EMBASSY OF AUSTRALIA 1601 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.

Proposed Chancery Building Evaluation of Compatibility August 2017

Prepared for Embassy of Australia

Board of ZoningBoard Adjustment of Zoning Adjustment District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia CASE NO.19557 Case No. 19557 EXHIBIT NO.41D 41D Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Purpose and Methodology 3

Existing Embassy of Australia 4

Sixteenth Street Historic District Overview 7

Foreign Missions Board of Zoning Adjustment (FMBZA) Criteria 9

Analysis of Proposed Design 11

Proposed Design Meets D.C. and Federal Standards 22

Conclusion 22

References Cited 23 Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 3

PURPOSE AND METHODOLOGY The evaluation presented in this report was undertaken to provide a formal assessment of the compatibility of the proposed design for the new Embassy of Australia with the character of the Sixteenth Street Historic District and the Massachusetts Avenue “” corridor. Specifically, the evaluation focuses on whether the proposed design meets the test of compatibility with its historic environs. EHT Traceries based its evaluation of the plans on the design principles included in the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, prepared by the D.C. Historic Preservation Office (HPO) and adopted by the Historic Preservation Review Board. The HPO publication “New Construction in Historic Districts” identifies twelve (12) design principles to be considered when evaluating the compatibility of new buildings planned within existing historic districts. These design principles are: setback, height, orientation, materials, scale, color, proportion, roof shape, rhythm, details and ornamentation, massing, and landscape features. Also considered is the compatibility of the design with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 4

EXISTING EMBASSY OF AUSTRALIA

Location The existing Embassy of Australia at 1601 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. is located in Square 181, Lot 162 (Figure 1). The 0.7-acre lot is bound by Massachusetts Avenue and on the south and Sixteenth Street on the east. A public alley separates the building from the Embassy of Philippines on the west.

Figure 1. Map showing the location of the Chancery of Australia (D.C. Atlas)

General Description Completed in 1969, the Embassy is a seven- story Tennessee marble-clad, concrete, glass, and steel office building (Figure 2). The building is rectangular in plan. An extension, which matched the original, was added to the northern half of the site in 1977. The building features a flat roof with a mechanical penthouse setback from the building line, which has no parapet, and an underground parking facility. Both the main pedestrian entrance and the entrance to the parking level are located in the south (Massachusetts Avenue) elevation. In addition, a small landscaped plaza featuring concrete planters is located between the building and the Massachusetts Avenue sidewalk. Architecturally, the Embassy Figure 2. Aerial image of the current chancery (Google) is characteristic of the latter phase of the International Style. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 5

Site History The initial development of the site dates to the late nineteenth century. In 1881, U. S. Treasury Secretary William Windom constructed a three-story brick dwelling on the property, the legal description of which was Lot 141 within John P. Olmstead’s Subdivision of Lots within Square 181 (Figure 3).1 Windom’s residence is depicted on Hopkins’ 1887 map (Figure 4). This residence is later depicted on the 1959 Sanborn map, at which time it was owned by the “Catholic Daughters of America” (Figure 5).

Figure 3. View north from Scott Circle, with the Windom residence to the left of the Scott Statue, 1888 (Historical Society of Washington, D.C.)

Figures 4-5. Detail from 1887 Hopkins map (left), and 1960 Sanborn map (right) (Library of Congress)

1 D.C. Building Permit 1362, June 6, 1881. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 6

The Australian government purchased the property in 1963 from the Court District of Columbia Club, Inc.2 The Embassy was constructed between 1967 and 1969.3 It was designed by the Melbourne architectural firm of Bates, Smart & McCutcheon, and was built by the George Hyman Construction Company (Figure 6).4

Figure 6. View northwest from Scott Circle, showing new chancery, 1969 (Historical Society of Washington, D.C.)

2 D.C. Recorder of Deeds, Liber 12052, Folio 401, recorded August 16, 1963. 3 “Lord Casey to Visit,” Evening Star, May 4, 1969. 4 “New Offices for The Land From Down Under,” Evening Star, June 20, 1969. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 7

SIXTEENTH STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERVIEW Boundaries: Generally including structures fronting on Sixteenth Street, NW from Lafayette Square to (Figure 7).

