Executive Director's Recommendation

Executive Director’s Recommendation Commission Meeting: July 10, 2014

PROJECT NCPC FILE NUMBER Foreign Missions & International CP01F Organizations Element of the Comprehensive Plan for the National NCPC MAP FILE NUMBER Capital N/A Washington, DC APPLICANT’S REQUEST SUBMITTED BY Final adoption of the updated Staff of the National Capital Planning policies to the Foreign Missions & Commission International Organizations Element, to take effect when all of REVIEW AUTHORITY the Federal Elements of the Preparation and Adoption of Federal Elements Comprehensive Plan for the of the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to 40 National Capital have been U.S.C. § 8721 adopted.

PROPOSED ACTION Approve as requested

ACTION ITEM TYPE Staff Presentation

PROJECT SUMMARY Staff is requesting final adoption of the updated policies to the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element. On May 2, 2013, the Commission released the draft policies for a 60-day public comment period from May 6, 2013, through July 5, 2013. NCPC hosted a public meeting on June 11, 2013, to discuss the draft policy updates. The proposed revisions include public input, guidance from stakeholder agencies, and new data.

Staff is recommending the final adoption of the updated policies to the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element to take effect when the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital are adopted.

KEY INFORMATION  The revised goal statement conveys greater sensitivity to the character and land use patterns of the city’s neighborhoods.  The updated narrative removes the 1/3-2/3 method developed in the 1983 Comprehensive Plan.  The U.S. Department of State provided updated data.  The policies are reorganized into five themes: Chancery Development, Locating Chanceries, Chancery Facilities, Ambassadors’ Residences, and International Organizations.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 2 NCPC File No. CP01F

 The Commission released the draft Element for a 60-day public comment period from May 6, 2013, - July 5, 2013. NCPC hosted a public meeting on June 11, 2013. See the public comments in Appendix 3.

RECOMMENDATION Commission action requested:

 Approves the final adoption of the updated policies in the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element.

 Holds the policies in abeyance until final adoption of the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan, pursuant to 40 U.S.C. § 8721.

PROJECT REVIEW TIMELINE

Previous actions August 5, 2004 – The Commission adopted the updated Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital, which included the current Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element. May 2, 2013 – The Commission released the draft update to the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element for a 60-day public comment period.

Remaining actions NCPC staff will return to Commission for approval and final adoption (anticipated) of the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

Prepared by A. Dupont June 23, 2014

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 3 NCPC File No. CP01F

Table of Contents

I. Project Description ...... 4 Background ...... 4 Proposal ...... 4 II. Project Analysis/Conformance ...... 5 DC Zoning Regulations Review ...... 5 Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital ...... 5 National Environmental Policy Act ...... 6 National Historic Preservation Act ...... 6 III. Consultation ...... 6 Public Comment Period ...... 6 Coordination with federal and local agencies ...... 6 IV. APPENDICES ...... 6 Appendix 1: Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element (Narrative & Policies) . 7 Appendix 2: Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element (Policies) ...... 27 Appendix 3: Public Comments & Responses ...... 30

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 4 NCPC File No. CP01F

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Background NCPC updated the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element in 2004 when the last full update of the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan was completed. Since that time, NCPC staff has updated the Element to reflect new planning initiatives, a new chancery development area for a foreign missions center, and guidance on locating and siting chanceries. The Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element provides a planning policy framework that takes into account two important responsibilities. The first priority is for the United States to fulfill its diplomatic obligations, including identifying suitable locations for chanceries. A second goal is to ensure that chanceries are located in a way that is sensitive to the character and land use patterns of the city’s neighborhoods.

Proposal On May 2, 2013, the Commission released the draft Element for a 60-day public comment period from May 6, 2013, through July 5, 2013. During that period, NCPC hosted a public meeting on June 11, 2013, to present the draft policy updates to the public. The proposed revisions include public input, guidance from stakeholder agencies, and new data from the U.S. Department of State. Staff has revised language in the goal statement, narrative, and policies for clarification purposes and updated maps to reflect potential changes to the District of Columbia’s update to its zoning regulations.

The update includes a revised goal statement to reflect a broad objective to recognize the planning challenges that have emerged regarding chancery development in residential neighborhoods. The proposed new goal statement is as follows:

“It is the goal of the federal government to: Plan a secure and welcoming environment for the location of diplomatic and international activities in Washington, DC in a manner that is appropriate to the status and dignity of these activities, contributes to and enhances Washington’s role as one of the world’s great capitals, and is sensitive to the character and use patterns of the city’s neighborhoods.”

The policies are organized into five themes: Chancery Development, Locating Chanceries, Chancery Facilities, Ambassadors’ Residences, and International Organizations. For purposes of clarity, NCPC staff has reorganized the narrative to match the policy structure.

The proposed update includes a narrative that sets the context for the Element’s policies. As is customary with all of the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan, the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element provides relevant data on trends and issues that are the focus of its policies and reinforces current planning initiatives. In this case, the data includes an update to the existing number of chanceries, ambassadors’ residences and international organizations. The update primarily focuses on locating chanceries at the proposed foreign missions center and matter-of-right areas, and balancing the needs of chancery facilities with the responsibility of development in neighborhood communities.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 5 NCPC File No. CP01F

One key challenge is balancing the need for secure chancery locations while being sensitive to the character and needs of residential neighborhoods. A methodology was developed in 1983 to further refine the approach for locating chanceries. The 1/3 – 2/3 method allowed foreign missions to locate in low- and medium-density residential when one third or more of a square consisted of office, commercial, or other non-residential uses. It has since been noted that the methodology has been applied inconsistently and may result in an increase in the concentration of chanceries in certain residential neighborhoods. Thus, the current Comprehensive Plan is moving away from the 1/3 – 2/3 method. It recommends prioritizing matter-of-right areas and the proposed foreign missions center for locating new chanceries. The location of chanceries outside of the matter-of-right areas are subject to the review of the District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA). The District of Columbia BZA makes a determination based on the set of six criteria as defined in the Act, which considers both the local and federal interests. This public decision-making process includes the input and participation of stakeholders, and attempts to balance the need for diplomatic activities with the concerns of residential neighborhoods.

II. PROJECT ANALYSIS/CONFORMANCE

DC Zoning Regulations Review The DC Office of Planning (DCOP) is leading a multi-year public effort to review and revise the District's zoning regulations. The DC Zoning Regulations Review (ZRR) process was initiated in 2007, in response to the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. DCOP submitted draft text to the Zoning Commission on July 29, 2013. The Zoning Commission set down the proposed ZRR text for public hearings on September 9, 2013.

The ZRR includes proposed changes to clarify the rules related to the review of chancery applications. The new rules proposed by DCOP eliminate the current Diplomatic Use Overlay Zone and prescribe a BZA review process applicable to chanceries in all residential zones. The recommended process for low to medium density residential zones includes a threshold evaluation by the BZA of the square within which a chancery seeks to locate. If 50 percent or more of the subject square is used for institutional uses, the application is deemed eligible by the BZA for review on its merits in accordance with the six review criteria specified by the Foreign Missions Act (FMA). Applications that fail to meet the 50 percent criteria are determined ineligible for chancery use and are dismissed by the BZA. In other residential zones, i.e., Medium-High and High Density Residential, and Mixed-Use zones, no threshold determination is proposed and an application proceeds directly to the BZA for review in accordance with the FMA criteria.

The Zoning Commission is holding public hearings and gathering community feedback. The record of the ZRR will remain open until September 15, 2014.

Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital This update to the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element of the Comprehensive Plan is provided in accordance with the provisions of the preparation and adoption of Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan specified at 40 U.S.C. § 8721.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 6 NCPC File No. CP01F

National Environmental Policy Act Staff reviewed the proposal in accordance with NCPC’s Environmental and Historic Preservation Policies and Procedures, and determined that the proposed Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element update can be categorically excluded from further environmental analysis and documentation. The action is determined by the staff to qualify as categorical exclusion as cited at the Commission’s procedure (11) “Adopt a Federal Element of the Comprehensive Plan or amendment thereto, 40 U.S.C. 8721(a): D.C. Code 2-1003.”

National Historic Preservation Act This proposal does not sustain characteristics as a federal undertaking. The proposal of policy revision does not implement, contract, or take other actions that would preclude consideration of the full range of alternatives to avoid or minimize harm to federal historic properties. Consequently, the proposed action does not require review pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 process.

III. CONSULTATION

Public Comment Period The draft policies to the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element were released for a 60-day public comment period. During that period, NCPC received numerous public comments. See Appendix 3 for the list of public comments received along with staff responses.

Coordination with federal and local agencies The draft policies of the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element were coordinated with the U.S. Department of State, Office of Foreign Missions and DCOP. Updates since the draft have been coordinated with the U.S. Department of State, Office of Foreign Missions.

