK AREA
BUILDING GROSS SF: 4,185 SF 76 SF 76 SF
INVESTIGATOR INVESTIGATOR

SHERIFF NORTHERN
STORAGE COMMAND
COMMON AREA 4,033 SF
INVESTIGATOR INVESTIGATOR
SECRETARY
RECEPTIONIST

CONFERENCE ROOM PROPERTY CRIMES INVESTIGATORS INVESTIGATOR INVESTIGATOR SERGEANT PROPERTY CRIMES

SHERIFF NORTHERN COMMAND FLOOR PLAN

GREENVILLE, SC
08/04/16
 ARCHITECTS
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
PLANNERS
PARKING CONSULTANTS
RESTORATION ENGINEERS
GREEN PARKING CONSULTING

Memorandum
To: Mark R. Wawner, P.E.
City of Virginia Beach Department of Economic Development

From: David Taxman, P.E.

Date: November 17, 2015

Subject: Updated Shared Parking Analysis for Virginia Beach Town Center
Virginia Beach, Virginia

DESMAN updated the shared parking study for Virginia Beach Town Center, based on recent changes to
the development program. The previous shared parking analysis was performed on August 26, 2014.
There are planned changes to only Block 9. Below is a summary of the final land use program at Block 9:

Block 9

 Retail – 33,000 s.f.

 Restaurant – 5,000 s.f.
 Residential – 120 units (63 studio units and 56 one-bedroom units)
 Performing Arts Theater – 300 seats

Table 1 shows a summary of the land use program for each block at Virginia Beach Town Center.

8000 WESTPARK DR, STE 610, McLEAN, VA 22102 www.desman.com PHONE 703.448.1190 FAX 703.893.4067
NEW YORK  CHICAGO  WASHINGTON D.C.  BOSTON  CLEVELAND  HARTFORD  FT. LAUDERDALE  DENVER  PITTSBURGH
 Page 2 of 4

Table 1 – Virginia Beach Town Center Updated Land Use Program by Block

10

11

12
2

l
k

ta
k

k
oc

oc

oc

oc

oc

oc

oc

oc

oc

oc

oc

To
Bl

Bl

Bl

Bl

Bl

Bl

Bl

Bl
Land Use Type

Bl

Bl

Bl
Retail (sq.ft.) 0 5,101 19,554 7,445 1,758 0 6,940 33,000 22,466 21,000 0 117,264
Office (sq.ft.) 0 68,710 274,413 195,526 0 21,024 0 0 10,240 212,000 20,000 801,913
Residential (units) 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 120 342 287 0 805
Restaurant (sq.ft.) 0 19,764 25,727 1,485 9,832 13,202 28,751 5,000 9,249 5,000 0 118,010
Hotel (rooms) 0 0 0 176 0 240 0 0 0 0 0 416
M eeting Rooms (seats) 0 0 0 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120
M eeting Space (sq.ft.) 0 0 0 0 0 9,300 0 0 0 0 0 9,300
Theater (seats) 0 0 0 0 1,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,200
Performing Arts (seats) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 0 300
Art Institute (sq.ft.) 0 0 0 35,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,000
Dicks Sporting (sq.ft.) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84,000 84,000
Parking Spaces 186 0 1,284 71 0 735 0 0 854 927 578 4,635

Table 2 shows the parking surplus/deficit analysis by block during the peak weekday period at 12 PM in
the afternoon. Based on the shared parking analysis, there is a projected surplus of 652 spaces during a
peak weekday afternoon period.

Table 3 shows the parking surplus/deficit analysis by block during a peak weekend period at 8 PM in the
evening. Based on the shared parking analysis, there is a deficit of 8 spaces during the weekend evening
peak parking period.

Overall, there is currently adequate parking provided at Virginia Beach Town Center to support the
weekday parking demand. The weekend parking deficit is minimal and could be addressed though
management strategies instead of building additional parking.
 Page 3 of 4

Table 2 – Peak Weekday Total Practical 12 PM Peak Weekday

Gross Leasable Supply Demand Ratio Demand Surplus/Deficit
(12 PM) Parking Surplus/ Block 2 (Beacon Bldg.)

Deficit Analysis by Block Parking Lot

Retail
186
0
167
1.05 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Office 0 2.30 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Restaurant 0 6.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Block 2 Total --- 167 --- 0 167
Block 3
Retail 5,101 1.05 /1,000 gsf 5 ---
Office 68,710 2.30 /1,000 gsf 158 ---
Restaurant 19,764 6.00 /1,000 gsf 119 ---
Block 3 Total --- 0 --- 282 -282
Block 4
Parking Garage 1,284 1,156
Retail 19,554 1.05 /1,000 gsf 21 ---
Office 274,413 2.30 /1,000 gsf 631 ---
Restaurant 25,727 6.00 /1,000 gsf 154 ---
Block 4 Total --- 1,156 --- 806 350
Block 5
Parking Lot 71 64
Hotel (Rooms) 176 0.35 /room 61 ---
Meeting Rooms (seats) 120 na ---
Retail 7,445 1.05 /1,000 gsf 8 ---
Office (excludes AI) 195,526 2.30 /1,000 gsf 450 ---
Restaurant 1,485 6.00 /1,000 gsf 9 ---
The Art Institute 35,000 footnote 2 280 ---
Block 5 Total --- 64 --- 808 -744
Block 6
Theater (Seats) 1,200 0.03 /seat 36 ---
Retail 1,758 1.05 /1,000 gsf 2 ---
Restaurant 9,832 6.00 /1,000 gsf 59 ---
Residential 56 0.36 /unit 20 ---
Block 6 Total --- 0 --- 117 -117
Block 7
Parking Garage 735 662
Hotel (Rooms) 240 0.35 /room 83 ---
Meeting Space 9,300 na ---
Restaurant 13,202 6.00 /1,000 gsf 79 ---
Office 21,024 2.30 /1,000 gsf 48 ---
Condominiums na footnote 1 na ---
Block 7 Total --- 662 --- 210 452
Block 8
Retail 6,940 1.05 /1,000 gsf 7 ---
Restaurant 28,751 6.00 /1,000 gsf 173 ---
Block 8 Total --- 0 --- 180 -180
Block 9
Retail 33,000 1.05 /1,000 gsf 35 ---
Restaurant 5,000 6.00 /1,000 gsf 30 ---
Residential 120 0.36 /unit 43 ---
Performing Arts (seats) 300 0.12 /seat 36
Cinema (seats) 0 0.03 /seat 0 ---
Block 9 Total --- 0 --- 144 -144
Block 10
Parking Garage 854 769
Retail 22,466 1.05 /1,000 gsf 24 ---
Office 10,240 2.30 /1,000 gsf 24 ---
Restaurant 9,249 6.00 /1,000 gsf 55 ---
Residential 342 0.36 /unit 123 ---
Block 10 Total --- 769 --- 226 543
Block 11 Total
Parking Garage 927 834
Retail 21,000 1.05 /1,000 gsf 22 ---
Office 212,000 2.30 /1,000 gsf 488 ---
Restaurant 5,000 6.00 /1,000 gsf 30 ---
Residential 287 0.36 /unit 103 ---
Block 11 Total --- 834 --- 643 191
Block 12
Parking Garage 578 520
Dick's Sporting (footnote 3) 84,000 0.53 /1,000 gsf 44
Office (footnote 4) 20,000 3.00 /1,000 gsf 60 ---
Block 12 Total --- 520 --- 104 416
Town Center Total --- 4,172 --- 3,520 652