Character: Grand avenue of buildings along one of the most important streets in the Federal City; buildings varied in type and style, but related in conception, scale, materials, and quality of design; includes row houses, large detached houses, churches, small apartment buildings, monumental apartments, office buildings, and institutional buildings; styles include Italianate, Queen Anne, Richardsonian Romanesque, Beaux Arts, Colonial Revival, and Art Moderne; many of Washington’s most prominent architects are represented.

Resource Count: Contains approximately 147 contributing buildings dating from 1815-1959.

Individual D.C. Landmarks:

• St. John’s Church (1816, Benjamin Henry Latrobe) • Ashburton House, St. John’s Parish House (1836) • Carlton Hotel (1930, Mihran Mesrobian) • Russian Embassy (1910, Wyeth & Sullivan) • Lt. General Winfield Scott Statue, Scott Circle (1874, Henry Kirke Brown) • Daniel Webster Memorial (1900, Gaetano Trentanove) • Samuel Hahnemann Memorial (1900, Charles Henry Niehaus) • Carnegie Institution of Washington, Administration Building (1910, Carrère & Hastings) • Robert Simpson Woodward House (1895, William L. Conley) • Scottish Rite Temple (1911, John Russell Pope) • Congressional Club (1914, George Oakley Totten)

Period of Significance: 1815-1959.

Landmark Designation: DC listing November 8, 1964 (preliminary identification), designated March 9, 1977; National Register of Historic Places listing August 25, 1978; DC designation expanded January 18, 2007 to extend south of Scott Circle (effective March 11, 2007); NR listing expanded July 11, 2007.5

The Embassy of Australia lies outside of the period of significance and is a non-contributing resource within the Sixteenth Street Historic District. In addition, the chancery is located at the southern end of “Embassy Row,” a portion of Massachusetts Avenue running from , N.W. to Scott Circle, as described in the Foreign Missions and International Organizations Element of theComprehensive Plan for the National Capital. It is one of a number of embassy chanceries along Massachusetts Avenue between Scott Circle and .

5 D.C. Office of Planning, Historic Preservation Office, District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites (Washington: HPO, 2009), 146. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 8

Figure 7. Sixteenth Street Historic District with Australian Chancery and Individual D.C. Landmarks within the district annotated (D.C. Office of Planning) Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 9

FOREIGN MISSIONS BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT (FMBZA) CRITERIA

22 U.S. Code SEC. 4306 - Location of Foreign Missions in the District of Columbia The location, placement, or expansion of embassies and chanceries in the District of Columbia is subject to the regulations contained in the Foreign Missions Act of 1982 (U.S. Code, Title 22, Chapter 53, Section 4306). Pursuant to the Act, such changes in the disposition of real property are subject to review by the Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA). Foreign Mission cases are heard before the Foreign Mission Board of Zoning Adjustment (FMBZA), which is composed of the members of the BZA with the Executive Director of the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC).6 Furthermore, Section d (Criteria for Determination) of the Foreign Missions Act of 1982, Item 2 (Historic Preservation) states that:

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.7

Compatibility with D.C. and Federal Regulations Permit applications for new construction in the District of Columbia, including foreign embassies and chanceries, must be reviewed in accordance with both D.C. and federal historic preservation regulations and guidelines. The Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978 (D.C. Law 2-144, as amended), Section 8 (New Construction) requires that the Mayor review all permits for proposed new construction in D.C. historic districts. Prior to making a finding on the permit application, theMayor may refer the application to the Historic Preservation Review Board for recommendation, but must make the finding within 120 days of such referral. Following this review, the permit will be issued unless the Mayor finds that the “design of the building and the character of the historic district or historic landmark are incompatible.” The term “design” is defined as “exterior architectural features including height, appearance, texture, color, and nature of materials.” Section 8 of the law was amended in 2006 to allow the Mayor to approve a design deemed incompatible if the project is determined to be “of special merit.”8

Design Principles for New Buildings and Sites The “D.C. Historic Preservation Guidelines,” adopted by the Historic Preservation Review Board, includes the section, “New Construction in Historic Districts,” which provides a framework for evaluating the compatibility of a proposed design. This document outlines four design principles for new buildings and sites:

1. “The key to the design of a new building that enhances the existing environment is its compatibility with neighboring buildings.”

