Frequently Asked Questions (F.A.Q.)
Version 1 - Updated as of 11/28/2017
General
1. Is there an opportunity for residents / tenants of the Development Area to use the Home’s golf course?
The Home recognizes that use of the golf course might be an attractive amenity to future residents / tenants of the Development Area and is open to proposals to grant access and use privileges to this resource.
Master Plan
2. Is the developer encouraged to follow Master Plan product mixes and footprints or is there flexibility to work within the overall approved square footage?
The product mixes and layouts in the Master Plan are conceptual and the selected developer will have some flexibility in terms of the types and mix of uses; however, the density currently outlined in the Master Plan should serve as a guideline for proposals. Developers are encouraged not to exceed this density and to pay close attention to, and work within the environmental, historic and cultural constraints outlined in the Master Plan, Programmatic Agreement (PA) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Record of Decision (ROD) (incl. view sheds and building height restrictions) when contemplating building footprints, street layout and overall land use.
3. Is there a Master Plan preference for certain residential product types?
No. The Master Plan does not identify specific product types, but all proposed product types should fall within the guidelines and density outlined in the Master Plan.
4. Is there flexibility to change the Master Plan?
AFRH encourages proposals to be consistent with the Master Plan. If the selected developer chooses to propose development that is inconsistent with the current Master Plan, the developer will be responsible for amending the Master Plan. Maser Plan Amendments must be approved by the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) and are subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The Section 106 review process for Master Plan Amendments is stipulated in the PA.
Historic Preservation
5. Is the site subject to historic preservation requirements?
Yes. The entire AFRH-W campus (including the Development Area) is listed in the National Register of Historic Places as a Historic District. A PA was signed in 2008 stipulating the adaptive reuse of the contributing resources of the historic district and specifying guidelines for new construction. The Master Plan incorporated the reuse and design requirements and specified height restrictions for all improvements, including structures and site elements within the boundaries of the Development Area. See also Section 10 of the Master Plan. The heating plant would be subject to similar historic preservation requirements. Note that the PA was amended in 2015 to clarify the design review procedures for work undertaken by private developers in the Development Area.
6. Could a developer use historic tax credits to rehabilitate historic buildings on the site?
The site is listed in the National Register of Historic Places as a Historic District, so rehabilitation of historic buildings within the site may be eligible for tax credits. It will be up to the successful offeror to complete the application process and determine the actual tax credit eligibility.
7. Is there flexibility to change the Programmatic Agreement?
The Master Plan was developed in accordance with the PA to ensure compliance with Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Any actions to change the Master Plan would necessitate review of the PA. The PA amendment process is clearly articulated in Section XIV of the document.
8. Is the Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) involved in any new construction, or only adaptive reuse of existing buildings?
Both adaptive reuse and new construction will be subject to a design review process that is explained in detail in the amended PA. The DC Historic Preservation Office (HPO) participates throughout the design review process – from concept to the final permitting. HPO decides whether to bring projects to the HPRB or to review projects at the staff level, similar to projects in any other historic district in DC.
Environmental Considerations
9. Does the Development Area have environmental concerns?
The Development Area and some of the existing buildings may contain environmental concerns such as asbestos, lead-based paint and others. Please refer to the due diligence documentation available for download on the website. The ROD describes required environmental mitigation measures under the prior RFP effort. AFRH is in the process of updating the environmental information, and plans to provide that updated information with any new RFP.
10. Is the original Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) just for the Development Area?
No, the EIS completed in 2007 and its subsequent Record of Decision (ROD) apply to the entire campus. The Supplemental EIS will cover the entire campus as well.
11. Are developers responsible for conducting the Supplemental EIS or is this study produced by the Home?
AFRH is responsible for conducting the Supplemental EIS. Mitigation measures that result from the Supplemental EIS are included in an updated ROD and will be the developer’s responsibility to carry out.
12. Will results of the Supplemental EIS be presented prior to or after the release of the solicitation?
The Draft Supplemental EIS (SEIS) will be started prior to the selection of the developer. The Final SEIS will be completed after the developer has been selected. Content of the selected developer's proposal may be included as an alternative in the Final SEIS. Mitigation measures that result from the SEIS will be included in an updated ROD. Mitigations are not expected to be radically different from the 2007 EIS, with anticipated updates to reflect changes such as the new stormwater management regulations and changed traffic conditions.