IV. APPENDICES Appendix 1: Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element (Narrative & Policies) Appendix 2: Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element (Policies) Appendix 3: Public Comments & Responses

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 7 NCPC File No. CP01F

Appendix 1: Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element (Narrative & Policies)

FOREIGN MISSIONS & INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ELEMENT NARRATIVE & POLICIES

(PRE-FORMATTING)

Introduction

It is the goal of the federal government to:

Plan a secure and welcoming environment for the location of diplomatic and international activities in Washington, DC in a manner that is appropriate to the status and dignity of these activities, contributes to and enhances Washington’s role as one of the world’s great capitals, and is sensitive to the character and use patterns of the city’s neighborhoods.

Washington, DC is one of the world’s most important diplomatic centers. There are a total of 195 independent states in the world, and the United States maintains diplomatic relations with 191 of them.1 The United States also has diplomatic relations with many international organizations. There are approximately 185 countries that have foreign missions in Washington, DC.2 These missions are vital to the United States government in assisting diplomatic relations with international institutions, organizations, and states. Foreign missions help promote peace and stability, and bring nations together to address global challenges.

The Comprehensive Plan’s Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element provides a policy framework for the United States to fulfill its international obligation to assist foreign governments and international organizations in obtaining suitable locations for their diplomatic missions. This in turn supports efficient functioning of diplomatic and international activities. The element also includes policies to ensure that foreign missions promote the prestigious nature of the diplomatic mission, contribute to the city, and acknowledge the unique characteristics of Washington’s neighborhoods.

Honoring treaty obligations of the United States are an important component in accommodating foreign missions in the nation’s capital. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations obligates the U.S. government to assist foreign governments in obtaining suitable facilities for

1 U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Fact Sheet: Independent States in the World, March 2013, http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/4250.htm. 2 U.S. Department of State, Office of Foreign Missions, data received November 2013.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 8 NCPC File No. CP01F

diplomatic missions. The Convention states that the host country can either “facilitate the acquisition on its territory…by the sending State of premises necessary for its mission” or assist in “obtaining accommodations in some other way.”3

The Foreign Missions Act (Act) of 1982 reaffirms the federal government’s jurisdiction over the operation of foreign missions and international organizations in the United States.4 It enunciates the policy to support and facilitate the secure and efficient operation of U.S. missions abroad and of foreign missions and international organizations in the United States.

To ensure reciprocal accommodations in foreign countries, the Act established the Office of Foreign Missions within the U.S. Department of State to review and control the operations of foreign missions in the United States. It empowers the Secretary of State to set forth the mechanism and criteria relating to the location of foreign missions in the District of Columbia.

Chancery Development

Foreign missions occupy buildings of all sizes, shapes, and ages. Some are housed in former residential row houses or mansions, while many are in custom-designed buildings. Others lease space in commercial office buildings.

The facilities that house diplomatic functions—office space where the mission is conducted, and the residence of the ambassador—are commonly referred to collectively as embassies. Individually, these facilities are referred to differently depending upon their use. These uses include:

 Ambassador’s residence – the official home of the ambassador or the chief of mission.  Chancery – the principal offices of a foreign mission used for diplomatic or related purposes.  Chancery annex – used for diplomatic purposes in support of the mission, such as cultural or military attachés, or consular operations. Chanceries and chancery annexes are the same in this element when considering the accommodation of foreign missions in the District of Columbia.

Many foreign missions in Washington occupy chanceries, chancery annexes, and ambassadors’ residences in more than one location. Collectively and individually, these buildings contribute to the vibrancy and diversity of Washington’s neighborhoods and add significantly to the city’s visual interest and character.

3 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Vienna, April 18, 1961, http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf 4 Foreign Missions Act 22 U.S.C. 4301-4316

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 9 NCPC File No. CP01F

[CALL OUT BOX START]The Economic and Fiscal Impact of Foreign Missions on the Nation’s Capital

The foreign missions in the National Capital Region represent the world’s major countries, and with few exceptions are those countries’ largest missions. Even though foreign missions by themselves are not major generators of economic activity, they have an economic force far exceeding their measurable benefits. In addition to their direct and indirect spending, they represent a critical component of the international business industry in the District of Columbia. The continued growth and vitality of the city’s international business industry is closely tied to Washington maintaining its position as the power center among world capitals, generating country-to-country business opportunities, and attracting visitors seeking individual or multiple-country meetings.

In 2001, the total contribution of spending associated with foreign missions to the District of Columbia economy was estimated at $411 million.5 Foreign missions support and facilitate a significant and growing sector within the District economy, in the following ways:

 Foreign missions employ workers in the District of Columbia.  Consumer spending by foreign mission employees.  Non-payroll spending by foreign missions.  Foreign missions attract a large volume of day visitors and business visitors staying overnight, who spend money on lodging, food, and shopping.  The District collects taxes generated by the office space and homes leased in the city by foreign missions and their employees, respectively. [CALL OUT BOX END]

Some countries maintain limited diplomatic establishments in Washington, with only the minimal staff needed to maintain diplomatic relations. Others have quite extensive activities and employ hundreds of people to work in specialized offices with particular functions. For example, several foreign missions maintain trade offices to encourage the import and export of goods to and from their countries and many missions have offices for military liaisons to the U.S. Department of Defense. The diplomatic and international community continues to be a source of economic growth in the District of Columbia, as it provides employment and attracts international culture and commerce.

In recent decades, the nature of international diplomacy has shifted. In addition to political relationships, economic and cultural relationships have taken on added significance. This expansion of diplomatic functions has resulted in a commensurate shift in foreign mission facilities, with buildings increasingly used to signify the importance the country places in its relations with its host and to project a positive image.

5 The Economic and Fiscal Impact of Foreign Missions on the Nation’s Capital, prepared for NCPC by Stephen S. Fuller, George Mason University, 2002.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 10 NCPC File No. CP01F

In addition to their traditional function as places of negotiation, chanceries also act as communication vehicles for their countries. Increasingly, foreign missions use their chancery facilities as event spaces to foster intergovernmental relations at the political, economic, and cultural level. Using the power of architecture to convey a message in a way that spoken and written words cannot, many foreign missions now host public and private cultural events such as art exhibits, concerts, and films, or sponsor special events to increase awareness of their country and promote trade and tourism. These new programs often result in the need for larger buildings and specialized space. In addition, increased security requirements have become a consideration in chancery development.

Foreign Missions Since 2004: Key Developments and Trends

In 2004, when the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element of the Comprehensive Plan was last updated, there were 169 countries with foreign missions in Washington, DC spread across 507 facilities (residential and non-residential) in the region: 451 facilities in the District of Columbia, 41 facilities in Maryland, and 15 facilities in Virginia. In the District of Columbia, there were 195 chanceries with 18 located on federal land and 177 located on non-federal land.

The collapse in the 1990s of both the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia resulted in the creation of 21 new countries, all of which established diplomatic missions in Washington with many located in small, historic townhouses in the northwest areas. Two decades later, many of these countries have already outgrown their smaller facilities.

In the past decade, the growth and prominence of foreign missions such as Brazil, China, India, and Vietnam, had a significant impact on the diplomatic presence of such governments, as well as on Department of State’s reciprocal presence and operations in those countries.

The construction of the new U.S. chancery in Beijing and the Chinese chancery in the District of Columbia provides an example of how reciprocity functions. Without the ability to accommodate China’s construction at the ICC, U.S. Department of State’s efforts to construct a new U.S. chancery in Beijing would likely not have been successful.6 Another example relates to a proposal from the Republic of Georgia. In January 2014, the Foreign Missions Board of Zoning Adjustment reviewed the Republic’s proposed relocation of chancery functions to another property. The U.S. Department of State determined that the case was a federal interest and acknowledged the Republic of Georgia’s generous assistance in establishing a new U.S. Embassy in Tbilisi in 2005. Such cooperation was essential for successfully achieving the Federal Government’s mission for providing safe, secure and functional facilities for the conduct of U.S. diplomacy and the promotion of U.S. interests worldwide.

6 U.S. Department of State, Foreign Missions Center at the Former Walter Reed Army Medical Center Draft Environmental Impact State, January 2014.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 11 NCPC File No. CP01F

In addition, the increasing “footprints” of U.S. diplomatic facilities abroad largely due to security requirements has resulted in additional pressure for similarly sized sites for foreign missions here in the U.S. Within the District of Columbia, this task has been challenging due to the lack of larger, undeveloped land.

As foreign governments continue to face greater difficulty identifying properties within the District of Columbia that are either available for chancery use, or viewed by foreign governments as being suitable for modern embassy operations, the U.S. Department of State faces a number of new challenges in its attempts to reciprocally acquire properties in other countries.

Today there are 322 chanceries (chancery and chancery annexes), 78 ambassador residences, and 46 missions to the Organization of American States in the District of Columbia.7 Currently the Chinese Embassy Annex project on Connecticut Avenue is in the construction process and the Moroccan Embassy at the International Chancery Center is in the development process. While most chancery facilities are owned by the countries that occupy them, several missions lease space, typically floors or suites in office buildings and sometimes in small commercial buildings or freestanding structures and, as necessary, renovated, not newly constructed. Since 2004, multiple renovation and expansion projects acquired new facilities including the Embassy of the Republic of Congo, Embassy of South Africa, and the Embassy of Brazil.

