Yes and no. The plot of land around RFK is called Reservation 13 and plans for its redevelopment started all the way back in the early 2000's. The original plan called for (and still calls for) residential housing, parks, and fields. Some of those projects have been completed but a lot of them, including newer plans for a food market hall (similar to the one at Union Market), more bridges across the river, and a larger sports and recreation complex, are on hold and will be on hold until there is a long-term decision on use of the land, and the long-term decision on use of the land has been undecided while they wait to see what's going to happen with the Redskins and their new stadium.
So yes, while some members of the community argue that there's no need for a stadium when so many people are being priced out of DC and the priority needs to be mixed-use housing -- which are fair points -- I think it's pretty clear that the local and federal decision-makers are and have been waiting to see what will happen with the Redskins because bringing them back to the District will be the most profitable, which is almost always the deciding factor.
I suspect they'll announce at some point after the name change that a new stadium will built to be the center of a revitalized neighborhood, and they'll compare it to Nats Park (and Audi Field) and the area around it that has since been revitalized by new apartment buildings, restaurants, and parks. They'll commit a certain percentage of the new housing buildings towards housing lower-income families to try and appease the local community and will make other announcements around building parks and bridges and making other infrastructure investments to sell it as more than just building a new stadium. Of course I could be wrong but there's a reason most of the development of that land and neighborhood has been stalled for close to two decades and it's probably because they're waiting for the biggest domino to fall.