Transportation and Access
13. Describe the current and proposed access points and security of the Development Area, including access from the outside of the campus and access from the AFRH portion of campus.
a) Access: A chain-link fence currently surrounds the perimeter of the Development Area. The Development Area has an existing access point at Scale Gate Road, off of North Capitol Street. The Master Plan proposes to increase external connectivity by adding two new access points along Irving Street as well as reactivating the existing entrance opposite First Street.
b) Security: The Master Plan calls for the placement of a perimeter fence around the Development Area, with defined access points to the Home.
14. Will the District of Columbia annex the road and utility infrastructure into the municipal infrastructure network post development?
At this time, the answer is no. The successful offeror should consult with the DC Department of Transportation on this matter.
15. Will GSA / AFRH contribute financially to road and utility infrastructure improvements and upgrades required to implement the selected development plan?
No.
Property and Existing Buildings
16. Heating Plant
a) Is the Heating Plant capable of co-generation?
The Heating Plant would need to be refurbished such that it meets current regulations in order to be used as a cogeneration facility.
b) Can you provide an overview of the plant's supply capabilities?
The Heating Plant contains boilers with 125 MBTU/hour capacity.
c) Will the Development Area be required to use the Heating Plant as a power source?
The selected developer may determine the best use of the Heating Plant, either as a power source or some other form of adaptive reuse (within the parameters of the Master Plan).
d) Can the Heating Plant be used to supply the Development Area, or has its equipment been removed?
The Heating Plant was decommissioned in 2013. Its equipment is still in place and has been properly decommissioned and stored. The plant could be reactivated and its supply infrastructure to the entire campus (incl. facilities in the Development Area) is still in place.
17. Are there any existing tenants on the property?
There are no existing tenants in any of the buildings, but the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is a parking tenant in the eastern portion of the Development Area around the shop buildings. VA’s current agreement with the Home to provide parking can be terminated on short notice when the area is conveyed to a developer. If the demand still exists, the selected developer would be free to negotiate a parking arrangement with VA.
18. Is the Pasture considered sacrosanct or can this area be developed and/or landscaped?
The Master Plan calls for the retention of the Pasture as open space and specifies its treatment and use as a publicly accessible amenity. The Master Plan sets deliberate boundaries for the Pasture based on historic preservation considerations and consultation with the local community about public open space. Encroaching on the Pasture with substantial development would be a significant deviation from the Master Plan, requiring the developer to submit a Master Plan amendment and potentially reopening negotiations regarding open space with surrounding communities and others. The Master Plan does not propose a specific design for the Pasture but provides guidelines for its design and use, including public access, lighting, storm water management, etc. See the Master Plan for additional details.
19. What is the interior condition of the LaGarde Building?
The LaGarde building was decommissioned in 2013 based on GSA decommissioning guidelines. Preventative maintenance and inspections have been kept up to meet government requirements. It is anticipated that the building could be occupied again with minimal effort / investment required.
20. Will AFRH make the Development Area available to interested parties for site tours?
Yes. AFRH will develop a site tour schedule in conjunction with an RFP release.
Solicitation
21. Would GSA consider redevelopment proposals for only portions of the Development Area vs. the entire approx. 80 acres?
No.
22. What future ownership structure do you anticipate?
Long-term ground lease.
23. Is the ground lease structure final or would AFRH consider portions of the Development Area for fee- simple sale?
The ground lease structure is the only structure available under AFRH’s legal authority. A sale would be required to go through the GSA federal disposal process and the associated screening process under the Property Act.
24. Was a ground lease done with the previously selected developer? What would be the envisioned term of the ground lease?
A ground lease was negotiated with the previously selected developer; but the lease was never executed. The previously negotiated office / apartment / retail term was for 60 years with provisions for renewals, and a parcel with For-Sale residential product types would have been for 99 years with provisions for renewals.