Where Foreign Missions Have Located

Currently, all chanceries in Washington, DC are located in the District’s Northwest quadrant, with the majority located between 16th Street on the east and Wisconsin Avenue on the west. The Sheridan Kalorama neighborhood contains the highest number of chanceries than any other neighborhood in the city, with the adjacent neighborhood of Dupont Circle having the second highest.

[CALLOUT BOX START] Embassies are located predominately in the northwest quadrant of Washington, DC, with a high concentration along a stretch of Massachusetts Avenue, NW known as “Embassy Row,” and along New Hampshire Avenue, NW and 16th Street, NW. Many embassies are located in neighborhoods such as Dupont Circle, Downtown, Foggy Bottom, Georgetown, Kalorama, and North Cleveland Park. Where foreign missions locate can influence the existing neighborhood character. For example, many embassies are located in the Dupont Circle area and bring a constant flow of employment and distinctive international feel to the historically designated neighborhood.8 The embassies at Glover Park and Dupont Circle generate demand for restaurants and the arts, helping establish the neighborhoods’ distinct character. [CALLOUT BOX END]

7 U.S. Department of State, Office of Foreign Missions, November 2013. 8 Washington, DC Economic Partnership, DC Neighborhood Profiles 2013.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 12 NCPC File No. CP01F

Figure 4: Where Foreign Missions Are Located

In 1968, the International Center Act established a 47-acre enclave in the Van Ness neighborhood known as the International Chancery Center, where foreign missions lease land from the U.S. government. The International Chancery Center became a purpose-built community designed to balance the federal government’s need to accommodate foreign mission facilities while addressing the concerns of citizens about the location and operation of foreign missions in the District of Columbia.

The International Chancery Center currently houses 17 chanceries and the headquarters of Intelsat (which was formerly an international organization). The International Chancery Center is essentially built out as all 47 acres have been developed with the exception of two lots, both of which have been assigned to Morocco. The final plans for the new Moroccan chancery have already been approved, and once completed, the International Chancery Center would not accommodate additional chanceries.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 13 NCPC File No. CP01F

Future Demand

The greatest demand for new chancery facilities will likely be from existing foreign missions that expand as they increase their presence and the services they perform. A few small countries that house their primary diplomatic missions to the U.S. in New York may also choose to open chanceries in the capital. As new countries are created over time, it is likely that they too may establish diplomatic relations with the U.S. and would require new chanceries in the District of Columbia.

New foreign missions and relocating of existing ones could require the identification of chancery sites each year. It is unlikely that all foreign missions would require new sites—some may purchase or lease existing foreign mission facilities, while others may purchase or lease other existing buildings. However, the past trend has been toward new construction of larger facilities on large lots, both on privately owned land and in the International Chancery Center. Because of the full build-out of the International Chancery Center, another large tract of federally owned land to accommodate a new foreign missions center is planned. For a discussion of the proposed foreign missions center at the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center campus, go to page 22.

Locating Chanceries

Where Foreign Missions May Locate

The Act establishes procedures and criteria governing the location, replacement, or expansion of chanceries in the District of Columbia. The Act identifies areas where foreign missions may locate without regulatory review, and areas where foreign missions may locate subject to disapproval by the District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA).

[CALL OUT BOX START] The BZA is a five-member, quasi-judicial board created by the Zoning Enabling Act of 1938, as amended and charged with hearing cases related to variances, special exceptions, and appeals of administrative decisions related to zoning. The BZA also undertakes special reviews of proposed chancery development for facilities proposed to be located in certain mixed-use areas of the city. When the BZA is performing functions regarding Foreign and Chancery applications, the BZA consists of three Mayoral appointees, the Director of the U.S. National Park Service or designee, and the NCPC Executive Director. [CALL OUT BOX ENDS]

The areas where foreign missions may locate without regulatory review are referred to as matter- of-right. A foreign mission may locate a chancery in a matter-of-right area without it being subject to review by the BZA. The Act establishes matter-of-right areas as those areas in the District of Columbia zoned commercial, industrial, waterfront, or mixed use. According to the current District of Columbia zoning map, these areas are located in all quadrants of the city, with the single largest contiguous area within the central business district. From this core, several matter-of-right areas

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 14 NCPC File No. CP01F

extend outward along major avenues of the city. In addition, large matter-of-right areas are located south of the National Mall and east of the Anacostia River.9

Figure 1: Areas zoned Commercial

Figure 2: Areas zoned Waterfront

Figure 3: Areas zoned Mixed Use

9 The District of Columbia Zoning Regulations are currently undergoing an extensive rewrite through a multi-year update initiative led by the District of Columbia Office of Planning. As a result of this initiative, the distribution of the areas where chanceries are permitted to locate either as a matter-of-right, or subject to the disapproval of the District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, are likely to change.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 15 NCPC File No. CP01F

Foreign missions are also permitted to locate chanceries in areas outside of the matter-of-right areas subject to review and disapproval by the BZA as defined in Section 4306(b)(2) of the Act. These include areas zoned medium-high or high density residential, as well as “any other area” deemed suitable for a chancery use on a case-by-case basis. For these latter areas, prior to making a decision concerning the location of a chancery, the BZA must first determine whether the area within which the chancery is to be located is suitable based upon an evaluation of existing office or institutional uses in that area. As required by the Act, any determination concerning the location of a chancery outside of the matter-of-right areas must be based solely on a set of six criteria found in Section 4306(d) of the Act. While the areas considered outside of the matter-of-right can be found in all quadrants of the District, these areas are primarily located in Northwest and Northeast Washington.

[CALLOUT BOX START]Six Criteria in Section 4306(d) of the Foreign Missions Act (d) Criteria for determination Any determination concerning the location of a chancery under subsection (b)(2) of this section, or concerning an appeal of an administrative decision with respect to a chancery based in whole or in part upon any zoning regulation or map, shall be based solely on the following criteria: (1) The international obligation of the United States to facilitate the provision of adequate and secure facilities for foreign missions in the Nation’s Capital. (2) Historic preservation, as determined by the Board of Zoning Adjustment in carrying out this section; and in order to ensure compatibility with historic landmarks and districts, substantial compliance with District of Columbia and Federal regulations governing historic preservation shall be required with respect to new construction and to demolition of or alteration to historic landmarks. (3) The adequacy of off-street or other parking and the extent to which the area will be served by public transportation to reduce parking requirements, subject to such special security requirements as may be determined by the Secretary, after consultation with Federal agencies authorized to perform protective services. (4) The extent to which the area is capable of being adequately protected, as determined by the Secretary, after consultation with Federal agencies authorized to perform protective services. (5) The municipal interest, as determined by the Mayor of the District of Columbia. (6) The Federal interest, as determined by the Secretary. [CALLOUT BOX END]

Location Decisions

All foreign missions in Washington are currently located in the city’s Northwest quadrant. This is due to historic development patterns, availability of buildings and land, proximity to government offices and other chanceries, and former Comprehensive Plan policies that encouraged this practice.

Historic Patterns. The historic pattern of foreign missions locating in the city’s Northwest quadrant came early in Washington’s diplomatic history. The first foreign missions in the city were near the White House, and as outlying areas of the city became fashionable––and increasingly urbanized–– foreign missions followed. The first concentration of foreign missions in Washington occurred

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 16 NCPC File No. CP01F

along 16th Street, NW, in the vicinity of Meridian Hill Park. By the 1920s 16th Street was referred to as Embassy Row.

However, during the Depression, many of the grand homes in the area northwest of Dupont Circle became vacant and were bought by foreign missions that wanted to establish their presence in a stylish neighborhood. By the end of the 1930s Massachusetts Avenue from Scott Circle to Wisconsin Avenue had become the new Embassy Row. As the United States became an international power and Washington became an increasingly important diplomatic center, more and more foreign missions clustered around this area, and its desirability continues to this day.

Available Buildings. As large private homes became available, many foreign missions purchased and occupied them. When these foreign missions later moved into larger facilities, new missions establishing or increasing their diplomatic presence often moved into these former residences.

Available Land. Although chancery construction has dispersed to areas such as the Pennsylvania Avenue corridor and Georgetown, for many years the availability of large lots along the Massachusetts Avenue corridor allowed for the construction of new chancery facilities that accommodate a variety of functions and uses.

Proximity to Government Offices and Other Chanceries. As increasing numbers of foreign missions clustered in the Northwest quadrant of the city, the desirability of locating chanceries near or in the cluster increased. The neighborhood character and the prestige of the nearby foreign missions added to the desire to locate in these areas. In addition, foreign missions in Northwest often prefer to be located in proximity to the U.S. Department of State headquarters, with easy access to other government functions located around the monumental core.