(1) 119 residential units (Weston Condominiums) in Block 7 have 212 reserved spaces in the Block 7 garage. As such, parking
demand and parking supply for these units is excluded from the overall analysis (947 spaces minus 212 equals 735).
(2) The Art Institute's parking demand is based on 900 students and faculty, 60% are present on a typical day, 60% are present
during at 12 PM (peak hour), 90% arrive via auto and park, and the average persons per occupied vehicle is 1.05.
(3) Given the size of Dick's Sporting and the evening peak hour the parking demand ratio for this "big box" retail store is estimated to be
50% of the daytime demand ratio associated with smaller boutique retail stores.
(4) Assumed a higher parking demand factor since this is planned to be an office call center, which has a higher parking generation.
 Page 4 of 4

Table 3 – Peak Weekend Total Practical 8 PM Peak Weekend

Gross Leasable Supply Demand Ratio Demand Surplus/Deficit
(8 PM) Parking Surplus/ Block 2 (Beacon Bldg.)

Deficit Analysis by Block Parking Lot

Retail
186
0
167
2.80 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Office 0 0.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Restaurant 0 14.40 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Block 2 Total --- 167 --- 0 167
Block 3
Retail 5,101 2.80 /1,000 gsf 14 ---
Office 68,710 0.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Restaurant 19,764 14.40 /1,000 gsf 285 ---
Block 3 Total --- 0 --- 299 -299
Block 4
Parking Garage 1,284 1,156
Retail 19,554 2.80 /1,000 gsf 55 ---
Office 274,413 0.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Restaurant 25,727 14.40 /1,000 gsf 370 ---
Block 4 Total --- 1,156 --- 425 731
Block 5
Parking Lot 71 64
Hotel (Rooms) 176 0.80 /room 141 ---
Meeting Rooms (seats) 120 na ---
Retail 7,445 2.80 /1,000 gsf 21 ---
Office (excludes AI) 195,526 0.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Restaurant 1,485 14.40 /1,000 gsf 21 ---
The Art Institute 35,000 footnote 2 0 ---
Block 5 Total --- 64 --- 183 -119
Block 6
Theater (Seats) 1,200 0.25 /seat 300 ---
Retail 1,758 2.80 /1,000 gsf 5 ---
Restaurant 9,832 14.40 /1,000 gsf 142 ---
Residential 56 1.60 /unit 90 ---
Block 6 Total --- 0 --- 537 -537
Block 7
Parking Garage 735 662
Hotel (Rooms) 240 0.80 /room 192 ---
Meeting Space 9,300 na ---
Restaurant 13,202 14.40 /1,000 gsf 190 ---
Office 21,024 0.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Condominiums na footnote 1 na ---
Block 7 Total --- 662 --- 382 280
Block 8
Retail 6,940 2.80 /1,000 gsf 19 ---
Restaurant 28,751 14.40 /1,000 gsf 414 ---
Block 8 Total --- 0 --- 433 -433
Block 9
Retail 33,000 2.80 /1,000 gsf 92 ---
Restaurant 5,000 14.40 /1,000 gsf 72
Residential 120 1.60 /unit 192 ---
Performing Arts (seats) 300 0.38 /seat 114 ---
Cinema (seats) 0 0.25 /seat 0 ---
Block 9 Total --- 0 --- 470 -470
Block 10
Parking Garage 854 769
Retail 22,466 2.80 /1,000 gsf 63 ---
Office 10,240 0.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Restaurant 9,249 14.40 /1,000 gsf 133 ---
Residential 342 1.60 /unit 547 ---
Block 10 Total --- 769 --- 743 26
Block 11 Total
Parking Garage 927 834
Retail 21,000 2.80 /1,000 gsf 59 ---
Office 212,000 0.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Restaurant 5,000 14.40 /1,000 gsf 72 ---
Residential 287 1.60 /unit 459 ---
Block 11 Total --- 834 --- 590 244
Block 12
Parking Garage 578 520
Dick's Sporting (footnote 3) 84,000 1.40 /1,000 gsf 118
Office 20,000 0.00 /1,000 gsf 0 ---
Block 12 Total --- 520 --- 118 402
Town Center Total --- 4,172 --- 4,180 -8

(1) 119 residential units (Weston Condominiums) in Block 7 have 212 reserved spaces in the Block 7 garage. As such, parking
demand and parking supply for these units is excluded from the overall analysis (947 spaces minus 212 equals 735).
(2) The Art Institute's parking demand is based on 900 students and faculty, 60% are present on a typical day, 60% are present
during at 12 PM (peak hour), 90% arrive via auto and park, and the average persons per occupied vehicle is 1.05.
(3) Given the size of Dick's Sporting and the evening peak hour the parking demand ratio for this "big box" retail store is estimated to be
50% of the daytime demand ratio associated with smaller boutique retail stores.
UNIVERSITY RIDGE DEVELOPMENT

RFP for a 6 acre portion of the

37.4± Acres on University Ridge
 April 6, 2017

REBUILDING University Ridge Development

COMMUNITIES 301 University Ridge
Suite 2400
AND INDIVIDUAL
Greenville, SC 29601
LIVES THROUGH
Dear Members of the Selection Committee,
HOUSING, ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT, AND Homes of Hope and our professional design team of LS3P Architects and CCAD Engineering is
pleased to present our proposal for the development of parcels B and C of Greenville County’s
JOB TRAINING.
University Ridge Development RFP. Our proposal is offered in conjunction with a master proposal
from CitiSculpt for the entire development. We are honored to join CitiSculpt’s effort by providing a
key component in this thriving mixed-use development and to include high quality mixed-income
homes that will be beautiful, energy efficient, and long-lasting.

We understand that Greenville County’s project goals include the design and construction of a
vibrant mixed-use development which will contribute to economic development and to the health
of the surrounding area. Primary criteria for success of the development include high quality, high
density designs which are aesthetically appealing, create a sense of place, and are thoughtfully
integrated into the urban fabric.