25. What financial commitments will be required in the RFP?
Financial wherewithal will be part of the selection criteria. GSA is currently in the process of drafting the solicitation.
26. How flexible are the boundaries of the Development Area?
The RFP will be based on the existing Development Area boundaries outlined in the Master Plan (with the addition of the Heating Plant area), as all existing planning documents are based on the boundaries as shown. If an alteration of the Development Area is proposed it will trigger amendments to the Master Plan, PA and EIS.
27. Can developers pursue other temporary uses in the Development Area that fall outside of the Master Plan?
We generally believe that interim uses of existing facilities would be permitted. If temporary uses are proposed, developers should include them in their proposal.
28. Will AFRH be looking for any space in the Development Area?
No. AFRH has consolidated its operations to the northern portion of campus and will not be a tenant in the Development Area.
29. What is the solicitation process for selection of a developer?
The government’s goal is to issue a Request for Proposals in Spring 2018 to develop the area identified in the Master Plan as Zone A and the Heating Plant (collectively, the Development Area). The Home anticipates providing developers a 120 day response period.
30. Does GSA or AFRH provide development incentives or subsidies?
No. Interested parties may explore potential economic development incentives / subsidies with the local jurisdiction having authority.
Zoning and Entitlements
31. Is the site fully entitled?
No. The Master Plan provides a redevelopment scenario with density, product mix, structure heights and view sheds deemed acceptable by the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), the DC Office of Planning (DCOP) and AFRH.
32. What is the site’s current zoning?
Since the site is currently owned by the Federal Government, it is considered a “Federal Enclave” and is not zoned by the District of Columbia (DC). Per the terms of the Land Use Memorandum of Understanding (MOU; posted on website) executed in 2007 between NCPC, DCOP and AFRH, any AFRH land sold or ground leased to a private entity is subject to DCOP zoning, because the improvements to be constructed would not be owned or used by the Federal government and are therefore not Federal public buildings.
33. Can you summarize the city entitlement process?
The Land Use Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between DCOP, NCPC and AFRH states that following Master Plan approval, DCOP would sponsor an abbreviated zoning change process to allow matter of right zoning for the approved Master Plan. The selected developer would be expected to support this process.
1. Is there an opportunity for residents / tenants of the Development Area to use the Home’s golf course?
The Home recognizes that use of the golf course might be an attractive amenity to future residents / tenants of the Development Area and is open to proposals to grant access and use privileges to this resource.
Master Plan
2. Is the developer encouraged to follow Master Plan product mixes and footprints or is there flexibility to work within the overall approved square footage?
The product mixes and layouts in the Master Plan are conceptual and the selected developer will have some flexibility in terms of the types and mix of uses; however, the density currently outlined in the Master Plan should serve as a guideline for proposals. Developers are encouraged not to exceed this density and to pay close attention to, and work within the environmental, historic and cultural constraints outlined in the Master Plan, Programmatic Agreement (PA) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Record of Decision (ROD) (incl. view sheds and building height restrictions) when contemplating building footprints, street layout and overall land use.
3. Is there a Master Plan preference for certain residential product types?
No. The Master Plan does not identify specific product types, but all proposed product types should fall within the guidelines and density outlined in the Master Plan.
4. Is there flexibility to change the Master Plan?
AFRH encourages proposals to be consistent with the Master Plan. If the selected developer chooses to propose development that is inconsistent with the current Master Plan, the developer will be responsible for amending the Master Plan. Maser Plan Amendments must be approved by the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) and are subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The Section 106 review process for Master Plan Amendments is stipulated in the PA.
Historic Preservation
5. Is the site subject to historic preservation requirements?
Yes. The entire AFRH-W campus (including the Development Area) is listed in the National Register of Historic Places as a Historic District. A PA was signed in 2008 stipulating the adaptive reuse of the contributing resources of the historic district and specifying guidelines for new construction. The Master Plan incorporated the reuse and design requirements and specified height restrictions for all improvements, including structures and site elements within the boundaries of the Development Area. See also Section 10 of the Master Plan. The heating plant would be subject to similar historic preservation requirements. Note that the PA was amended in 2015 to clarify the design review procedures for work undertaken by private developers in the Development Area.
