Braddock East Master Plan
creating communities together
⬚ figure
October, 2008
Amended 2/25/2012 by Ordinance 4752
Amended 6/19/21, Ordinance 5353
creating communities together
⬚ figure
October, 2008
Amended 2/25/2012 by Ordinance 4752
Amended 6/19/21, Ordinance 5353
CITY COUNCIL Mayor William D. Euille Vice Mayor Redella S. Pepper Councilman Ludwig P. Gaines Councilman K. Rob Krupicka Councilmember Timothy B. Lovain Councilman Paul C. Smedberg Councilman Justin M. Wilson
ALEXANDRIA REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING AUTHORITY Roy Priest, Acting Interim Executive Director Melvin Miller, Chair Carlyle C. Ring, Vice Chair Carter Fleming Leslie Hagan Fletcher Johnson Ruby Tucker Kerry Ann Powell Dianicia Brooks Peter Lawson
PLANNING COMMISSION Eric R. Wagner, Chair John Komoroske, Vice Chair H. Stewart Dunn, Jr. Donna Fossum Jesse Jennings Mary Lyman J. Lawrence Robinson
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE James K. Hartmann, City Manager Mark Jinks, Deputy City Manager
BRADDOCK EAST ADVISORY GROUP John Dupree Harvey Grey Janice Howard Nakia Johnson Howard Katz John Komoroske Merrick Malone Gwen Menafee Carlyle C. Ring Sylvia Sibrover Salena Zellers Schmidtke Leslie Zupan
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING Faroll Hamer, Director Jeffrey Farner, Deputy Director, Urban Design Thomas H. Canfield, City Architect
Neighborhood Planning and Community Development: Kathleen Beeton, Division Chief Andrea Barlow, Principal Planner Andrew Spurgin, Urban Planner Brandi Collins, Urban Planner
Development: Dirk Geratz, Principal Planner Katye Parker, Urban Planner Maya Contreras, Urban Planner
OFFICE OF HOUSING Mildrilyn Stephens Davis, Director Helen McIlvaine, Deputy Director
Consultant Team
GOODY CLANCY David Dixon Ben Carlson Phil Goff Martina Ruhfass Ganesh Ramachandran
MARY MEANS & ASSOCIATES Mary Means Jinni Benson
EJP Rhae Parkes
W-ZHA, LLC Sarah Woodworth
LAMBERT CONSULTING INTERNATIONAL George Lambert
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction................................................................................................................................ 11
Context for Braddock East Plan .................................................................................................. 14
PROMOTING MIXED INCOME COMMUNITIES
BRADDOCK METRO NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
RESOLUTION 830
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXISTING PUBLIC HOUSING COMMUNITY
THE BRADDOCK EAST ADVISORY GROUP
ENGAGING THE PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS
ENGAGING THE WIDER COMMUNITY
THE BENEFITS OF MIXED-INCOME COMMUNITIES
THE CHALLENGES OF DEVELOPING MIXED-INCOME COMMUNITIES
THE FINANCIAL COST OF BUILDING PUBLIC HOUSING
PAYING FOR PUBLIC HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT
LAND USE
URBAN DESIGN
DESIGN OF HOUSING
SITE DESIGN GOALS
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE OF BRADDOCK EAST
CDD Guidelines ............................................................................................................................ 50
Conclusions.................................................................................................................................. 55
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 56
Appendices ..................................................................................................................................... 60
APPENDIX A: BRADDOCK METRO NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
APPENDIX B: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
APPENDIX C: URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES
The Braddock East Master Plan is an amendment to the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan (BMNP) expanding upon the principles established in that Plan relating to the redevelopment of the existing public housing in the Braddock area.
This Master Plan relates to nine blocks of public housing in the Braddock East neighborhood - James Bland (and Bland Addition), Andrew Adkins, Samuel Madden (Uptown), and Ramsey Homes – owned by the Alexandria Housing and Redevelopment Authority (ARHA). The plan also includes ten privately owned single-family homes between Andrew Adkins and West Street.
Resolution 830, adopted by City Council and ARHA in 1981 and amended in 1982, is an agreement to retain existing public housing units in Alexandria and requires one-for-one replacement of any public housing unit lost through redevelopment.
A March 2008 Memorandum of Understanding between the City and ARHA provides that, the City and ARHA will “jointly and cooperatively work in developing a Master Plan for ARHA’s East Braddock Road properties...”
This Master Plan provides guidance and parameters for the potential redevelopment of these properties into vibrant and sustainable mixed-income, mixed-use, urban and pedestrian-oriented residential communities, while preserving all the public housing units and respecting the interests of the existing public housing residents.
This joint endeavor has involved the surrounding communities and an Advisory Group, representing neighbors, public housing residents and other stakeholders. It is in the interest of everyone – ARHA, public housing residents, the City of Alexandria and the larger community – to work together to create mixed-income housing to meet the needs of current and future residents, unite a diverse neighborhood, celebrate its history and build a sustainable future together.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The framework and recommendations in the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan (BMNP) are based on seven guiding principles. The Braddock East Master Plan expands upon the fifth of these principles; to promote mixed-income communities through the redevelopment of the existing public housing sites within the Braddock East planning area.
The Braddock East Master Plan also incorporates the other principles of the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan into the planning framework for these sites. The urban design guidelines set out in the BMNP apply equally to the Braddock East sites and are attached in full at Appendix C of this Plan. The recommendations of Chapter 8 of the BMNP relating to traffic impact and transportation management also apply to the Braddock East sites and there is no separate traffic analysis as part of the Braddock East Plan.
The Braddock East Master Plan amends the North East Small Area Plan only in respect of the two northern blocks of James Bland that lie within its plan boundary. No other aspect of the North East Small Area Plan is to be amended.
The Braddock East Master Plan embraces the Strategic Plan goal of creating a community that is diverse and affordable. The goal of the Braddock East Master Plan is to create communities with a mix of income levels and large enough to sustain a critical mass of public housing residents in order to maintain the strong social and support networks that are essential in low-income communities.
The City and ARHA began a comprehensive, nine-month community planning process in February 2008 that resulted in this Plan. City Council appointed a twelve person Braddock East Advisory Group to represent the diverse interests in the Braddock East area. The Advisory Group met monthly from February through October (excluding August), for a total of eight meetings. All the meetings were open to the public and were attended by neighborhood citizens and other concerned Alexandrians.
⬚ figure
This process developed a community-wide dialogue addressing the future of public housing and the transition to mixed-income housing developments. Creating a community vision involved many lively and important discussions among the Advisory Group and community members, all of whom brought diverse points of view to the process.
Specific efforts were made to engage the public housing residents in the overall planning process, through a series of meetings, focus groups and a community barbeque. In addition, ARHA employed a consultant to help with outreach efforts with the public housing residents.
There is general support from public housing residents for redevelopment, provided:
A Design Charrette was held in June 2008, the purpose of which was to establish the scale of new development that would be appropriate for this neighborhood. Participants confirmed that the height of any new building should be sensitive to the scale of adjacent development. It was suggested that new buildings should be generally no more than one-story higher than adjacent buildings (with greater height permissible further away). New buildings should also incorporate shoulders along sensitive edges, to transition taller buildings to smaller context of adjacent properties.
⬚ figure
The Braddock East Master Plan promotes a diversity of housing types at differing levels of affordability. A broad range of housing types, unit sizes, and affordability levels will help to encourage a mix of people with different lifestyles, family sizes, and other characteristics that will promote the neighborhood’s livability.
The goal is to create communities with a mix of income levels and that is large enough to sustain a critical mass of public housing residents in order to maintain the strong social and support networks that are essential in low-income communities. Adding a range of
housing options, including workforce and affordable housing, to new development is desirable, as it will contribute to the diversity of the neighborhood and will help to “bridge” the social and economic gap between the market-rate and public housing residents. Subsidized ownership housing may also provide the potential for public housing residents to improve their economic standing while remaining in the neighborhood.
Mixed-income housing helps draw together individuals with different backgrounds and histories. When families of different income brackets live in the same development together, their children gain opportunities to meet each other and play together without regard to income level. Adults in a mixed-income community are drawn into a shared sense of community as they work together to manage their housing and address issues of shared concern to residents.
⬚ figure
Anecdotes from public housing residents who have moved into the existing mixed-income communities at Chatham Square and Quaker Hill in Alexandria demonstrate how being part of a social network with residents of higher education and/or incomes has helped expand their education, job and home ownership opportunities (page 28 of Plan).
The City’s consultants have assessed the cost of redeveloping public housing in Alexandria using current comparable data (see page 33 of Plan). Based on experience, it has been assumed that public and private funding sources could finance approximately 50% of these costs. The market value of the land will be used to fund the remaining 50% of development costs.
Based on current estimates of land value, it has been calculated that between 1.8 and 2.5 market rate units are needed to bridge the funding gap for replacing one public housing unit. This formula provides the context for the Development Framework in this Plan, as it guides the overall number of units needed to make redevelopment viable. However, this is only an approximate measure, as changes in market conditions and funding options will affect the underlying assumptions of this analysis.
The recommendations for urban design, scale, massing, land use, open space, parking and density for the redeveloped public housing sites are based upon the outcome of the Community Design Charrette, discussions with ARHA, ensuring integration with the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan and applying established planning and zoning principles. These are reflected in the Development Framework Chapter of the Plan and in the diagram on page 5.
Redevelopment plans were submitted to the City in June 2008 for the redevelopment of the James Bland site. The proposals for this site are consistent with the Development Framework recommendations within this Master Plan.
Land Use
A mix of public housing and market-rate housing and, where possible an element of affordable and/or workforce housing is recommended. The precise ratio for this mix should be determined through the development planning process, as it will be influenced by the funding available at that time.
Ground floor retail uses are recommended to contribute to the walkability and security of key walking streets in the neighborhood. A grocery store is identified as a potential use for the Samuel Madden blocks. The retail uses should be neighborhood serving and should meet the needs of the whole community.
Office use is recommended as a potential use for the western half of Adkins and the northern Samuel Madden block in order to help balance the overall mix of residential and retail uses within the plan area. A hotel use is recommended for the West Street frontage, opposite the Metro station, which includes the land currently occupied by privately owned single-family properties.
The provision of improved community facilities/supportive services as part of any redevelopment plan is encouraged. The location and programming of such facilities will be determined by an analysis of resident needs and should complement the Recreation Center program.
⬚ figure
5
A variety of open spaces should be provided to meet the needs of the new residents of the proposed mixed-income communities, with particular regard to the recreational needs of young children and teenagers.
The open spaces should complement the programmed activities at the new Charles Houston Recreation Center, which is due to open in Spring 2009, and the community park planned for the Post Office site in the BMNP. Focusing recreation provision on these facilities that serve the whole community will help to integrate further the diverse population within the neighborhood.
The Braddock East Plan adopts the parking requirements recommended in the BMNP. These parking standards are reductions from the City zoning code requirements, which reflects the proximity of the area to Metro and the goal of promoting sustainability and minimizing traffic generation.
All new development in the plan area is required to:
In addition, new developments will be encouraged to meet LEED, Earthcraft or other equivalent sustainability standards.
The core priority of this plan is to provide high quality housing for everyone. To this end, the exterior facades of public and/or affordable housing should be designed to be indistinguishable from the market rate housing. The public housing units should be integrated throughout the new development, and not
concentrated in any one location on the site. ARHA prefers building designs that minimize shared corridors and elevators and provide individual exterior entrances at ground level to each unit. The Plan suggests that increased density thresholds necessary to make mixed-income development financially viable may require some moderation of this policy, provided the design can still avoid past pitfalls of multifamily public housing buildings.
⬚ figure
The architecture and design of Chatham Square, Alexandria (above) and Langham Court, Boston (below) make no distinctions among units market-rate, middle-, and low-income residents.
⬚ figure
Implications for the Future of Braddock East
There are 365 public housing units today in the James Bland (and Bland addition), Andrew Adkins, Ramsey Homes and Samuel Madden (Uptown) complexes on approximately 18 acres combined. The primary goal of the Braddock East Master Plan is to encourage and guide future redevelopment of these public housing sites into diverse mixed-income, mixed-use urban communities. At the same time, it recognizes ARHA’s role as stewards of public assets and the welfare of its residents and the one-for-one replacement policy of Resolution 830.
As the City and ARHA have worked through this process with the community, it has become apparent that, due to a multitude of variable factors influenced by market conditions and public policy (such as land values, development costs, funding availability), it is not practical within this Plan to be prescriptive about the mix of housing within the new community or the resultant number of public housing units that may need to be replaced elsewhere in the City.
However, as specific proposals are evaluated, it may become appropriate for the City and ARHA to consider replacement of some units at other locations in the City, rather than to replace all of the public housing units on the original sites within the Braddock East area.
The retention of existing public housing in the Braddock East area will be contingent upon:
This has been demonstrated by both the Chatham Square and James Bland redevelopments. Approximately one-third to one-half of the existing public housing units on these sites were/are to be relocated off-sited. This is due to constraints on the development of these sites, such as the need for open space, the limitation on heights and the need for compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods, as well as the available funding and market conditions, which are different in each case.
Similarly, as redevelopment opportunities are presented for Samuel Madden and Andrew Adkins, the needs and wishes of public housing residents in these complexes may be in part met by off-site locations better situated for families than between streets carrying Route 1 traffic and high-density uses next to the metro station.
In summary, it is likely that the densities needed to replace all of the public housing on-site in Braddock East, while adding enough market rate units to make the development feasible, may not be viable. Consequently, it will be necessary to replace some of the existing public housing units in Braddock East at other locations in the City. Based on the experience of the similar redevelopments in Alexandria referred to above, this may be somewhere in the region of one-third to one-half. In order to responsibly plan for this potential need, the City and ARHA should work together to identify and secure replacement sites to anticipate any future requirement for replacement housing units.
As it is likely to be a number of years before the Samuel Madden and Andrew Adkins sites redevelop, it is not possible or practical to identify these sites now. For the same reason, basing any recommendation regarding unit
■ 7
⬚ figure
The redevelopment plans for Chatham Square (above) and James Bland (below) in Alexandria resulted in between one-third to one-half of the existing public housing units being relocated elsewhere in the City.
⬚ figure
mix/unit retention on current market conditions and current funding expectations would be unreliable
Accordingly, despite the desires of some members of the community, this Plan does not make a specific recommendation regarding the number of public housing units that will be relocated out of the Braddock East neighborhood. The Braddock East Master Plan seeks to identify the appropriate strategy for ensuring that adequate and appropriate replacement housing sites are available when they are required to meet the needs of any future redevelopment.
As part of the BMNP recommendations, developers are expected to contribute to the City's Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The outstanding pledges for the Braddock area are:
| The Madison | $777,000 |
| Braddock Gateway (Jaguar) | $5,000,000 |
| 621 North Payne Street | $748,000 |
| Total | $6,525,000 |
In order to support the objective of securing opportunities for replacement public housing, this Plan recommends that at least 50% of the available Affordable Housing Trust Funds generated from future development in the Braddock area be reserved for off-site replacement of public housing from the Braddock East area. These funds can only be used to fund replacement sites for units currently in the Braddock East neighborhood and cannot be used for any other purpose until after all of the necessary replacement sites are identified and paid for.
All contributions are payable on receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Given the current economic climate, it may be some time before these contributions to the Affordable Housing Trust fund are received by the City. Based on current build-out projections for the Madison and Payne Street projects, some funding is likely to be available within a 3-5 year period.
The majority of the implementation of the Braddock East Master Plan is within the control of and at the discretion of ARHA. Those items that are the responsibility of the City will be subsumed by the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan implementation process, which is in the Work Program to begin in early 2009. As part of that process, the City will set up an internal working group and appoint an advisory group that will meet regularly to advance the implementation program. ARHA will be included in these discussions as it relates to the Braddock East public housing sites.
The Plan does not rezone any portion of the planning area, but recommends a Coordinated Development District (CDD) for James Bland (and Bland Addition), Samuel Madden Uptown and Andrew Adkins blocks. The CDD Guidelines in Section 8 of the Plan implement the principles established in the Development Framework in Section 7 of the Plan.
The recommended parking standards will be executed by an amendment to the zoning ordinance through the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan implementation process.
The City and ARHA have worked closely through their respective staffs, both internally and through community meetings, in developing the guidance and parameters for this Master Plan. In order to accomplish the goals and recommendations of the Braddock East Plan, the Plan includes a commitment by the City and ARHA to the following:
The City and ARHA will work together to identify and pursue appropriate measures to tap into the multiple sources of funds available for the redevelopment of public housing.