While CitiSculpt’s overall proposal will accommodate all of these goals, our Homes of Hope, LS3P
Architects, and CCAD team will be vital to extending that significant positive community impact from
the heart of the development into the surrounding neighborhoods. High quality mixed income housing
in the downtown core will support diversity and encourage downtown activity and investment,
creating a win-win scenario for residents, business owners, and the entire community.

Homes of Hope has operated continuously in the Greenville area since 1998, and has a proven track
record of community success. Led by Don Oglesby, Homes of Hope focuses on the development of
mixed income homes as well as financial wellness training and other initiatives for the community.
LS3P’s Custom Home Studio, led by John Edwards, AIA, has operated in the Greenville area for
nearly fifty years, and has a diverse array of residences in its portfolio at all scales, both multifamily
and single-family. CCAD Engineering, founded and led by Jamie McCutchen, PE, has provided top-
tier civil engineering and consulting services in the Greenville area since 1999. Each entity is deeply
committed to the Greenville area, in which we all live and work.

DESIGN APPROACH
Homes of Hope has developed 560 mixed income homes over the past 18 years, primarily in Greenville
County, and we believe strongly in single-family development in family-friendly environments. Many
of our residents are workforce families, and our work prioritizes market-rate quality, energy efficiency,
walkable neighborhoods, community wellness, and green space. Mixed-income development is
paramount in our development philosophy and in building a diverse, connected community. Given
the enormous public pressure for the city and county to support homes that are affordable for our vital
local workforce near the core of the city, we believe that this project offers a remarkable opportunity
to build a stronger community for all.
3 DUNEAN STREET GREENVILLE, SC 29611 864.269.4663 PH 864.269.6235 FA X HOMESOFHOPE.ORG
We propose to build and develop the 6 acres across the street from County Square in this same
family-friendly, neighborhood-oriented way. We believe that this approach is far more viable to the
long-term health of the community than the typical approach of building four to six story apartment
complexes with entirely low-income or high-income populations which remain disconnected from
the urban fabric and community participation.

We propose to develop 78 residences, including 15 single-family homes and 63 town homes, in a site
with abundant green space and walkability. These homes will consist of a 50/50 mix of market rate
home buyers and moderate income work-force families. Twenty of the 78 residences will be rental
properties, which will be interspersed among the other homes that will be owner-occupied. 50%
of the rentals will be market-rate. The work-force homes will be indistinguishable from the market-
rate homes, and fully integrated within the development. We will continue to offer financial wellness
training to each work-force family we house; this valuable training often helps workforce families
move into the middle class through asset growth and an “investment versus spending” mentality.

To give an idea of the pricing and income mix in the development, pricing is expected to range from
$150k-$295k, and rental rates are expected to be from $650-$1500. At the base level of that range,
the family incomes these home prices accommodate will include first responders such as fire, police
and EMS staff as well as teachers, service sector and other public employees. At the upper level
of that range, family incomes these home prices accommodate will be consistent with the region’s
professional workforce.

We believe that this lower-than-apartment-density, family friendly environment is beneficial to

both the project and to the greater community in order to create a transition from the most dense
development to the traditional single-family residences found in Haynie Sirrine. Our approach of
including single-family homes and townhomes will blend better with the exiting neighborhood context
than would a higher-density apartment style approach. Our mixed-income housing approach will
also enhance the larger scaled redevelopment of the County Square property. In order to make this
type of development viable, however, we believe that the county will need to adjust its pricing for
these 6 acres. We propose a purchase price of $2 M, which we know will be lower than expected,
but we believe strongly that the trade-off will reap long-term economic benefits for the neighborhood
and for city and county governments.

As President/CEO of Homes of Home, Don Oglesby, HDFP, EDFP, is authorized to execute legal
binding documents related to this portion of the larger proposal. Don Oglesby hereby attests that the
information contained in this response is accurate to the best of his knowledge.

While the master proposal for this proposed development is from CitiSculpt of Charlotte, NC, Don
will serve as the contact person for the component of the response regarding parcels B and C
(see signature page below for contact information.) We are enthusiastic about the opportunity to
collaborate with CitiSculpt and Greenville County to include mixed income housing as part of this
endeavor, and we look forward to the opportunity to discuss our proposal with you in an interview.
Best regards,

Don Oglesby HDFP, EDFP

President | CEO
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

HOMES OF HOPE partnered with LS3P: CHICORA CREST

MAIN CONTACT WORK PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Don Oglesby
President/CEO of Homes of Hope DEVELOPER FEASIBILITY STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
(864) 546-4637
doglesby@homesofhope.org ALTERNATIVE FINANCING MODELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
homesofhope.org
QUALIFICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

CAPABILITY and CAPACITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

REQUIREMENTS of GREENVILLE COUNTY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

 WORK PLAN
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Total 730 Days (2 Years)

Design
185 Total Days

Schematic Design Refinement

45 Days

Prelim Design Review City of Greenville DRB

Development Subdivision Review with Planning Commission
30 Days (Concurrent with Design Development)

Design Development
65 Days

Final Design Review City of Greenville DRB

30 Days (Concurrent with Construction Documents)

Construction Documents
75 Days

Procurement & Permitting

75 Total Days

Bidding and Negotiation

45 Days

Permitting
30 Days

Site Preparation
90 Total Days

Site Preparation and Grading

90 Days

Building Construction
380 Total Days

Construction of Townhomes
380 Days

Construction of Single Family Homes

90 Days (Concurrent with Townhomes)

UNIVERSIT Y RIDGE DE VELOPMENT   HOMES OF HOPE  7

 DEVELOPER FEASIBILITY STUDY

HOMES OF HOPE: BRADLEY PLACE

DEVELOPER FEASIBILITY STUDY

The master CitiSculpt proposal addresses most items of the requested developer
feasibility study items for the site as a whole. For the Homes of Hope, LS3P/Neal Prince
Studios, and CCAD portion of the proposal, we refer you to the “Balancing Prosperity and
Housing Affordability in Greenville” report adopted by the City of Greenville in January of
2017, which analyzes the shortage of available housing across income levels, proposes
strategies to encourage the development of more housing that is affordable, and defines
future goals to address those needs. We will also draw from CitiSculpt’s studies of the
highest and best use of the site to inform the long-term viability of the neighborhood’s
future. Our team is enthusiastic about providing housing options that welcome and
support a wide range of ages, incomes, and family sizes to create a healthy and diverse
downtown community.

