(Photo: Orygun, Wikimedia)

As we’ve reported in numerous postings throughout the past year (click on “BRAC” in the “Categories” to the right), the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) process has led to the closure of more than 350 military bases—and the movement of many military operations from one base to another—since 1988. Whether we’ll experience another round of BRAC remains to be seen, but even if we don’t, the most recent round of base closings and realignments now wrapping up will continue to have a huge impact on Department of Defense property throughout the nation. We’re therefore beginning this new series, which will focus on individual military installations and how they—and related real estate uses in the surrounding area—are changing as a result of BRAC-related movements. Although the first few postings will explore bases in the National Capital Region, future pieces will examine others located throughout the nation.

Fort Belvoir has experienced some of the heaviest impacts from BRAC of all military installations in the National Capital Region. In early BRAC rounds, a number of federal agencies, including the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), relocated from other locations in the region to new facilities on Fort Belvoir. More recently, other large federal agencies have relocated to Fort Belvoir in the past two years, including the following:

  • The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), which consolidated 8,500 employees from various locations in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia into the new 2.77 million-square-foot, five-building NGA Campus East—the third-largest federal facility in the Washington, D.C., area—on the site of the former Engineering Proving Ground last year;
  • The Missile Defense Agency (MDA), which consolidated its direction, guidance and policy command center from other locations in the region into a new 99,000-square-foot facility on Fort Belvoir’s South Post that was completed last summer; and
  • The U.S. Army Program Executive Office Enterprise Information Systems (POE IS), which relocated from Fort Monmouth, N.J., to a newly renovated 75,000-square-foot building on the South Post, in a three-phase move that was completed last July.

In addition, the Fort Belvoir Community Hospital—a new, 1.3-million-square-foot, state-of-the-art medical facility built on the former site of Fort Belvoir’s South Post Golf Course, opened in August 2011. The new hospital is double that of the old Fort Belvoir DeWitt Army Community Hospital.

What impacts are all of these new facilities—and the addition of nearly 12,000 new military and civilian jobs—having on the surrounding area? Because the Springfield office market has had little Class A inventory available, we have seen new office construction built for and marketed to the many defense contractors who will want to relocate near the agencies now at Fort Belvoir. Normally, we would have expected this growth to continue at a very fairly brisk pace but pending sequestration and other DoD cutbacks have served to suspend contractor demand.  In some instances, contractors have already begun to pare back in anticipation that contracts will be downsized or cancelled. Ultimately, we expect the Fort Belvoir area – especially near Fort Belvoir North – to establish itself as a significant defense community focal point but the path today is not as clear.

Recently completed Bakersfield Federal Courthouse (Photo: KBAK/KBFX)

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) signed by President Obama in 2009 called for major new construction and the energy-efficient modernization of federal office buildings, courthouses and land ports across the country. This is the fourth piece in a series in which we examine some of the projects funded by these stimulus dollars.

The new federal courthouse in Bakersfield, Calif., has been built with $28.5 million in ARRA funding, by a collaboration between Gilbane Building Co. and NBBJ Architects of Seattle, under the GSA’s expedited Design and Construction Excellence Program. That program, which condensed the entire design and construction process into about two and a half years, has resulted in the project’s being completed almost two months ahead of schedule and roughly $2.5 million under budget. The two-story, 33,400-square-foot building at 510 19th Street will house the U.S. Magistrate Court, U.S. Marshals Service, and U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services. Located adjacent to the Bakersfield Central Park on a site donated by the city, the structure is seen as a vital part of the Central Park at Mill Creek revitalization project. It was designed to enhance the city’s civic center while offering sweeping views of the park and water landscape along the western side of the building.

The structure also was designed to earn a LEED Gold rating from the U.S. Green Building Council. Clean sightlines, natural lighting, and acoustic design elements are integrated throughout the building, which will be the first in the nation to use chilled beam technology for cooling. Staff members began moving in this week (July 9–13); the courthouse is scheduled to open for business on Monday, July 16, although a formal ribbon-cutting celebration will not be held until September 28.