Former Comprehensive Plan Policies. Based on prior development patterns over the course of 20 years, the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2004 recognized a potential for future expansion of existing foreign missions and demand for new chancery sites. Planning challenges that emerged regarding chancery development in the District of Columbia since adoption of the previous Comprehensive Plan included the overconcentration of chanceries in specific neighborhoods and the impact on traffic, parking, noise, and land use patterns. To address those challenges, several potential development areas were identified in the 2004 Comprehensive Plan that could accommodate future chanceries including the 16th Street Corridor and South Capitol Street Corridor. Other policies encouraged the development of a new foreign missions center at the Armed Forces Retirement Home and along the South Capitol Street Corridor. However, due to changing conditions, future foreign missions centers at the Armed Forces Retirement Home and along the South Capitol Street Corridor are no longer viable.

Key Policy Issues and Challenges. The Foreign Missions Act continues to serve as the federal regulatory framework that guides the location of chanceries in the District of Columbia. Section 4306 of the Foreign Missions Act establishes specific areas where chanceries are permitted as a matter-of-right, and areas where chanceries are permitted subject to the disapproval of the District of Columbia BZA (implemented at a local level through the District of Columbia Zoning Regulations). In general, the BZA process and the matter-of-right zoning restrictions are intended

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 17 NCPC File No. CP01F

to balance a number of key planning challenges associated with locating chanceries within the context of both federal and local interests. For example, concentrating chanceries in neighborhoods may impact traffic, parking, noise, and land use patterns. There may be other issues related to protecting neighborhood character or site-specific historic preservation issues. These must be balanced with fundamental federal interests to respect the nation’s diplomatic obligations and locate chanceries within the capital.

One topic for locating chanceries has been how to define the “in any other area” section of the Act defined in Section 4306(b)(2)(B) and described on page 15 of this element. In December 1983, NCPC amended the Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element to provide planning and policy guidance to the Zoning Commission and the BZA with a method developed to delineate the “in any other area.” It included a methodology that identified areas with 1/3 office and institutional and 2/3 residential land uses, thus, it was commonly referred to as the “1/3 – 2/3 method.” This mixed-use ratio was then applied to city squares zoned low- to medium-density residential, and squares that met the ratio were identified as being appropriate for chanceries under Section 4306(b)(2)(B).

The 1/3-2/3 methodology was intended to clarify guidance in the Act and help delineate areas where chanceries are appropriate. However, from a process perspective, it has been noted that the methodology has been applied somewhat inconsistently and in some cases has caused an unanticipated increase in the concentration of chanceries in certain residential neighborhoods. Thus, NCPC is not recommending inclusion of such methodology within this update to the Element. NCPC supports prioritizing matter-of-right areas and the proposed foreign missions center for location of chanceries. The location of chanceries outside of the matter-of-right areas are subject to the review of the District of Columbia BZA. The District of Columbia BZA makes their determination based on the set of six criteria as defined in the Act, which considers both the local and federal interests.

Chancery Facilities

Future Building Requirements

In the past years, foreign countries have built new large, distinctive chancery facilities built on prominent, busy streets. Most of these chanceries were stand-alone, multi-use buildings with underground garage parking and increasingly sophisticated security. Although there is a high demand for new construction, there is a lack of larger sites available for foreign mission development or redevelopment in the District of Columbia leading three other patterns of chancery development to have emerged:

1. Rehabilitating prestigious historic structures 2. Relocating into vacated chancery buildings 3. Leasing space in commercial office buildings

Many foreign countries use the power of architecture in the design of their chancery facilities to convey a message. Buildings are often used as statements about their countries and relationships to

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 18 NCPC File No. CP01F

the international community. For example, the design of the South African Embassy renovation and expansion project represents the “new” South Africa with a symbolic message that South Africa, while respecting the past, is moving towards a bright future free of the political strife that characterized the country’s recent history. The contemporary Scandinavian architecture of the House of Sweden, located in Georgetown, exemplifies Swedish values such as openness, transparency and democracy with a building that is light and airy with large glass segments. The Finnish Embassy’s architecture includes materials that are age-old and contemporary, with simplicity and transparency which captures the essence of Finnish culture. The building was the first embassy in the United States to receive the Environmental Protection Agency’s ENERGY STAR for superior energy efficiency, as well as the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design certificate for green buildings. The German embassy is undergoing substantial renovations to create highly sustainable facilities, embodying an emerging interest across the diplomatic community to showcase sustainable technologies and practices.

[CALL OUT BOX START] Many countries are incorporating sustainable design in their architecture and green facility renovations. The Greening Diplomacy Initiative was launched in 2009 to improve the environmental sustainability of the U.S. Department of State’s global operations and encouraged foreign embassies in Washington, DC to do the same. The D.C. Greening Embassies Forum established by the U.S. Department of State and Earth Day network has brought to-date over 75 diplomatic missions and international organizations to sign a pledge with the City and Mayor to commit to maintain their operations sustainably and to pursue environmental and efficiency goals that are consistent with those of the District of Columbia. [CALL OUT BOX ENDS]

Future Land Requirements

While there will continue to be variation in lot sizes due to the nature of the diplomatic relationship of the country with the United States, overall economy of the country, staff needs, and security requirements, we anticipate an increased demand for larger sites in the future. Larger chanceries that house a multitude of functions, increased parking requirements for employees, visitors, and guests attending special events, and increased security requirements that necessitate larger building setbacks will increasingly dominate land requirements and require larger parcels. The availability of sites that meet these needs within traditional diplomatic areas in the city is increasingly limited; and therefore, identification of additional areas zoned for matter-of-right chancery use may be necessary to accommodate future demand and relieve overconcentration in traditional diplomatic enclaves. The location of chanceries on sites outside of the matter-of-right are subject to the review of the District of Columbia BZA. In addition, the International Chancery Center is now fully developed and cannot accommodate any future demand for larger parcels.

Fortunately, the U.S. Department of State is currently preparing a master plan for a new foreign missions center on a 43.5-acre portion of the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center campus, which was closed in 2011 as a result of the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process. Similar to the International Chancery Center, it is envisioned that the master plan will divide the property into several development parcels that would be assigned to foreign governments, under long-term leases, for the construction of foreign mission facilities. The master plan estimates that the year

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 19 NCPC File No. CP01F

2032 represents the completion of the planned buildout of the foreign missions center over an approximately 20-year period.

Policies

Chancery Development

As the seat of our nation’s government and an important diplomatic center, Washington, DC should provide future development opportunities for new chanceries so that foreign missions will not have to relocate outside the boundaries of the nation’s capital.

Foreign missions in the nation’s capital make their chancery siting decisions for a variety of reasons, including proximity to other foreign missions and government offices, neighborhood character, access, cost, and security requirements. Future chancery development areas need to consider matter-of-right areas, compatible land uses with chancery development, adequate land for a variety of chancery sizes, and potential redevelopment and reuse opportunities. These areas should offer prominent sites that can accommodate the prestigious nature of the diplomatic mission, and meet the planning objectives of the local and federal government. These areas should be easily accessible by multiple modes of transportation, promote historic preservation and adaptive reuse, and strengthen the image and character of the capital. These areas should have special consideration to building heights and provide adequate and secure siting for foreign missions.

New chancery development should be encouraged at the proposed foreign mission center at the former Walter Reed campus. Opportunities to locate chanceries in areas of the District that have not traditionally been considered should also be promoted. In areas where chancery uses are already present, chancery development can strengthen neighborhood redevelopment, revitalization and economic development goals. The National Capital Planning Commission in collaboration with the U.S. Department of State and the District of Columbia government should continue to study future potential chancery development areas in the nation’s capital.

Future chancery development should occur where chancery functions are sensitive to the character and use patterns of the city’s neighborhoods and can contribute to the vibrant life of the nation’s capital. Many embassies already host events such as tours, exhibits, lectures, and performances that promote the country’s culture. There are also organizations dedicated to cultural programs that work with embassies to help celebrate Washington’s diplomatic community and add a rich and diverse culture in neighborhoods across the District of Columbia by planning and promoting larger festivals and events.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 20 NCPC File No. CP01F

CHANCERY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

The federal government should:

1. Encourage all foreign missions to locate chanceries, combined chancery/ambassadors’ residences, and chancery annexes in owned or leased facilities in the District of Columbia due to its stature as the established seat of the federal government. 2. Identify areas appropriate for the future location of foreign missions in the nation’s capital.

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

1. Site chanceries so that they satisfy their operational requirements to further the efficient conduct of diplomatic relations between the United States and other nations. 2. Site chanceries so that they add visual interest and character, contribute to cultural life, and promote diverse and lively communities.

Locating Chanceries

As the number of foreign missions in Washington increased throughout the twentieth century, different regulatory mechanisms were enacted to guide chancery location decisions. Over time, technology driven methodologies were created to guide future chancery locations, which resulted in land-use controversies in some of the residential neighborhoods in which chanceries are located.