UNIVERSIT Y RIDGE DE VELOPMENT   HOMES OF HOPE  9

DEVELOPER FEASIBILITY STUDY

10 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
DEVELOPER FEASIBILITY STUDY

  H O M E S O F H O P E 11
 ALTERNATIVE FINANCING MODELS

HOMES OF HOPE partnered with LS3P: CHICORA CREST

ALTERNATIVE FINANCING MODELS

Our team intends to use private local lending institutions for 80-85% of the financing,
and our own equity capital for the other 15-20% using our CED (Community Economic
Development) tax credits to attract capital investment, and a small grant ($375K).

UNIVERSIT Y RIDGE DE VELOPMENT   H O M E S O F H O P E   13

 QUALIFICATIONS

HOMES OF HOPE partnered with LS3P: FOREST PARK

QUALIFICATIONS

Our Homes of Hope, LS3P/Neal Prince Studio, and CCAD team are proposing to lead
the development of parcels B and C within the overall site development efforts led by
CitiSculpt.

UNIVERSIT Y RIDGE DE VELOPMENT   H O M E S O F H O P E   15

PROJECT EXPERIENCE EXAMPLES
Chicora Crest Master Plan & Single Family Affordable Housing
Greenville, SC - Haynie-Sirrine Neighborhood

The Haynie-Sirrine Neighborhood in downtown Greenville has a rich cultural history, but
in recent decades its housing stock had fallen into neglect. Major changes to address this
issue are underway, and many severely deteriorated or abandoned structures have been
removed in order to make way for neighborhood revitalization.

At Chicora Crest, LS3P’s Master Plan for a 29-home, mixed-income urban planned
development is the centerpiece of the revitalization effort. Based on Traditional Neighborhood
Design (TND) principles, Chicora Crest supports both market-rate-for-sale and affordable-
rent homes, with the goal of making the two housing types indistinguishable from one
another. LS3P’s design for Homes of Hope’s housing prototypes at Chicora Crest brings
a number of new Craftsman-style homes to the neighborhood. The first 11 rental houses
were constructed using a variety of grant-based funding resources. Following completion
of the rental units, Homes of Hope constructed 6 market-rate homes geared toward owner
occupants. The remaining 12 lots were construction in a third phase.

The Greater Greenville Association of REALTORS presented Chicora Crest with a special
recognition in its annual Revitalization Awards Program. The program acknowledges
individuals and projects that took significant risks by investing substantial time and money
in property in Greenville, Laurens, and Pickens counties, where the resulting built project
acts as a catalyst to improve its particular community. The LS3P design was commended
by the review committee for the fact that all of the homes are similar enough in design that
a ride-by of the neighborhood would not reveal which homes are owned by middle-income
workforce families and which are affordable rental properties.

16 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
 PROJECT DETAILS

Client: Homes of Hope

Project Location: Seawright

Lane, McHan Street, and
Haynie Street, Greenville, SC

Original Budget: $3,700,000

Const. Cost: $3, 678,991

Projected Duration: P1: 12

mo.; P2: 7 mo.; P3: 7mo.

Actual Duration: P1: 12 mo.;

P2: 7 mo.; P3: 7mo.

Team Members:
Don Oglesby, Homes of Hope
John Edwards, LS3P

  H O M E S O F H O P E 17
PROJECT EXPERIENCE EXAMPLES
Markley Row
Greenville, SC

Markley Row, a 10-unit multifamily housing development, sits at a hinge point between
Greenville’s dense central business district and its adjacent single family residential
neighborhoods. The corner site fronts a busy two-lane street with numerous large commercial
structures on the east side, and a primarily residential street on the south side. Within 300
feet of the site are a five-story, 150-unit apartment; warehouses; a historic grocery building;
a 1,200 seat church sanctuary; and more than a dozen single-family and duplex dwellings.
Markley Row simultaneously serves as an anchor, a transition point, and a buffer between
intense urban uses to the east and less intense residential uses to the west.

To acknowledge this anchor/transitional role, the design team examined residential building
patterns and traditions for medium density urban housing, and derived the design from the
pattern established by early twentieth century housing courts. These buildings are typically
arranged in a horseshoe plan to frame a central shared green space, with a pattern of

18 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
Pavilion-Link-Pavilion which shows up in both Markley and other larger-scale local examples
PROJECT DETAILS
of the typology. In that spirit, Markley Row is organized such that the end pavilions are
pulled forward toward Markley Street, and the three center structures are set back to form Client: Rallis Holdings
a shared garden courtyard. Pulling the end Pavilions forward also creates a strong building
presence at the street corner, and distances the development from the nearest adjacent Project Location:
single-family residences. Markley Street, Greenville, SC

Original Budget: $4,500,000

Other design cues, including the box-like geometry and use of brick as a dominant material
rising from the grade plane, are derived from the context found in the West End neighborhood. Const. Cost: TBD
In order to illustrate that Markley Row is a new building in a mixed-age building context,
the design includes refined modern finishes to define Markley Row as an early twenty-first Projected Duration: TBD
century building.
Actual Duration: TBD

Team Members:
John Edwards, LS3P

  H O M E S O F H O P E 19
PROJECT EXPERIENCE EXAMPLES
Anson House Luxury Condominiums
Charleston, SC

This new 32-residence condominium building located on the Charleston Harbor near the
South Carolina Aquarium and LS3P’s new Concord Park development will be the pinnacle
of luxury living in Charleston. Each unit of the six-story building contains high ceilings and
tall window walls that flow seamlessly to open the entire space to the outdoors. Unique
entrance foyers open into graciously proportioned rooms.

Some of the amenities in the building include semi-private elevators serving two units per
floor, and a private elevator that accesses the penthouse condos. One of the penthouses
contains its own art gallery. Each unit has a spacious terrace that dimensionally allows
for full entertaining, and is very much akin to the true Charleston piazza.

The top of the structure actually “crowns” the building with penthouses set back far
enough to provide a high degree of planting, terraces, and pergolas, avoiding the flat top
so common in large new buildings. These terraces provide expansive views of the harbor
and Ravenel Bridge.

The centerpiece for the building on the ground level is a public fountain with seating. First-
floor piazzas have stairs to the ground to reduce the feel of removal from the public realm.
These, together with the intense planting and brick-like paving, combine to complement
the effort across the street at the Concord Park project, making a true urban experience,
rather than isolated residential enclaves.

20 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
 PROJECT DETAILS

Client: John P. Zervos

Project Location:
Laurens Street, Charleston, SC

Original Budget: $30,000,000

Const. Cost: $30,500,000

Projected Duration: 18 mo.

Actual Duration: 18 mo.

