Posted tagged ‘housing’

Development Proposed for 435 Park Road

August 10, 2017

On August 10, 2017, I received notice that BZA application #19603 was filed for 435 Park Road, NW. A description of the property and the proposed use from the application follows:

The Property is located at 435 Park Road, N.W., and is located in the RF-1 zone district. The Property is currently a large corner lot measuring 4,119 square feet of land area. The Applicant intends to subdivide the lot into two smaller lots. The subject Property, 435 Park Road, N.W., will become an interior lot. In order to complete the proposed subdivision, the Applicant will be removing a large bay window on the east side of the Building facing Park Place. Abutting the Property to the west is a semi-detached dwelling. Abutting the Property to the south and east are Park Road and Park Place, respectively. Once the subdivision is complete, the Applicant intends to construct a new flat on 433 Park Road, N.W., which will abut the subject Property to the east. Abutting the Property’s rear yard, to the north, is a row dwelling. The Applicant is proposing to convert the existing Building from a single-family dwelling to a flat.

Based on my understanding of the case, the entire project as proposed would have been by-right if not for the removal of the bay window and the architectural cornice on the bay window. The removal of the architectural feature requires a special exception. The BZA hearing has not yet been scheduled.

(435 Park Road, NW. A new two two-unit flat is proposed to be located between the existing house and Park Place, NW.)

More Housing Coming to Newton Place

August 9, 2017

There has been a lot of focus on the 600 block of Newton Place lately, particularly related to deeply rooted issues that relate to public safety. Because of this I’m happy to share some good news. The vacant lot on the south side of Newton between the two apartment buildings recently broke ground with a plan to construct four rowhouses for a total of 4 new residential units. The configuration will be two structures in the front of the lot and two structures toward the rear of the lot.

I’ll share drawings of the development when I receive them. Below is a view of the lot looking north from the alley.

Checking on Progress of Park Road Church Project

July 31, 2017

The project to redevelop the old church at 625 Park Road, the surface parking lot, and the rowhouse at 633 Park Road is making good progress. Work began in earnest in January 2017 following approval from the Board of Zoning Adjustment in July 2014.

The approved plans are for new construction connected to the historic church to create 38 new housing units in the neighborhood.

Below are views of the construction in progress.

ANCs Recommend Victory Housing as Top Pick for Hebrew Home Development

July 17, 2017

(Early rendering showing one potential design by Victory Housing.)

On July 12, at separate meetings, both Advisory Neighborhood Commissions 4C and 1A recommended Victory Housing & Brinshore Development as their primary choice for the development team to redevelop the former Hebrew Home property at 1125 Spring Road into a mixed income/multi-generational community. The two Commissions differed on their second choices.

Both Commissions felt that the Victory Housing proposal “meets the shared community priority of providing 88 units of dedicated, affordable senior housing in the former Hebrew Home. It also provides the largest number of affordable, family-sized units of any of the proposals as well with 29 three-bedroom rental units. In addition, it proposes home ownership opportunities along Spring Road NW. It also provides 75 underground parking spaces, with approximately 1.8 parking spaces for each 3 units of non-senior housing.”

The Commissions’ recommendations will be sent to the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED), where the final decision on selecting a development team will be determined.

The Commissions differed on their second choices. ANC4C’s second choice was the NHP Foundation, Fivesquares Development, and Warrenton Group. ANC 1A’s second choice, on the other hand, was the Bozzuto Homes proposal. ANC 1A further selected the Mission First proposal as its third choice. (read ANC 1A resolution at goo.gl/RChVH3 ).

DMPED is expected to select a development team prior to the July 27, 2017 public meeting scheduled to present the District’s intent to declare the Hebrew Home surplus. The meeting’s purpose is to receive comments on the proposed designation of 1125 Spring Road, NW, as surplus property. The surplus meeting is held in order to receive feedback from the community on the District’s finding that the property is no longer required for public purposes. Comments collected at the public meeting will be submitted to the Council of the District of Columbia for its review.

The date, time, and location of the surplus meeting is below:

Date: Thursday, July 27, 2017
Time: 7:00 pm-8:30 pm
Location: Raymond Recreation Center
3725 10th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20010

New Housing Coming to Newton Place After 4 Year Delay

July 10, 2017

As reported in April, the long-stalled infill development first proposed for 429 Newton Place, NW, in 2012 and approved in 2013 is moving forward following a change in ownership. Over the weekend I observed that the foundations have been poured, an excellent sign that this isn’t another false start.

(New foundations for the six flats under construction at 429 Newton Place, NW.)

The project, as approved, will result in three rowhouse-type infill buildings. Each will contain two living units for a total of 6 new living units. Below is the elevation on how the development will integrate into the existing neighborhood.

(Elevation of new rowhouses currently under construction at 429 Newton Place, NW.)

Proposals to Develop Hebrew Home Presented to Community

May 26, 2017

On Thursday evening, May 25th, DMPED hosted a meeting at Raymond Recreation Center so that the seven most promising development teams could present their ideas to the community on their ideas to renovate the old Hebrew Home property. All teams presented idea to convert the historic structure into housing and construct new housing to the east. However, no two presentations were exactly alike, with key differences being the number of units proposed, the amount of affordability of those units, and the density of the buildings.