The City’s Department of Recreation, Parks and Cultural Activities will coordinate with ARHA and other appropriate City agencies regarding the programming of the Charles Houston Recreation Center to ensure that the interests of the public housing residents are equitably represented.
The City’s Department of Human Services will coordinate with ARHA to ensure that public housing residents are made fully aware of all the existing City social services that are available to assist their transition into mixed-income housing.
The City Housing Master Plan will provide a strategy for identifying and securing sites for replacement public housing units to support the redevelopment proposal in the Plan, anticipating the possibility that it may be necessary to accommodate existing public housing units in Braddock East to locations elsewhere in the City.
The Braddock East Master Plan is the result of an exhaustive, extensive and inclusive process. It engaged a broad cross-section of the community and addressed difficult issues head- on with the benefit of tools and information to ensure that the community could effectively discuss tradeoffs and reach an informed consensus or community vision as laid out in the Plan.
The Braddock East Master Plan is the first step in the process of redeveloping the public housing sites in Braddock East to create new mixed-income, mixed-use, urban communities. It creates a framework to encourage and guide future improvement and potential redevelopment of the public housing sites.
The decision to redevelop these public housing sites is ultimately at ARHA’s discretion and is highly dependent upon what will be economically feasible at the time. The Braddock East Master Plan provides sufficient flexibility to enable ARHA to achieve its mission of providing quality housing to persons of low income in a manner that allows ARHA to capitalize on its major asset – its land, which is held in trust primarily for the benefit of its residents. At the same time, the Master Plan provides guidance for new development that is intended to be physically, visually and socially integrated into the existing community so that quality of life is enhanced for all residents in the community.
Optimistically, the future will provide opportunities for building a strong, vibrant and diverse community, consistent with the goals of the City’s Strategic Plan.
⬚ figure
Chatham Square in Alexandria (above) is a local example of a successful redevelopment of public housing into a mixed-income community. Prospective buyers lined up days in advance to purchase the new homes (below).
⬚ figure
The Braddock East Master Plan is an amendment to the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan (BMNP) expanding upon the principle established in that Plan - to promote mixed-income housing through the redevelopment of the existing public housing sites that form the Braddock East planning area.
⬚ figure
This Master Plan provides guidance and parameters for the potential redevelopment of nine blocks of public housing in the Braddock East neighborhood as mixed-income, mixed-use, urban and pedestrian-oriented residential communities. These are the properties owned by the Alexandria Redevelopment and Housing Authority (ARHA), known as James Bland (and Bland Addition), Andrew Adkins, Samuel Madden (Uptown), and Ramsey Homes. The City and ARHA jointly and co-operatively undertake to prepare this Master Plan for the guidance of opportunities as they may arise for feasible redevelopment of public housing units in the Braddock East area, with full replacement of all the units currently located in the nine-block area, as required by Resolution 830.
A March 2008 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and ARHA provides: “ARHA and the City will jointly and cooperatively work in developing a Master Plan for ARHA’s East Braddock Road properties, and it would be anticipated that ARHA’s Board and the City Council would adopt this Master Plan and that any future City capital grants or loans to ARHA would be considered by the City in the context of the Master Plan.”
ARHA is a public agency established by the State of Virginia in 1939. Its primary mission is to provide sanitary and safe dwelling accommodations to persons of very low income, at rents they can afford. In furtherance of its primary mission, ARHA promotes personal and economic self-sufficiency for its program participants, including the implementation of programs that will enhance the quality of the residents’ lives.
ARHA currently owns and manages 1,150 public housing units and administers 1,722 Housing Choice Vouchers. The City appoints ARHA’s nine-member Board of Commissioners. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides operating subsidy and capital funding to ARHA. ARHA is active in exploring innovative partnerships and strategies for increasing the supply of housing for low and moderate income households.
The City and ARHA have worked closely through their respective staffs, both internally and through community meetings, in developing the guidance and parameters for this Master Plan. Through the conduit of ARHA Board meetings, meetings of the ARHA Redevelopment Work Group and other special meetings, City and ARHA staffs and consultants have liaised with ARHA to provide continual updates on the process, to obtain input into the proposals and to work through issues as they have arisen. The Board has provided necessary input essential to the integrity of the Plan process.
The Plan has also been prepared in collaboration with an Advisory Group representing neighbors, public housing residents and other stakeholders, and with the local community.
It is in the interest of everyone – ARHA, public housing residents, the City of Alexandria and the larger community – to work together to create mixed-income housing that meets the needs of existing and new residents, and to unite a diverse neighborhood, celebrate its history and build a sustainable future together. Examples of mixed-income housing programs in Alexandria and elsewhere have demonstrated the benefits of mixed-income communities.
The increased desirability of the Braddock East neighborhood makes it an area in which people who can afford market rate housing will choose to live in mixed-income housing because of its location in a stable and thriving community. This is spurred in part by significantly greater interest in living within walking distance of Metro stations and demographic trends that increasingly favor more urban neighborhoods.
The associated increase in property values in neighborhoods near Metro has enabled ARHA to pursue the redevelopment of the James Bland property, which is currently before City Planning Commission and City Council.
These high property values may provide future opportunities for improvement and redevelopment of the other public housing sites located in the Braddock East neighborhood. High property values alos create opportunities for ARHA to leverage its land assets in support of its broader redevelopment goals. This is an exceptional opportunity for ARHA and the City, as other housing authorities usually do not have the benefit of such valuable land assets.
⬚ figure
New mixed-income housing in Braddock East will help create a more sustainable and vibrant neighborhood.
The optimal redevelopment of public housing sites into mixed-income communities should include the provision of a range of housing types, accessible open space, high quality design and community facilities to accommodate the diversity of households who will live there, while also being compatible with the adjoining neighborhoods. In addition, any redevelopment must retain a sense of community for people at varying income levels and offer housing opportunities for existing public housing residents who want to return to the neighborhood. Public housing has been part of Braddock East for a long time and its residents deserve an equitable stake in the new community.
Redevelopment creates the opportunity for a new urban form with varying heights, massing and design that respects the character of the surrounding neighborhoods, capitalizes on the proximity to Braddock Metro station and creates a highly sustainable community that complements the character of the area.
The Braddock East Master Plan is the first step in the process of redeveloping the public housing sites in Braddock East to create new mixed-income, mixed-use, urban communities. It creates a framework to encourage and guide future improvement and potential redevelopment of the public housing sites.
The decision to redevelop these public housing sites is ultimately at ARHA’s discretion and is highly dependent on a range of factors, including what will be economically feasible at the time. The Braddock East Master Plan provides flexibility to enable ARHA to achieve its mission of providing quality housing to persons of low income in a manner that allows ARHA to capitalize on its major asset – its land, which is held in trust primarily for the benefit of its residents. The Plan also provides guidance to ensure new development be physically, visually and socially integrated into the existing community so that quality of life is enhanced for all residents in the community.
For generations, the Braddock East neighborhood has been a community for low-income families where their churches, social clubs, as well as their homes, have been located. An important goal of the Master Plan is to respect the interests of the existing public housing tenants, as more fully stated in the needs and aspirations of public housing residents (Section 5); urban design amenities (Section 7) and recommendations 2, 5, 7, 8 and 14 of this Plan.
The Braddock East Master Plan promotes a diversity of housing types at differing levels of affordability to accommodate households with a broad range of income levels within the community. A mix of housing types, unit sizes, and affordability levels will help to encourage a mix of people with different lifestyles, household sizes, and other characteristics that will enhance and promote the neighborhood’s livability.
Locally, the City and ARHA have already endorsed and successfully implemented mixed-income housing at Quaker Hill and Chatham Square and there are numerous successful examples elsewhere in the country.
Tent City Boston, Massachusetts
In terms of materials and massing, Tent City responds to and makes a transition in scale from the 19th-century Victorian townhouses to the south to the large new buildings of Copley Place to the north. Housing, commercial spaces, and an interior landscaped courtyard are built over a two-level below-grade parking garage. The development is totally integrated in that no physical or visible distinctions link a dwelling unit’s type, size, or location to the income, race, or ethnic background of its residents. In addition to its multiple national and local awards for design excellence, Tent City received the 1994 United Nations World Habitat Award for outstanding housing in a developed country.
⬚ figure
• Area: 3 acres • Units: 269 units • Residential Density: 89 units/acre • Income Mix: 25% low-income, 50% affordable, 25% market-rate • Architect: Goody Clancy • Developer: JMB/Urban Development Company
Alexandria, Virginia
⬚ figure
Chatham Square’s most innovative quality is its seamless integration of the 52 public housing units with the 100 market-rate units. Due to the building configurations, which typically include four market-rate townhomes mirrored by six public-housing units on the reverse side, the different unit types appear remarkably similar in nature.
Rear alleys provide vehicular access to the shared, underground parking garage. Financing for the project came from the sale of the public housing site itself, low-income tax credits from the Commonwealth of Virginia, a $3.5-million dollars loan from a combination of the City and Housing Trust Fund (which has been repaid), as well as from a Federal Hope VI grant.
Alexandria, Virginia
⬚ figure
Quaker Hill is one of the earliest examples of redeveloping public housing into mixed-income communities. In 1987/1988, ARHA demolished the 264-unit Cameron Valley public housing development. The public housing units were replaced in several sites across the City, one of which was the newly developed Quaker Hill. The development was financed by the sale of 40 acres of land for an adjacent shopping center, the sale of the market-rate units, and low-income housing tax credit financing. Quaker Hill is a mixed-income community comprising 60 public housing units and 166 market-rate units, in a combination of townhomes, condominiums and apartments.
Chicago, Illinois
Both the plan and redevelopment guidelines establish a signature new neighborhood with a full spectrum of uses and incomes, a strong sense of place, and restored connections to surrounding neighborhoods that end years of physical and social isolation for the area. The two phases of the plan will create an extensive new public realm built on a new street grid and system of blocks designed to build a sense of community. Phase IA— which encompasses 760 new units—was partially funded through a HOPE VI grant, with limited additional funds from city and other public investment. The plan’s architectural guidelines draw on traditional Chicago block patterns and building styles, including row houses, walk-up one- and two-floor flats, and apartment buildings.
⬚ figure
Washington D.C.
This successful mixed-income community serves as a connection and transition between higher-income and lower-income areas on either side, bringing stability and a new sense of pride to the surrounding community. A cooperative structure governed sale of 134 new townhomes to applicants ranging from 0% to 115 % of the area’s median income. The redevelopment also included 13 market-rate townhomes and a 6,000-square-foot community center.
⬚ figure
Boston, Massachusetts
⬚ figure
Comfortably integrated into Boston’s historic South End, Langham Court’s 84 units (on a one-acre site) demonstrate how building densities can be raised to “smart growth” levels while matching the scale, massing, and rhythm of the surrounding neighborhood. Notable for a subtle transition from the public street to the private courtyard, the complex’s architecture and design make no distinctions among units earmarked for market-rate, middle-, and low-income residents.
• Area: 1 acre • Units: 89 • Residential Density: 89 units/acre • Affordability breakdown: 33% low-income, 33% affordable, 33% market-rate • Planning/Urban Design: Goody Clancy (1990) • Developer: Four Corners Development Corporation
The Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan (BMNP) was adopted by City Council on March 15, 2008. The framework and recommendations of the BMNP are based on seven guiding principles. (See Appendix A for details). The Braddock East Plan is an amendment to the BMNP intended primarily to expand upon the fifth principle; to promote mixed-income housing through the redevelopment of the existing public housing sites that form the Braddock East planning area.
The Braddock East Master Plan will also incorporate the other principles into the planning framework for these sites. In particular, the Design Guidelines set out in Appendix A of the BMNP apply equally to the Braddock East sites. The recommendations in Chapter 8 relating to traffic impact and transportation management also apply to the Braddock East sites and there is no separate traffic analysis as part of this Master Plan.
The BMNP recommended that the Braddock East public housing be redeveloped into higher density, mixed-income housing, attracting a range of household types and incomes. It also recommended future designation of the sites as Coordinated Development Districts (CDDs) and the creation of CDD guidelines.
■ 17
Resolution 830, adopted by City Council and ARHA in 1981 and amended in 1982, updated a previous resolution and agreement between the City and ARHA. It created a joint commitment and agreement between the City and ARHA to retain, at a minimum, 1,150 public or publicly assisted housing units in Alexandria, 365 of which are in the Braddock East area.
Resolution 830 establishes a requirement for one-for-one replacement of any public housing unit lost through redevelopment. It requires that no public housing unit be demolished unless replacement publicly assisted housing is available and that no tenant be displaced from public housing until they can be moved into appropriate replacement housing. It also requires that the net proceeds from the sale or lease of any public housing project be used to benefit the living environment of public housing residents and that all relocation costs be borne by ARHA or its developer. ARHA also asserts that ownership by ARHA is essential to preserve and maintain the limited public housing stock.
Therefore, any redevelopment of the public housing units in the Braddock East neighborhood will require the replacement of all existing public housing units either on the original site or elsewhere in the City.
⬚ figure
The City’s Strategic Plan. One of the goals of the Strategic Plan is that Alexandria should be a caring community that is diverse and affordable. With this in mind, the Strategic Plan envisions a City where:
The Braddock East Plan builds upon these strategic objectives for the City.
⬚ figure
The City’s Strategic Plan wants Alexandria to be a caring community that is diverse and affordable.
Housing Master Plan. In 2006, the Mayor and City Council appointed an Affordable Housing Initiatives Work Group (AHIWG) to study the City's current policies and tools and to develop strategies to maximize affordable and workforce housing opportunities. In April 2008, AHIWG delivered an interim report that set out a variety of recommendations for immediate implementation, including:
"In order to manage the City’s goals of housing preservation, to fully understand the roles of non-profits, private developers and ARHA, to achieve City goals of an equitable distribution of housing options throughout the community, and to fully plan for and equitably use density or other housing tools, we need a comprehensive housing plan. This is an ambitious project that will be possible only with adequate staffing and other resources. The City should consider using housing contributions to fund this study. This planning work is a natural extension of the Braddock East Planning exercise."
The City will initiate an affordable housing master plan process during fiscal year 2009; expecting to be completed within eighteen months. The Housing Plan will establish clear land-use tools and other policies to preserve and develop affordable and workforce housing; identify opportunities for replacement public housing; and identify appropriate target areas for preservation or development of affordable housing and/or workforce housing. It is anticipated that such a process will involve extensive participation and coordination among several City departments; citywide community outreach and education; the formation and facilitation of a stakeholder/advisory group; multiple presentations to public groups and City leadership; and the development of a final Plan/report.
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between ARHA and the City, March 2008. The MOU sets out a process for better planning, coordination and communication between ARHA and the City in order to develop an affordable housing strategy, with the goal of sustaining and improving the public and publicly assisted housing within Alexandria. With the City and ARHA working as partners, the purpose of the MOU is to undertake short and long-term land use and capital planning, monitor program performance and achieve a more sustainable financial condition for ARHA.
The MOU notes that since the 1970s, the policy of the City and ARHA has been to preserve and improve designated public housing units by one-for-one replacement and de-concentration by scattered site replacements under Resolution 830 and its predecessor resolution. It reinforces the City’s commitment to work with ARHA and the community to develop a coordinated long-term strategy for the redevelopment and maintenance of aging public housing sites and deconcentration of public housing as part of an affordable strategy that addresses affordable housing throughout the City.
The MOU recommends that the City and ARHA should continue to maintain a working group (including two members from each body) and required the preparation a long-term strategic plan for ARHA. It also states that ARHA and the City will jointly and cooperatively work in developing a Master Plan for ARHA’s Braddock East properties and that, once adopted by the City and ARHA, any City capital grants or loans to ARHA would be considered by the City in the context of that plan.
Parker-Gray Historic District. The James Bland, Ramsey and Samuel Madden public housing sites lie within the Parker-Gray Historic District. Any redevelopment plan for these sites must pay special attention to building scale and cultural history and will be reviewed by the Parker-Gray Board of Architectural Review.
⬚ figure
New development should respect the historic character of the Parker-Gray Historic District.
Northeast Small Area Plan. The two northern blocks of James Bland lie within the boundaries of the Northeast Chapter of the Alexandria Master Plan. The plan currently designates these parcels as medium density residential land use (RB). The current redevelopment plan for James Bland is supported by a concurrent master plan amendment to change the land use classification of these parcels to Coordinated Development District (CDD).
⬚ figure
There are 365 public housing units today in the James Bland (and Bland addition), Andrew Adkins, Ramsey Homes and Samuel Madden (Uptown) complexes on approximately 18 acres combined.
The Plan area also includes 10 single-family homes at the west end of the Andrew Adkins block, which include a Masonic lodge.