Team Members:
Richard Gowe, LS3P

  H O M E S O F H O P E 21
PROJECT TEAM
Don Oglesby
President | CEO
DETAILS

Education:
Certified HDFP—(Housing Development Finance
Professional)—NDC course 2009

Certified EDFP—(Economic Development Finance
Professional)—NDC course 2012

Masters Degree in Theology from CLST

Spartanburg, SC 2002

Experience:
Homes of Hope, Inc
Greenville, South Carolina
2000 – Present

Started 1-1-2000 as Executive Director of very

small non-profit organization, staff of 4 with annual
budget of $180,000. Now President/CEO of same
organization now with staff of 15 and annual
operating budget of $8,000,000. Has led Homes
of Hope in the development of over 500 affordable
rental homes for low-income persons—mostly
single family homes—and the job training/mentoring
of over 280 men overcoming drug and alcohol
addictions.

Showcase of Homes, Inc

Piedmont, South Carolina
38 years experience business management, the first 18 years in retail 1995 – 2000
management culminating in actually owning own small business. 5 years
Was Comptroller for manufactured housing
experience in business finance—as comptroller for manufactured housing development company managing finances
business—15 years experience in non-profit management as Executive for company operating with annual budget of
Director, then President/CEO of Homes of Hope, a Christian ministry $4,000,000 and staff of 30.

dedicated to developing affordable housing in conjunction with low-income Rey’s, Inc.

neighborhood community development while also providing job training/ Greenville, South Carolina
1989-1995
mentoring for men overcoming drug and alcohol addictions.
Manager of downtown flagship store out of chain of
eleven stores. Annual sales exceeded $1,000,000
and managed staff of 8.

Camelot, Inc.
Tuscaloosa, Alabama
1987-1989

Owner-Operator of small retail store. Annual sales of

$400,000 and managed staff of 4.

22 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
 PROJECT TEAM
Dawn Dowden
Chief Operating Officer
DETAILS

Education:
Winthrop University
Rock Hill, SC
Non-­Profit Management

University of Akron
Akron, OH
Elementary Education

Specialized Training:
NeighborWorks Training Institute (2011, 2012)

Experience:

Homes of Hope, Chief Operating Officer

2008-­Present
Assist President/CEO in leading the Development
Team in all phases of new construction
development. Lead and manage administrative and
program staff of 13 in implementing Homes of Hope
housing strategies and best practices. Work with the
Fund raising Team to secure funding for client
development programs. Oversee the administration
of HOME, HTF,and NSP grant programs.

Trek Alliance, Assistant Events Coordinator

Accomplished and experienced in securing funding and coordinating
all stages of single family affordable housing development. Working
knowledge of federal and state housing grant programs to include: HOME,
HTF, and NSP. Six years of non-profit management experience. Over
eight years of experience in programs serving homeless and low-income
families and individuals.
1998-2000
Organized and executed sales and
marketing seminars for 5000+ sales and
marketing professionals throughout the
United States. Coordinated and managed
training volunteers at each venue.
Marc Accetta, Executive Assistant
1996-1998
Responsible for handling all details of business
executive’s personal and business affairs. Managed
household and oversight of household staff.

  H O M E S O F H O P E 23
PROJECT TEAM
Rick Ingram
Chief Financial Officer
Chief Financial Officer, Homes Of Hope, Inc.
Greenville, SC 2016 – Present
Responsible for providing overall financial management,
asset management and reporting for Homes of Hope in
accordance with Homes of Hope’s vision, mission and
strategies. As a member of the leadership team, works
closely with the CEO and COO to determine real estate
structuring, feasibility and continued property asset
management. Oversees accounting, asset management,
financial grant management and compliance, budgets,
controls, audits, and lender and vendor relationships.
Responsible for Homes of Hope’s financial plans and policies,
its accounting practices, the conduct of its relationships with
lending institutions, investors and the financial community,
the maintenance of its fiscal records, and the preparation
of financial reports. Supervision over general accounting,
real estate development accounting, property accounting,
internal auditing, cost accounting, and budgetary controls.
Essential functions of this position include, but are not limited
to the following:
24 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
DETAILS
• Business Competencies:
• Operations/Financial Leadership
• Budgeting & Financial Planning
• Training/Mentoring/Coaching
• Resource Management/Allocation
• Real Estate Industry and Markets
• Financial Statements/Analysis
• Develop Proposals/Reports/Plans
• Strategic Planning & Forecasting
• Building Positive Relationships
• Public Relations and Partnerships
• Human Resources / IT / Legal
• Develop/Deliver Presentations
• Develop, analyze, and interpret statistical and accounting
information in order to appraise operating results in
terms of profitability, performance against budget, and
other matters bearing on fiscal soundness and operating
effectiveness of organization.
• Oversee the preparation of financial reports, including
but not limited to, budget to actual by department,
financial statements, cash flow reports, and construction
costs, project development reports, financial forecasts
and written analyses of report variances.
• Manage organizations financial tools and assets to
include loans, bank accounts, investments, and real
estate. Monitor property debt; make recommendations
on refinancing, and plan for adequate reserve deposits
and balances at all properties.
 PROJECT TEAM
R. Denice Harris
Executive Director of Client Development
DETAILS

Education:
University of South Carolina Upstate 1989-1991
University of South Carolina 1986-1988
Church Financial Law Courses
Human Resources Courses
Professional Christian Life Coach – Certified
Financial Literacy - Certified
Property Management Certification

Experience:
Homes of Hope
Executive Director of Client Development
October 2008 - present

Find Great People Staffing Accounting Coordinator

September 2007 -April 2008

Cricket Wireless Communications—ELR Consulting

(Contract Position) Accounting Assistant/
Administrative Assistant for Project Manager
November 2007-February 2008

Bethlehem Baptist Church

Church Accountant
May 2006-August 2007

Lee Road Baptist Church

Financial Administrator/Coordinator
Extensive professional experience in key positions of responsibility. July 2002-May 2006
Attention to detail, precise, accurate, well organized; excellent
communication/interpersonal skills—able to develop positive relationships
with individuals of all ages and backgrounds. Excellent computer skills.

  H O M E S O F H O P E 25
PROJECT TEAM
Julia Schmidt
Director of Administration
DETAILS

Education:
Clemson University 2011
Clemson, South Carolina

Bachelor of Science in Parks, Recreation and

Tourism Management. Concentration in Community
Recreation, Sport and Camp Management
Minor: Sociology

Experience:
Homes of Hope
Executive Assistant
2012 - 2014

Homes of Hope
Administrative Assistant
February 2012 - August 2012

Invisible Children
Office Management Intern
Fall 2011

Ella Bailey Recreation Center

Recreation Leader
Summer 2010

Homes of Hope, Greenville, SC

Director of Administration
September 2014- Present

• Assist President/CEO and Vice President of Operations

• Support the administrative needs of construction development
• Database development and management to
track over 300 construction projects
• Supervise the Administrative Associate and oversee
Office Management including developing an office
• budget, and monitoring supply costs and needs
• Facilitate HR policies and procedures including tracking
time off, and maintaining company manual
• Support in the planning and execution of corporate
events that reach over 500 people
• Design and create professional documents such as impact
reports, registration forms, company brochures,
• business cards and signage
• Communicate with IT Support Company concerning
new equipment, tech requests, office needs

26 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
 PROJECT TEAM
Scott May, AIA, LEED® AP, BD+C
Vice President | Principal
DETAILS

Registration(s):
Architecture, South Carolina #3205, 1985.