One of the key challenges with locating chanceries is balancing the need to plan secure locations for diplomatic activities while being sensitive to residential neighborhoods. The 1/3 – 2/3 method developed in the 1983 Comprehensive Plan resulted in an increase in the concentration of chanceries in certain residential neighborhoods not suitable for chancery uses. As a result of indirect impacts to residential neighborhoods, the current Comprehensive Plan is moving away from the previous 1/3 – 2/3 method, instead, giving priority consideration for the location of chanceries in matter-of-right areas and the proposed foreign missions center—areas compatible for chancery uses. The location of chanceries outside of the matter-of-right areas are subject to the review of the District of Columbia BZA. The District of Columbia BZA makes their determination based on the set of six criteria as defined in the Act, which considers both the local and federal interests. This public decision-making process includes the input and participation of stakeholders, and attempts to balance the need for diplomatic activities with the concerns of residential neighborhoods

Currently the District of Columbia is in the process of a multi-year update to its zoning regulations. Throughout the District’s zoning update process, NCPC, the U.S. Department of State, and the District of Columbia government should work collaboratively to ensure that any proposed zoning regulations and maps reflect areas identified as appropriate for accommodating future foreign missions and meet planning objectives in a manner that is consistent with the Foreign Missions Act.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 21 NCPC File No. CP01F

Establish New Foreign Missions Center

The continuing demand for new chancery sites within the District of Columbia, the build-out of the International Chancery Center, and increasing private-sector land and development costs demonstrate the need to plan and establish an additional foreign missions center to assist in the accommodation of new and expanding foreign missions.

Foreign missions can be expected to relocate their chanceries to a new foreign missions center for several reasons: a range of office space alternatives; office space that is appropriate for chancery use; increased security requirements; proximity to other chanceries; and amenities that serve the diplomatic community.

Incentives. At the existing International Chancery Center, foreign missions lease land at a favorable rate. The lease price for the land was determined by the size of the property and the commensurate cost of building the infrastructure necessary to support the facility. Although it is unlikely that the same low-cost lease rates could be offered in a new foreign missions center, it is anticipated that land acquisition costs would be more favorable than in the open market.

Office Space Alternatives. Several foreign missions currently occupy small buildings or office space in commercial buildings. Several foreign missions have moved from small facilities to larger facilities as their missions expand and the range of services they provide increases. The demand for varying space requirements over time would be met in a foreign missions center that contains a wide range of buildings available to foreign missions for shorter lease periods than is currently available.

Appropriate Office Space. Chancery office space in a center can also fulfill the unique requirements of the diplomatic community without the need for expensive renovation, and without negatively affecting the character of the neighborhood. This might mean the construction of facilities with increased security and privacy requirements, or parking requirements appropriate to the vehicular traffic a foreign mission may be expected to generate.

Security. It may be easier to control access and provide increased security to chanceries located in a foreign missions center. In addition, facilities built exclusively for chancery use can be built to accommodate specific security standards.

Proximity. As was demonstrated by the success of the International Chancery Center, proximity to other foreign missions may create greater demand to relocate, and add to the prestige of a foreign missions center address.

Amenities. A large concentration of chanceries is likely to require amenities necessary to support the diplomatic community, such as restaurants, housing, retail, and back-office functions. As a foreign missions center is developed these amenities are likely to locate in the vicinity.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 22 NCPC File No. CP01F

Potential Development Area

In the foreseeable future the prime development opportunity for a large-scale foreign missions center is at the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center, located on 16th Street NW. As part of 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC), the Department of Defense closed the Walter Reed Army Medical Center campus in Washington, relocating its functions to facilities in Virginia and Maryland. After several years of considering the suitability of other locations throughout the District, the U.S. Department of State concluded that the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center site presents a viable option for a development of a foreign mission center of a similar size and scale to the existing International Chancery Center. Walter Reed campus located on 16th Street, one of most important streets in Washington, with visual and symbolic connection to the White House and the historic embassy district centered on Meridian Hill, making it an appropriate location for the development of a new international center.

The U.S. Department of State is currently in the process of developing a master plan for the northwest portion, approximately 43.5 acres, of the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center campus that will guide the long-term development of a foreign missions center. The master plan is being developed with consideration given to the District of Columbia government’s plan to redevelop the remainder of the campus with a mix of uses including office, institutional, residential, and retail. The new foreign missions center is expected to follow a similar long-term lease model as the existing International Chancery Center and may accommodate approximately 15 chanceries.

Former Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) – Existing Campus

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 23 NCPC File No. CP01F

LOCATING CHANCERIES POLICIES

The federal government is encouraged to:

1. Give priority consideration for the location of chancery facilities at the proposed foreign missions center. 2. Give priority consideration for the location of chancery facilities in matter-of-right areas.

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

1. Locate chanceries in locations where they would support neighborhood revitalization and economic development. 2. Locate chancery facilities in areas where adjacent existing and proposed land use and zoning are compatible (e.g., office, commercial, and mixed use), giving special care to protecting the integrity of residential areas. 3. Renovate, expand, or reuse an existing chancery to the extent consistent with the Foreign Missions Act. 4. Evaluate the availability of chancery sites in matter-of-right areas prior to considering sites within areas that are primarily residential in nature.

Chancery Facilities

Federal and local planners in Washington have the unique responsibility of balancing the needs of foreign missions with the responsibility of orderly growth and development of the community.

Consistency with federal and District planning initiatives and compliance with federal and local plans and regulations are primary criteria guiding planners’ decisions. Some of these criteria include historic preservation and revitalization goals that must be balanced against the needs of the foreign missions. Other criteria include transportation goals, sustainability guidelines, and the desire to protect the unique character of the city established by the 1791 L’Enfant Plan. Together, these criteria form a complementary set of guiding principles from which the most desirable locations can be recommended for future chancery facilities. Foreign missions may locate without regulatory review in matter-of-right areas, including all areas zoned commercial, industrial, waterfront, or mixed use.

The following policies provide general guidance in response to the identified needs of foreign missions and ensure foreign missions maintain chanceries in a way that enhances the unique qualities of the nation’s capital. When new chanceries are built or foreign missions relocate to other facilities, these policies should be applied to ensure that chancery development is compatible with the neighborhood and that the integrity of residential neighborhoods is maintained. As foreign missions relocate their chanceries for future needs, the policies should be applied to ensure that older existing chanceries are maintained so they do not negatively impact the neighborhood character.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 24 NCPC File No. CP01F

CHANCERY FACILITIES POLICIES

Urban Design

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

1. Protect the historic open space system of the L’Enfant Plan, and develop structures and landscaping that enhance and preserve its historic qualities. 2. Preserve and enhance the urban spaces, circles, squares, and plazas generated by the L’Enfant Plan and the unique views and vistas of the nation’s capital. 3. Protect Washington’s historic legacy by ensuring that buildings and landscapes are consistent with the grandeur of a great world capital. 4. Design chanceries to complement and be consistent with the height, size, and spatial orientation of existing buildings and surrounding neighborhood character. 5. Construct buildings and landscapes in a manner that demonstrate an appreciation for the architecture and landscape of the surroundings while expressing characteristics of native architectural styles of the corresponding nation. 6. Maintain existing chancery facilities so they do not negatively impact neighborhood character. 7. Include sustainable site and building design and pursue environmental and efficiency goals that are consistent with the District of Columbia, where possible.

Historic Preservation

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

1. Protect, preserve, and rehabilitate historic buildings when locating chanceries in them. 2. Ensure that chanceries located in historic districts are respectful of the architectural character established by the district. 3. Protect and enhance historic landscapes by ensuring that development adjacent to such landscapes promotes their preservation and rehabilitation. 4. Promote awareness of significant historic properties.

Access

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

1. Locate chanceries such that access is possible from multiple modes of transportation (walking, bicycling, public transportation, and automobile). 2. Consider urban design qualities, neighborhood characteristics, and traffic capacity in the configuration of vehicular access for diplomats, staff, and service and delivery vehicles. 3. Provide pedestrian access and offer safe, clean, and pleasant environments for pedestrians that include sidewalks and other amenities. 4. Provide adequate off-street parking on private property that accommodates employees, visitors, and special event participants.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 25 NCPC File No. CP01F

5. Minimize obstructions to public connections for local and regional trails, bikeways, pedestrian ways or open space networks where possible. 6. Minimize public space obstructions such as vehicular curb cuts and orient service areas away from major streets or locate them in an area that will be the least disruptive on the site. 7. Locate perimeter security elements within the building yard and not in public space where possible. Where necessary, perimeter security elements located in public space should be minimized, unobtrusive, and designed to relate to the surrounding context.

Open Space and Parkland

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

1. Preserve existing parks and open space. 2. Enhance and make accessible open space or parkland, including waterfront locations, when chanceries are located adjacent to it. 3. Construct landscapes that promote a beautiful and healthy environment by preserving the tree canopy and avoiding the destruction of mature trees. 4. Maintain and enhance the public space adjacent to chancery facilities so they do not negatively impact neighborhood character.

