Ward 3 Affordable Housing News Digest -- Special Chevy Chase Edition
Developers Propose Affordable Housing for Chevy Chase Civic Core
At the Chevy Chase D.C. Community Center on Saturday (March 29), eight development teams presented their proposals for redeveloping the Chevy Chase Library and Community Center site, referred to as the “Civic Core,” in response to the District’s Request for Proposals (RFP). The RFP required that proposals include housing at the site, and that at least 30% of the housing units be dedicated affordable. As it turns out, seven of the proposals contemplate 100% affordable housing at various income levels, with the eighth providing 67% affordable units. The total number of housing units proposed ranged from 113 to 206, with a few developers focused on senior housing while others included family-sized units.
Site History
The current library was built in 1967, and the community center followed a few years later in 1971. Both facilities are worn and outdated, and the city has been eyeing replacing them for some time. Following the 2021 revisions to the District’s Comprehensive Plan, and with extensive community input, the Office of Planning prepared a Chevy Chase Small Area Plan, which the D.C. Council approved unanimously in July 2022. That SAP called for a “reimagined Civic Core,” to include both modern replacements for the library and community center and mixed-income housing.
The Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) issued the RFP for the redevelopment of the Civic Core Site in January 2024, with a submission deadline eventually extended to last August 28.
For its part, the Office of Planning proposed zoning changes to allow more height and density, both at the Civic Core and along several commercial blocks on either side of Connecticut Avenue. The Zoning Commission approved those changes on January 30 of this year, noting that they are consistent with the objectives in the Comp Plan and SAP to increase both affordable and market-rate housing along the Connecticut Avenue corridor and at the Civic Core. The Commission also noted that the new zoning for the commercial lots requires ground floor retail with certain design criteria to activate the corridor in a way it isn't activated now.
Chevy Chase residents opposed to development of the Civic Core and greater density along Connecticut Avenue have formed an opposition group, called Chevy Chase Voice. That group has filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the Zoning Commission’s decision, primarily on procedural grounds.
The Proposals
The proposed designs for the Civic Core unveiled on March 29 combine a wide range of striking architecture with thoughtful planning, all claiming to provide state-of-the-art library and community center facilities. The developer presentation materials are now posted on DMPED’s project webpage, and the videorecording of the meeting should be available there soon. Urban Turf also posted brief summaries of the proposals.
All of the proposals would provide vastly-improved library and community center facilities compared to the outdated and deteriorating public buildings we have in Chevy Chase today. And all of them would bring sorely-needed affordable apartments to Chevy Chase and the Rock Creek West planning area, which lags far behind all other parts of the city in creating new, dedicated affordable housing. Here are the highlights of the eight proposals, in the order presented to the public. It’s worth following the links to see the renderings in the proposals.
A team led by non-profit True Ground Housing Partners (formerly APAH) and Cunningham Quill Architects focused on family housing, offering 113 apartments comprising 24 one-bedroom, 49 two-bedroom, and 40 three-bedroom units on four floors of housing over two floors of public facilities. The design features glass-walled library and community center spaces fronting on Connecticut Avenue, with a paseo from a public plaza in front through to a kids’ play area, basketball/pickleball courts, and a community garden in back. All of the housing would be dedicated affordable at the 30%, 50%, and 60% area median income (AMI) levels. True Ground would retain a long-term commitment to operating the residential portion of the property, and would provide wrap-around resident services with an on-site resident services coordinator. Parking would be moved below grade, with 62 spaces divided between 38 for residential tenants and 24 for users of the library and community center. Mitch Crispell, True Ground’s director of real estate development, commented that Chevy Chase is one of the highest opportunity neighborhoods in D.C., exactly the kind of place where we should be building low-income housing.
The second team, calling itself Chevy Chase Development Partners, presented a proposal for 147 units of all-affordable housing for active seniors, with a range of affordability levels at 30%, 50% and 100% of AMI. Unit sizes would be divided equally between studios, one-bedrooms, and two-bedrooms. Part of this team’s pitch for senior housing was to avoid “additional pressure” on the area’s overcrowded schools. The team’s lead developers are Banneker Communities and H&H Realty Corp. Like True Ground, this group proposes four levels of housing over two levels of glass-walled community facilities, with a paseo from a “front porch” on Connecticut Avenue through to a children’s play area and pickleball and basketball courts in the back. Their presentation also highlighted use of renewable energy, a green roof, and LEED certification. Most of the 68 parking spaces would be below ground, with a few in a surface parking lot for library and community center users. Greystar would be brought in as property manager for the residential portion.
EastBanc, non-profit Victory Housing, Rosewood, and Montage Development Group formed a team proposing 139 units of affordable senior housing, with 131 one-bedroom units and 8 two-bedroom units for grand-families. Ten percent would be offered at 30% AMI and the remainder at 50% AMI. EastBanc developed the West End Public Library, the existing example in D.C. of housing over a library. This proposal contemplates reusing the support structure of the existing library, while adding two overhanging floors on top for the community center. Both facilities would make generous use of glass outer walls, but the south side of the community center levels would have a retractable metal curtain across the exterior. This team emphasized fitting the housing into the neighborhood; its proposal did the most to break up the massing of the residential space, with two apartment buildings broken into distinct blocks, and sinuous green spaces and a central courtyard in between. The southwest corner of the complex would offer a 2,000 square foot commercial space beneath a public green on an occupiable green roof. 76 parking spaces would all be underground.