Education:
Clemson University, Bachelor of Science in Design,
Cum Laude, 1981. University of South Carolina,
Master of Business Administration, coursework.

Community Involvement / Professional Affiliations:

Scott May is LS3P’s Higher Education Practice Leader. With nearly 30 years
of experience in master planning and architectural design, Scott serves as an
invaluable firm-wide resource providing design leadership and expertise in creating
innovative environments for learning.
With university clients including Clemson University, the University of South
Carolina, Furman University, Bob Jones University, Winthrop University, Anderson
University, Presbyterian College, Lander University, Tri-County Technical College,
Spartanburg Community College, Greenville Technical College, and Piedmont
Technical College, Scott brings his extensive specialized knowledge to the
collaborative design process. Scott works closely with clients, contractors,
consultants, and the LS3P team to create cross-disciplinary design solutions. An
active member and advocate of the US Green Building Council, Scott received his
LEED® Accreditation in 2002. He has since worked on more than a dozen facilities
with an emphasis on sustainable design.
Outside of the office, Scott’s activities revolve around his church and international
missions. He has served in various capacities at Christ Community Church in
Simpsonville, SC, and has served in Africa on short-term missions as pharmacist,
medical aide, designer/builder, and church planter. Scott is also an avid athlete,
participating locally in charitable golf tournaments and road races.
Columbia Council of Architects: Member (1984-
1988); Council President (1987). AIA, Member
(1985-Present). AIA Greenville Chapter, Member
(1988-Present). Christ Community Church, Member
(1990-Present). City of Greenville Historical
Architectural Review Board: Member (1991-1994);
Chairman (1994). Greenville Board of Architectural
Review for Designated Historic Districts and
Structures, Vice Chairman (1992-1995). Opportunity
Greenville, Class of 1998. Society for College
and University Planning, Member (2000-Present).
Greenville Hospital System, Advisory Committee:
Member (1999-2002); Chairman (2001). Council of
Educational Facilities Planners International,
Member (2000-Present). USGBC, Board of Directors
(2008-2009). Leadership Greenville Class 38
(2011-2012). Wachovia Advisory Board Member
(2013-Present). Upstate Fatherhood Coalition, Board
Member (2013 - Present).
Recognitions:
Phi Kappa Phi National Honor National Honor
Fraternity. Tau Sigma Delta National Honor Society
for Architectural and the Allied Arts.
Relevant Projects:
Clemson University - West End Zone Component III
Clemson, SC
Principal in Charge
Clemson University - Memorial Stadium Suites
Renovations Clemson, SC
Principal in Charge
Clemson University - Littlejohn Coliseum
Clemson, SC
Principal in Charge

Clemson University - West Campus Chiller Plant

Clemson, SC
Principal in Charge & Project Manager

Tri-County Technical College Occupational Service

Building
Easley, South Carolina
Principal in Charge

  H O M E S O F H O P E 27
PROJECT TEAM
John Edwards, AIA, NCARB
Associate Principal | Project Manager
John joined LS3P in 2005, after having previously served as a principal
in Charleston based Epps Edwards Architects. He was born in Charleston
and raised near Greenville, South Carolina.
John has extensive experience in the design and management of a
variety of projects including, Municipal, Higher Education, Health
Care, Commercial, and Custom Residential. He has completed award
honored projects with complex planning, site, budget and time-of-
delivery constraints. His guidance and community leadership have aided
several organizations including Greenville Pickens Area Transportation
Study (GPATS) Advisory Committee, Greenville’s Design & Preservation
Commission (DPC) and the Design Review Board (DRB), where he is Vice
Chair. His career-long commitment to quality workforce housing has helped
to significantly improve the design of Greenville’s affordable housing
inventory. John has also served as President of the Greenville Spinners
and as President of the Heritage Historic District.
When away from the office, John can typically be found bicycling around
the upstate, touring historic sites or enjoying the outdoors in the
company of friends, family and his two Tibetan Terriers.
28 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
DETAILS
Registration(s):
Architecture: North Carolina #8894; South Carolina
#4802; Ohio #10410.
Education:
Clemson University, Bachelor of Science in Design,
1988. Clemson University, Graduate Overseas
Program, 1989. Clemson University, Master of
Architecture, 1990.
Community Involvement / Professional Affiliations:
AIA, Member (1994-Present). City of Greenville:
Construction and Maintenance Board of
Adjustments and Appeals (2002-2008); Design
and Preservation Commission (2008-2009);
Design Review Board (2010-Present). Greenville
Pickens Area Transportation Study, Long Range
Transportation Plan Advisory Board (2006-2007).
Heritage Historic District Association, President
(2007-2010). Leadership Greenville, Class
XXXVI (2009-2010); Palmetto Cycling Coalition,
2002-Present; Greenville Chamber of Commerce
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
2009-Present; AIA-CRAN Greenville, Charter
Member; Hands on Greenville, Community Project
Team Leader (2007-2009); National Council
of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB)
1993-Present; City of Greenville – Citywide
Housing Strategy Steering Committee, 2012-2013.
Relevant Projects:
GTA | Greenlink Transfer Center Renovation
Greenville, SC
Project Architect
GTA | Greenlink Transfer Station Administrative
Offices
Greenville, SC
Project Architect/Studio Leader
GTA | Greenlink Transfer Center Addition – Bicycle
Commuter Station
Greenville, SC
Project Manager/Studio Leader
City of Greenville Community Centers Assessment
Greenville, SC
Project Architect
Greenville Chamber of Commerce & Greenville
County Recreation District - Sterling Greenway –
Master Plan & Trail Phase 1
Greenville, SC
Project Architect/Planner
 PROJECT TEAM
Dean Oang, Associate AIA
Associate | Project Manager
DETAILS

Education:
University of Detroit-Mercy School of Architecture,
Professional Bachelors Degree, 2003. University
of Detroit-Mercy School of Architecture, Masters
Degree, 2004.