6. Could a developer use historic tax credits to rehabilitate historic buildings on the site?
The site is listed in the National Register of Historic Places as a Historic District, so rehabilitation of historic buildings within the site may be eligible for tax credits. It will be up to the successful offeror to complete the application process and determine the actual tax credit eligibility.
7. Is there flexibility to change the Programmatic Agreement?
The Master Plan was developed in accordance with the PA to ensure compliance with Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Any actions to change the Master Plan would necessitate review of the PA. The PA amendment process is clearly articulated in Section XIV of the document.
8. Is the Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) involved in any new construction, or only adaptive reuse of existing buildings?
Both adaptive reuse and new construction will be subject to a design review process that is explained in detail in the amended PA. The DC Historic Preservation Office (HPO) participates throughout the design review process – from concept to the final permitting. HPO decides whether to bring projects to the HPRB or to review projects at the staff level, similar to projects in any other historic district in DC.
Environmental Considerations
9. Does the Development Area have environmental concerns?
The Development Area and some of the existing buildings may contain environmental concerns such as asbestos, lead-based paint and others. Please refer to the due diligence documentation available for download on the website. The ROD describes required environmental mitigation measures under the prior RFP effort. AFRH is in the process of updating the environmental information, and plans to provide that updated information with any new RFP.
10. Is the original Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) just for the Development Area?
No, the EIS completed in 2007 and its subsequent Record of Decision (ROD) apply to the entire campus. The Supplemental EIS will cover the entire campus as well.
11. Are developers responsible for conducting the Supplemental EIS or is this study produced by the Home?
AFRH is responsible for conducting the Supplemental EIS. Mitigation measures that result from the Supplemental EIS are included in an updated ROD and will be the developer’s responsibility to carry out.
12. Will results of the Supplemental EIS be presented prior to or after the release of the solicitation?
The Draft Supplemental EIS (SEIS) will be started prior to the selection of the developer. The Final SEIS will be completed after the developer has been selected. Content of the selected developer's proposal may be included as an alternative in the Final SEIS. Mitigation measures that result from the SEIS will be included in an updated ROD. Mitigations are not expected to be radically different from the 2007 EIS, with anticipated updates to reflect changes such as the new stormwater management regulations and changed traffic conditions.
Transportation and Access
13. Describe the current and proposed access points and security of the Development Area, including access from the outside of the campus and access from the AFRH portion of campus.
a) Access: A chain-link fence currently surrounds the perimeter of the Development Area. The Development Area has an existing access point at Scale Gate Road, off of North Capitol Street. The Master Plan proposes to increase external connectivity by adding two new access points along Irving Street as well as reactivating the existing entrance opposite First Street.
b) Security: The Master Plan calls for the placement of a perimeter fence around the Development Area, with defined access points to the Home.
14. Will the District of Columbia annex the road and utility infrastructure into the municipal infrastructure network post development?
At this time, the answer is no. The successful offeror should consult with the DC Department of Transportation on this matter.
15. Will GSA / AFRH contribute financially to road and utility infrastructure improvements and upgrades required to implement the selected development plan?
No.
Property and Existing Buildings
16. Heating Plant
a) Is the Heating Plant capable of co-generation?
The Heating Plant would need to be refurbished such that it meets current regulations in order to be used as a cogeneration facility.
b) Can you provide an overview of the plant's supply capabilities?
The Heating Plant contains boilers with 125 MBTU/hour capacity.
c) Will the Development Area be required to use the Heating Plant as a power source?
The selected developer may determine the best use of the Heating Plant, either as a power source or some other form of adaptive reuse (within the parameters of the Master Plan).
d) Can the Heating Plant be used to supply the Development Area, or has its equipment been removed?
The Heating Plant was decommissioned in 2013. Its equipment is still in place and has been properly decommissioned and stored. The plant could be reactivated and its supply infrastructure to the entire campus (incl. facilities in the Development Area) is still in place.
17. Are there any existing tenants on the property?
There are no existing tenants in any of the buildings, but the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is a parking tenant in the eastern portion of the Development Area around the shop buildings. VA’s current agreement with the Home to provide parking can be terminated on short notice when the area is conveyed to a developer. If the demand still exists, the selected developer would be free to negotiate a parking arrangement with VA.