A team led by Menkiti Group and non-profit The Community Builders offered 120 units of low-income and workforce family housing, with 36 one-bedrooms, 60 two-bedrooms, and 24 three-bedrooms. 30 apartments would be reserved for tenants earning 30% or less of AMI, 6 at 50% AMI, 54 at 60% AMI, and 30 at 80% AMI. This team stood out by proposing separate buildings for the public facilities and the residences, in distinctly different styles, designed by architect Matt Bell of Perkins Eastman DC. Among other things, the separation allows the project to be phased so that the existing library could remain in use while the new library/community center is built. A walkway with a civic plaza and public garden would separate the two buildings. This proposal also includes a café run by D.C. Central Kitchen, which would provide job training as well as refreshment. A community life program would help residents build financial literacy and would use Howard University social work students to provide one-on-one coaching to residents. Parking would be divided between 50 spaces underground for the residences and 20 surface parking spaces for users of the community facilities.
Gilbane Development Co., Cubed Partners, and architect Michael Graves presented what might be the most visually-striking design, with dramatic curved facades on multiple levels at the front of the public spaces, and multiple rooftop courtyards. This proposal includes 191 housing units, all dedicated affordable at or below 80% of AMI. 88 of the apartments would be in a distinct section reserved for seniors. The public spaces would have a ground-floor community center with five levels of library above, including a café and several outdoor terraces accessible from the library. The building would be designed to achieve LEED Gold certification, and 84 parking spaces would all be underground (60 for residents, 24 for users of the civic spaces). This presentation provided no information on unit sizes or resident services.
A development team led by non-profit Lincoln-Westmoreland Housing proposed a development designed by Shalom Baranes Associates, with a 183-unit affordable apartment building consisting of 12 studios, 69 one-bedrooms, 43 two-bedrooms, and 59 three-bedrooms. All the units would be affordable, variously at 30%, 50%, and 80% of AMI. The design puts 5-6 floors of housing above the civic facilities, with the library having two stories of reading halls behind a glass front wall on the southwest corner of the property. A civic plaza would be front-and-center on Connecticut Avenue, with a playground and outdoor courts behind the library wing. 93 underground parking spaces would be divided between residential tenants and users of the library and community center. The building would be designed to achieve LEED Platinum certification. One unusual feature of Lincoln-Westmoreland Housing is that representatives of their tenant associations have voting seats on the organization’s governing board.
Rift Valley Partners and STUDIOS Architecture proposed a plan they called The Hub of Chevy Chase. This proposal had the most housing units – 206 – and was the only one to include any market-rate housing. The team proposed dividing the housing roughly in thirds, with 69 market-rate apartments, 67 “workforce” units available at 80% AMI, and 70 units reserved for households at 30% and 50% of AMI. The design features a row of pillars supporting a raised terrace wrapping around three sides of the library. A large entry portal to the library and community center would be flanked by 8,000 square feet of community-serving retail. With outdoor reading areas, a play park and plaza, sports courts, and a small amphitheater, the developers said their proposal would more than double the existing outdoor space at the site. 147 parking spaces would be underground, with 30 spaces reserved for library and community center users, 109 for residents, and 8 for retail. No specifics were provided on unit sizes, floor plans, or resident services.
Closing out the presentations, a development team consisting of Urban Atlantic, CSG Urban Partners and non-profit NHT Communities proposed 156 apartments divided between senior and family housing, with four floors of housing above two floors of public facilities. They proposed to offer 16 senior units and 17 family units at 30% of AMI; 52 senior apartments and 54 family apartments at 50% AMI, and 8 senior and 9 family units at 80% AMI. The senior apartments over the community center will all be one bedrooms, while the family units in a separate building above the library will be 50% one-bedrooms, 40% two-bedrooms, and 10% three-bedrooms. The team said their proposal would increase usable green space by over 100%; outdoor spaces will include a “futuristic” playground, a multipurpose sports court, and a splash park, with a landscaped courtyard in the center of the complex. Together, the community center and library will include co-working spaces, a large fitness center, auditorium, and café. The buildings will have rooftop solar panels and be designed to achieve LEED Platinum certification, and all 70 parking spaces will be below grade. The presenters mentioned that the developers will retain long-term ownership of the residential portion, and that NHT will provide an on-site resident services coordinator.
What Comes Next
A public comment session followed in the afternoon, after all the developer presentations. DMPED considers the March 29 meeting to be a “disposition hearing” pursuant to D.C. Code §10-801 because, for the project to go forward, the D.C. Council would have to enact a “surplus and disposition” resolution authorizing the sale or long-term lease of a portion of the District’s property (or air rights) at the Civic Core to the selected housing developer.
About 50-60 people spoke during the public forum, divided roughly evenly between supporters and opponents of adding affordable housing to the Civic Core site. Through the morning presentations, several of the project opponents’ most frequent objections – that we shouldn’t “give away” public land for mostly luxury housing, for example, or that redevelopment would radically limit the amount of public green space at the site – had evaporated in the face of the proposals actually presented. Opponents instead argued variously that the proposals included too little parking, local schools are overcrowded, neighboring property values will decline, the “village” feel of Chevy Chase will be destroyed, the housing will overwhelm the civic uses of the site, and the city has done a poor job of managing existing affordable housing. Project supporters generally complimented the quality of the proposals and spoke to the desperate need for more affordable housing in high-amenity, high-opportunity neighborhoods like Chevy Chase.
There’s plenty of opportunity remaining to comment on the relative merit of the eight development proposals and the need for more affordable housing in the Rock Creek West planning area and in Chevy Chase specifically. DMPED will accept written comments and suggestions regarding the proposals for 60 days after the hearing, i.e., until May 28, 2025. Comments may be submitted by email to daniel.lyons@dc.gov, or by mail to: The Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, Attention: Daniel Lyons, 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 317, Washington, DC 20004.