Community Involvement / Professional Affiliations:

AIA Students, Fundraiser (1998-2003). Hands on
Greenville, Volunteer (2004-Present). Opportunity
Greenville (2006). AIA Associate, Member
(2006-Present). Mauldin Comprehensive Plan,
People and Places Advisory Group (2008-Present).
United State Tennis Association – UPTA Board
Member & League Coordinator (2007-Present).
Greenville Chamber of Commerce – Transportation &
Infrastructure Committee Chairmen (2011-2013).

Relevant Projects:
Greenlink/GTA Transit Center & Office Renovation
Greenville, SC
Project Manager
Dean Oang has been a part of the LS3P team since 2005. Over the past
Greenlink/GTA Transit Center – Bike Station Addition
eight years, he has served as a Project Manager. His principal focus and
Greenville, SC
interest has been working with municipal governments and quasi- Project Manager
governmental agencies on a broad range of project types. These diverse
Seneca Area Transit Center
projects have included office buildings, recreation centers, cultural centers
Seneca, SC
and transit facilities. Dean has demonstrated a unique sensitivity toward Project Manager
developing design solutions that balance environmentally responsive
Clemson Area Transit
design while adhering to client goals, vision, and budget.
Clemson, SC
Project Manager (TIGER/FTA Grant Funded)
Dean is a Master of Architecture graduate of The University of Detroit
Coast RTA Intermodal Transportation Center
Mercy. He has enjoyed a respected reputation in competitive tennis. This Myrtle Beach, SC
same drive to succeed has proven to be an asset for him in the design Project Designer
studio where his peers feel that he lends a valuable perspective to any
Spartanburg Va-Du-Mar McMillian Park
project undertaken. Spartanburg, SC
Project Manager

Orangeburg Community Center

Orangeburg, SC
Project Manager

Mauldin Cultural Center – Auditorium Renovation

Mauldin, SC
Project Manager

Anderson Municipal Business Center

Anderson, SC
Project Manager

  H O M E S O F H O P E 29
PROJECT TEAM

JAMES D. MCCUTCHEN, JR., P.E.

PRESIDENT

EXPERIENCE

March 1999- CCAD Engineering, LLC; Greenville, South Carolina

Present: President. Founded company to provide civil engineering and consulting
services for developers, architects and municipalities in all phases of sitework
related projects.

September 1997- Dalton & Neves Co.; Greenville, South Carolina

March 1999: Vice President. Responsible for all civil engineering design and surveying
operations. Company assists developers and architects in all phases of civil
engineering design for land development. Company also performs boundary
surveys, loan surveys and topographical surveys.

June 1994- Site Design, Inc.; Greenville, South Carolina

September 1997: Employed as a Civil Engineer performing duties relating to site work on
residential and commercial sites. Duties include designing commercial sites
and residential subdivision lot layouts, stormwater and erosion control plans,
sewer and roadway plans and profiles. Design duties include computer aided
drafting (AutoCAD) as well as drainage calculations and permitting.

January 1993- Law Engineering; Raleigh, North Carolina

June 1994: Employed as a Staff Engineer in Environmental Services and leader of the
underground storage tank (UST) closure and assessment program. Other
responsibilities included performance of Environmental Assessments (EA's),
Preliminary Environmental Site Assessments (Phase I's) and preliminary and
comprehensive site contamination assessments.

EDUCATION

Clemson University Bachelor of Science

Clemson, South Carolina Civil Engineering-1992

PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS

Registered Professional Engineer - South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)

30 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
 PROJECT TEAM

TIMOTHY L. (CHIP) BUCHANAN, JR., E.I.T., LEED GREEN ASSOCIATE

PROJECT ENGINEER

EXPERIENCE

September 2013- CCAD Engineering, LLC; Greenville, South Carolina

Present: Project Engineer. Prepare Site Development plans for commercial, industrial
and residential projects using Civil 3D for AutoCAD. Develop site work
cost estimates based on conceptual site plans. Write Engineering reports to
be submitted to municipalities for land disturbance permitting. Model
Stormwater for quantity and quality using Hydraflow Hydrographs, IDEAL
Model and SEDCAD. Construction Administration services including Pre-
Construction Meetings, Submittal Review, Value Engineering, As-Built
Certifications and Permit Closeout.

February 2012- Spectrum Interiors of South Carolina; Greenville, South Carolina

September 2013: Project Manager/Estimator. Manage projects up to $1.4M using Sage
Timberline to track the project’s budget. Prepared monthly forecasting
reports for each job managed. Created monthly billings to be sent to the
General Contractor using AIA G702 & G703 forms.
Bid new construction projects and renovations using On-Screen Takeoff 3
and Quick Bid 4.
Projects: USC School of Medicine - Greenville; Chiquita Banana HQ -
Charlotte; BB&T Knights Stadium - Charlotte; Self Regional Healthcare
MOB (Laurens, SC), Bridge Connector (Greenwood, SC), Behavioral Health
Unit (Greenwood); Palmetto Health Parkridge ASB - Columbia, SC;
CertusBANK Branch - Greenville; Greenville Health System Small Projects
October 2010- Project Engineer/Assistant Project Manager. Submitted Product Data,
February 2012: Samples, LEED Criteria, etc. to General Contractors for approval. Contacted
suppliers for material quotes, prepared Purchase Orders and processed
Change Orders.

Summer 2007- Land Planning Associates; Easley, South Carolina

Summer 2008: Civil Engineering Intern. Used AutoCAD to design grading, drainage, utility,
and erosion control plans. Completed drainage calculations based on average
rainfall, soil type, and surface type Utilized multiple city and county online
GIS systems to complete projects. Created a retention pond maintenance and
classification system for Easley MS4.

Summer 2006: Sinclair & Associates; Duncan, South Carolina

Employed as a Staff Engineer in Environmental Services and leader of the
underground storage tank (UST) closure and assessment program. Other
responsibilities included performance of Environmental Assessments (EA's),
Preliminary Environmental Site Assessments (Phase I's) and preliminary and
comprehensive site contamination assessments.

  H O M E S O F H O P E 31
PROJECT TEAM

DANIEL C. PELLICANO, PE
SENIOR ENGINEER

EXPERIENCE

May 2016- CCAD Engineering, LLC; Greenville, South Carolina

Present: Senior Engineer. Oversee all commercial and industrial projects. Provide
consulting engineering services for land development projects including
commercial, industrial and residential projects. Commercial projects include
mixed-use, restaurant and retail facilities. Residential projects include single
family subdivisions, multi-unit, multi-family developments. Design work
includes preparation of site, grading/drainage, utility, and erosion/sediment
control plans for permitting by City, County, and State agencies. Management
duties include project cost estimate, proposal preparation, scheduling and
staff supervision.