James Bland. The 8.49-acre James Bland site comprises 194 housing units on five city blocks in an area bounded by North Patrick Street on the west, First Street on the north, North Columbus Street on the east, and Wythe Street on the south. The property, built in 1954 and 1959, includes 106 two-bedroom units, 66 three-bedroom units, 13 four-bedroom units and nine one-bedroom units. Two of the site’s blocks lie within the North East Small Area Plan and the entire site is within the Parker-Gray Historic District.
One of the units at James Bland—910 Montgomery Street—is occupied by the Family Learning and Resource Center. This provides educational after-school programs for public housing tenants and is considered a valuable resource by ARHA and its residents.
A redevelopment plan for the James Bland site was submitted for City review and approval in June 2008 (see page 24 for details).
Samuel Madden (Uptown). The Samuel Madden site, built in 1945, consists of 66 housing units located on two blocks along North Henry Street between Madison and First Streets. This 3.44 acre site lies at the point where Route 1 divides into two one-way streets, making it an important gateway location. The development includes 46 two-bedroom units and 20 three-bedroom units. The site is within the Parker-Gray Historic District.
Andrew Adkins. This 3.52-acre site consists of 90 housing units on land that was originally two city blocks between North Fayette and West streets and between Wythe and Madison streets. The two and three-story buildings, built in 1968, contain some of the largest public housing units in the city, including 32 four- and five-bedroom units.
At the west end of the Andrew Adkins block are 10 small, single-family homes, many built in the early 20th century. One lot, near the corner of West and Wythe Streets, has recently been remodeled. Two of the units are owned and occupied by a Masonic lodge.
⬚ figure
Two- and three-story townhomes units at the Andrew Adkins public housing site.
Ramsey Homes. Ramsey Homes consists of 15 public housing units along the eastern side of North Patrick Street, between Pendleton and Wythe Streets. The 0.71-acre site lies just to the south of the new Charles Houston Recreation Center and to the north and west of primarily two-story historic row houses. The quartet of two-story apartment buildings was built in 1942 and all are 2-bedroom units. The site is within the Parker-Gray Historic District.
Analysis of ARHA data as of April 2008 reveals that there are 333 combined households in the study area with 983 individuals living in these households (36 units are currently off-line). The average household size is nearly three persons per household. About 60 percent of all occupied units are two bedroom units, although there are also significant numbers of three, 4- and 5-bedroom units. The 4- and 5-bedroom units comprise a significant percentage of the city’s whole inventory of public housing units of that size.
The typical public housing household is headed by a non-elderly single parent who is an African American female. While 53 percent of households have income from wages, most households are low-income and over 83 percent are considered extremely low-income based on the Metropolitan Statistical Area guidelines prepared by HUD. Nine percent of all households have at least one disabled person living in that household.
The length of tenure of public housing varies. Just over a quarter have lived in public housing for 11 years or more, while nearly one-fifth have lived in public housing for less than one year.
Over 70 percent of households are considered ‘over housed’, meaning they are living in larger units than they actually need. This may be because there is not a strong demand for the
larger units; it is generally cheaper to keep a family over housed than to transfer them to a smaller unit; or there are too few smaller units. Only two households are classed as ‘under housed’.
As of April 2008, there were 1,767 families on the ARHA waiting list, of which 1,081 (61%) are requests for one-bedroom units, 434 (25%) for two-bedroom units, 226 (13%) for three-bedroom units and 26 (1.5%) for four- and five-bedroom units. The waiting list is currently closed.
The waiting list data, together with the high percentage of ‘over housed’ households, suggests that the demographics of the public housing residents are moving toward smaller households, which is consistent with the national demographic trend.
⬚ figure
April 2008
⬚ figure
View of Samuel Madden from Henry Street
■ 23
James Bland covers five city blocks between North Patrick Street to the west, North Columbus Street to the east, Wythe Street to the south and First Street to the north. There are currently 194 public housing units on the 8.5-acre site.
⬚ figure
The James Bland redevelopment is necessarily a part of the financial feasibility of the redevelopment of the ARHA owned property at Glebe Park. Due to deteriorating conditions and high vacancy levels at Glebe Park, it became necessary to redevelop/rehabilitate these units in order to maintain federal funding. ARHA selected EYA as its development partner for the redevelopment of Glebe Park, with whom it had successfully developed Chatham Square. Other properties within ARHA's portfolio were also offered for redevelopment to help finance the redevelopment of Glebe Park, which was not feasible on its own. The James Bland site was considered the most viable candidate for a combined redevelopment with Glebe Park due to its size and the strength of the residential market in the Braddock neighborhood.
The James Bland DSUP application was submitted in June 2008 and proposes 134 new public housing units and 245 new market-rate units; a total of 379 units on the site. Glebe Park will accommodated 44 of the displaced units from James Bland with the remaining 16 units to be replaced elsewhere in the City at a location yet to be determined.
⬚ figure
The project design transitions height and density from 4-story multi-family buildings located adjacent to Route 1* down to 2.5-story townhomes along Columbus St. The public housing units will be integrated into the overall development and wider community by making the exterior design of the ARHA units indistinguishable from the market-rate units and ensuring that they are uniformly represented throughout the project, with approximately 35% proposed in each block. The open space has been planned to contribute to the urban character of the area as well as providing recreation space for residents. Construction will be phased in order to minimize the number of times residents will be required to relocate and development is currently anticipated to be built between Fall 2009 and 2015.
In November 2007, ARHA applied for federal HOPE VI grant funding for the James Bland Redevelopment, but the process is extremely competitive and the grant was not successful. In May 2008, the State of Virginia awarded Low-Income Housing Tax Credits for the Glebe Park redevelopment, which includes the 44 replacement units for Bland. Applications for additional tax credit funding for the rest of the James Bland housing will be made over a five-year period. The remaining funding for the redevelopment of James Bland will come from the sale of the market rate housing.
24 ■
*Except that one multi-family building may be increased to 60 feet in the northern multi-family block adjacent to Patrick Street.
The City and ARHA began an intensive, nine-month community planning process in February 2008 that resulted in this Plan. Details of the process are presented in Appendix B.
The City Council appointed a twelve person Braddock East Advisory Group to represent the diverse interests in the Braddock East area. The Advisory Group met monthly from February through October (excluding August), for a total of eight meetings. All the meetings were open to the public and were attended by neighborhood citizens and other concerned Alexandrians.
This process helped to facilitate a community-wide dialogue about the future of public housing and the transition to mixed-income housing developments.
⬚ figure
The Braddock East Advisory group met monthly to formulate the vision for the Plan
Creating a community vision involved many lively and important discussions among the Advisory Group and community members, all of whom brought diverse points of view to the process.
Specific efforts were made to engage the public housing residents in the overall planning process, through a series of meetings, focus groups and a community barbeque. In addition, ARHA employed a consultant to help with outreach efforts with the public housing residents.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Engaging the Wider Community
Throughout the process City Staff, EYA and ARHA met with individual civic associations and resident groups to discuss the proposed redevelopment site plan for James Bland specifically. The principal concerns of these residents related to increased density, height and traffic congestion, a lack of open space and parking, and some in the community wish to see more public housing units relocated to other parts in the City.
A Design Charrette was held in June 2008 that involved members of the Advisory Group, and representatives from the public housing, the wider community, ARHA and other interested persons. The purpose of the charrette was to establish the scale of new development that would be appropriate for this neighborhood. It was generally agreed that new buildings should be no more than one-story higher than adjacent buildings (with greater height permissible further away). New buildings should also incorporate shoulders along sensitive edges, to transition taller buildings to smaller context of adjacent properties.
⬚ figure
Participants at the Design Charrette agreed that the height of any new building should be sensitive to the scale of adjacent development.
The primary goal of the Braddock East Master Plan is to encourage and guide future redevelopment of the public housing sites in the Braddock East area into diverse mixed-income, mixed-use urban communities, in a manner sensitive to the interests of the residents of the public housing that has been in the area for generations. This is consistent with the City’s Strategic Plan vision for choices of housing opportunities for a variety of income and age levels and for workers in Alexandria
The objective is to create communities with a broad mix of income levels and large enough to sustain a critical mass of public housing residents in order to maintain the strong social and support networks that are essential in low-income communities. Adding a range of housing options, including workforce and affordable housing, to new development is desirable, as it will contribute to the diversity of the neighborhood. Workforce and affordable housing also help to “bridge” the social and economic gap between the market-rate and public housing residents. Subsidized ownership housing may also provide the potential for public housing residents to improve their economic standing while remaining in the neighborhood.
Public housing was first created during the 1930s to provide decent, safe, and sanitary low-cost housing. For many decades, public housing was home to predominantly working-class and middle-class households. However, over time, public housing has evolved to house lower income families with few opportunities to move into unsubsidized housing. The result is communities with high concentrations of very poor families who are often socially and economically isolated. This has produced less than desirable living conditions and other negative impacts for both public housing residents and the surrounding community. Since the 1990s, the national policy approach has been toward redeveloping public housing to create new mixed-income communities that are revitalized and livable for everyone.
⬚ figure
Mixed-income housing produces physical, economic, and social benefits and is deemed rational public policy and effective social and urban planning; making better communities for everyone. The Braddock East planning process has confirmed many of the advantages often advocated for redeveloping public housing into mixed-income communities.
Mixed-income housing helps draw together individuals with different backgrounds and histories. It creates a mixed and diverse neighborhood, where families of different incomes live in the same development and their children can gain opportunities to meet each other and play together without regard to income level. Adults in a mixed-income community are drawn into a shared sense of community as they work together to manage their housing and address issues of shared concern to residents. In many cases, lower income residents have indicated that being part of a social network with residents of higher education and/or incomes has helped expand their education and job opportunities.
Important benefits also accrue to the larger community when mixed-income housing reduces concentrations of low-income housing. Property owners within several blocks of transformed public housing sites benefit from significant increases in property values. Cities in turn benefit from the increased property taxes associated with rising real estate values. In many cases renters in the surrounding community can gain access to newly created affordable ownership housing on the redeveloped sites
A key element of any successful mixed income community is creating opportunities for supportive services for families. Through the school system, the Recreation and Parks Department, the Department of Human Services, and the Office on Aging, as well as through other entities and their programs, the City already provides a wide range of social and other services that are available to public housing residents, such as workforce readiness training and child-care.
Kim Wade was a resident of Quaker Hill from 1996 to 2002. According to Ms. Wade, “compared to where I came from, Quaker Hill was a blessing. I lived on Alfred Street when it was referred to (by some) as the strip. Quaker Hill changed my life and that of my family”. Now a homeowner, the experience at Quaker Hill helped her make the transition.
Lolita Arrington (below) has lived at Chatham Square for three years. She moved from Montgomery Street. She considers the move “a step-up, not a handout”. According to Ms. Arrington, the neighbors are nice and the neighborhood is quiet. She has had to budget in order to handle her utilities but is happy to be part of this newly developed community. Ms. Arrington is in school pursuing a degree in early childhood education. She is pictured below with her nephew, Bob Corrie McNeely.
⬚ figure
Kerry Beatty (below) has lived in Quaker Hill for two and a half years. She moved from a private apartment complex with her three children, ages 10, 7 and 3. According to Ms. Beatty, Quaker Hill provides a much better space, which includes a basement. Her children are able to play in the basement during inclement weather. She has a good relationship with her neighbors and enjoys the convenience of shopping within walking distance. She hopes to buy a home within the next five years.
⬚ figure
The significant investment resources that redevelopment can unlock has the potential to provide a more robust program of human and social services to support the transition of public housing residents to greater self-sufficiency, and to explore potential collaborations by ARHA with local agencies to expand other services available for residents.
This is consistent with the City's Strategic Plan goal to ensure that appropriate types and levels of human and social services are available and that these services are responsive to changing needs.
Redeveloping public housing into mixed-income communities presents many challenges, including providing relocation resources, new housing for current public housing residents; achieving a balance among the diverse needs for housing types; and financing the redevelopment. Although these are significant challenges, they are not insurmountable if planned well, as was shown in the Chatham Square and Quaker Hill development processes and other successful public housing redevelopments across the country.
In accordance with Resolution 830, any displaced public housing units from Braddock East will have to be replaced elsewhere in the City. There are 365 public housing units today in the James Bland, Andrew Adkins, Ramsey Homes and Samuel Madden communities. As Andrew Adkins, Ramsey Homes and Samuel Madden may not be redeveloped for a number of years; it is not practical to determine at this time the number of units to be replaced on site or locations for replacement units.
Mixed-income and affordable housing strategies provide a range of different housing types to serve the needs of a mix of families at different income levels.
Public housing units: Income-restricted housing units that are targeted to extremely low- to low-income families. Residents pay 30% of their adjusted income as rent and HUD provides the local housing authority with subsidies to maintain the units and the developments in which they are located.
Section 8/Housing Choice Voucher Program: A federal program that provides rental assistance to low-income families in the form of a voucher. Families with a Section 8 voucher usually pay 30% of their adjusted income monthly income towards rent and the public housing authority covers the difference between the family’s rent contribution and the full rent for the home, up to a specified limit known as the “payment standard”. The family pays any rent above the payment standard.
Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC): A reduction of the investor’s federal income tax liability for investments in affordable housing projects. A qualified tax credit project is income restricted at a variety of levels and must comply continuously with these restrictions for a minimum of 15-years.
Area Median Income (AMI): Median family income reflects the income level at which half of all families earn more and half earn less. The 2008 AMI in the Washington-Arlington-Alexandria area for a family of four is $99,000.
Workforce Housing: Housing units that target households of moderate incomes. Moderate income may include incomes ranging from 50% - 120% of Area Median Income. Workforce housing may include both rental and ownership housing.
Affordable for-sale housing: Income-restricted units that may include price reductions, down payment assistance, and “silent second mortgages.” These units are typically targeted to families at or below 80% of the area median income level.
Mixed-Income Development: Uses private and/or public sources to develop market rate and affordable housing that may include Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units, Workforce Housing and market rate owner-occupied units and rentals.
HOPE VI: A federal grant program managed by HUD that provides funding to redevelop public housing developments. Funding may also be used for demolition of severely deteriorated public housing, acquisition of sites for off-site construction, relocation and community and supportive service programs for residents; including those relocated due to revitalization efforts.
With regard to the needs and aspirations of the public housing residents (described in Section 4 and Appendix 2) and the management requirements of ARHA, the following key criteria have been developed for the creation of new mixed-income housing:
The City will continue to evaluate whether new developments elsewhere in the City provide opportunities for affordable housing, including sites for public housing units. An initial assessment of areas within the City where there will be pressure for major redevelopment in the next 5-10 years suggests that there may be opportunities to leverage some replacement public housing units and/or funding for public housing units throughout the City.
As part of the Glebe Park redevelopment plan, it is anticipated that 44 public housing units from the eventual redevelopment of James Bland will be relocated to Glebe Park and that another 16 Bland units will be relocated off-site. These 16 units will be relocated in accordance with ARHA's current agreement with the City and with the criteria recommended in this Plan.
Similarly, Resolution 830 requires that any replacement housing units needed due to the redevelopment of the Madden, Adkins and Ramsey sites must be available before the existing public housing units are demolished.
It is clear that a proactive policy of establishing criteria for replacement units and identifying and safeguarding replacement unit sites is important to ensure their adequacy and availability even for redevelopment projects five, ten or more years in the future. This Master Plan establishes the criteria for the replacement sites, if appropriate and necessary, but does not identify specific sites. Opportunities for replacement public housing will be discussed through the City's Housing Master Plan process for consideration by ARHA.
Mixed-income housing creates diverse physical, social, and economic needs that affect the viability and sustainability of the development. The actual mix and type of housing – whether rental or ownership; market-rate, public housing, or affordable; family or senior – depends not only on market demand, but also on attracting a range of incomes and meeting the needs of the existing neighborhood.
New mixed-income developments across the country demonstrate a variety of income-mix that can be successful. The examples of mixed income housing on pages 14-17 demonstrate this. Locally, the Chatham Square development includes 66% market rate for sale units and 33% low-income housing and Quaker Hill has 73% market rate for sale units and 27% low-income housing. A similar ratio is currently being
⬚ figure
Prospective buyers (and stand-ins), some with tents, line up days in advance to buy $550,000 to $1.1 million homes in the new Chatham Square development.
proposed for the James Bland redevelopment. Tent City in Boston includes 25% low-income, 50% affordable and 25% market rate. Langham Court in Boston is a three-way split between low-income, affordable and market rate housing. The development cited at Parkside, Chicago is 30% low-income, 20% affordable and 50% market-rate. Conversely, the Town Homes at Capitol Hill are almost all low-income or affordable, with only 13 (9%) market rate units.