Ambassadors’ Residences

As the number of foreign missions in Washington has increased, so has the number of ambassadors’ residences. Like most chancery facilities, most ambassadors’ residences are under the ownership of the country that occupies them. The ambassadors’ residences are located in the District of Columbia, as well as in the Maryland and Northern Virginia suburbs immediately outside the District. Today, there are 78 ambassadors’ residences in Washington, DC.

The number of new residences established in the National Capital Region is expected to be the same as the number of foreign countries that establish new foreign missions. While the majority of residences are expected to locate in the District of Columbia, some are expected to locate in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs. Ambassadors’ residences are considered residential uses under the DC Zoning Regulations. As such, these residences are permitted to locate in all areas of the District of Columbia except areas zoned industrial.

AMBASSADORS’ RESIDENCE POLICIES

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

1. Locate ambassadors’ residences, as the official home of the ambassadors or heads of foreign missions, in the District of Columbia due to its status as the established seat of the federal government. 2. Locate ambassadors’ residences in all areas where compatible with residential uses within the District of Columbia, in all quadrants of the city.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 26 NCPC File No. CP01F

International Organizations

International organizations perform a wide range of functions and activities in the National Capital Region. A public international organization is designated or created pursuant to the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288-288f-2), treaty, or other international agreement where two or more foreign governments engage in some aspect of their conduct of international affairs. International organizations are an official mission that is supported by real property and personnel.10 In 1983, there were 23 international organizations located in the region; in 2002, there were 28. Today, there are 31 international organizations and 46 missions to the Organization of American States.11 Most international organizations are located in the downtown office district, particularly in the area west of the White House. Proximity to the State Department, the Treasury Department, and other international activities has been a key factor in the site selection of international organizations.

Most international organizations prefer high-density office and mixed-use areas that are convenient to federal offices and other organizations and foreign missions with which they interact. The majority of the organizations occupy leased office space. While national symbolism is typically not a factor for international organizations, the location and design of international organizations’ facilities can increase public awareness of the organization. Additionally, international organizations can contribute to the visual appearance of the nation’s capital by maintaining and restoring historic structures and locating on the historic street network of the L’Enfant Plan.

Under the Foreign Missions Act, the Secretary of State may extend the relevant provisions of the Act to an international organization. In that event, the references to chanceries in the preceding policies would also apply to the offices of that international organization. When subject to the Act, international organizations are permitted to locate as a matter-of-right in areas zoned waterfront, mixed use, and commercial. The location of international organizations outside of the matter-of- right areas are subject to the review of the District of Columbia BZA.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS POLICIES

International organizations in the National Capital Region are encouraged to:

1. Locate their principal offices in the District of Columbia, due to its status as the established seat of the federal government. 2. Locate such that access is possible from multiple modes of transportation and in a manner that permits the activities they house to function efficiently and to be compatible with the land uses surrounding them.

10 Foreign Missions Act 22 U.S.C. 4301-4316 11 U.S. Department of State, Office of Foreign Missions, data received November 2013.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 27 NCPC File No. CP01F

Appendix 2: Foreign Missions & International Organizations Element (Policies)

THE FOREIGN MISSIONS & INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ELEMENT POLICIES

CHANCERY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

The federal government should:

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

LOCATING CHANCERIES POLICIES

The federal government is encouraged to:

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 28 NCPC File No. CP01F

CHANCERY FACILITIES POLICIES

Urban Design

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

Historic Preservation

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

Access

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 29 NCPC File No. CP01F

Open Space and Parkland

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

AMBASSADORS’ RESIDENCE POLICIES

Foreign missions are encouraged to:

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS POLICIES

International organizations in the National Capital Region are encouraged to:

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 30 NCPC File No. CP01F

Appendix 3: Public Comments & Responses Below is a list of public comments received during the 60-day public comment period along with staff responses in italics.

Comments submitted by Bob (online comment portal) Received: May 29, 2013

“I highly recommend that if chanceries are encouraged to locate on the former Walter Reed site, the site NOT be zoned as a matter-of-right location so that chanceries are subject to review and not be tempted to destroy the historic fabric of the campus.”

The U.S. Department of State will obtain approximately 43.5 acres of the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center property from the Army, a transfer of property between federal agencies. The portion of the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center proposed as a foreign missions center site would not be zoned as matter-of-right. The U.S. Department of State in coordination with the National Capital Planning Commission is currently master planning for the long-term development of a foreign mission center which will address future development including placement of construction, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, parking within the property boundaries, open space in and around the campus, required setbacks, historic properties, natural and scenic resources, noise, and lighting. As part of the master planning, an Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, which will evaluate the potential impacts to historic and cultural resources. The Department of State is currently undergoing Section 106 consultation pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(a). Any future development of chanceries built on the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center proposed as a foreign missions center would be subject to National Capital Planning Commission review and approval.

Comments submitted by Christopher H. Collins, Holland & Knight Received: July 1, 2013

“Foreign Mission & International Organization Policies, Locating Chanceries (pg. 14, Policy 4) In Section 206(b) of the Foreign Missions Act, Congress established where foreign missions can locate as a matter or right, and where they can locate subject to FMBZA review. Congress did not state a priority or preference for either matter-of-right locations or for FMBZA review locations. Accordingly, the Element should not include such a priority as an official federal policy.”

While Congress may not have stated a preference, from a planning perspective, matter of right areas for chanceries are areas zoned for commercial, industrial, mixed-use, and waterfront. We encourage the federal government to give preference to matter or right areas in order to help protect residential neighborhoods from intrusion of office uses and associated impacts related to noise, traffic, etc.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 31 NCPC File No. CP01F

“Foreign Mission & International Organization Policies, Chancery Facilities, Historic Preservation (pg. 16, Policy 4) and Access (Pg. 16, Policy 5) In Section 206(d) of the Foreign Missions Act, Congress established the six criteria to be applied by the FMBZA when reviewing a foreign mission application. The first criterion is “the international obligation of the United States to facilitate the provision of adequate and secure facilities for foreign missions in the Nation’s Capital.” Adopting an official federal policy that foreign missions should open up their properties for public use and enjoyment seems at odds with this international obligation, as well as with the ever- increasing need for security at diplomatic facilities both in the US and around the world. The Element should not include this as an official policy.”

Staff agrees with the importance of providing adequate and secure facilities for foreign missions in the Nation’s Capital and has revised and/or removed the applicable policies.

Comments submitted by Alice Kelly, Policy, Planning and Sustainability Administration, District Department of Transportation Received: July 3, 2013

“Foreign Mission & International Organization Policies, Locating Chanceries (pg. 14, all policies in Foreign missions are encouraged to) All foreign missions should be encouraged to reuse existing facilities. When foreign missions move out of an area, such as the 16th Street corridor, where they have historically been located, because of the size of many of these historic buildings, they often sit vacant for years. These vacant properties can actually contribute to neighborhood blight. In addition, foreign missions should be encouraged to work through the Office of Foreign Missions, U.S. Department of State to understand and comply with the District of Columbia’s regulations concerning construction on private property and use of public space.

Proposed changes to the section stating that Foreign missions are encouraged to: Delete proposed 1 ‐ recent history has shown that chanceries do not necessarily support neighborhood revitalization and economic development. Insert instead: 1. Renovate, expand, or reuse an existing chancery to the extent consistent with the Foreign Missions Act. [Note: this should be given a higher priority and listed first] 2. Familiarize themselves with local regulations governing construction in private space and the management of abutting public land. 3. To the extent possible, given reasonable safety and security needs, cooperate with local officials to ensure that construction and landscape plans conform to all relevant regulations. This cooperation could include submission of plans, for review and approval, by the appropriate governing bodies. 4. Same as proposed 5. Same as proposed”

Pursuant to the Foreign Missions Act, all foreign missions are obligated to notify the Department of State prior to any acquisition, use, sale or other disposition of real property

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 32 NCPC File No. CP01F

in the United States. This includes purchase, resale, lease, alteration, renovation, addition, or change in the purpose for which real property is used by a foreign mission.

Staff does not agree with the point of deleting Policy 1 and the Elements in the Comprehensive Plan does not prioritize policies. Staff appreciates the recommended policies.

“Foreign Mission & International Organization Policies, Ambassadors’ Residence (pg. 17, all policies in Foreign missions are encouraged to) AMBASSADOR’S RESIDENCE POLICIES should include access criteria such as that included for foreign missions. Proposed change (insert after 2): 6. Locate Ambassador’s residence such that access is possible from multi‐modal transportation options (walking, bicycling, public transportation and automobile). 7. Consider urban design qualities, neighborhood characteristics, and traffic capacity in the configuration of vehicular access. 8. Provide adequate off‐street parking on private property that accommodates employees, visitors and special event participants.”

Staff appreciates the recommended policies.

“Foreign Mission & International Organization Policies, International Organization (pg. 18, all policies in Foreign missions are encouraged to) INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION POLICIES should include access criteria such as that included for foreign missions. Proposed change (insert after 2) 3. Locate principal office such that access is possible from multi‐modal transportation options (walking, bicycling, public transportation and automobile). 4. Consider urban design qualities, neighborhood characteristics, and traffic capacity in the configuration of vehicular access. 5. Provide adequate off‐street parking on private property that accommodates employees, visitors and special event participants.”

Staff appreciates the recommended policies.

Comments submitted by Lindsley Williams Received: July 3, 2013

“First and foremost, the adopted document should be one that rests on a solid review of whether zoning regulations established by the Zoning Commission, with review by NCPC, apply to Federally‐owned or Federally‐controlled sites. Whatever the outcome, the text should reflect it. The draft spoke of giving “priority consideration for the location of chancery facilities in matter‐of‐right areas.” If the area is unzoned, it’s not subject to zoning at all. If unzoned, then the priority should be something like “areas where the Commission reviews development plans in lieu of zoning or where chancery use under zoning is matter‐

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 33 NCPC File No. CP01F

of‐right.” As a schematic matter, perhaps the Commission should develop a map of the areas in which chancery use is favored, be it areas zoned (as in “Embassy Row” along Massachusetts Avenue from Dupont Circle to the Naval Observatory) or within the Van Ness area or the western portion of the Walter Reed site.”

The Element has been updated parallel with the review of the proposed zoning changes. Staff has revised the applicable policies to consider areas where zoning does not apply.

“The overall introduction should add the words “current and future” to the first provision of what “Foreign mission are encouraged to” do when siting chanceries.”

Staff appreciates the recommendation.

“As to the order of where foreign missions are encouraged to locate, it seems that what was first in the draft (“support neighborhood revitalization”), however laudable, would fall lower in the rankings if there is a priority to locate in Federally owned/controlled sites, those where the use is matter of right, or in areas designated in a possible map (as per above).”

The Elements in the Comprehensive Plan does not prioritize policies.

“Within the draft’s “Urban Design” portion, one part calls for implementing “sustainable site and building design on a precinct level.” The term precinct is unclear in the context. If the Department of State is encouraging sustainability, it would improve the policy if some details of what this means were added, be they mandates or words of encouragement.”

Staff revised the language in the policy for clarity purposes.

“Within the draft’s “Historic District” portion, the part calling for “[public?] access to campuses” may be challenging given security concerns and overall diplomatic reciprocity issues; maybe it should be dropped or be nothing more demanding than “encouraging” such access.”

Staff agrees with the importance of providing adequate and secure facilities for foreign missions in the Nation’s Capital and has revised and/or removed the applicable policies.

“Under the “Access” section, the scope should be expanded to “vehicular access for diplomats, staff, service and delivery vehicles.””

Staff agrees with the importance of providing adequate and secure facilities for foreign missions in the Nation’s Capital and has revised and/or removed the applicable policies.

“I would further suggest that the term “chancery” note that the use can, but on an optional basis, include space within which the foreign mission might want to hold public or private events to exhibit, portray, demonstrate, display products made there, arts produced there,

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 34 NCPC File No. CP01F

resources extracted there, and all manner of arts. This would be in keeping with one role of foreign missions, and should not trigger a zoning or use exception as if it appears akin to “exhibit space” or a “public hall.””

Staff has revised language.

“Finally, and not least important, I hope the Commission will reach out to those from Cultural Tourism to explore ways in which the adopted element might contain language that notes and gives added “Federal” legitimacy to activities within the sites the policy covers and the overall region that promote international exchange of the world’s diverse cultures.”

Staff has revised narrative to include discussion about cultural activities. Currently we have a policy under Chancery Development that encourages chancery sites that contribute to cultural life.

Comments submitted by Lindsley Williams Received: July 4, 2013

“On the question of Walter Reed/Van Ness being “zoned” or being “unzoned” (arising from Federal ownership, etc.), if the outcome is discretionary, then I’d prefer to see the land zoned. Zoning can, and should for those areas for sure, provide that there would be no question of the right to foreign missions there “by right” — no public review by any kind of zoning board such as the FMBZA. But zoning could frame the development allowed by yard, height, and density provisions in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan (both Federal and District elements).

But, zoning could also clarify what else could be located within that is not Federally owned and operated. For example, a business could be successful in these locations if it offered goods and services that foreign missions and their visitors need. This could be as simple as passport photos, but also include higher end services such as visa processing. Or “eating or drinking establishments”, “convenience stores.” Etc.

For these areas — indeed all of the District of Columbia — I would think the path forward would be to apply zoning to all land, including that which is now “unzoned” Federal land, but instead of “automatically unzoning” land as it becomes “Federal” change the operation so that instead of “unzoning” provide that DC zoning “would not apply.” This preserves Federal sovereignty but keeps zoning in place to guide uses that are non‐Federal while in formal Federal ownership and indicates the zoning that would exist if the land ceased being Federal at some later time.”

Zoning does not apply to the proposed Walter Reed foreign missions center.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 35 NCPC File No. CP01F

Comments submitted by Committee of 100 Received: July 5, 2013

Executive Director’s Recommendation (Page 1)

“Public Review of Final Draft The Executive Director’s Recommendation begins by noting that the staff has completed an initial update (emphasis added) and, after the 60 day public review period, the staff will update and revise the policies based on input and updated information received and will then bring the updated Element back to the Commission for final adoption (Page 1). We note that in the following “Draft Update & Policies” there are eight places with the wording, “This section will be revised to reflect updated information to be provided before the final draft”. Since this is not a “complete draft”, and so much material is to be updated and added later, we believe some additional time should be provided for public review and comment before the final draft goes back to the Commission for approval.”

Prior to the release of the draft Foreign Missions and International Organizations Element, we did not receive updated data from U.S. Department of State, Office of Foreign Missions. The data provided was an update to the number of countries with foreign missions in Washington, DC and the number of existing facilities (chanceries, ambassadors’ residences, and international organizations). The data received from the Office of Foreign Missions did not warrant changes to the policies.

IV. Appendix I-Foreign Missions and International Organizations Element: Draft Update Narrative and Policies

“Introduction (Page 6) The Committee of 100 believes that the opening goal statement (page 6) is a good one, but we suggest that one or more additional sentences be added to indicate the need to avoid or limit adverse impacts of foreign missions on residential neighborhoods and provide substantial and appropriate protection to existing urban fabric and residential areas.”

Staff has revised the opening goal statement.

“The Economic and Fiscal Impact of Foreign Missions on the Nation’s Capital (Page 8) On page 8 there is a brief paragraph about where foreign missions are located and the benefits they bring. The Committee of 100 suggests that, without going into undue detail, there be a fuller discussion and tabulation of the major neighborhoods where embassies are located and the impacts, both positive and negative. For example, the Kalorama neighborhood has a major concentration of embassies but that is not mentioned here (it is noted on page 10). A tabulation of neighborhoods where foreign missions are located, and the number of such missions, would be useful and would increase understanding of where foreign missions are located and their impact.”

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 36 NCPC File No. CP01F

Staff appreciates the recommendations. The Economic and Fiscal Impact of Foreign Missions on the National Capital section was intended to be a call-out box in the Element. The neighborhood discussion has been moved to a more appropriate location in this report to discuss foreign missions and their impact to neighborhoods.

“There is a brief discussion of a foreign mission’s role in providing a cultural function in promoting that country’s culture in Washington and in the United States (bottom of page 8 and top of page 9). At the June 11 public meeting on this Element, Cheryl Crowell of Cultural Tourism DC gave a presentation that highlighted the important and growing cultural role of foreign missions, and the importance of those activities to the overall cultural life of Washington. We believe that role and how it can be enhanced should be elaborated in this section, and encouraged in appropriate policies.”

Staff has revised narrative to include discussion about cultural activities. Currently we have a policy under Chancery Development that encourages chancery sites that contribute to cultural life.

“Foreign Missions Since 2004 (Page 9) This section has information about the number of foreign missions in Washington in 2004 and today (Page 9). However, the number of missions does not seem to add up, and it is difficult to know what types of facilities are being discussed. This is one of the sections where it is noted that revisions will be made to reflect updated information before the final draft. The Committee of 100 suggests that clarifying definitions and arranging numbers for 2004 and 2013 in a tabular format would greatly improve understanding of these changes.”

Staff has revised this section to reflect DOS updated numbers.

“Where Foreign Missions May Locate (Page 10) This is a critical section and also includes the map on page 11. The Committee of 100 believes that additional information about the Foreign Missions Act and the operation and impact of the Diplomatic Overlay District is needed. The D.C. Office of Planning, with the involvement of other agencies, is currently undertaking a major program to revise the D.C. Zoning Regulations. This is a work in progress and the final document has not yet been submitted to the District Council. However, there should be some indication of the changes that are being proposed that would effect in some way the location of foreign missions as well as the means by which consistency between D.C. Zoning and federal intentions will be achieved.”

