Ask the Developer: Kindlewood

In the following Q+A, J.T. Engelhardt, Director of Real Estate at National Housing Trust (NHT), discusses the redevelopment of Kindlewood in Charlottesville, Virginia, a groundbreaking project that places residents at the center of the design and planning process. Originally named Friendship Court, this 12-acre site has a layered history that spans from its early days on land owned by Alexander Garrett through its evolution into a predominantly Black neighborhood, to its controversial designation as "blighted" during 1970s urban renewal efforts. 

In partnership with Piedmont Housing Alliance (PHA), NHT is modeling an innovative approach to affordable housing redevelopment that goes beyond traditional community engagement requirements. Through a resident advisory council established in the mid-2010s, residents have maintained decision-making authority over every aspect of the development, from architectural design to financing structures. Engelhardt shares insights into the challenges and rewards of this resident-led model, offering valuable lessons for other developers seeking to create more inclusive and community-driven housing solutions. 

This Q+A explores how meaningful resident participation, while time intensive and complex, can lead to stronger communities and better development outcomes when developers recognize and value the lived experiences of those who call these places home. 

Q: Can you talk about the history of the land and the community that Kindlewood is a part of? 

J.T.: The land was originally indigenous territory, but when private ownership began, the area was purchased by Alexander Garrett, who was a business leader and an associate of Thomas Jefferson. Garrett enslaved more than 50 people on the estate. The streets that bound the Kindlewood site still bear his name today. After the Civil War, the land was developed for commercial use and eventually became a working-class residential neighborhood. By the middle of the 20th century, Kindlewood had evolved into a predominantly black neighborhood of single-family homes located just south of the city’s main commercial areas. 

            In the 1970s, the City of Charlottesville declared the area blighted and forced landlords to sell their property as part of an urban renewal plan, including  a 150 unit, 100% project based Section 8 property, which would eventually become Kindlewood. 

            In 2002, Piedmont Housing Alliance (PHA) and National Housing Trust (NHT) purchased the property, began renovating it, and ultimately renamed the property Friendship Court through a resident participatory process. 

Q: Can you go into a little detail about how NHT and PHA partnered on the Kindlewood redevelopment? 

J.T.:  The previous owner did not maintain the property well, and it was dangerously close to having its Section 8 contract revoked. NHT, with expertise in HUD preservation, approached HUD and the owner to facilitate a sale. We brought in PHA as our local partner, and that’s how our two organizations came together in partnership to try to keep the Section 8 contract at the property and improve the property. 

Q: This development is unique in how it’s involved residents in the design and planning process from a very early stage. Can you talk about how NHT and PHA first approached working with the residents? 

J.T.: By 2012, actual physical structures on the property were also nearing the end of their useful life. At the same time, Charlottesville was really growing as a community, partially because of the growth of the University of Virginia. Even though the property is near the Amtrak tracks, which historically separated the city, it was close to this award-winning, high end pedestrian mall, so there was a real risk being posed by gentrification. The city of Charlottesville looked at this site, saw the potential it had, and identified it as an area of redevelopment that they would support. 

To get HUD approval to take a piece of the Section 8 contract and apply it to first 106 units, there are resident engagement and resident notification requirements. PHA put real intention behind meeting those requirements, and along with support from the city, Vibrant Community funding, and pre-development funding from Virginia Housing Authority, this allowed us to make the design process a resident led. 

            Thanks to this early work, residents have participated in every aspect of planning from the mid 2010’s until today through a resident advisory council, which is a combination of residents and local Charlottesville leaders. For the redevelopment, we had a landscape architect on the council, and there have been City Councilmembers who contribute to this council, but the votes have always come from the residents, no one else. Since my involvement in 2018, this has truly been resident led. Every single decision is taken to the residents, and we give them a few feasible options, and they choose for themselves. 

Q. Have there been any hurdles you’ve encountered when working with residents so closely? 

J.T.: While it is a meaningful process, it certainly is very time-consuming and requires some odd hours at times. It can also be costly because of the architects, the civil engineers, the marketing and branding people. We must spend more time here than on other developments because of the presentation of options along with making sure residents understand what their options are.  

           For example, the original intent of the advisory council was to have it be truly mixed income. The general plan was to go from 150 project base Section 8 units to 400 to 450 total units and about a third of those units would be project-based Section 8, another third tax credit based, and then the remaining portion of units would be unrestricted or market rate units. We were having difficulty getting this financed in phase one, so we had to go back to the residents and tell them that the only way we could have enough money to build phase one was if we converted the market rate tier to 80% AMI. This was a highly technical issue, but we presented the advisory council with the options, and they chose to have it be 100% tax credit and we were able to honor the idea.  

           There are going to be moments where you must spend extra time laying it out to residents what these technical situations imply and help them understand what that means for them. But when you take a step back from it all, ultimately, that extra time spent isn’t a hurdle when you realize that it’s all going towards outcomes that create a more vibrant and thriving community. 

Q: Can you give any tips or tricks to any other developments who are looking to enhance their partnership and involvement with residents and communities? 

J.T.: First of all, it is not easy, but it is worth it. I encourage other developers to value, appreciate, and seek the earned wisdom of the residents that live at a property. You would be very surprised at what kinds of outcomes, the level of trust, and the strong communities that can result from simply understanding that as a developer our experience has limitations. Our experience as developers certainly has value, but there is a lot to be gained from earnestly listening to residents’ and the community’s experiences. 

            There will always be constraints of one type or another, and cost and time will always be one of those, but this has been meaningful work for me, and it will continue to be. The work is also meaningful to the residents. They’re elected, serve a term, and are compensated for their time. They’re held accountable to showing up and participating. I’m confident that no matter what your constraints are, if you move in the direction of directly involving residents from the ground up, better outcomes will result.