18. Is the Pasture considered sacrosanct or can this area be developed and/or landscaped?
The Master Plan calls for the retention of the Pasture as open space and specifies its treatment and use as a publicly accessible amenity. The Master Plan sets deliberate boundaries for the Pasture based on historic preservation considerations and consultation with the local community about public open space. Encroaching on the Pasture with substantial development would be a significant deviation from the Master Plan, requiring the developer to submit a Master Plan amendment and potentially reopening negotiations regarding open space with surrounding communities and others. The Master Plan does not propose a specific design for the Pasture but provides guidelines for its design and use, including public access, lighting, storm water management, etc. See the Master Plan for additional details.
19. What is the interior condition of the LaGarde Building?
The LaGarde building was decommissioned in 2013 based on GSA decommissioning guidelines. Preventative maintenance and inspections have been kept up to meet government requirements. It is anticipated that the building could be occupied again with minimal effort / investment required.
20. Will AFRH make the Development Area available to interested parties for site tours?
Yes. AFRH will develop a site tour schedule in conjunction with an RFP release.
Solicitation
21. Would GSA consider redevelopment proposals for only portions of the Development Area vs. the entire approx. 80 acres?
No.
22. What future ownership structure do you anticipate?
Long-term ground lease.
23. Is the ground lease structure final or would AFRH consider portions of the Development Area for fee- simple sale?
The ground lease structure is the only structure available under AFRH’s legal authority. A sale would be required to go through the GSA federal disposal process and the associated screening process under the Property Act.
24. Was a ground lease done with the previously selected developer? What would be the envisioned term of the ground lease?
A ground lease was negotiated with the previously selected developer; but the lease was never executed. The previously negotiated office / apartment / retail term was for 60 years with provisions for renewals, and a parcel with For-Sale residential product types would have been for 99 years with provisions for renewals.
25. What financial commitments will be required in the RFP?
Financial wherewithal will be part of the selection criteria. GSA is currently in the process of drafting the solicitation.
26. How flexible are the boundaries of the Development Area?
The RFP will be based on the existing Development Area boundaries outlined in the Master Plan (with the addition of the Heating Plant area), as all existing planning documents are based on the boundaries as shown. If an alteration of the Development Area is proposed it will trigger amendments to the Master Plan, PA and EIS.
27. Can developers pursue other temporary uses in the Development Area that fall outside of the Master Plan?
We generally believe that interim uses of existing facilities would be permitted. If temporary uses are proposed, developers should include them in their proposal.
28. Will AFRH be looking for any space in the Development Area?
No. AFRH has consolidated its operations to the northern portion of campus and will not be a tenant in the Development Area.
29. What is the solicitation process for selection of a developer?
The government’s goal is to issue a Request for Proposals in Spring 2018 to develop the area identified in the Master Plan as Zone A and the Heating Plant (collectively, the Development Area). The Home anticipates providing developers a 120 day response period.
30. Does GSA or AFRH provide development incentives or subsidies?
No. Interested parties may explore potential economic development incentives / subsidies with the local jurisdiction having authority.
Zoning and Entitlements
31. Is the site fully entitled?
No. The Master Plan provides a redevelopment scenario with density, product mix, structure heights and view sheds deemed acceptable by the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), the DC Office of Planning (DCOP) and AFRH.
32. What is the site’s current zoning?
Since the site is currently owned by the Federal Government, it is considered a “Federal Enclave” and is not zoned by the District of Columbia (DC). Per the terms of the Land Use Memorandum of Understanding (MOU; posted on website) executed in 2007 between NCPC, DCOP and AFRH, any AFRH land sold or ground leased to a private entity is subject to DCOP zoning, because the improvements to be constructed would not be owned or used by the Federal government and are therefore not Federal public buildings.
33. Can you summarize the city entitlement process?
The Land Use Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between DCOP, NCPC and AFRH states that following Master Plan approval, DCOP would sponsor an abbreviated zoning change process to allow matter of right zoning for the approved Master Plan. The selected developer would be expected to support this process.