February 2009- Ford, Bacon & Davis; Greenville, South Carolina

May 2016: Civil Engineer. Provided civil site consulting engineering services for
industrial projects. Design work included preparation of site infrastructure,
grading/drainage, underground utility, and erosion/sediment control plans
for permitting by City, County, and State agencies. Projects located
nationwide.

February 2009- CIVIL CONSULTING AND DESIGN; Greenville, South Carolina

April 2006: Senior Engineer/Project Manager. Provided consulting engineering services
for land development projects including commercial, residential, and
industrial projects. Commercial projects include mixed-use, restaurant and
retail facilities. Residential projects included single family subdivisions, multi-
unit, multi-family developments. Design work included preparation of site,
grading/drainage, utility, and erosion/sediment control plans for permitting
by City, County, and State agencies. Management duties included project cost
estimate, proposal preparation, and scheduling.

In addition, I served as consulting engineer for the Taylor’s Fire and Sewer
District, where I was responsible for review/approval of sewer designs for
the district, performing inspections of sewer construction, and witness testing

March 2005- TRIGON ENGR CONSULTANTS; Greenville, South Carolina

April 2006: Senior Consultant/Department Manager. Provide consulting engineering
services for land development projects including commercial, residential, and
industrial projects. Commercial projects include mixed-use, restaurant and
retail facilities. Residential projects include multi-unit, multi-family
developments. Design work includes preparation of site, grading/drainage,
utility, and erosion/sediment control plans for permitting by City, County,
and State agencies. Assist environmental department with Air Permitting,

32 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
 PROJECT TEAM

DAVE C. JONES
SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER

EXPERIENCE

August 2016- CCAD Engineering, LLC; Greenville, South Carolina

Present: Senior Project Manager. Civil Engineering and Design, Land Development,
Construction Management and Inspection.

February 2011- Professional Engineering Associates; Greenville, South Carolina

August 2016: Project Manager/Senior Civil Site Designer.

Additional Previous Employers:

Site Design
Davis & Floyd
Caliber
JTH Associates
Arcadis
JE Sirrine (Jacobs)
Fluor Engineering
Jones Brothers Builders

Over 15 years of Civil Land Development Planning, Design and Permitting. Civil 3D Autodesk
Software Suites, SSA, Hydraflow, SedCAD, IDEAL Model and Microsoft office Suites. Surface
model development and analysis, Grading Volumes utility gravity drainage Pipeworks. Road and Rail
Corridor Development. Site Design for Large Industrial, Commercial, Institutional, Municipal,
Utility, Roadway, Sports and Recreation Projects. Permit Application Package Preparation, Land
Disturbance, Storm Water, Roadway Encroachment, Erosion Control and Utility Extension. On Site
Construction, Observation, Inspection, Certification. Property Evaluation and Site Due Diligent
Analysis. Site Conditions Survey and document existing conditions for design development. On Site
Soils and borings evaluation, Environmental Impact, Wetlands and tree inventory information
collection and Studies. Residential Subdivision Design and Development, Lot layout Planning,
Roadway and Utility Design. Residential Home Design and Building. SC Licensed Plumber.
Considerable hands on experience with many Residential Building Trades. Grading, Loader,
Excavator, Skid Steer and Backhoe equipment operations. Landscaping Design and Tree Protection
Regulation and design. Timbering, Logging, Tree identification, Harvesting. Property acquisition,
Easements and Right of Way Negotiation and legal recording.

  H O M E S O F H O P E 33
REFERENCES

HOMES OF HOPE: BRADLEY PLACE

HOMES OF HOPE LS3P CCAD

McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture Clemson University Creative Builders

Joe Pazdan, Principal in Charge Roger Wiggins Will McCauley
400 Augusta St. #200 Project Manager 200 E. Broad St., Suite 150
Greenville, SC 29601 101 Calhoun Drive Greenville, SC
(864) 242-2033 Clemson, SC 29634 (864) 233-1631
Provided A&E for a project in (864) 643-628 Client for multiple projects
Greenville and currently providing Client for multiple projects
A&E for a project in N. Charleston

Quinn-Satterfield Builders CU-ICAR KDS Commercial Properties

Rick Quinn, Partner Mike Davis
136 Greenacre Road Associate Director of Facilities
Greenville, SC 29607 Planning and Management
(864) 235-8500 5 Research Drive
Has built over 40% of the Greenville, SC 29607
560 homes we’ve developed (864) 283-7105
Client for multiple projects
Mike Kiriakides
340 Rocky Slope Road, #302
Greenville, SC 29607
(864) 242-4200
Client for multiple projects

34 U N I V E R S I T Y R I D G E D E V E L O P M E N T
 CAPABILITY AND CAPACITY

LS3P: CHICORA STREET SENIOR DUPLEXES

CAPABILITY AND CAPACITY

Homes of Hope, founded in 1998, has developed over $65M in quality, energy efficient
housing for mixed income communities. To date, 560 homes have been completed.
Homes of Hope has also successfully owned and managed 320 rental properties to-
date, and has maintained corporate sustainability achieving a 98% collection percentage
of rents, and a 96% occupancy rate. 240 homes have been sold successfully to-date.
Homes of Hope currently has total assets of $30M and a net worth of $11M, with liquid
assets of slightly more than $4M. Homes of Hope has twice been awarded the Housing
Achievement Award by the SC Housing Finance and Development Authority.

Our team is ready to begin working immediately with highly qualified staff devoted to your
project. We have available and can commit the necessary staff to handle your project,
and our BIM capabilities further enhance our team’s design and production capacity.
We have reviewed project requirements and can assure you that lead personnel are
available to start work and will keep to the required schedule. In anticipation of multiple
design projects, we have included sufficient staffing in all disciplines to manage and
design all work. With the resources of a large, flexible support staff, our assigned team
can also meet aggressive schedules.

  H O M E S O F H O P E 35
 PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

LS3P: MARAIS AT SEASIDE FARMS

PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

For our proposed portion of the development on parcels B and C, we are only asking
the county demolish the existing buildings once they are vacated. We will provide all
other investment needed through our usual resources.

UNIVERSIT Y RIDGE DE VELOPMENT   H O M E S O F H O P E   37

 REQUIREMENTS

HOMES OF HOPE partnered with LS3P: CHICORA CREST

REQUIREMENTS OF GREENVILLE COUNTY

As in answer G above, for our proposed portion of the development on parcels B and
C, we are only asking the county demolish the existing buildings once they are vacated.
We will provide all other investment needed through our usual resources.

UNIVERSIT Y RIDGE DE VELOPMENT   H O M E S O F H O P E   39

3 DUNEAN STREET GREENVILLE, SC 29611 864.269.4663 PH 864.269.6235 FA X HOMESOFHOPE.ORG