Other examples are provided in Table 1 below. Collectively these examples illustrate that each development is unique. The income-mix of any redevelopment will be influenced by market conditions, funding availability and other factors that can only be resolved at the time the development program for each site is being decided.
Currently, the neighborhood is home to a broad demographic range: small households of singles, empty nesters, the elderly, young professionals, and families with children. Redevelopment of public housing will create a new community for a variety of residents, and amenities should recognize the diversity of the population. Such considerations are:
Table 1: Mixed-Income Development: Examples of Income Mix
| Public Housing | Affordable Sale | Affordable Rent | Market Rate Sale | Market Rate Rent | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Magnolia Gardens, Beaumont, TX | 37% | 21% | 42% | ||
| Cochran Gardens, St Louis | 36% | 8% | 35% | 21% | |
| Preston Taylor Homes, Nashville, TN | 74% | 20% | 6% | ||
| Uptown Square Apartments, Memphis, TN | 22% | 38% | 40% | ||
| 2008 HOPE VI Awards | |||||
| West Park, Bremerton, WA | 19% | 3% | 27% | 51% | |
| Park Lake Homes II, King County, WA | 52% | 5% | 8% | 35% | |
| Lake City, Seattle, WA | 50% | 5% | 34% | 11% | |
| C.J. Peete Homes, New Orleans | 40% | 5% | 30% | 25% | |
| A.L. Krone Homes, Phoenix | 19% | 18% | 11% | 44% | 8% |
| Sheridan Terrace, Washington, DC | 33% | 15% | 20% | 32% |
It is recommended above that new mixed- income development should include high quality and experienced management of facilities and grounds. For each of the new developments, specific consideration should be given to the provision of private on-site management.
To further the objective of developing a meaningful sense of community throughout the Braddock neighborhood, the Plan encourages the formation of an inclusive neighborhood organization comprising representatives across the broad spectrum of households in the community, including residents of public housing. Such a group could be supported by grant funding.
Relocation Resolution 830 requires that no tenant be displaced from public housing until they can be moved into replacement housing. Federal law mandates providing certain benefits to any families relocated from public housing, including relocation assistance and counseling.
Consistent with the Uniform Relocation Act, before redevelopment occurs, ARHA will develop a Relocation Plan, subject to HUD approval, that clearly articulates relocation options, re-occupancy criteria, services, mobility counseling, schedule, phasing and cost.
The total development cost of any new development includes the costs of construction (i.e. demolition, buildings, parking, landscaping, infrastructure, and development soft costs such as design, legal, and contractor/ developer fees), the cost of the land (if off site acquisition is proposed) and associated transactional costs and financing expenses, which are expressed as a percentage of construction and land costs. With the redevelopment of public housing there are some additional “soft costs” including site work, demolition, remediation, relocation assistance, transition services and the housing authority’s administrative, management and legal costs.
The table below provides estimates of development costs for strategic planning purposes. As such, these costs include markups and contingencies.
For the purposes of planning for future development scenarios, it is appropriate to apply a range of approximately 10% above and below the total development cost estimate calculated above to accommodate construction cost variability over a longer-term horizon.
Accordingly, it is reasonable to assume that, in Alexandria, a total development cost of $270,000 to $330,000 per on-site public housing unit, plus an additional land cost of $70,000 to $90,000 for any unit that is relocated elsewhere in the City
While the City may be able to secure off-site housing sites at no cost, through negotiation with developers in return for increased density or other benefits, these sites will generally represent a trade-off for other potential benefits and thus it is necessary to recognize a site cost for off-site units.
Table 2: Estimate of Total Development Costs
| Public On-Site | Public Off-Site | Market | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Construction Costs $^{(1)}$ | |||
| Buildings, parking... | $172 | $172 | $212 |
| Design... | $44 | $44 | $54 |
| Land $^{(2)}$ | n/a | $60 | $60 |
| Financing $^{(3)}$ | $17 | $22 | $26 |
| Total per square foot | $233 | $298 | $352 |
| Public Housing “soft costs” $^{(4)}$ | $23k | $23k | n/a |
| Total per 1200 sf unit $^{(5)}$ | $303k | $381k | $422.5k |
Table Notes: (1) Based on comparables in DC Metropolitan area (source: WZH-A). (2) Based on comparables for Braddock Metro area (source: WZH-A). (3) 8% of construction costs (source: WZH-A). (4) Based on analysis of other Public Housing redevelopments (source: EJP). (5) Assumed average unit size for townhomes and multifamily of 1200 sf. gross (source: consultant team)
The process for securing federal funding for mixed-income and mixed-finance redevelopment projects is often highly competitive and requires formation of numerous financing and development partnerships. It also required layering a variety of public and private sources.
| Potential and typical financing approaches include creative layering of multiple sources of funds, including: |
|---|
| • Low-Income Housing Tax Credits;<br>• HOPE VI grants;<br>• Tax-exempt bonds;<br>• Municipal funds;<br>• Federal Home Loan Bank funds;<br>• Public housing authority funds;<br>• Developer contributions;<br>• Local government loans and grants;<br>• and<br>• Private support from non-profits or foundations. |
These public and private funding sources generally only provide a proportion of the funds needed to support the redevelopment of public housing. For example, the 2003 Chatham Square redevelopment project in Alexandria was funded from the sale of the land, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs) from Virginia Housing Development Authority, $6.7 million from a HOPE VI grant, and a City loan from a combination of funding sources, and the purchase of a replacement housing site by the City.
HUD’s HOPE VI grant program has been a major funding source for many public housing redevelopment projects over the past 15 years. The number and amount of HOPE VI grants has diminished in recent years and the future of the program, despite some indications of
Congressional support for expansion, is uncertain. Alexandria is competing for more limited funds with jurisdictions that have more severely "distressed" public housing than exists in Alexandria. In November 2007, ARHA applied for a HOPE VI grant for the James Bland redevelopment but was not successful. The redevelopment of James Bland is to be funded solely by LIHTCs and the sale of the land.
The City and ARHA should work together to identify and pursue appropriate measures to tap into the multiple sources of funds available for the redevelopment of public housing.
In order to satisfy the requirements of Resolution 830, the redevelopment of the existing public housing units in Braddock East has to provide sufficient funding to rebuild all the public housing units whether they remain on-site or are replaced elsewhere.
As noted above, Alexandria cannot rely on the availability of HOPE VI grants to fund any future redevelopment of public housing in the City. It is therefore necessary to tap the other financing options referred to above, although these are also not guaranteed to be available. The 44 units from James Bland that are being replaced at Glebe Park have already received LIHTC’s. The balance of the James Bland public housing will be submitted for potential tax credit funding over a five-year period. If successful, it is anticipated that tax credits will account for approximately 30% of the total public housing redevelopment costs.
Based on experience with public housing redevelopment nationwide and ARHA’s own development efforts, it is reasonable to assume that public sources (a combination of federal, state and local sources) might cover up to 50% of development costs if they can be secured. Assuming an average total development cost of approximately $300,000 per unit (see Table 1), this means that $150,000 must be paid for from other sources. This is for the cost of the unit only and does not include the additional land
cost for any units relocated off-site. Fortunately, the Braddock East public housing sites possess the unique and unprecedented opportunity to benefit from the high land values that come with being in walking distance of a Metro station. This significant land value can be leveraged by selling rights to develop market rate housing or office space on the sites, provided that development capacity is retained for replacement public housing units on-site and/or on other sites that can be purchased with revenues achieved from the sale of development rights.
Accordingly, to redevelop public housing in Braddock East, the gap in project funding has to be bridged by the market value of the land on which the public housing is sited. Land price is valued on a "buildable" square foot basis (total development potential permitted by zoning). This value changes by location, zoning and market conditions. Based on comparable data from the Braddock East area, we have assumed that, in the current market, the value of land in this area is between $50 and $70 per buildable square foot. Assuming an average unit size of 1200 sf, this means that a market-rate unit contributes between $60,000 and $84,000 to the cost of each public housing unit.
In this scenario, and based on current market conditions, between 1.8 and 2.5 market rate units are needed to bridge the funding gap of approximately $150,000 for each replacement public housing unit, with additional market rate units needed to fund any off-site land costs.
This formula provides the context for the redevelopment of the Braddock East public housing sites. As noted above, the James Bland site is already in the redevelopment plan process and, given its relationship with the Glebe Park redevelopment, the funding
mechanisms for the off-site units are not typical. With regard to the other three public housing sites – Madden, Adkins and Ramsey – the above ratio suggests that between 308 and 428 market rate units would be needed to pay for the replacement of the existing 171 public housing units on these sites. This means that the total number of new units – market and public housing – that would be needed to provide for the replacement of the public housing units on-site would be between 479 and 599 units. Beyond this, additional market rate units would be needed to fund the land cost of replacing any public housing units elsewhere in the City.
It has to be emphasized that this is only an approximate measure, as changes in market conditions will affect development costs and land values beyond the conservative estimates and ranges used in this analysis. If the real estate market is at a low point at the time of redevelopment then it may be the case that the redevelopment of these sites will be economically unviable at that time. As the market improves, feasibility may improve, and the number of market-rate units needed to support a new public housing unit will decrease proportionally. This is not intended to be prescriptive and simply provides a basis for the plan framework.
This section sets out the recommendations for the Plan that will determine urban design, scale, massing, land use, open space, parking and density for the redeveloped public housing sites. These recommendations are based upon the outcome of the Community Design Charrette, discussions with ARHA, ensuring integration with the BMNP and applying established planning and zoning principles. These recommendations are reflected in the Coordinated Development District (CDD) guidelines set out in Section 8.
Residential. A mix of public housing and market-rate housing, and where possible an element of affordable and/or workforce housing is recommended. The precise ratio for this mix should be determined through the development planning process, as it will be influenced by the funding available at that time.
Retail. It is desirable to include some retail uses on the ground floor of the Samuel Madden blocks, which will compliment existing and proposed retail in the area. A grocery store is recommended as a potential land use for these blocks. The overall mix of retail in the study area, including any grocery store in this location, should meet the needs of the whole community and should be neighborhood serving.
For the Andrew Adkins block, this Plan recommends retail land use on the ground floor of the recommended hotel and/or office on West Street. There is also potential for retail uses at ground floor along Madison Street.
⬚ figure
(Above) The Colecroft Station development provides an appropriate transition in scale to its surrounding context. (Below) The Meridian development lacks an appropriate scale transition to the historic blocks within the Braddock Metro Neighborhood.
⬚ figure
Office. The plan recommends that the western half of Adkins, adjacent to the Metro site, and/or the northern Samuel Madden block be considered as possible office uses. The office uses will help to balance the overall mix of residential and retail uses within the plan area.
Table 3: Land Use, as amended
| Site | Parcel Area | Existing Development | Current Zoning | Recommended Zoning | Required Land Use | Preferred Land Use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SF | Acres | SF | ||||
| James Bland | 370,000 | 8.49 | 200,000 | RB | CDD | Residential |
| Andrew Adkins1 | 196,000 | 4.50 | 148,000 | RB | CDD | GF Retail |
| Braddock West1 1352-1362 Madison Street, 711-727 N. West Street, 1319-1329 Wythe Street | 41,398 | 0.95 | 11,606 | RB | OCH | GF Retail |
| Andrew Adkins Public Housing Site1 | 133,602 | 3.07 | 98,000 | RB | CDD | GF Retail |
| Samuel Madden | 150,000 | 3.44 | 64,000 | RB | CDD | GF Retail |
| Ramsey | 31,000 | 0.71 | 14,000 | RB | (2) | Residential |
(1) Based on a 175,000 sf site area net of Payne Street extension for consistency with the BMNP Land Use and Development Tables (2) Appropriate zoning to be determined through the DSUP and rezoning process subject to the height and density limitations identified in the Development Framework.
Hotel. The BMNP proposes a hotel use for the western edge of the Adkins block that is currently occupied by the single-family properties between Adkins and West Street. This Plan continues to recommend this as an appropriate use in this location.
Community facilities. The Advisory Group meetings and the Design Charrette identified a need to include community facilities/supportive services within the new mixed-income community, such as job training, childcare and community function rooms. ARHA considers that sufficient facilities are available at the new Charles Houston Recreation Center and that it is a matter of ensuring that the events and activities are programmed to take into account the needs of ARHA residents as part of the overall community. The City supports this approach and is committed to working with ARHA to achieve a better integration of the Recreation Center program with the needs of public housing residents. While the provision of new facilities as part of any redevelopment plan is encouraged, the location and programming of such facilities will be determined by an analysis of resident needs and should complement the Recreation Center program.
A variety of open spaces should be provided to meet the needs of the new residents of the proposed mixed-income communities. Public housing has a higher than average number of children per household. A range of open space is required to provide for the recreational needs of young children and teenagers. These areas should be designed and located to allow effective supervision and surveillance from surrounding streets, residential properties and/or community and retail facilities. Each residential block should have safe and convenient access to play spaces for young children.
⬚ figure
Open space should include a wide range of spaces that meet the community’s needs, especially those of young children.
The open spaces should complement the programmed activities at the new Charles Houston Recreation Center, which is due to open in Spring 2009, and the community park planned for the Post Office site in the BMNP. Focusing recreation provision on these facilities that serve the whole community will help to integrate the diverse population within the neighborhood.
The design charrette identified a need for accessible and consolidated open space for each site, with a possible rooftop park in the grocery store option.
The Braddock East Plan adopts the parking requirements recommended in the BMNP. These parking standards are reductions from the City zoning code requirements, which reflects the proximity of the area to Metro and the goal of promoting sustainability and minimizing traffic generation.
Based on surveys of current resident car ownership it is recommended that up to 0.75 spaces be provided per public housing unit. These spaces may be provided either within the development or on the streets immediately adjacent to the development site.
These parking standards will be executed by an amendment to the zoning ordinance through the BMNP implementation process.
Any development within Braddock East should strive to fulfill, to the fullest extent possible, the Design Guidelines at Appendix A of the BMNP. These set out specific guidance related to spatial definition of streets, scale and proportion of buildings, ground floor relationships to sidewalks, streetscape, trees
TABLE 4: PARKING REQUIREMENTS
| Land Use | Braddock Metro Neighborhood Parking District Ratios1 |
|---|---|
| Single-family Residential, Two-family and Row or Townhouse Dwellings | 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit (DU) plus 15% visitor parking.2 |
| Multi-family Residential | 1.0 spaces per DU of less than 3 bedrooms or 1.5 per DU of 3 bedrooms or more, plus 15% visitor parking.2 |
| Public Housing | Up to 0.75 spaces per unit3 |
| Hotels | 0.7 spaces per 1 guest room plus 1 employee parking space per 15 guestrooms. Additional off-street parking for auxiliary uses will be determined at the time of development review. |
| Retail | 3.0 spaces per 1,000 SF. First 15,000SF of grocery stores and first 1,200 SF of all other retail exempt.2 |
| Restaurants | 1 space per 4 seats. First 60 seats exempt. |
| Office | 1.67 space per 1,000 SF. |
and landscaping, lighting, street furniture, public art, and public information, among other things.
It is recognized that ARHA serves an important public policy in providing public housing to the needy and these guidelines are purposely flexible to accommodate this public interest.
These guidelines are attached in full at Appendix C of this Plan for convenient reference.
Provided however that in the cases of fractional spaces, the parking requirement may be rounded up or down to the nearest whole number without requiring SUP. ↩
In the event that new development increases the net number of on-street parking spaces available the increase in on-street spaces shall apply to the visitor or retail parking requirement. ↩ ↩2 ↩3
All or some of the parking requirement can be provided on-street if accompanied by a SUP parking reduction application ↩
In accordance with the recommendations of the BMNP, all new development in the plan area will:
⬚ figure
The mix of scales and styles in the neighborhood should be reflected in new construction.
any one or more of the period styles, with particular attention to reflecting the character of nearby buildings.
⬚ figure
A well-planted residential setback helps to create green edges along streets (above). A residential building positioned too close to the street does not contribute in the same manner (below).
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Multi-family housing with frequent ground-level stoops contributes to walkable streets.
Housing, whether in single-family, townhomes or multi-family buildings, should have frequent ground-level entrances, and yards and other details expressing individual units and residents. All buildings should have frequent glazing with good views of the sidewalk to enhance safety through informal surveillance.
Existing above grade utilities should be relocated below grade with the redevelopment of each block.
In all cases, architectural design quality is of utmost importance in successfully interpreting these guidelines to create places that will truly appeal to the wide range of needs and desires of residents in the new mixed-income housing for Braddock East.