One of the biggest challenges designers faced was how to make the building both secure and accessible to the public. Security requirements for federal courthouses have increased since the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, and the Bakersfield courthouse thus features extensive security and monitoring systems, including a glass-enclosed “ice cube” structure that houses security screening staff and equipment at the building’s entrance.

At the heart of the structure is a federal courtroom equipped with sophisticated electronic equipment—including large display screens on which evidence will be presented to jurors—as well as high windows along the ceiling that provide ample daylight. The building also contains chambers for the presiding U.S. magistrate and a visiting judge, offices for court and pre-trial staff as well as marshals and seven holding cells capable of holding up to 20 prisoners.

When—and in honor of whom—will the courthouse be named? That may not be determined for years, since it requires an act of Congress. Last year, at the behest of federal judges in Fresno, Republican Rep. Jim Costa and Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to name the building after the late Judge Myron Crocker. But Crocker had no ties to Bakersfield, and few people there had ever heard of him. Others have proposed naming the courthouse after former U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren (a former California attorney general and governor who grew up in Bakersfield), recently deceased Kern County Superior Court Judge Arthur Wallace or several other local legal legends. Costa, Boxer, and Feinstein later withdrew their legislation, and the building’s name remains in question. In the meantime, as the Bakersfield Californian reports, “a simple but elegant sign adorns the building’s front on 19th Street. It reads: United States Courthouse.”

Want to learn more about GSA’s stimulus spending projects? Click our “Stimulus” link in the column to the right or visit GSA’s interactive map showing all of the projects on which it is spending its $5.5 billion in ARRA funds.

Which federal agency was formed “to engage Americans of all ages and backgrounds in service to meet community needs”? The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) engages more than 5 million Americans in service through three major programs: Senior Corps, AmeriCorps and Learn and Serve America. Its mission is to “improve lives, strengthen communities, and foster civic engagement through service and volunteering.” It offers people opportunities to participate in a wide array of educational, environmental, public safety, homeland security and other types of projects. Participants mentor and tutor at-risk youth, help rebuild communities struck by natural disasters, assist seniors in living independently, support veterans and military families and much more.

Formerly known as the Corporation for National Service (CNS), CNCS was created by the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993.  It merged the work and staffs of two predecessor agencies, ACTION and the Commission on National and Community Service. CNCS is led by a board of directors and a chief executive officer appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Its headquarters are at 1201 New York Avenue, N.W., in Washington, D.C. The corporation also maintains state offices in all 50 states (as well as in American Samoa, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto Rico) that conduct public outreach and program support, and are directly responsible for developing grants and projects and for overseeing all Senior Corps and AmeriCorps projects within their states or territories.

CNCS collaborates with state service commissions, state education agencies, national nonprofit organizations and private corporations to promote its mission. It provides annual grants that help these types of groups support local organizations in administering community service and service-learning projects and programs; its volunteers have enabled tens of thousands of nonprofit and faith-based service organizations to increase their capacity and effectiveness. President Obama’s FY 2013 budget requested $1.063 billion for the CNCS, an increase of $13.8 million over the FY 2012 funding level.

Federal Center South Rendering (Source: GSA)

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), signed by President Obama on February 13, 2009, called for major new construction and the energy-efficient modernization of federal office buildings, courthouses and land ports across the country. This is the third piece in a series in which we examine some of the projects funded by these stimulus dollars.

The almost completed 209,000-square-foot regional headquarters of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) at Federal Center South, in Seattle, Wa., features the transformation of a nondescript old warehouse into a LEED-Gold certified modern office building with security enhancements and seismic upgrades (including repairing/replacing sections of the existing foundation as well as stabilizing liquefiable soils), plus a range of energy-saving features, including the following:

  • A high-performance facade;
  • The conversion of existing hardscape into low-impact sustainable green space;
  • Optimum orientation and dimensions for daylighting and passive solar heating;
  • High-efficiency lighting;
  • An overhead, water-based chilled-beam system of pipes for cooling;
  • A phase-change thermal storage tank coupled with a ground-loop heat exchanger to capture and reuse thermal energy; and
  • Innovative integrated mechanical systems.