Staff has revised the narrative in the Element to address the proposed zoning changes.

“The map on page 11, “Where Foreign Missions May Locate” uses two colors, brown to indicate “Matter-of-right areas” and dark blue to indicate “Other areas where foreign missions may locate”. A note indicates that the map will be updated to reflect updated information. We assume the map is technically correct, based primarily on zoning districts. However, in terms of understanding where foreign missions may actually locate in the

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 37 NCPC File No. CP01F

future, we find the map is unintentionally misleading. For example, the large brown area at the southern end of the city is actually the Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant and the D.C. Village (District Government) area. Other brown areas include the railroad yards in Northeast and other railroad lines, as well as major commercial areas of the city. “Other areas where foreign missions may locate”, shown in blue, include university campuses, hospitals and other institutions where it is not likely that foreign missions would locate. We suggest that, at the least, there should be a note indicating these conceptual problems with this map. Ideally, the map should be redone to provide a more realistic overview of where foreign missions are likely to locate in the future.”

Staff has removed the ‘Where Foreign Missions May Locate’ to address future changes to the zoning regulations.

“This is also an important section and includes the map on page 12. We believe some additional background discussion of the International Center Act (1968), the site, and its development would be useful. Most Washingtonians refer to the International Chancery Area as being located at Van Ness. Information on its boundaries, overall design and timing of development would be helpful, as well as the economic benefits that the International Chancery Area has brought to the Van Ness neighborhood. This data would be extremely beneficial and meaningful in light of the intention to develop the former Walter Reed site.”

Staff has revised narrative to include further discussion of the International Chancery Center.

“We also suggest that the map on Page 12 be expanded north to the northern tip of the District so that the location of the proposed Foreign Missions Center on the Walter Reed site can be shown and the “Northwest quadrant” can be made clear. The cluster of foreign missions in the existing International Chancery Area should be outlined and identified. Using this map, and a tabulation of foreign mission locations by neighborhood, would aid public understanding of the overall location pattern. Since the planning for the Walter Reed Site for a chancery center is moving ahead, the status of that work and the general schedule should be made clear.”

Staff has revised the map.

“Chancery Development (Page 16) The Committee of 100 generally agrees with the discussion in this section but believes some additional emphasis is needed on avoiding or limiting adverse impacts of foreign missions on the areas where they are located, especially in residential neighborhoods.”

Staff has revised the narrative in this section.

“Chancery Development Policies (Page 16) These policies, which are not proposed for revision, generally seem satisfactory. We suggest adding at the end a new policy about avoiding adverse impacts on neighborhoods.”

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 38 NCPC File No. CP01F

Staff appreciates the recommendation.

“Locating Chanceries (Page 17) As previously noted, the discussion of how “chancery development can strengthen neighborhood development, revitalization and economic development goals” (page 17) should also note the need to avoid adverse impacts. Here and elsewhere we have some questions about the real impact of foreign missions on economic development in the areas where they are located. While there is clearly an overall economic development impact of foreign missions, their impact on economic development and vitality of neighborhoods in which they are located may be overstated in some cases. Are the foreign missions purchasing goods and services in the neighborhood, or as highly specialized institutional users, are they not more likely to be purchasing goods and services in bulk from providers throughout the region? How much benefit actually accrues to the local economy from foreign missions?

Additionally, while foreign missions rightly belong in the capital city and often add luster, renown and beauty, the day to day business and special functions can have impacts, including but not limited to parking restrictions and set up and dismantling for events, typically involving multiple delivery trucks. These are neighborhood costs which are not adequately addressed and accounted for within the Element at this time.”

Staff appreciates the recommendation and have revised the narrative in this section.

“Establish New Foreign Missions Center (Page 17) Now that planning for the Walter Reed site is moving ahead, the text should be more specific about that site (while not necessarily going into too much detail). Located on 16th Street, one of the most important streets in Washington, with visual and symbolic connection to the White House and the historic embassy district centered on Meridian Hill, the choice of the Walter Reed campus, seems particularly appropriate for the development of a new international center. The Committee of 100 has been involved throughout the Section 106 process, the city’s Small Area Plan and most recently (June, 2013) in commenting on the Department of State’s Foreign Missions Center Plan and Its Effects on Historic Properties. We look forward to continued involvement as the plans for this historic property evolve.

The existing International Center at Van Ness was, in effect, a first attempt at this kind of international center. It seems desirable to make some design and environmental improvements at the Walter Reed site. These would include creating an overall sense of place, relating to the future private and public development on the eastern portion of the site, encouraging porosity between the commercial development and the diplomatic functions insofar as possible, and maintaining an attractive border around the site (especially on views from 16th Street, Alaska Avenue and Fern Street, NW). The Chancery Complex should generally be open to the public (except for security arrangements) and designed so that the overall landscape of the site can be seen and appreciated.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 39 NCPC File No. CP01F

The historical building and landscape features of the Walter Reed campus need to be respected. The general description on page 18 speaks of mid and high-rise chanceries which is a large concern. High rise structures, especially at this location, are problematic in not respecting the historic character of the campus, surrounding scale and residential uses or the 16th Street corridor. We believe significant additional discussion of the vision intended is needed.”

This section is more broadly discussed for future foreign missions center. The following section has further discussion regarding the proposed Walter Reed foreign missions center.

“Potential Development Area (Page 19) Since planning for that area is moving forward, it would be helpful to rearrange sections and wording so that the plans and policies for the Walter Reed site are clear.”

Staff appreciates the recommendation.

“Locating Chancery Policies (Page 20) Are there any other sites where NCPC would recommend for a future chancery center, looking beyond Walter Reed? Please see also our comments found passim about avoiding adverse impacts.”

At this time, we have not identified a location for a future chancery center besides Walter Reed.

“Chancery Facilities Policies (Page 21) We believe the existing policies on “Land Use and Zoning” are strong and clear and should be retained. Zoning provides protections for existing residents, businesses and land uses and those protections are weakened by deleting the Land Use and Zoning Policies.”

The existing policies on Land Use and Zoning have been incorporated into the Chancery Siting location.

“For Policy 7 under Urban Design, the meaning here of “precinct level” should be clarified. Under Open Space and Parkland, the reference in the first policy to “parkland” should be clarified.”

Staff has revised language.

“Ambassadors’ Residences (Page 22) Additional information on the number and general locations of Ambassadors’ Residences would be useful.”

Staff has revised language.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 40 NCPC File No. CP01F

“Ambassadors’ Residence Policies (Page 23) We believe there needs to be a stronger policy statement about having ambassadors' residences compatible with the residential neighborhood, while recognizing security requirements.”

Staff has revised language.

“International Organizations (Page 23) Note that this section is to be revised to reflect updated information. We suggest that the international organizations be listed with information on where they are located and the employment they provide. A location map of international organizations should be added.”

Staff appreciates the recommendation.

“International Organizations Policies (Page 24) We suggest adding a policy to encourage international organizations to provide some access to the public in order to provide information about their activities. Many existing international organizations already do this.”

Staff appreciates the recommendation.

“Next Steps The Committee of 100 on the Federal City appreciates the opportunity to comment on the partial draft of the Foreign Missions and International Organizations Element. We look forward to seeing the final draft when the additional information is added, and request that the National Capital Planning Commission allow additional time for public review when that updated information is added.”

Staff is requesting that the Commission take an action on the final adoption of the updated policies and to hold the policies in abeyance until the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital have been adopted at which time the policies will go into effect. The final draft will be available for review prior to the Commission Meeting.

Comments submitted by Cultural Tourism Received: July 5, 2013

“On page 6, the Executive Director’s Recommendation notes that the policies of the Element will help ensure that foreign missions “contribute to the city.” On page 7, the document notes that, as buildings, the chanceries, chancery annexes and ambassadors’ residences “contribute to the vibrancy and diversity of Washington’s neighborhoods and add significantly to the city’s visual interest and character.” On Page 8, the document notes that certain aspects of international diplomacy, including “cultural relationships have taken on added significance.” Later on the same page and on page 9, the document notes that “Increasingly, foreign missions use their chancery facilities as event spaces to foster

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 41 NCPC File No. CP01F

intergovernmental relation at the political, economic and cultural level.” Many foreign missions now hose cultural events such as art exhibits, concerts, and films, or sponsor special events to increase awareness of their country and to promote trade and tourism” (emphases added).

While these points are referenced in the draft element, there is nothing in the proposed Policies that encourage these kinds of activities. Please consider adding on Page 21 under the heading of “Chancery Facilities Policies,” perhaps under the subheading of “Access” or in a separate subheading, language that encourages foreign missions to work with non- profit organizations such as Cultural Tourism DC to open their doors to the public for art exhibits, concerts, films and other special events in order to increase public awareness of their countries and cultures.”

Staff appreciates the recommendation and has revised narrative to include discussion about cultural activities. Currently we have a policy under Chancery Development that encourages chancery sites that contribute to cultural life.