⬚ figure
Hierarchy of scales
The design of individual residential buildings and units themselves is of great importance, as they have greater overall impact on neighborhood form and character than structures for any other use. The core priority of this plan is to provide high quality housing for everyone. To this end, the exterior facades of public and/or affordable housing should be designed to be indistinguishable from the market rate housing. The public housing units should be integrated throughout the new development, and not concentrated in any one location.
ARHA prefers building designs that minimize shared corridors and elevators and provide individual exterior entrances at ground level to each unit (whether unit is at ground level or reached via a dedicated flight of stairs). ARHA believes this enhances the sense of overall safety and security as it provides greater visibility and gives residents a more defensible external space; it may also allow for better integration with the market-rate units. Additionally, units accessed from the ground level are particularly appropriate for households with children, which are especially prevalent in the Braddock East housing developments.
The increased density thresholds necessary to make mixed-income development financially viable suggest that some moderation of the policy avoiding shared corridors and elevators may be appropriate if design can still avoid past pitfalls of multifamily public housing buildings. One approach, currently planned for the James Bland redevelopment, and previously proven effective at Chatham Square, is to locate some public housing units at second floor level with individual stairs leading directly to a ground level entrance. Another approach, employed successfully in Boston and Milwaukee, is to create mid-rise buildings that have small numbers of units (10 or fewer) per floor, and that locate most family units at the ground or second floor level with their own exterior entrances.
All new developments will be encouraged to meet LEED, Earthcraft or other equivalent sustainability standards.
⬚ figure
Mixed income housing at Chatham Square, Alexandria, Virginia (above), and at Franklin Hill, Boston, Massachusetts (below)
⬚ figure
Appropriate building scale and massing is important to character in the Braddock area and was the primary focus of the Community Design Charrette held during this planning process.
City Staff and consultants combined the results of the charrette into a composite plan that best represented the collective ideas of the group. This was then further refined to reflect more closely the over-arching themes emanating from the charrette, the BMNP urban design guidelines and other City design criteria and planning objectives. The resultant designs goals for each public housing site are described below
This site lies within the Parker Gray Historic District and it is bounded on three sides primarily by two to two and a half story historic townhomes. Its fourth side abuts Patrick Street, which forms part of US Route 1. To the south is the proposed Charles Houston recreation center.
⬚ figure
View of James Bland from Alfred Street
The proposed redevelopment plan described on page 24 depicts townhomes of a scale that complements the surrounding neighborhood to the north and east, increasing in scale to the west, with four-story multi-family buildings fronting US Route 1.
To reflect the current development proposals, this Plan recommends heights of 30-40 feet along First Street and Columbus Street, rising to 40-50 feet toward the center of the site and up to 50 feet along Patrick Street.*
Open space has been planned to contribute to the urban character of the area as well as provide recreation space for residents. Because of the size of the redevelopment area of James Bland, the Plan recommends open space on each block and a minimum of one centralized and consolidated public open space.
This Plan also recommends that Alfred Street be added to the list of “walking streets” established in the BMNP. On these “walking streets”, priority is given to the pedestrian and measures are recommended to improve the quality and security of the walking environment, such as deeper front yards, porches and bay windows.
Although this site is on the edge of the Historic District, its primary context is provided by Patrick Street to the east and Henry Street to the west, both of which are one-way legs of US Route 1. These streets meet at the northern apex of the site. To the east is the proposed four-story multi-family element of the James Bland redevelopment. To the west are proposed commercial buildings, with 50 feet height limits to the south. Smaller scale
⬚ figure
Samuel Madden
*Except that one multi-family building may be increased to 60 feet in the northern multi-family block adjacent to Patrick Street.
residential is situated to the north-east. This Plan recommends an open space/focal point at the apex of Samuel Madden at First Street. This should be designed as an attractive entrance at this gateway to the City and neighborhood, and would complement the scale and character of the residential to the north-east
⬚ figure
The northern-most point of Samuel Madden is recommended for an open space or focal point to act as a gateway.
Ideally, the building form and shape will reinforce the triangular profile of the block. Because of the “gateway” nature of this site, the northern portion of any future building should highlight this gateway location with a memorable form, shape and/or materials.
On this northern block of Samuel Madden, the building will be required to have a building shoulder of 30-40 feet. This building ‘shoulder’, which is an upper-level setback of the building façade, will facilitate walkable streets and improve transition with adjacent residential buildings. Particular attention should be given to the relationship with existing residential tonwhomes to the north-east.
Moving southward through the block the Plan recommends an increase in building height up to 60-70 feet in the center of the block to provide the opportunity for a signature building at this key gateway into the City. This would also be of sufficient height to accommodate either residential or office use. There should be variation in building height across the block to mitigate the massing effect of the new structure.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The concept of building “shoulders” was introduced in the BMNP. It stated that the four walking streets (Madison, Fayette, Montgomery and Wythe) should be defined by multistory buildings (or open space) tall enough to create a sense of enclosure without being out of scale to pedestrians. As such, the BMNP recommends “shoulders” that are capped at three stories or 40 feet, with new buildings allowed to rise higher after stepping back some distance from the building front.
Building heights up to 50-60 feet are recommended for the southern block of Samuel Madden, with 40-50 feet shoulders. Retail development is to be located on the first floor, either in the form of small shops, a grocery store or a combination of the two. As the floor to ceiling height required for a grocery store is approximately 20 feet, this would allow for 3-4 stories of residential above the grocery store and the potential for an area of open space on the roof of the grocery store, enclosed by the residential. This could be a similar design as the Whole Foods grocery store on Duke Street, which has 3-stories of residential overlooking a rooftop courtyard.
⬚ figure
Whole Foods grocery store with housing above (Alexandria, VA)
A critical consideration in development of any retail on this block, but especially a large-footprint supermarket stretching across the block, is ensuring that any retail edges along sidewalks be transparent, include entrances, and otherwise contribute to the pedestrian realm. No blank walls are acceptable. Consideration should be given to building a ‘liner’ of residential or other uses along retail space edges that cannot engage the sidewalk.
As this site is in close proximity to the Braddock Metro and is not within the Historic District it has the greatest potential for higher density development with taller buildings. However, any new development will have to be compatible with the existing townhomes to the north, east and south. This was a key factor in assessing appropriate heights during the community charrette.
The BMNP proposed a mixed-use (hotel/office/retail) development along the western boundary of this block fronting West Street, on the area occupied by single-family homes and outside ARHA’s ownership. This
Plan reinforces this recommendation and proposes building heights up to 70 feet with 30-foot shoulders along the “walking streets” of Wythe, West and Madison. The co-operation of the single-family homeowners will be necessary for any development to progress on this part of the site.
⬚ figure
Andrew Adkins
Consistent with the recommendations of the BMNP, this Plan recommends the continuation of Payne Street axis through the Andrew Adkins site to reconnect the street grid. The connection to public open space areas north of Madison Street is especially important to the neighborhood as a whole. It also would improve access to the site and improve walkability and visibility through the area. These are important components of the overall objectives for improving connectivity through the Braddock area, and similar requirements have been endorsed for other sites locally, such as the Madison and Jaguar development proposals.
For the remainder of the western block either office or residential uses would be preferred with the possibility of some ground floor retail if and where it would be marketable. It is intended that development on this part of Adkins should complement the proposals for the Braddock Road Metro site, which has a maximum proposed height of 77’ with a 40-foot
shoulder. Accordingly, the recommended height for the western half of Adkins is up to 50-70 feet with a 30-40 feet shoulder. There should be variation in building height across the block to mitigate the massing effect of the new structure and to preserve existing views where possible.
For compatibility with adjacent residential areas, the preferred use of the eastern half of the Adkins block is residential and recommended heights are 40-50 feet with a 30-40 feet shoulder.
The character of development on this small site will be determined and be compatible with the scale and height of the adjacent townhomes.
This Plan recommends that Ramsey Homes should either be rehabilitated as part of the overall redevelopment program for the area, with some potential for infill, or be redeveloped with townhomes or townhouse scale buildings that are consistent with the character and scale of adjacent residential and are within the 30-40 feet height range.
⬚ figure
Ramsey Homes
⬚ figure
| Retail space | Approximate height: | |
| Proposed/existing retail adjacent to plan area | ||
Note: building setbacks for graphic purposes only.
*Except that one multi-family building may be increased to 60 feet in the northern multi-family block adjacent to Patrick Street.
Table 5: Development Framework
| Site | Net Parcel Area | Existing Development | Existing Housing Units | Current Allowable FAR | Current Allowable Height | Current Allowable Development | Max Total Development | Approx. Range of Housing | Max FAR | Max Height |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SF | Acres | SF | FT | SF | SF | |||||
| James Bland | 370,000 | 8.49 | 200,000 | 194 | 0.75 | 45 | 277,500 | 647,500 | 400 | 1.75 |
| Andrew Adkins | 196,000 | 4.50 | 148,000 | 90 | 0.75 | 45 | 147,000 | 332,500 | 200-250 | 2.50 |
| Braddock West1 1352-1362 Madison Street, 711-727 N. West Street, 1319-1329 Wythe Street | 41,398 | 0.95 | 11,606 | 0.75 | 45 | 31,049 | 124,1942 | 180 | 3.0 w/SUP | |
| Andrew Adkins Public Housing Site1 | 133,602 | 3.07 | 98,000 | 90 | 0.75 | 45 | 100,202 | 225,806-400,806 | TBD | 2.50 |
| Samuel Madden | 150,000 | 3.44 | 64,000 | 66 | 0.75 | 45 | 112,500 | 300,000 | 165-225 | 2.00 |
| Ramsey | 31,000 | 0.71 | 14,000 | 15 | 0.75 | 45 | 23,250 | 21,000 | 15-30 | 1.40 |
| TOTAL | 922,000 | 21.16 | 535,606 | 365 | 691,501 | 1,301,000 | 780-905 |
Ord. 5353 Amended 6/19/21, Ord. 5353
Taking into account the recommended height limitations, open space requirements and other design considerations, the resulting densities, expressed as a Floor Space Ratio (FAR), are up to 1.75 on James Bland, up to 2.5 on the Adkins site, up to 2.0 on the Madden site and up to 1.5 on Ramsey. This is generally consistent with the density recommendations in the BMNP for the key redevelopment sites at the Metro (FAR 3.0) and Northern Gateway (FAR 2.5).
These FARs are the maximum that is likely to be supportable on these sites. The ranges identified in Table 5 are indicative of the wide variety of potential scenarios that could be viable on these sites.
In the event that density considerations and market conditions at the time of redevelopment indicate that it is unlikely that all of the public housing can be relocated on the sites within the Plan area then, under Resolution 830, it will be necessary to replace some of the public housing units elsewhere in the City.
The retention of existing public housing in the Braddock East area will be contingent upon:
This has been demonstrated by both the Chatham Square and James Bland redevelopments. Approximately one-third to one-half of the existing public housing units on these sites were/are to be relocated off-sited. This is due to constraints on the development of these sites, such as the need for open space, the limitation on heights and the need for compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods, as well as the available funding and market conditions, which are different in each case.
*Except that one multi-family building may be increased to 60 feet in the northern multi-family block adjacent to Patrick Street.
Similarly, as redevelopment opportunities are presented for Samuel Madden and Andrew Adkins, the needs and wishes of public housing residents in these complexes may be in part met by off-site locations better situated for families than between streets carrying Route 1 traffic and high-density uses next to the metro station.
In summary, it is likely that the densities needed to replace all of the public housing on-site in Braddock East, while adding enough market rate units to make the development feasible, may not be viable. Consequently, it will be necessary to replace some of the existing public housing units in Braddock East at other locations in the City. Based on the experience of the similar redevelopments in Alexandria referred to above, this may be somewhere in the region of one-third to one-half. There are currently 90 units in Andrew Adkins, 66 units at Samuel Madden, and 15 units at the Ramsey Homes; a total of 171 units in the Braddock East area, not including James Bland. One-third to one-half represents 57 to 85 units that may need to be replaced offsite. In order to responsibly plan for this potential need, the City and ARHA should work together to identify and secure replacement sites to anticipate any future requirement for replacement housing units.
As it is likely to be a number of years before the Samuel Madden and Andrew Adkins sites redevelop, it is not possible or practical to identify these sites now. For the same reason, basing any recommendation regarding unit mix/unit retention on current market conditions and current funding expectations would be unreliable
Accordingly, despite the desires of some members of the community, this Plan does not make a specific recommendation regarding the number of public housing units that will be relocated out of the Braddock East neighborhood. The Braddock East Master Plan seeks to identify the appropriate strategy for
⬚ figure
The redevelopment plans for Chatham Square (above) and James Bland (below) in Alexandria resulted in between one-third to one-half of the existing public housing units being relocated elsewhere in the City.
⬚ figure
ensuring that adequate and appropriate replacement housing sites are available when they are required to meet the needs of any future redevelopment.
As part of the BMNP recommendations, developers are expected to contribute to the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The outstanding pledges for the Braddock area are:
| The Madison | $777,000 |
| Braddock Gateway (Jaguar) | $5,000,000 |
| 621 North Payne Street | $748,000 |
| Total | $6,525,000 |
In order to support the objective of securing opportunities for replacement public housing, this Plan recommends that at least 50% of the available Affordable Housing Trust Funds generated from future development in the Braddock area be reserved for off-site replacement of public housing from the Braddock East area. These funds can only be used to fund replacement sites for units currently in the Braddock East neighborhood and cannot be used for any other purpose until after all of the necessary replacement sites are identified and paid for.
All contributions are payable on receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy. (The developers of the Jaguar site have agreed to consider an advance payment when the first phase of financing for the project is received.) Given the current economic climate, it may be some time before these contributions to the Affordable Housing Trust fund are received by the City. Based on current build-out projections for the Madison and Payne Street projects, some funding is likely to be available within a 3-5 year period.
To achieve the goals described in this Plan it is recommended that the James Bland (and Bland Addition, Samuel Madden (uptown) and Andrew Adkins properties be designated as individual Coordinated Development Districts. Development of the public housing sites will be guided by an Urban Design Concept Plan and by the following CDD guidelines.
⬚ figure
CDD boundary for James Bland and James Bland Addition
Land Uses The allowable land use within the CDD is residential (and related accessory uses). The residential use should provide a range of housing including market-rate and public, and affordable/ workforce units when feasible. Retail uses will also be permissible along Patrick Street.
Height Maximum height ranges are shown in Section 7 of this Plan. The final building heights will be further evaluated through the DSUP process. In order to facilitate walkable streets and improve transition with adjacent residential buildings, a building ‘shoulder’ (an upper-level setback of the building façade) will be required where appropriate.
Density Maximum density shall be:
Building Design Development shall be consistent with the design principles articulated in the Development Framework in Section 7 of this Plan, which in turn refers to the Urban Design Guidelines of the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan (Appendix C). Development shall also adhere to the historic district guidelines as they relate to Parker-Gray.
Open Space Publicly accessible, ground level open space will be provided on each block to meet the needs of residents (especially children) in the new development. There should be one centralized and consolidated public open space.
Street Grid The CDD shall retain its current network of streets. Where practical, a central alley pattern should be reintroduced to provide access to parking.
Pedestrian Connections The CDD shall enhance the pedestrian experience for residents, employees, and visitors to the neighborhood with appropriate streetscape, sidewalks, lighting, and intersection amenities. Alfred Street is identified as a “walking street” and is to be enhanced with wider sidewalks, deeper and varied front yards, and the inclusion of front porches in building designs and/or active retail uses at ground level along Patrick Street.
Parking For all building types, other than townhomes, all parking shall be located below grade. For townhomes, access to parking/garages shall be from an internal alley or street. Surface parking lots for 10 or more spaces are prohibited. Parking shall be provided in accordance with the parking standards in Section 7 of this Plan.
Transportation CDD property owners shall participate in a district-wide Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to include all future developments in the Braddock East Planning Area and the Braddock Metro Neighborhood, as established in the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan.
Management The new development will provide high quality and experienced management of facilities and grounds, with homeowner and tenant associations that are attentive and sensitive to the needs of all its residents.
A community association or similar group, including property-owners and ARHA residents should be established to ensure that public housing residents have a voice in the new community.
Samuel Madden Uptown
⬚ figure
CDD boundary for Samuel Madden
Land Uses Allowable uses within the CDD include residential (and related accessory uses), retail and office. The residential use should provide a range of housing including market-rate and public, and affordable/workforce units when feasible. Ground floor retail space that is primarily neighborhood-serving and pedestrian-friendly shall be provided at street level. Retail uses may include a grocery store. The locations of retail uses shall be consistent with the Development Framework Plan within this Plan.
Height Maximum height ranges are shown in Section 7 of this Plan. The final building heights will be further evaluated through the DSUP process. In order to facilitate walkable streets and improve transition with adjacent residential buildings, a building ‘shoulder’ (an upper-level setback of
the building façade) will be required where appropriate.