A chief concern voiced by many residents was the impact that the development would have on area parking. There were also differing opinions on how much housing should be affordable, and how much density or height the new construction should be for the right balance.

The Powerpoint presentations from the meeting are available online here. Members of the public are invited to review them and provide any comments through an online forum available here: https://goo.gl/frtYFa  The forum will close on June 9th.

Below is a brief recap of each of the proposals with key data:

Team #1: Victory Housing & Brinshore Development

Key facts

Planned Unit Development: Yes

Housing proposed: Total 187  units

  • 88 senior units in historic Hebrew Home (100% affordable) (1- and 2-bedroom units)
  • 91 new construction units (60 affordable, 31 market rate) (1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units)
  • 8 new townhouses for home-ownership opportunities

Parking spaces provided: 75

Comments: More information is needed on levels of affordability. Powerpoint available here.

Team #2: Bozzuto & The Menkiti Group

Key facts

Planned Unit Development: No

Housing proposed: Total 146 units

  • 90 senior units (100% affordable)
  • 50 market townhouses
  • 6 affordable townhouses

Parking spaces provided: onsite for townhouse units

Comments: Would be the fastest to build as it would be a by-right project, but is also problematic as it has no affordable units outside of the senior units. Additionally, six of the rowhouses are planned on the site of the historic Hebrew Home which would require HPO and HPRB approval, which I find doubtful. Powerpoint available here.

Team #3: Mission First, Urban Matters, & Lock7

Key facts

Planned Unit Development: Yes

Housing proposed: Total 224 units

  • 86 senior units in historic Hebrew Home (81 affordable, 21% at less than 30% AMI) (1- and 2-bedroom units)
  • 117 new construction apartment units (95 affordable, 24% at less than 30% AMI) (1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units)
  • 21 new condo units on 10th Street (2 affordable)

Parking spaces provided: underground.

Comments: This project would be completed in three phases, with the Hebrew Home building being the first phase. This proposal is the most sensitive of those that were presented with regards to the preservation and renovation of the Hebrew Home building, with a commitment to preserve/restore interior elements of the building as well. Of the projects that proposed more density, this proposal has good harmony and relationship to the historic structure. Powerpoint available here.

Team #4: CPDC & NVR

Key facts

Planned Unit Development: Yes

Housing proposed: Total 109 units

  • 77 senior units in historic Hebrew Home (100% affordable) (1- and 2-bedroom units)
  • 32 new construction townhouses (4 affordable)

Parking spaces provided: contained in each new rowhouse.

Comments: This team proposed the least number of overall units for the site, with nearly all of the affordable units being for seniors in the Hebrew Home building. The rowhouses proposed reflect the rowhouse character of the surrounding neighborhood. Powerpoint available here.

Team #5: Borger Management & Spectrum Management

Key facts

Planned Unit Development: Yes

Housing proposed: Total 202  units

  • 30% of the units will be affordable
  • 15% of units will be set aside for families at 30% of AMI.

Parking spaces provided: 49 surface parking spaces.

Comments: This is a good architect and developer, but the number of affordable units is at the minimum amount required. There is no dedicated senior housing, and the current design isn’t as compatible or sensitive or compatible with the surrounding community as other high-density proposals. Powerpoint available here.

Team #6: NHP Foundation, Fivesquares, & The Warrenton Group

Key facts

Planned Unit Development: Yes

Housing proposed: Total 206 units

  • 131 apartments (95 affordable)
  • 75 condos (8 affordable)

Parking spaces provided: underground parking.

Comments: The density of this project was compatible with the existing Hebrew Home building. One of the merits of this proposal was how it focused on greenspace. The green roofs, landscaping, and particularly the deep set back on 10th Street which included a wide sidewalk and benches were features that should be incorporated into the final project regardless of who the developer is. Powerpoirnt available here.

Team #7: Gilbane Development & NHT-Enterprise

Key facts

Planned Unit Development: Yes

Housing proposed: Total 212  units

Hebrew Home building:

  • 71 affordable units for seniors and families, some of whom are formerly homeless
  • 41 deeply affordable units at 30% AMI

New mixed income building:

  • Mixed-income building with 10% of units affordable to families at 80% AMI
  • 9 for-sale townhomes

Parking spaces provided: underground

Comments: This was a good group who indicated a wiliness to create more affordable units if the District would be willing to provide additional financial support. It was the only proposal to include permanent supportive housing for residents formerly homeless, and the team demonstrated a record of other deeply affordable projects that they had completed. Powerpoint available here.

Reminder — Meeting on Developing the Old Hebrew Home is Thursday

May 24, 2017

Here’s a reminder that on Thursday, May 25th, the next public meeting is scheduled for the redevelopment of the old Hebrew Home on Spring Road. The flyer is below. You can read an overview of the June 3, 2016, meeting here.


%d bloggers like this: