Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

1125 Spring Road Redevelopment Project Survey Findings (August 12, 2014)

249

Published on

Published in: News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
249
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District
  • 2. 1125 SPRING ROAD REDEVELOPMENT Elevating the Quality of Life in the District COMMUNITY MEETING
  • 3. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District Property Address 1125 Spring Road, NW Ward 4 ANC 4C Legal Description Square 2902, Lot 804 Net Building Area 85,865 SF Zoning D/R-4 Historic Designation Landmark designation Hebrew Home for the Aged
  • 4. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District Property Address 3700 10th Street, NW Ward 4 ANC 4C Legal Description Square 2902, Lot 807 Net Building Area 12,378 SF Zoning D/R-4 Historic Designation No Paul Robeson School
  • 5. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District Hebrew Home and the Paul Robeson School have been designated as surplus because:  The buildings are inadequate for District Government Use  Substantial capital investment needed for redevelopment  No identified District Government purposes Surplus / Disposition Process
  • 6. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District Surplus Statutory Requirements According to the DC Code there are legal requirements associated with surplus properties, including the following:  Requirement of a public hearing prior to submission to Council for approval of the surplus designation.  A surplus resolution must be submitted to Council for review.  In general, applies to long-term leases (greater than 20- years) or the sale of public property.  Disposition agreement must state development program.
  • 7. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District Development Program Process  DGS identified affordable housing as a critical need that could be provided in some amount at this site.  Enlisted DCHA based on their expertise and ability to move forward quickly.  Gathering input from the community through a variety of channels:  Public forums  ANC meetings/consultation with ANC Commissioners  Resident survey  Emails/phone calls  Present development program for feedback
  • 8. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District Community Engagement Meetings  ANC 1A Meeting held on April 9th  ANC 4C Meeting held on May 14th  Surplus Meeting held on June 17th  Site Walk thru held on July 8th  Survey conducted July 8th thru July 18th  Fact Sheet distributed on July 9th  Leadership Roundtable Meeting held July 28th  Community Meeting held on August 12th  Program Development Meeting September 2014  ANC1A Meeting October 2014  ANC4C Meeting October 2014
  • 9. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  Residents requested a survey be conducted in order to gather the general consensus of the community.  A Survey was conducted July 8th thru July 18th  Survey Monkey was used to conduct an electronic survey.  Residents with access to electronic mail could participate. Resident Survey
  • 10. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Neither Ward 4 Ward 1 Q1. In which Ward do you live?  527 residents participated in the survey  11 residents who participated in the survey did not live in Ward 1/4. 56.74% 41.18% 2.09%
  • 11. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Columbia Heights 16th Street Heights Fort Totten Manor Park Parkview Petworth Q2. Which community do you live in?  Nearly 50% of those who participated in the survey live in Columbia Heights.  Nearly 30% were from Petworth.  20% resided in other communities within these wards. 29.79% 13.85% .57% 1.52% 6.26% 48.01%
  • 12. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Other ANC Representative Government Web Page E-mail Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  A majority of the residents who participated in this survey would prefer to be contacted by electronic mail.  The survey was conducted anonymously which encouraged participants to vote as they deemed fit. 71.20% 14.20% 20.40% 11.00% Q3. How would you prefer to be notified of future meetings regarding the redevelopment of 1125 Spring Road?
  • 13. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  A majority of survey participants are in favor of redeveloping the property for housing purposes.  Those who selected “no” or “undecided” were not asked their preference. The site’s R4 zoning restricts development for any other type of use. Q4. Are you in favor of redeveloping the 1125 Spring Road property for Housing? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Undecided No Yes 85.77% 4.74% 9.49%
  • 14. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  Nearly 80% of respondents were in favor of some mix of affordable housing , ranging from 10% – 100% of the development. Q5. Affordable Housing refers to properties that were originally built using a tax subsidy and are now required to provide below-market rents for low-income people, persons with disabilities, and/or seniors. What percentage of Affordable Housing should be included in this development? 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% None 100% 60% 25% 10% 28.27% 22.20% 11.57% 16.32% 21.63%