Density Maximum density shall be:
Building Design Development shall be consistent with the design principles articulated in the Development Framework in Section 7 of this Plan, which in turn refers to the Urban Design Guidelines of the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan (Appendix C). Development shall also adhere to the historic district guidelines as they relate to Parker-Gray. The northern portion of any future building should accentuate this site’s gateway location with a memorable building form, shape and/or materials.
Open Space Publicly accessible, ground level open space will be provided to meet the needs of residents (especially children) in the new development. If a grocery store is proposed, a portion of the open space requirement may be provided on the roof of the grocery store (or other large single use) if planted with a vegetated (green) roof and if overlooked by residential. An open space/focal point should be provided at the site’s northern apex, to complement its gateway location and the character of the neighborhood.
Street Grid The CDD shall retain its current network of streets. Where practical, a central alley pattern should be reintroduced to provide access to parking and loading. Commercial loading (and trash pickup) for retail uses should occur in an alley.
Pedestrian Connections The CDD shall enhance the pedestrian experience for residents, employees, and visitors to the neighborhood with appropriate
streetscape, sidewalks, lighting, and intersection amenities. Madison Street is identified as a “walking street” to be enhanced with wider sidewalks, deeper and varied front yards, the inclusion of front porches, balconies and/or lobby entrances in building designs and/or active retail or restaurant uses at ground level.
Parking For all building types other than town homes, all parking shall be located below grade. For townhomes, access to parking/garages shall be from an internal alley or street. Surface parking lots for 10 or more spaces are prohibited. Parking shall be provided in accordance with the parking standards in Section 7 of this Plan.
Transportation CDD property owners shall participate in a district-wide Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to include all future developments in the Braddock East Planning Area and the Braddock Metro Neighborhood, as established in the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan
Management The new development will provide high quality and experienced management of facilities and grounds, with homeowner and tenant associations that are attentive and sensitive to the needs of all its residents.
A community association or similar group, including property-owners and ARHA residents should be established to ensure that public housing residents have a voice in the new community.
⬚ figure
CDD boundary for Andrew Adkins
Allowable uses within the CDD include residential (and related accessory uses), retail and office. A hotel is an allowable for the western end of the block fronting West Street. The residential use should provide a range of housing including market-rate and public, and affordable/workforce units when feasible. Ground floor retail space that is primarily neighborhood-serving and pedestrian-friendly shall be provided at street level along West Street and Madison Street. The locations of retail uses shall be consistent with the Development Framework Plan within this Plan.
Maximum height ranges are shown in Section 7 of this Plan. The final building heights will be further evaluated through the DSUP process. In order to facilitate walkable streets and improve transition with adjacent residential buildings, a building ‘shoulder’ (an upper-level setback of the building façade) will be required where appropriate.
Maximum density shall be:
Development shall be consistent with the design principles articulated in the Development Framework in Section 7 of this Plan, which in turn refers to the Urban Design Guidelines of the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan (Appendix C).
Publicly accessible, ground level open space will be provided on each block to meet the needs of residents (especially children) in the new development.
The extension of Payne Street through the block to reconnect the street grid and to improve access is an objective of this CDD. If extended, Payne Street must include sidewalks, lighting, street trees, and other streetscape improvements. Where practical, a central alley pattern should be reintroduced to provide access to parking and loading. Commercial loading (and trash pickup) for retail uses should occur in an alley.
The CDD shall enhance the pedestrian experience for residents, employees, and visitors to the neighborhood with appropriate streetscape, sidewalks, lighting, and intersection amenities. Madison Street is identified as a “walking street” to be enhanced with wider sidewalks, deeper and varied front yards, the inclusion of front porches, balconies and/or lobby entrances in building designs and/or active retail or restaurant uses at ground level.
For all building types other than town homes,
all parking shall be located below grade. For townhomes, access to parking/garages shall be from an internal alley or street. Surface parking lots for 10 or more spaces are prohibited. Parking shall be provided in accordance with the parking standards in Section 7 of this Plan.
Transportation CDD property owners shall participate in a district-wide Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to include all future developments in the Braddock East Planning Area and the Braddock Metro Neighborhood, as established in the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan.
Management The new development will provide high quality and experienced management of facilities and grounds, with homeowner and tenant associations that are attentive and sensitive to the needs of all its residents.
A community association or similar group, including property-owners and ARHA residents should be established to ensure that public housing residents have a voice in the new community.
The Braddock East Plan provides a framework to guide the potential redevelopment of public housing with mixed-income, mixed-use, urban and pedestrian-orientated development, improving the quality of life for public housing residents. Optimistically, the future will provide opportunities for building a strong, vibrant and diverse community, consistent with the goals of the City’s strategic plan.
The Plan encourages and provides guidelines for the redevelopment of the existing public housing sites into mixed-income communities incorporating, where possible, a range of market-rate, affordable, workforce and public housing and other appropriate uses. At the same time, it recognizes ARHA’s role as stewards of public assets and the welfare of its residents. The one-for-one replacement policy of Resolution 830 is embraced by this Master Plan.
Land value associated with Metro proximity provides a very important resource to help create a mixed-income social community and generate the funding to pay for public housing redevelopment. This is a unique opportunity for the City and ARHA, as many other public housing authorities usually do not have the benefit of such valuable land assets.
As the City and ARHA have worked through this process with the community, it has become apparent that, due to a multitude of variable factors influenced by market conditions and public policy (such as land values, development costs, funding availability), it is not practical within this Plan to be prescriptive about the mix of housing within the new community or the resultant number of public housing units that may need to be replaced elsewhere in the City.
However, as specific proposals are evaluated, it may become appropriate for the City and ARHA to consider replacement of some units at other locations in the City, rather than to replace all of the public housing units on the original sites within the Braddock East area.
⬚ figure
The architecture and design of Langham Court, a mixed-income community in Boston, Massachusetts, make no distinctions among units earmarked for market-rate, middle-, and low-income residents.
The primary goal of the Braddock East Master Plan is to encourage and guide future redevelopment of the public housing sites in the Braddock East area into diverse mixed-income, mixed-use, urban communities.
In order to accomplish the goals and recommendations of the Braddock East Plan, the City and ARHA commit to the following:
The following recommendations set out the framework for achieving this goal:
Recommendation 1: Redevelopment of public housing should recognize the diversity of the population. Such considerations are:
Recommendation 2: The City and ARHA should work together to ensure that the process of creating new mixed-income housing addresses the following criteria:
Recommendation 3: The ARHA Strategic Plan should consider ways to enhance ARHA’s ability to provide human and social services to its residents and providing preparedness training for returning residents to the new mixed-income communities.
Recommendation 4: To achieve the urban design goals set out in this Plan, the ARHA-owned properties of James Bland (and Bland Addition), Samuel Madden Uptown and Andrew Adkins (including the adjacent privately owned single-family properties) will be designated as individual Coordinated Development Districts and be subject to the CDD guidelines set out in Chapter 8 of this Plan.
Recommendation 5: All new development in the plan area will:
Recommendation 6: The following recommendations are made with regard to the appropriate land uses for each site within the Braddock East Mater Plan Boundary:
Recommendation 6A: All sites should include a mix of public housing and market-rate housing, and affordable and/or workforce housing where possible.
Recommendation 6B: Neighborhood-serving retail is recommended for the ground floor of the Samuel Madden blocks, to compliment existing and proposed retail, with the possible inclusion of a grocery store in these blocks.
Recommendation 6C: Neighborhood-serving retail is recommended for the ground floor of the Andrew Adkins block along Madison Street.
Recommendation 6D: The western half of Adkins and/or the northern Samuel Madden block has potential for office uses, to help to balance the overall mix of uses within the plan area.
Recommendation 6E: A hotel/office use with ground floor retail is recommended for that part of the Adkins block that is currently occupied by the single-family properties between Adkins and West Street.
Recommendation 7: A variety of open spaces should be provided to meet the needs of the residents of the new mixed-income communities. These open spaces should complement the programmed activities at the new Charles Houston Recreation Center.
Recommendation 8: The exterior facades of public and/or affordable housing in the new development should be designed to be indistinguishable from the market rate housing.
Recommendation 9: The public housing units should be integrated throughout the new development, and not concentrated in any one location.
Recommendation 10: The following recommendations relate to the design goals for the James Bland site:
Recommendation 10A: A shoulder of 30-40 feet is recommended along First Street and Columbus Street, rising to 40-50 feet toward the center of the site and up to 50 feet along Patrick Street.*
Recommendation 10B: Open space should be located on each block and there should be a minimum of one centralized and consolidated public open space.
Recommendation 10C: Alfred Street should be added to the list of “walking streets” established in the BMNP, where priority is given to the pedestrian.
Recommendation 11: The following recommendations relate to the design goals for the Samuel Madden site:
Recommendation 11A: An open space/focal point is recommended at the apex of Samuel Madden at First Street. This should be designed as an attractive entrance at this gateway to the City and as a transition with the surrounding neighborhood.
Recommendation 11B: The northern portion of any future building should highlight this gateway location with a memorable form, shape and/or materials.
Recommendation 11C: Building heights up to 60-70 feet are recommended for the northern block of Samuel Madden, with 30-40 foot shoulders. Particular attention should be given to the relationship with existing residential townhomes to the northeast. There should be variation in building height across the block to mitigate the massing effect of the new structure.
Recommendation 11D: Building heights up to 50-60 feet are recommended for the southern block of Samuel Madden, with 40-50 foot shoulders.
Recommendation 11E: Any retail edges along sidewalks should be transparent, include entrances, and otherwise contribute to the pedestrian realm.
Recommendation 12: The following recommendations relate to the design goals for the Andrew Adkins site:
Recommendation 12A: Building heights up to 70 feet with 30-foot shoulders are recommended along the “walking streets” of Wythe, West and Madison. There should be variation in building height across the block to mitigate the massing effect of the new structure and retain existing views where possible.
Recommendation 12B: The continuation of Payne Street axis through the Andrew Adkins site is recommended to reconnect the street grid and reflect the scale and character of the surrounding blocks.
Recommendation 12C: Building heights up to 50-70 feet with a 30-40 feet shoulder
*Except that one multi-family building may be increased to 60 feet in the northern multi-family block adjacent to Patrick Street.
are recommended for the western half of Adkins.
Recommendation 13: The Ramsey Homes site should be rehabilitated as part of the overall redevelopment program for the area, with some potential for infill, or be redeveloped with townhomes or townhouse scale buildings.
Recommendation 14: Any replacement housing units that may be needed in connection with the redevelopment of the public housing sites must be made available in accordance with Resolution 830 or any subsequent amendment.
Recommendation 15: At least 50% of the available Affordable Housing Trust Funds generated from future development in the Braddock Metro area, including the Madison, Payne Street and Jaguar, should be reserved for off-site replacement of public housing from the Braddock East area. These funds can only be used to fund replacement sites for units currently in the Braddock East neighborhood and cannot be used for any other purpose until after all of the necessary replacement sites are identified and paid for.
⬚ figure
The Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan (BMNP) was adopted by City Council on March 15, 2008. It includes the area covered by the Braddock East Plan, except for the northern two blocks of James Bland, which lie within the boundary of the North East Small Area Plan.
Chapter 7 of the BMNP notes that the City and ARHA have long endorsed deconcentration by scattering public housing throughout the City and have successfully implemented mixed-income housing.
The BMNP sets out a series of recommendations based on seven guiding principles:
Principle 1: Create a sense of place/ neighborhood identity, vitality and diversity. Principle 2: Provide walkable neighborhoods that are also secure and feel safe. Principle 3: Establish a variety of community serving, usable open spaces. Principle 4: Encourage community-serving retail and services. Principle 5: Promote mixed-income housing and follow an inclusive process to deconcentrate public housing. Principle 6: Manage multi-modal transportation, parking and road infrastructure. Principle 7: Achieve varying and transitional heights and scales.
These principles form the basis for the framework and recommendations of the BMNP. The Braddock East Master Plan is an amendment to the BMNP intended primarily to expand upon the fifth principle; to promote mixed-income housing through the redevelopment of the existing public housing sites that form the Braddock East planning area.
The City and ARHA began an intensive, nine-month community planning process in February 2008 that resulted in this Plan. The Mayor and City Council appointed a twelve person Braddock East Advisory Group to represent the diverse interests in the Braddock East area. The group comprises:
⬚ figure
The mission of the Braddock East Advisory Group is to:
| Schedule of Braddock East Advisory Group Meetings: |
|---|
| February 28 - Introduction to the planning process; review of the recommendations of the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan. |
| March 19 - Braddock East planning process; introduction to developing mixed-income communities; update on James Bland redevelopment plan. |
| April 19 - Tour of Mixed-Income Housing Developments in Alexandria and Washington DC. |
| April 24 - Public housing resident outreach; lessons learned from tour; James Bland concept design presentation and discussion. |
| May 15 - Charles Houston Recreation Center program and schedule; Public housing redevelopment finance and planning criteria; City strategy and opportunities for securing replacement units. |
| June 19 - presentation of Conceptual Framework; Urban Design Goals and Design Considerations. |
| June 26 - Community Urban Design Charrette. |
| July 15 - Review of Charrette Outcomes; Group discussion on the progress of the Plan and key issues. |
| September 3 - Presentation of Draft Braddock East Plan. |
| September 16 - Final presentation of Braddock East Plan. |
| October 16 - Review of Planning Commission meeting and preparation for City Council. |
The Advisory Group met monthly from February through October (excluding August), for a total of eight meetings. All the meetings were open to the public and were attended by neighborhood citizens and other concerned Alexandrians. This process developed a community-wide dialogue addressing the future of public housing and the transition to mixed-income housing developments.
⬚ figure
Topics covered at the various Advisory Group meetings included:
⬚ figure
These and more topics provided information to the Advisory Group as they weighed and balanced competing concerns and worked to create the vision that this Plan articulates.
Creating a community vision involved many lively and important discussions among the Advisory Group and community members, all of whom brought diverse points of view to the process.
The Advisory Group and other interested members of the community went on a bus tour of mixed-income housing projects in Alexandria and Washington DC. This was an informative exercise as it developed an appreciation of how successful public housing units could be physically, visually and socially integrated with market-rate housing.
⬚ figure
Chatham Square is the redevelopment of a two-story 100-unit public housing complex that was originally the Samuel Madden (Downtown) built in 1940. In 2001, ARHA selected developers EYA to redevelop the site with a mix of 52 replacement public housing units and 100 market-rate townhomes. The remaining 48 public housing units were replaced elsewhere within the City. Financing for the project came from the land sale, low-income tax credits, a $6.7 million Federal Hope VI grant and a bridge loan of City funds, subsequently repaid.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
In 1987/1988, ARHA demolished the 264-unit Cameron Valley public housing development. The public housing units were replaced in several sites across the City, one of which was the newly developed Quaker Hill. Quaker Hill is a mixed-income community comprised of 99 townhomes and 127 condominiums. Of those units, 60 are low-income rental units subsidized by Section 8 Vouchers. The development was financed by the sale of 40 acres of land to Hechinger's for a shopping center (Alexandria Commons), the sale of the market-rate units, and low-income housing tax credit financing.
Townhomes on Capitol Hill is the redevelopment of 134 two- and three-story public housing units built in 1941. The redevelopment was funded through a $25 million HOPE VI grant in 1993. The new development includes 134 townhome units sold through a cooperative structure to families in the following income categories:
In addition, 13 lots were sold as fee simple townhomes.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The plan for the revitalization of Arthur Capper/Carrollsburg was awarded a $34.9 million HOPE VI grant, which has been leveraged to provide a total of over $424 million for the creation of 1,562 rental and home ownership units, office space, neighborhood retail space and a community center. The housing strategy will replace the demolished units with 707 public housing units, 525 affordable rental units and 330 market rate homes for purchase, for a total of 1,562 new units. By replacing all occupied public housing units, the Arthur Capper/Carrollsburg development will be the first HOPE VI site in the country to provide one-for-one on-site replacement of demolished public housing units.
Specific efforts were made to engage the public housing residents in the overall planning process. In the fall of 2007, ARHA held a number of meetings with the residents of the James Bland development in connection with the Hope VI application for the redevelopment of that site. A further meeting was held with the residents in April 2008 to provide more detailed information about the proposed redevelopment of the site and to solicit feedback from the residents.
A series of focus groups was convened with residents of the other public housing developments (Madden, Adkins and Ramsey) in April 2008. These were directed at providing a general overview of the Braddock East process and to gain an understanding of the public housing residents’ feelings about their community and the future of the neighborhood.