While the project appears to be on track to exceed GSA’s aggressive high-performance goals, its most unusual feature may be a contractual one: the design-build team agreed to risk 0.5% of its original $66 million contract award if it does not meet or exceed those goals. If the new three-story building does not meet energy-use targets promised by the team before construction began, GSA will hold back $330,000. (The agency also is testing this type of fee-holdback contract at several other projects.)

The Federal Center South site is a wedge-shaped, nearly 46-acre property in the industrial area of South Seattle. In March 2009, GSA received authorization to demolish Building No. 1202—a nondescript single-story warehouse that was constructed by the U.S. Army during World War II and had been determined  to have no historic value—and build a high-performance office building on half of the warehouse footprint. (The structure is immediately to the west of the historic Albert Kahn–designed Ford Motor Company Assembly Plant, also known as Building No. 1201, which has been renovated and upgraded several times for use as a federal office building.) GSA’s original informational meeting in October 2009 attracted more than 100 interested parties. A dozen submitted proposals, and GSA shortlisted three of those to participate in a design-build competition. A team led by Seattle-based Sellen Construction Company and ZGF Architects was awarded the contract on March 26, 2010, and given only 18 weeks to develop its design far enough that it could guarantee a maximum price for delivery. The team also promised to deliver a structure that uses 30% less energy than the ASHRAE 90.1-2007 standard, which translates to 27,600 Btu per square foot per year.

The team began demolishing the existing structure in July 2010, and construction of the new structure started the following January. Although the project originally was scheduled to be completed this month (July 2012), the completion date has been pushed back to September because of unforeseen site conditions, tenant improvements, and additions to the scope of the project, including rainwater harvesting, a geothermal system, upgraded lighting, and other features. The total value of the contract has grown to $75.2 million, $59.3 million of which has been spent to date. If all goes as planned, the structure will be in the top 1% of energy-efficient buildings in the nation. The design-build team and GSA currently are working out specifics for the measurement, validation and fine-tuning period, which begins upon completion.

Want to learn more about GSA’s stimulus spending projects?  Click our “Stimulus” link in the column to the right or visit GSA’s interactive map showing all of the projects where it is spending its $5.5 billion in ARRA funds.

Because of the high number of leases in the National Capital Region, the GSA developed a system known as the Advanced Acquisition Program (AAP) back in the early or mid-1990’s.  Once per year, the GSA would issue a generic Solicitation for Offer (SFO) requesting proposals from area landlords for office or warehouse space ranging from 2,000 SF to 100,000 SF.  Landlords and brokers spent many late nights scrambling to assemble offers, usually resulting in a teetering stack of 3-ring binders, followed by the carpal-tunnel inducing task of initialing/signing several hundred pages (that would only need to be initialed/signed again at Best and Final and again at lease award), followed by the mad rush down to the Bid Room at the GSA Regional Office in order to meet a firm deadline.

After the procurement process, GSA found itself with dozens of standing offers for vacant space and, back then anyway, plenty of customer agencies looking to fill that space.  GSA benefited from being able to expedite lease acquisitions because most of the offer paperwork was complete and they could move straight into drafting a lease after selecting a building.  On the other hand, GSA suffered as the months rolled by.  As the least expensive space was gobbled up by various agencies, GSA was left to choose among more expensive properties and coasted into some above-market transactions as the shrinking pool of eligible offers grew stale.

In order to reduce the administrative burden of dealing with cubicles full of offer binders, reduce errors, allow for better data analysis and shorten the interval between AAP cycles, the GSA rolled out the Automated Advanced Acquisition Program (AAAP) in 2005 and has used the web-based platform ever since.  During the first week of every month, the GSA allows landlords to submit or modify offers, which are then “locked in” for the remainder of the month.  Landlords can modify offers in response to market conditions, other AAAP lease awards and changes in budgets or vacancy on a monthly basis, instead of having to wait up to a year or more.  GSA has effectively eliminated the staleness factor described above and is able to obtain better lease rates.  Landlords enjoy the new system, as it allows for adjustments to offers over time instead of wholesale offer replacements each year, and of course it’s 100% paperless.