2. “Compatibility is achieved through careful attention to the following design principles of building:”

6 D.C. Office of Zoning, Interactive Zoning Information System, “Initiating/Managing a BZA Case,” https://dcoz.dc.gov/ page/initiatingmanaging-bza-case (accessed May 23, 2017). 7 United States Congress, Public Law 97-241, Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse, Chapter 53, Authorities Relating to the Regulation of Foreign Missions, U.S. Statutes at Large 96 (1982): 286, codified at U.S. Code 22, § 4306. 8 District of Columbia, Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978, D.C. Law 2-144, as amended, § 8 (New Construction), codified at D.C. Code, § 6-1107. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 10

a) Setback b) Orientation c) Scale d) Proportion e) Rhythm f) Massing g) Height h) Materials i) Color j) Roof Shape k) Details and Ornamentation l) Landscape Features

3. “Compatibility does not mean exact duplication the existing building or environment. A new building should be seen as a product of its own time.”

4. “To reproduce a historic building, or to copy exactly a style from the past creates a false sense of history. By relating to the existing buildings and the environment, but being of its own time, a new building shows a district’s evolution just as the existing buildings show its past.”9

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 authorized the Secretary of the Interior to develop professional standards for the preservation of historic properties. The resulting Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, first released in 1977, offer four distinct approaches to the treatment of historic properties: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction. Of these, the Standards for Rehabilitation contain language that is relevant to new construction, stating that:

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.10

9 District of Columbia, Office of Planning, District of Columbia Historic Preservation Guidelines, “New Construction in Historic Districts,” https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/publication/attachments/DC%20New%20 Construction%20Reformatted.pdf (accessed April 17, 2017). 10 Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Technical Preservation Services, “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties,” https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards.htm (accessed April 17, 2017). Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 11

ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DESIGN

General Description The proposed building occupies a typical floor area of approximately 22,965 square feet. The building will contain three basement levels and six above-grade levels, including a second-floor mezzanine. Polygonal in outline, the proposed building’s main entrance is oriented to the south. Its proposed height is 89 feet, 9.5 inches to the main glazed atrium roof (88 feet to the building parapet) and 98 feet, 4 inches to the penthouse roof. Thoroughly contemporary in appearance, the facade features grey tinted glass cladding offset by vertical treated metal “blades,” of a reddish color. The porte-cochère will feature metal cladding with clear glass infills, and the main entrance canopy will be sheathed in zinc or a similar material. This exterior palette is intended to create a variety of textures, while presenting a natural color scheme of reflected sky and earthen tones (Figures 7-9).

Figures 7-9. Exterior renderings, looking north (top), northeast (middle), and west (bottom). Street trees have been removed for clarity. (Bates Smart Architects) Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 12

Landscape The landscape design (Figure 10) features a mix of natural stone and a range of plant and tree species. A bluestone-paved forecourt extends to the south of the main entrance and a water feature runs along a portion of the south elevation. In addition, a bluestone-clad security barrier, screened byazaleas, extends a minimum of sixteen feet away from the building edge along Sixteenth Street and a portion of Massachusetts Avenue. A six-and-a-half-foot wide perimeter path paved in bluestone will run between the building and the security barrier. Corresponding to key internal spaces, “Art Courtyards” are interspersed along the Sixteenth Street frontage. These courtyards will each showcase Australian art and cultural material. A bluestone-clad wall runs along the building’s north elevation, stepping up as a green wall to serve as a backdrop for the viewing axis through the building. Proposed street trees include four Zelkova trees planted along Massachusetts Avenue, and eight Oak trees along Sixteenth Street.