  • 15. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% None 100% 60% 25% 10% Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  70% of residents who participated in this survey are in favor of between 10% - 25% of Work Force Development Housing included in this development.  13% of residents who completed this survey would like to see anywhere from 60% - 100% of Work Force Housing for this project. Q6. Work Force Development Housing is targeted for “essential workers” in a community (i.e. police officers, fire fighters, teachers, nurses, medical personnel etc.). What percentage of Work Force Development should be included in this development? 31.88% 37.57% 10.44% 3.42% 16.70%
  • 16. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% None 100% 60% 25% 10% Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  Nearly 60% of respondents were not in favor of any Transitional Housing on this site.  37% of residents who completed this survey are in favor of including 10% - 25% of Transitional Housing. Q7. Transitional Housing is shorter-term housing, usually for less than two years, that provides intensive support services, geared toward increasing a household's self- sufficiency and helping it move towards permanency and stability. What percentage of Transitional housing should be included in this development? 25.24% 11.57% 3.23% 1.90% 58.06%
  • 17. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% None 100% 60% 25% 10% Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  70% of respondents are in favor of including 10% - 25% of Senior Housing within this redevelopment.  10% of respondents would like to see between 60% - 100% of Senior Housing included in this project. Q8. Senior Housing is occupied solely by persons who are 62 years or older and are able to live independently. What percentage of Senior Housing should be included in this development? 43.07% 27.89% 6.07% 3.42% 19.54%
  • 18. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% None 100% 60% 25% 10% Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  Nearly 60% of respondents were not in favor of Permanent Supportive Housing here.  36% of survey participants would like to see between 10% - 25% of Permanent Supportive Housing included. Q9. Permanent Supportive Housing provides permanent housing and supportive services to individuals and families with histories of homelessness to ensure housing stabilization and maximum levels of self-sufficiency. What percentage of Permanent Supportive Housing should be included in this development? 23.34% 12.90% 4.17% 3.61% 55.98%
  • 19. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% None 100% 60% 25% 10% Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  36% of residents who completed this survey were in favor of 60% of Market Rate housing included within this project.  23% of survey participants would prefer the inclusion of between 10% - 25% Market Rate units; another 23% would prefer that no Market Rate units are included. Q10. Market Rate Housing refers to properties that are rented or owned by people who pay market rate rent to lease the property or paid market value when they purchase the property. There is no subsidy for Market Rate Housing. What percentage of Market Rate Housing should be included in this development? 7.59% 15.94% 36.62% 16.70% 23.15%
  • 20. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% None 30% 25% 15% 10% Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  Over 60% of respondents were not in favor of including units for those managing mental illness here.  31% of the survey participants are in favor including anywhere between 10% - 25% of units for residents who are managing mental illness.  11% of respondents would be in favor of having between 25%-30% of units set aside for people who are managing mental illness. Q11. A subset of Affordable Housing is targeted to those managing mental illness as well as those who have been formerly homeless. Up to what percentage of this subset should be set aside within this development? 20.49% 6.45% 4.55% 7.02% 61.48%
  • 21.  Over 80% of respondents are in favor of developing the site for Housing.  Over 75% of respondents are in favor of some level of Market Rate Housing.  Almost 80% of respondents are in favor of some level of Affordable Housing, ranging from 10% - 100%.  Over 80% of residents are in favor of some level of Work Force Development Housing, with 70% preferring that it is 10-25% of the units.  80% of respondents are in favor of some level of Senior Housing, with 70% of respondents preferring that it is to 10% - 25% of the units.  36% of respondents are in favor of including 10% - 25% of the units as Permanent Supportive Housing; majority of respondents are not in favor of the inclusion of such units.  31% of respondents are in favor of 10% - 25% of units for those managing mental illness; majority of respondents are not in favor of the inclusion of such units. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District Survey Findings
  • 22. Elevating the Quality of Life in the District  DCHA/DGS will present a development program at a future community meeting(s) and to ANCs to solicit feedback.  Development program will be finalized, and memorialized in disposition agreement and Surplus Resolution.  The Department of General Services will submit a Surplus Resolution package to Council for review.  Council may hold a roundtable to vote on the Resolution.  The Department of General Services will formally dispose of the property.  DCHA will proceed with development process, continue to work with the community on details of the development plan. Next Steps
  • 23. District of Columbia Housing Authority Elevating the Quality of Life in the District DEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW

×