In July 2008, a community barbecue was held for ARHA residents with the hope of engaging a greater number of public housing residents in the planning process. This was well attended and provided an opportunity to provide further information to the community about the James Bland proposal and to develop stronger relationships with the ARHA residents.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The following were the recurring themes from outreach efforts with the public housing residents:
housing residents. The consultant’s work included one-on-one meetings with public housing residents to encourage them to attend the Advisory Group meetings, community charrette and barbecue; facilitating a meeting between residents of Andrew Adkins and the adjacent Braddock Lofts condo community to initiate a beautification partnership for their immediate neighborhood; and instigating greater involvement from the Alexandria Residents Council (ARC), ARHA’s tenant council.
The City also produced a series of newsletters directed specifically to public housing residents, who may not have internet access, to keep them informed of the process and to encourage their involvement in meetings and events. The newsletters were mailed and hand delivered to the public housing residents.
The City also worked closely with a number of public housing residents, Advisory Group members and the James Bland Family Resource and Learning center to deliver flyers and generally “spread the word” about upcoming meetings.
All Advisory Group and community meetings were advertised on the City Web site and the materials from each meeting were posted on the web site. Prior to each meeting a news bulletin (ENews) was issued, subscription to which is free on the City web site.
In addition, through the James Bland redevelopment application process, a community open house was held in April to discuss the James Bland proposals. Throughout the process City Staff, EYA and ARHA met with individual civic associations and resident groups to discuss the proposed redevelopment site plan for James Bland specifically. The principal concerns of these residents related to increased
density, height and traffic congestion, a lack of open space and parking, and some in the community wish to see more public housing units relocated to other parts in the City.
Schedule of Meetings held with civic and citizens’ associations and resident groups regarding the James Bland Redevelopment Plan
| Date | Organization |
|---|---|
| 4/5/2008 | Meeting with ARHA Residents |
| 4/16/2008 | NorthEast Citizens’ Assn General Meeting |
| 4/17/2008 | Columbus Street Neighborhood Meeting |
| 4/23/2008 | James Bland Open House |
| 5/7/2008 | Inner City Board Meeting |
| 5/14/2008 | Inner City Civic Assn General Meeting |
| 5/21/2008 | NorthEast Citizens’ Assn General Meeting |
| 5/19/2008 | Upper King Street Neighborhood Civic Assn |
| 5/21/2008 | Columbus Street Neighborhood Meeting |
| 6/18/2008 | NorthEast Citizens’ Assn General Meeting |
| 7/9/2008 | Inner City Civic Assn General Meeting |
| 7/10/2008 | NorthEast Land Use Committee |
| 8/4/2008 | First Street Residents |
| 8/5/2008 | NorthEast Land Use Committee |
| 8/13/2008 | NorthEast Citizens’ Assn General Meeting |
| 8/18/2008 | Inner City Civic Assn General Meeting |
| 8/21/2008 | First Street Residents |
| 9/17/2008 | NorthEast Citizens’ Assn General Meeting |
A Design Charrette was held in June 2008 that involved members of the Advisory Group, and representatives from the public housing, the wider community, ARHA and other interested persons. This involved a block building exercise to establish the urban design parameters and amenities that the groups considered would be desirable and acceptable for the three public housing sites of Adkins, Madden and Ramsey. Bland was not included in this exercise as it is the subject of a specific development proposal. [Refer to page 24 for details of the James Bland proposals].
⬚ figure
Participants working in small groups tested different arrangements and heights of building blocks on scale models that included context buildings for reference. Representations of open space and retail uses were also incorporated. The formula derived from the financial analysis (page 35), for the number of market-rate units required to pay for the redevelopment of public housing units, was the foundation of the exercise. Based on the need to replace the existing 171 units on the three public housing sites, the starting point for the exercise was to try to accommodate about 500 units on the three sites, as this would enable all of the public housing units to be replaced on site.
The purpose of the charrette was to establish the scale of new development that would be appropriate for this neighborhood. Participants confirmed that the height of any new building should be sensitive to the scale of adjacent development. It was suggested that new buildings should be generally no more than one-story higher than adjacent buildings (with greater height permissible further away). New buildings should also incorporate shoulders along sensitive edges, to transition taller buildings to smaller context and to create consistent façade heights along street edges.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Key Themes from the Community Design Charrette:
Exemplary urban design is fundamentally important to the success of the Plan and ensures that new development is compatible in this historic area. High quality urban design should pervade the entire public realm—streets, parks, plazas, transit facilities, as well as the design of building facades, ground-level uses and their interchange with the street, landscape areas, and building massing. Quality design of the public realm delivers benefits to individual places and the larger community in a variety of ways:
⬚ figure
Quality pedestrian environments help to increase a community’s sense of vitality.
A safe, inviting pedestrian and bicycle network helps sustain an accessible community, which in turn offers many significant benefits:
Greater mobility, especially for those with limited access to automobiles, especially due to the presence of significant transit resources—the Metro station and existing and planned bus service
Reduced auto use, which mitigates locally-generated traffic, pollution and energy use impacts
Public health benefits from increased everyday exercise
Greater presence of pedestrians on streets, which increases public safety, opportunities for informal interaction among residents, sense of vitality, and opportunities for pedestrian-oriented retail.
Well-designed urban landscapes reinforce sense of place and identity through several means. They:
introduce consistent themes and special landmarks that make an impression on resident and visitor alike;
can highlight the Parker-Gray Historic District and other unique aspects of local culture; and
extend the high level of urban design for which Alexandria is already well known for in neighborhoods like Old Town.
⬚ figure
Neighborhoods like Old Town and the area surrounding King Street are known for their high level of urban design.
➤ Beautiful streets shaped by street trees, smaller-scale landscaping, and handsome buildings. As noted in the Alexandria Open Space Plan, streets themselves constitute a very significant form of open space, owing to the sheer area they cover, their composition as a network serving the whole city, and the significant plantings and recreational opportunities (including everyday walking and biking) they include. In fact, the Open Space Plan specifically defines Patrick, Henry and Wythe Streets as major thoroughfares that should be enhanced to become more pedestrian-friendly and attractive urban open spaces.
⬚ figure
Quality recreational resources promote community health, value and vitality.
➤ Bike paths, parks and other recreational resources.
➤ The necessary framework for a balanced mix of well-located uses supporting neighborhood life, including pedestrian- and neighborhood-oriented retail, and a variety of housing types.
➤ Reduced energy use, pollution generation and heat gain, and other environmental benefits, particularly in comparison to communities with less landscaping and higher traffic generation.
⬚ figure
Streetscape enhancements can add value to existing ground-floor retail along Braddock Road.
• A high-quality public realm also benefits the privately owned built realm by:
➤ Protecting and increasing the value of existing properties;
➤ Adding value to new development, thereby providing incentive for high-quality new development where it supports community goals; and
➤ Preserving valuable views and daylight access through regulation of building form.
• Perhaps most important, a high-quality public realm is the expressed desire and will of the community.
⬚ figure
Ground-level retail, seating, and landscaping all contribute to a high-quality public realm.
The following design guidelines, applied to the entire plan area, aim to provide more specific direction on a number of issues already introduced in this document in terms that are more general.
Streets within the planning area should express a public realm character that falls within one of a limited number of defined street character types, as illustrated in the accompanying diagram. Traffic volume is just one of several factors used in classifying street character; building scale, extent of pedestrian facilities and volume, prevalent land uses and other factors also help define character. Defined character types consist of:
⬚ figure
• A1: Principal walking streets. These include four streets— West, Fayette, Madison and Wythe—designated as priority pedestrian routes deserving special attention to pedestrian accessibility. These streets also present important public faces to local residents and to others passing through the area to and from the Metro and other destinations. Accordingly, land use selection and quality of architecture and urban design are subject to high standards in these guidelines to ensure quality and distinction of character. • A2: Principal gateway streets. These include streets with the most significant vehicular (as
⬚ figure
Fayette Street is proposed as a principle walking street.
well as pedestrian) connections to surrounding areas of Alexandria and the region. Patrick and Henry Streets (U.S. 1) are the most prominent among these, but Braddock Road, Queen and Cameron Streets also fall into this category as principal public faces of the planning area to passers-by. As with A1 streets, land use selection and quality of architecture and urban design are subject to high standards in these guidelines to ensure quality and distinction of character. • B: Typical residential streets. These include the majority of streets other than types A1 and
⬚ figure
Route 1 is a principal gateway street in the Braddock Metro neighborhood.
A2. Their character is predominantly associated with residential development, although institutional and retail uses may occur in specific places. These also include the majority of streets within the Parker-Gray Historic District, and thus collectively should play an important role in reinforcing the presence of the district. Type B streets are subject to a somewhat looser set of guidelines than A1 and A2 streets in recognition of the practical and urban design value of greater architectural diversity and individual initiative by property owners on streets with less individual prominence.
⬚ figure
• C: Service streets. These streets, few in number, primarily serve vehicular traffic needs and have more limited standards for building frontage and pedestrian accommodation. They include the drive between First Street and the Metro station, and the proposed service street between Fayette and Henry Streets aligned with or offset from Montgomery Street.
⬚ figure
This drive between First Street and the Metro Station primarily serves vehicular traffic needs.
The design of public realm elements should reinforce place identity of the overall planning area and its sub-districts.
• Hierarchy. Devise a hierarchy of identity that defines the overall planning area foremost, as well as subsidiary districts, corridors, and activity centers, most importantly the Parker-Gray Historic District. Identifying elements may include signage, banners, street furniture, tree species and placement pattern, building form and/or other consistent elements that offer opportunity for customization.
⬚ figure
• Gateways. Landmark gateway elements offer special opportunities to define identity at a variety of levels. Gateway markers could take a variety of forms, from prominent buildings, to stone pillars, to more subtle changes in landscape such as change in street tree species or sidewalk paving. (See Retail, Views and Gateways diagram in Chapter 6)
• Public art, including publicly accessible art
High-quality wayfinding signage at pedestrian scale is as important to pedestrians as road signage is to drivers.
in private development, adds visual and cultural interest to the public realm, offering opportunities for community members to express individual and collective identity and help shape their own environment. Many everyday items along sidewalks, in parks and other public areas—from pavers and fences to bus shelters and pedestrian bridges—offer
possibilities for collaboration with artists. Public art cannot substitute for active ground-floor building uses that engage pedestrians, but it can serve as an important supplement. (See Open Space Framework diagram in Chapter 5)
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Many ubiquitous elements of streetscape present good opportunities to incorporate public art.
Sculptures, fountains and other public art and publicly accessible art in private development are important elements in the public realm, providing neighborhood focal points and objects of interest, places to meet and gather, and accessibility to art that some people might not otherwise have. The planning process took a comprehensive look at this important civic element to determine where art could best serve the neighborhood—celebrating
its rich history and creating a sense of place in a coordinated manner.
In addition to the planned public art at the new Charles Houston Recreation Center, the plan designates six locations that will bring the community together and help contribute to the vibrant place envisioned by the plan and the community. Public art or publicly accessible art in these six key locations will provide a strong visual impact, and strengthen and create new gathering places in the neighborhood with the redevelopment of each location.
The Plan recommends incorporating art in the neighborhood in the following ways:
(a) Preferred art locations include the redeveloped Metro Station site, the Northern Gateway neighborhood, Metro East (the current Andrew Adkins site), the Post Office site if transformed into public open space, and Samuel Madden Uptown and the Queen Street Retail Corridor.
(b) The blocks anticipated to redevelop shall make a monetary contribution to the City for the commissioning, design, and creation of each piece of art; or provide on-site art, as determined by the City as part of the review process.
(c) The Plan strongly encourages creation of art that reflects the rich industrial, railroad, and African American history of the neighborhood, and that local artisans be commissioned to create public art.
⬚ figure
Because the exact placement of the art is undefined, the plan recommends that, consistent with established City policy, art installed on public land be reviewed and approved by the Commission for the Arts. For art that may be installed on privately owned but publicly accessible land, the plan recommends that the community, developer, and City work together to identify the location and type of art to be installed. This approach has been successfully implemented in recent installations of publicly accessible art in private development projects.
• Protect pedestrians from traffic. Provide at least a planting strip or tree wells (except along retail frontage or other active ground-level uses where planted areas should be discontinuous or omitted) and on-street parking wherever possible. In planting strips or tree wells, include street trees where width allows; in other areas, particularly along streets with higher traffic levels, planting strips should be 4-to 6-feet wide or greater. Low-height planting materials can be utilized in areas with overhead utilities.
• Make street crossings prominent, safe and convenient. Good crosswalks are highly visible to drivers, make accessible connections to sidewalks, have convenient signals where they occur, and provide median refuges where possible at especially broad streets. Many area crossings lack one or more of these basics. At the Metro Station site, explore installation of masonry pavers or similar enhanced surface materials and added width.
(1) Distinguish crosswalk from adjacent traffic paving.
(2) At signaled intersections, provide pedestrian signals that display a numeric countdown of crossing time remaining and have audible indications of phase.
⬚ figure
(3) Countdown crossing signals alert pedestrians to the remaining safe crossing time more effectively than simple flashing signals.
each crosswalk at least as wide as the widest sidewalk approaching it. Provide accessible curb cuts linking crosswalks to sidewalks.
(4) At intersections where crosswalks span more than four traffic lanes—the key instances occur on Henry Street north of First Street—provide if possible a median refuge at least 6 feet wide to the extent possible for pedestrians.
• Keep curb radii as tight as possible at street corners, preferably 15 feet where curbside parking occurs (with no bulb-out), and 25 feet where curbside parking does not occur and where bulb-outs do occur.
• Provide adequate width. All sidewalk areas for new development shall be a minimum of 14 feet from the curb to the face of the building. Where retail or other active uses are provided, wider sidewalks, (16 to 20 feet) are required,
⬚ figure
Crossings at the targeted intersections identified above are priority locations for enhancements.
■ 73
⬚ figure
Provide generous entrance and visual access between sidewalks and ground-floor uses to make walking more interesting and safe.
occupying a portion of the development parcel if necessary. A portion of the 14-feet may be landscaped for residential uses if compatible with the character of the street, but maintain a 6- to 8-foot minimum sidewalk width in these areas. All sidewalk and planter bed edges shall be flush with grade.
Special Paving. Paving should maintain smooth surfaces, with level changes not exceeding ¼-inch. This standard facilitates ease and safety of access by people in wheelchairs, by people with other mobility constraints or using child strollers, and by those on foot. Maintaining this standard with bricks requires care in installation and maintenance. All brick sidewalks shall be embedded in a concrete base. Special accent paving is permitted at all building entrances. More specific requirements per street character type:
(1) Fayette and Wythe streets should have exclusively city-standard brick with a running bond paving pattern.
(2) Other Type A1 and A2 streets should have fully concrete sidewalks with visual accents such as score lines. Sidewalks must conform to concrete and other City of Alexandria standards, and include “lamp black” color additive.
(3) Fully concrete sidewalks are acceptable on type B and C streets and can be visually accented where desired with score lines and/or masonry pavers. Sidewalks must conform to concrete and other City of Alexandria standards, and include “lamp black” color additive.
(4) Other sidewalk and crosswalk areas noted in the diagram on page 73 (West Street and Braddock Road at the Metro station; Patrick at Fayette; and Henry and Patrick at First, Madison and Wythe) indicate prominent areas of high pedestrian traffic that deserve special attention to pedestrian convenience, safety and investment in quality materials. In other areas, give priority to basic connectivity over special aesthetic treatments.
⬚ figure
Running Bond pattern
Minimize the number of curb cuts along streets with active sidewalks and higher levels of vehicular traffic. Locate curb cuts on type C streets or alleys whenever possible, and otherwise on type B streets to minimize their presence on type A1, A2 and retail overlay streets. Where curb cuts do occur, sidewalk paving according to street character type shall be continuous, level and flush across the width of the curb cut. At locations with limited sight lines between drivers and pedestrians, provide audible signals indicating approaching vehicles. Loading areas are limited to C streets and off-street locations.
A continuous street tree canopy shall be provided wherever possible (street type C and alleys excepted) to serve multiple goals, including aesthetic appeal, pedestrian- and street-level scale, reduced solar heat gain, more comfortable microclimate, privacy and buffering between traffic, pedestrians and occupied buildings, and reduced stormwater flows. • Ensure a continuous rhythm of street trees lining both sides of the street, generally 25-30 feet on center.
⬚ figure
Planting strips accommodate a variety of vegetation that help separate pedestrians from traffic, define the character of the overall street, enhance adjacent buildings and open space, and allow natural stormwater infiltration.