In the National Capital Region, the AAP and AAAP have been the primary tool for GSA to obtain leases below the prospectus threshold for years.  It’s normally used to acquire standard administrative office space (the warehouse program was ultimately scrapped).  Lately, AAAP activity appears to have fallen off a cliff, which mirrors the pace of federal leasing on a national basis.   We had the honor of successfully closing the very first deal awarded through the web-based AAAP in 2006 and have carefully tracked all AAAP transactions since the program went into effect.   The table below illustrates the performance of the AAAP program over the years.  As you can see, 2012 is way off pace.

It’s also interesting to note that deal flow through AAAP is slightly weighted toward the first half of calendar years, but not statistically weighted toward the first OR second half of fiscal years, which suggests a general increase in activity between April and June, a time period that only saw 2 leases signed in 2012.

Which federal agency represents almost a quarter of all federal outlays and administers more grant dollars than all other federal agencies combined? The mission of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is to protect the health of all Americans and provide essential human services, especially for those who are least able to help themselves. Its motto is “Improving the health, safety, and well-being of America”; its Medicare program is the nation’s largest health insurer, handling more than 1 billion claims per year.

The agency began as the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) under President Eisenhower on April 11, 1953. In 1979, the Department of Education Organization Act created a separate Department of Education, and HEW officially became HHS on May 4, 1980.

HHS programs are administered by 11 operating divisions, including eight agencies in the U.S. Public Health Service and three human services agencies. Those divisions comprise more than 300 programs covering a broad spectrum of activities, including research, public health, food and drug safety, grants and other funding, health insurance, and more. In addition to delivering essential services, HHS programs also collect useful national health and other data. All of these programs are expensive; President Obama’s FY 2013 budget request for HHS totaled a whopping $940.9 billion in outlays and proposed $76.7 billion in discretionary budget authority. The department is expected to play an increasingly significant role in the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The Hubert H. Humphrey Building at 200 Independence Ave., S.W., at the foot of Capitol Hill, is home to HHS headquarters. Several HHS operating divisions—including the Food and Drug Administration, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and the Health Resources and Services Administration—as well as some 6,000 employees are based in leased space in the 18-story, three-wing Parklawn Building in Rockville, Md. where, after a controversial process, the agency recently renewed for 935,000 SF and 15 more years. But the largest National Capital Area HHS facility is the campus of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Md., which houses more than 17,000 employees in 40 buildings. Other HHS agencies are located in additional leased space throughout the region.

Ten regional HHS headquarters are located in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Kansas City, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Seattle. In addition to housing the Region 3 Headquarters, Atlanta also is home to the campus of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the offices of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Last week, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) released the first comprehensive overview of telework practices throughout the federal government since the enactment of the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010. Titled “2012 Status of Telework in the Federal Government: Report to the Congress,” the July 6 document provides a baseline for evaluating federal telework programs. It indicates that while telework is playing a larger role in many agencies, the government as a whole has a long way to go in implementing policies to ensure that more agencies—and more employees—make the most of cost-saving telework opportunities.

The report indicates that as of September/October 2011, nearly 169,000  federal employees were teleworking at least one day a week—out of the more than 680,000 deemed eligible to do so. Put another way, while 32% of federal employees were eligible to telework, only 25% of them—and only 8% of all federal employees—actually did. Fifty-six percent of those who teleworked spent one or two days teleworking each week, while only 27% did so three or more days per week. (The other 17% either teleworked on a less regular basis or worked at agencies that did not track telework frequency.)

Although the 2010 act does not set goals for how frequently employees should telework or how much agencies should increase teleworking, it does require agencies to take the following actions, all of which aim to ensure a more systematic implementation of telework throughout the federal government:

  • Establish a policy to allow eligible employees to telework;
  • Designate a telework managing officer;
  • Determine which employees are eligible to telework and notify them of their eligibility;
  • Require agency managers to have written agreements with all employees who are authorized to telework;
  • Ensure that employees have access to and complete an interactive training program before they enter into a telework agreement; and
  • Adopt telework as part of their continuity of operations plans.

The report highlights a number of agencies that are ahead of the curve in the percentage of teleworking employees, including both large ones—like the Patent and Trademark Office (82%), the GSA (59%), and the Department of the Treasury (48%)—as well as smaller ones like the National Mediation Board (77%), the Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (70%), and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (62%).

“Overall, the use of telework is expanding and improving in the Federal Government,” said OPM Director John Berry in the report’s opening message. “Ensuring its effective use will save energy and expense, boost accountability and resilience, and bring our Federal Workforce the responsiveness and flexibility that is expected in the 21st century.”

1 World Trade Center under construction (on left) (photo: Pwojdacz | Wikimedia Commons)

While the GSA reportedly is close to finalizing a long-awaited lease at the iconic One World Trade Center (1WTC), the deal remains unsigned, despite the owners’ desire to have had the lease executed by July 4. Although both the Senate and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PA) have approved the agreement, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, chaired by Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.) has not yet taken action. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has long championed the deal, said in a statement to the New York Post on July 2: “The GSA lease needs a final push to get over the finish line. The Senate committee has signed off and we’ve reached out to Congressman Mica to explain the special nature of this lease for New York and the country as a whole.” It has been widely reported that Mica is stalling the deal—as well as other federal leases—as part of his battle with the GSA over his plan to transfer the Federal Trade Commission’s Washington, D.C., headquarters building to the National Gallery of Art. But a Mica representative responded on July 5: “Chairman Mica and the committee have not held up this GSA lease and Sen. Schumer is aware of that.” Mica instead blamed the GSA for waiting too long to inform the committee of the lease details.

The deal has been in the works for more than five years. In 2007, the GSA and the PA announced a prospective agreement for 600,000 square feet. At the time, the structure was known as the Freedom Tower, and government officials were eager to help get the long-stalled project off the ground. Although the basic terms of the lease finally were agreed to in a term sheet last August, the leasing process stalled as the GSA was shaken by the conference spending scandal this past spring. On April 18, Schumer called GSA Acting Administrator Dan Tangherlini to urge him to finalize the agency’s lease agreement for 1WTC. On June 14—just in time for President Obama’s visit to Ground Zero that day—GSA signed off on a lease prospectus for 270,000 square feet with the Durst Organization, which is managing 1 WTC for its partner, the PA. That announcement—which meant that just over 50 percent of WTC’s 3 million square feet had been committed—was considered an important milestone for attracting additional tenants to the tower.

The GSA’s prospective footprint shrank by more than half after the PA and Durst—having struck a 1 million square-foot lease deal with Condé Nast—decided they’d rather keep more space available for private sector tenants. The agency will pay an average $66.33 per square foot in rent over the first five years of its 20-year lease, but a variety of concessions will make its actual payments considerably less. (The original, highly subsidized terms called for the GSA to pay a net-effective rent in the low $40s per square foot, compared with Condé Nast’s $60s a foot starting rent.)

The tower is scheduled to open in early 2015; the GSA is expected to move in after October 1 of that year.

Rep. Jeff Denham (left) and Sen. Tom Carper (right)

Congress has been busy this year working on bills meant to pave the way for the disposition of thousands of unneeded or underutilized properties. This is one of those rare instances where the Republican House and the Democratic Senate fundamentally agree. They both concede that the federal government has done a poor job of managing its real estate assets and, in particular, it has been ineffective in disposing of excess properties. This issue has been highlighted in numerous GAO reports including a February, 2011 report entitled “The Government Faces Challenges to Disposing of Unneeded Buildings” and a report issued just last month entitled “National Strategy and Better Data Needed to Improve Management of Excess and Underutilized Property”.

In response, both the House and Senate have launched legislation to tackle the problem. In February of this year, the House passed the Civilian Property Realignment Act. Meanwhile, the Federal Real Property Asset Management Reform Act was recently approved by the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee and should be headed to a full vote later this year.

The two legislative efforts share similar themes: both bills express the need to reduce operating and maintenance costs, consolidate the federal inventory and, of course, facilitate and expedite the sale of unneeded properties. If there is a primary point of difference, it comes in their proposed approach to disposing of these properties. The House proposes to create a civilian version of DoD’s BRAC process, establishing an independent committee to evaluate and approve properties for disposition. The Senate approach calls for development of an asset management plan and related performance measures, against which properties are identified as excess.

The following table compares the two bills:

House Senate
The Bill Civilian Property Realignment Act (H.R 1734) Federal Real Property Asset Management Reform Act of 2012 (S. 2178)
The Sponsor Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA) Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE)
The Authority A 9-member Civilian Property Realignment Commission (“Commission”) is established, comprised of public- and private-sector real estate professionals. A Federal Real Property Council (“FRPC”) is established, comprised of members from OMB, GSA and the senior real property officers of each federal agency.
The Process Within 120 days from enactment of the Act (and annually thereafter) each federal agency will submit to GSA and OMB a list of properties that can be sold. Within 60 additional days OMB and GSA will then submit their recommendations to the Commission. The Commission reviews these submissions, conducts public hearings and generates its own recommendations (to include the identification of at least 5 properties with an aggregate value in excess of $500 million) to the President, who must approve of the recommendations before they are finally sent to Congress to be approved by joint resolution. Within 90 days from when the FRPC is formed it will develop an asset management plan and deliver a report to Congress. Within 120 days from its formation the FRPC will deliver an asset disposal plan to OMB. This report will be updated annually and each year OMB will require agencies to dispose of the assets identified in the FRPC asset plan.
The Timing Dispositions must be initiated within 2 years and completed within 6 years. Dispositions are to begin within two years.  Annual asset management and disposition goals are established.
The Carrot Agencies enjoy reduced operating and maintenance costs but do not share in sales proceeds, except to defray the costs of property dispositions and associated space realignment. 18% of the sales proceeds shall be retained by the agencies to fund activities related to asset management and disposal.
The Stick No specific penalties are outlined, except that the Commission may decide on its own which of the agencies’ properties will be sold. Agencies that don’t comply within 18 months may not acquire (by lease or purchase) any new property. Agencies that don’t comply within 2 years will be subject to a 1-time sequester of their budgets equal to 80 percent of the value of their underutilized property.

Washington Office Center on left and Washington Design Center on right (with Washington Office Center partially visible behind it)

Today the Washington Business Journal reported that Vornado has selected a buyer for its Washington Office Center (409 3rd Street, SW) and Washington Design Center (300 D Street, SW) properties in Washington, DC’s Southwest submarket. The two connected buildings sit directly on the Federal Center SW Metrorail station and occupy the entire triangular-shaped block bounded by Virginia Avenue, 3rd, 4th, and D Streets, SW. At over 800,000 square feet, this will be among the largest sale transactions in the Washington, DC region this year. The complex is at the very heart of the Southwest DC federal enclave and completely surrounded by properties that are either leased to, or owned by, the US Government, which should enhance its long term leasing success. This investment is a fascinating amalgam of old and new, artsy and mundane, core and opportunity. The Office Center is a modern office building that we’d rank in the “B+” category. It’s anchored by a long term, 250,000 SF GSA lease for the Small Business Administration (SBA), with most of the remaining space leased to other GSA tenants, such as HHS, HUD and DOT. Based on the reported sales price of $186 million ($450/SF) for the Office Center component, we estimate the cap rate to be 6.6% to 7.0%.

The narrower piece of the pie wedge is the Washington Design Center, an historic brick warehouse constructed in the 1920’s, expanded in the 1980’s and leased to dozens of manufacturers and suppliers of high-end home furnishings.  With over 300,000 SF of showrooms, the Design Center is frequented by many interior designers, architects and retailers from across the region. The disposition of the Washington Design Center represents another step forward for Vornado in its effort to divest itself of the Merchandise Mart assets acquired in 1998. Together, the Washington Office Center and Washington Design Center offer the creative purchaser a tremendous opportunity. Improving the potential for redeveloping or repositioning the Design Center, the site accommodates 200,000 SF of additional FAR in a submarket that has traditionally held its vacancy rate well below 10 percent.