• Choose tree species that are native to the area, can tolerate drought, and contribute to street character. Consciously select species to reinforce general continuity of character along the length of streets, with contrasting species occurring along different streets and/or at special locations such as public parks, plazas and retail areas.
• Where possible, plant trees in earth planting strips that are as long and continuous as possible
⬚ figure
Tree wells should have contiguous tree trenches to encourage root growth and access to water, be flush with pavement, and be planted with groundcover.
⬚ figure
to maximize stormwater infiltration, help trees thrive, and reduce stormwater flows.
• Where tree wells are provided, observe the following:
(1) Tree wells shall be a minimum of 4 x 10 feet for new development. New development shall provide contiguous tree trenches to provide maximum soil area for roots to spread and for water and air to penetrate. Landscape may be provided in primarily residential areas where compatible with the existing character of the street. Provide irrigation (captured from stormwater instead of municipal supply wherever possible) to ensure adequate water to establish and maintain trees.
(2) Tree wells shall be flush with the sidewalk pavement and shall be planted with groundcover. Appropriate groundcover selections are ivy, pachysandra, periwinkles,
■ 75
liriope, and mondo grass; seasonal color may be added.
(3) Tree well plantings shall be maintained by the adjoining property owner.
(4) Tree wells shall include tree grates within the retail focus areas if required by the City. Desired type to be O.T. Series grate by Urban Associates, Snohomish, Washington, or equivalent, as approved by the City of Alexandria.
• Fixtures shall be single black Dominion Virginia Power colonial light fixtures with a standard black finish.
⬚ figure
Dominion Virginia Power colonial light fixtures
• All streetlights shall be placed to avoid conflict with street trees.
• Where located next to residential uses, streetlights should include house-side shields as needed to prevent lighting from directly entering residential windows.
• Use of fixtures that generate their own power from solar or wind sources is encouraged.
Development shall provide street and on-site furniture and amenities for public use. Street furniture may include benches, bicycle racks, trash receptacles, and other forms of art where appropriate.
• Benches
(1) Benches located on public streets shall be the Timberform Restoration Series manufactured by Columbia Cascade or similar as approved by the City of Alexandria. The exact bench type within the series may be selected by the property owner.
⬚ figure
(2) A minimum of two benches shall be provided in each block in appropriate locations based on the specific ground-floor use and the location of bus stops and public open space.
(3) Bench seats shall be yellow cedar and the metal frames shall have a standard black, powder coat finish.
• Bike racks
(1) To encourage and facilitate biking as a means of transportation, bike racks shall be provided.
⬚ figure
(2) Bike racks should be placed in groups at convenient, safe, well-lit paved areas in the building or curb zone.
(3) Bike racks shall also be provided in parking garages; and
(4) Desired style: consult Transportation and Environmental Services Department staff.
• Trash Receptacles
(1) The trash receptacle to be used throughout the area is the Iron Site Bethesda Receptacle (model SD-42) by Victor Stanley or equal as approved by the City of Alexandria.
⬚ figure
(2) Trash receptacles shall have a black, powder coat finish.
(3) Trash receptacles shall be generally located near the curb.
(4) One trash receptacle shall be located at each intersection.
(5) Two additional trash receptacles shall be located mid-block on streets with retail frontage.
• Bollards
(1) Bollards may be used as traffic control and safety/protection devices.
(2) Decorative bollards shall be used in high-visibility areas, where bollards are required and approved during site review.
⬚ figure
(3) Desired style: Princeton Embedded (direct burial) Cast Iron Bollard by Spring City Electrical Manufacturing Company, or approved equivalent; finished in black to match streetlight poles. Simple bollards may be used in less visible areas, such as building walls at service and parking entrances that require protection from automobiles. Desired style: simple round concrete-filled metal post with a concrete cap, painted in one color to match the building architecture.
⬚ figure
• Assisting wayfinding within the neighborhood to Metro and other key destinations. Signage should be provided along the principal walking streets enabling pedestrians to navigate to and from the Braddock Road Metro station, Old Town, King Street Metro Station, Charles Houston Recreation Center and other important destinations without use of a map. Good wayfinding information encourages walking, promotes safety, and welcomes those unfamiliar with the neighborhood.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Pedestrian-scale signage should explain local history and mark important walking routes or sites in the neighborhood.
• Reinforce identity as described above; tell stories of place—community history, culture, and values. Stories of place and identity reinforce the community’s own sense of self and introduce it to newcomers. Because of the significant amount of social and physical change that has occurred and will occur in the Braddock Metro area, public historical information is especially needed to teach current and future generations about what is not apparent to the eye.
• Announce community events through formal postings (i.e., temporary banners) and accommodation of informal postings on kiosks. Prominent designated kiosks for temporary postings serve as sources of ongoing information about events in the community. This not only provides basic useful information, but also a spontaneous window into the community’s vitality and identity. Kiosks also prevent posting of flyers in inappropriate places such as utility poles and trees.
All wayfinding signage should be coordinated with the citywide wayfinding initiative that will help direct visitors to tourist attractions, Metro stations and other major destinations.
The forms of individual buildings should work collectively to define streets, parks, and other open spaces as spaces clearly bounded on two or more sides. This approach enables each building to contribute its intrinsic form and use to help shape the form and use of the larger neighborhood. The edges of public streets and parks should be defined by creating a clearly visible alignment of facades from building to building within use zones (see Transitions section below for locations where a change in land use may cause a change in façade orientation).
⬚ figure
Consistent building edges flanking the street, together with street trees of consistent height and/or planting pattern, help define the street as a three-dimensional public space.
• Orient primary façade elements to be parallel to the street.
• At least 75% of a building’s façade length should meet a consistent setback or build-to line shared with adjacent buildings.
• Landscaped areas may intervene between buildings, but relationships from one building to the next should remain apparent.
• Occasional deep setbacks of buildings to create landscaped front courtyards, street corner plazas and similar open spaces can be appropriate, but only if they represent a distinct, isolated condition relative to a well-defined and predominant build-to line.
• Gateway sites and other locations of special prominence within the street network shall feature buildings and/or public art of high architectural quality celebrating their landmark presence.
Create a human-scaled setting at street level through careful proportioning of architectural massing, bays and details.
• Define a walkable street scale with appropriate and consistent building heights. Buildings along principal walking streets shall create a street edge at their lower floors that is tall enough to create an urban quality at ground level but not so tall as to make pedestrians feel that they are in a “canyon” substantially out of scale with typical context buildings and street trees. Greater heights, where allowed by zoning, are permitted for portions of buildings that are
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
set back from this street edge a sufficient dimension and at sufficient height above ground that they are perceived as only a secondary street edge subsidiary to that created at ground and initial floors. At the same time, heights less than two to three stories are discouraged as providing too little spatial street definition and too little continuity with taller context buildings. The Braddock Metro planning process involved substantial public input on appropriate street edge heights that resulted in broad endorsement of the following more specific design criteria.
(1) Building façade planes at ground and any subsequent initial floors (referred to below as “street edge facades”) along West, Fayette, Madison and Wythe streets shall not exceed three stories or 40 feet in height (exception: four stories or 50 to 60 feet in height is acceptable along portions of Fayette and Henry Streets. See Building Height and Massing Diagram in Chapter 9 for specific locations).
(2) At the same time, street edge façades shall be at least 25 feet in height (one tall story plus parapet for a retail ground floor, or two stories for other uses) and are encouraged to measure at least half the width of the street (creating a street aspect ratio of at least 1:2, height: width).
(3) Greater heights, where allowed by zoning, are permitted for portions of buildings set back with a “shoulder” of approximately 12 feet from the street-edge façade. The shoulder can occur no less than 25 feet above street level. For a typical 66-foot-wide street, this translates into an increase of at least 25% in the distance between upper façades, as compared to the distance between street-edge facades (assuming maximum 15-foot setbacks of street edge facades). The upper floor
■ 79
setback offers several value- enhancing benefits beyond those for human scale at street level:
(a) enhanced daylight access and sky sphere visibility to lower building floors and the ground plane;
(b) more space for growth of street trees; and
(c) potential for roof terraces at setback level that add to unit amenity and street character
• The unbroken horizontal length of any façade plane shall be minimized. Intervals of setback or projected façade area may be used to permit longer building lengths. For larger projects and developments, consider composing facades as a series of smaller adjacent facades resembling separate buildings to reduce the perceived horizontal mass and scale.
• Buildings shall incorporate elements of intermediate scale between human scale and that of the whole building. At minimum, this shall be accomplished through a “base/middle/top” compositional strategy that defines at least three zones from base to top of the building façade. Additional important intermediate-scale elements include bay windows extending through multiple floors, building wings, areas of consistent material, and other larger elements that are still subsidiary to the overall building form. Facades should include horizontal lines of expression (such as string courses, cornices and window alignments) that correspond to the height of adjacent context buildings.
• Buildings shall incorporate elements responding to human scale. Traditionally these have included windows and doors and their associated bays; porches and stoops; fences along the sidewalk edge; and smaller façade details such as window shutters, flower boxes and traditional brick, clapboard and shingle dimensions.
⬚ figure
A series of facades resembling separate buildings helps reduce the perceived mass and scale of these building.
• Building tops and other skyline elements that rise above context buildings deserve special attention as prominent elements in the public realm. As the Braddock Metro neighborhood accommodates another period of growth and change, some of the new structures that make this level of development economically feasible will be higher than the fabric of the existing surroundings. This will mean the construction of new buildings that form part of the City skyline when seen from adjoining neighborhoods, or approaching the Braddock neighborhood on Metro or across the new Monroe Avenue Bridge.
• As these taller buildings take their place in the cityscape, their tops will begin to play an important role in redefining the character and scale of the area, both as seen from the streets immediately below, and as recognizable and memorable parts of the skyline as a whole. Building tops should be both designed as attractive landmarks with special forms and materials, and limited in scale so as not to
appear bulky compared to context scale nor to block views excessively.
⬚ figure
Building elements that rise above the context of surrounding buildings should be treated as attractive landmarks.
Special treatment of upper floors where a building meets the sky creates a sense of drama, helps to make a memorable place, aids in wayfinding, and conveys the message that the building was designed with care, keeping its relationship to its surroundings in mind. The Design Principles for the City of Alexandria require that new buildings be designed using the principles of base/middle/top; create scale transitions that are sensitive to the surrounding building fabric; and employ articulated tower tops to create an interesting skyline, allow views between buildings, and help sunshine to reach lower building levels and public open spaces. This strategy will help to reinforce and add to the vitality of the Braddock neighborhood, while taking advantage of the opportunities offered by transit-oriented development.
• Use of simple geometric shapes in plan and elevation is encouraged, to simplify perception of buildings and help visually integrate them with built context.
• Utilize vertically proportioned fenestration; use no strip/ribbon windows.
⬚ figure
Ground-floor building use and design should engage pedestrians. Retail, office and institutional uses all can and should provide a high level of engagement. In residential buildings, including multifamily buildings, ground-floor units shall include individual street entrances and yards wherever possible. Industrial and institutional buildings with frontage on public streets should locate any engaging uses—such as entrance doors and lobbies, accessory office space, and windows into actively used space—along as much of the public sidewalk as possible.
• For retail and other active ground floor uses, provide transparent glazing for approximately 75% or more of façade area. At corner retail sites, ground-level storefront windows shall extend at least 20 feet along the side street, and both the architecture of the building and the storefront design should address and articulate the corner. The ground floors of all new
■ 81
buildings along street frontage designated for potential retail use should have a floor-to-floor height of at least 15 and no more than 20 feet to ensure the potential for quality retail space.
• Ground-level retail storefronts are encouraged to have exterior awnings that are coordinated with the design of the storefront and the overall building. Awnings should not overwhelm or obscure the architectural and decorative features of buildings. Awnings should not be backlit. In mixed-use buildings, differentiate expression of the ground level from that of floors above.
• The ground floor façade of live/work units should be composed of at least 50% transparent glazing. At residential uses, transparent glazing area shall be limited to 50% of facade area where “punched” windows predominate in adjacent context.
• Ground-floor façade area uninterrupted by glazing should extend no more than 20 linear feet horizontally.
• Provide entrances to retail, office and other active ground level uses at least every 100 feet along the sidewalk where possible. The primary pedestrian entrance should front directly along the sidewalk or corner and, wherever possible, shall provide the primary access to parking. In
⬚ figure
multiunit residential buildings, provide individual entrances for ground-level units and prominent lobby entrances. Single-family dwellings should have a walk linking the front entrance to the sidewalk. Entries should be prominently expressed with canopies, awnings,
A well designed retail facade should be at least 75% transparent and should incorporate awnings as these examples in Boston, MA do.
bay windows, balconies or similar elements.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Mixed-use buildings should include a high-degree of transparency at ground floor commercial uses and a distinctly different façade treatment on upper residential floors, typically expressing bay dimensions of rooms and dwelling units. Examples shown here are in Atlanta.
New development should create a compact “green edge” transition zone between residential buildings and the public sidewalk. The build-to line for residential buildings shall be located 6 to 15 feet back from the sidewalk to provide space for individual unit yards, plantings, fences, stoops and similar elements creating a privacy buffer between public space and private dwelling interiors. Ground-floor levels should be
elevated at least one foot above sidewalk level where accessibility requirements allow.
New buildings must make complementary transitions to context buildings of different height or use. Where a new building with commercial and/or multifamily uses abuts a single-family or attached residence, the new building shall be sensitive in vertical and horizontal scale to existing residential structures. The new building must also incorporate a significant change or articulation in material or plane along the horizontal extent of walls facing the residential parcel. Where a new building is located closer to the street edge than an adjacent existing one, the portion of the new building façade that faces the setback of the existing building shall be designed to be consistent in its materials and architectural composition with the main building façade(s) facing public streets.
⬚ figure
This building makes a transition to an adjacent residential street by terminating in a smaller building mass that matches the scale of nearby houses.
All new development must adhere to these material standards:
• Utilize high-quality building materials such as brick, stone, precast or metal. Locate heavier materials closer to the ground and highest-quality materials and details at pedestrian level.
• Utilize stone, metal or similar durable material for trim.
⬚ figure
This building incorporates high quality brick with heavier masonry materials at ground level.
• Use materials to help express base, middle and top sections of buildings.
• Balance glass and solid surfaces to create predominantly solid facades with windows placed within the wall. Glazing shall not exceed 50% of the overall façade where this proportion is typical of existing context (new retail components excluded).
• Use no reflective or darkly tinted glass.
• Integrate HVAC and mechanical equipment unobtrusively into the overall building design.
Building Types
• Civic
(1) Civic buildings, such as major state and local government facilities, churches, auditoriums and museums, shall strive to embody the noblest aspirations of their time within the context of Alexandria’s distinguished monumental endowment.
(2) Civic buildings shall stand out from all others by undisguised building mass, prominent lot placement, scale and importance of unique ornament. Civic buildings should not necessarily imitate the architectural scale of their built context; rather, it may be especially appropriate for them to stand out distinctly from the prevailing scale as community landmarks.
• Multifamily and townhouse residential. Units that do not have direct access from a public street are prohibited. Any unit sidewall that abuts a public street shall include windows and other façade details in size and quantity matching the expression of the front entrance façade.
• Retail. Retail spaces shall be at least 60 feet deep and preferably closer to 80 feet deep and shall have a floor-to-floor height of at least 15 and no more than 20 feet to ensure potential for high-quality retail space. The design of signage, awnings, storefronts, window displays and other elements defining retail presence should reinforce local neighborhood character. To this end, prominent use of corporate logos is discouraged. Signage font, scale, material and other characteristics should primarily reflect
⬚ figure
Retail signage should reinforce local character and identity.
⬚ figure
cues from the local setting – such as the architectural style of their own and adjacent buildings, themes established among local merchants, and public realm signage and public art reinforcing community identity – instead of conventional corporate signage and logo practice. Signage should be especially oriented to pedestrians, such as through use of signs suspended over the sidewalk.
• Office and Hotel. A high-quality design expression is encouraged for the anticipated new office and hotel buildings on the Braddock Metro site and facing it on the east side of West Street. Such an expression would help recognize and define the parcels and public spaces immediately adjoining the Metro station as a unique place within the Braddock Metro planning area. It would moreover emphasize its distinction from historic and other traditional architecture in the planning area and thus heighten the prominence of each style or era represented. The design shall embody contemporary interpretations of traditional Alexandria building motifs and shall embrace the relatively tall heights permitted in this area compared to context. At the same time, it is essential that buildings around the Metro station continue to exhibit the range of scales, scaled transitions to context, and other requirements of the Building Edge Conditions.
• Architectural Style. The Plan recommends the use of more modern architectural style in the northern part of the neighborhood to reflect the warehouse and industrial history of this area.