Figure 10. Landscape plan with key elements annotated (Bates Smart)

Assessment of Compatibility As stated in the D.C. Historic Preservation Guidelines, the “key to the design of a new building that enhances the existing environment is its compatibility with neighboring buildings.” While the Preservation Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards provide the critical framework for this analysis of compatibility, the Sixteenth Street Historic District provides the architectural context. As discussed, the district contains contributing resources dating from 1815-1959. While the proposed Embassy is compatible Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 13

with certain design attributes inherent to the nineteenth and early twentieth-century buildings within the district, the design, heavily influenced by the Modern Movement, primarily demonstrates compatibility with those contributing resources constructed between 1950-1959, the significance of which has increased in recent years with the publication of studies such asDC Modern: A Context for Modernism in the District of Columbia, 1945-1976.11 Considering the full spectrum of architectural resources within the historic district’s period of significance, therefore, and applying the design principles outlined in the Preservation Guidelines, EHT Traceries has evaluated the proposed design for the new Embassy of Australia, and has concluded that it is compatible with the overall character of the Sixteenth Street Historic District.

An assessment of the compatibility of the proposed facade design follows:

SETBACK: Located at the intersection of Sixteenth Street and Massachusetts Avenue at Scott Circle, the Australian Embassy building faces these two principal thoroughfares, sited contiguously with the east and south building lines. The siting is consistent and therefore compatible with that historically established throughout the Sixteenth Street Historic District (Figure 11).

Figure 11. Plan with building setback annotated in red (Bates Smart, EHT Traceries)

11 District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office, DC Modern: A Context for Modernism in the District of Columbia, 1945-1976, prepared by Robinson and Associates, January 2009. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 14

ORIENTATION: The front elevation and main entrances to the proposed Embassy are oriented to the south fronting on Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., and Scott Circle. This proposed entrance orientation is in keeping with the adjacent Embassy of Philippines Consular Section at 1617 Massachusetts Avenue, as well as other neighboring buildings along Massachusetts Avenue. The proposed building’s orientation, therefore, is consistent with that of Embassy Row and compatible with other buildings within the Sixteenth Street Historic District that are located on lots fronting east-west cross streets.

SCALE: The proposed Embassy exhibits a scale that is compatible with the existing buildings within the Sixteenth Street Historic District and those along Embassy Row. Sixteenth Street and Massachusetts Avenue contain numerous large-scale buildings that are associated with foreign and international organizations. Like other buildings in the historic district, the proposed Embassy communicates a feeling of formality, but has been designed at the pedestrian level to be to be accessible and human in scale. In addition, the building footprint of the proposed Embassy is approximately 22,965 square feet, which is consistent with that of other large buildings along Sixteenth Street such as the First Baptist Church of the City of Washington, D.C. at 1328 Sixteenth Street, N.W. (22,001 square feet), 1400 Sixteenth Street, N.W. (25,456 square feet), the Carnegie Institute at 1530 , N.W (19,719 square feet), and Foundry United Methodist Church at 1500 Sixteenth Street (20,333 square feet) (Figure 12).

Figure 12. Building footprints of the proposed Embassy and surrounding buildings (D.C. Atlas) Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 15

PROPORTION: Exterior design elements within the proposed Embassy are roughly proportionate to those of other neighboring buildings along Massachusetts Avenue and within the Sixteenth Street Historic District. While clearly a nationalist expression of functional modernism, lacking points of reference such as discernible window openings, the design nevertheless broadly references elements of the tripartite scheme of facade composition found in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century apartment buildings, townhouses, and mixed-use buildings located in the historic district. Although the design lacks a “cap,” or similar terminating architectural element, this historic compositional approach is expressed through the height of the raised ground story, or “base,” compared with the upper stories of the facade, or “shaft” (Figure 13). Taken together, the design pays homage to, while remaining distinct from, the historic building forms within its environs.

Figure 13. Architect’s rendering illustrating compositional elements of facade (Bates Smart, EHT Traceries) Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 16

RHYTHM: The proposed Embassy is in harmony with the established rhythm of alternating traditional and modernist building facades expressed along Sixteenth Street. This variation along the Sixteenth Street corridor is by now an established feature; it first surfaced during the mid-twentieth century with the construction of International-Style buildings such as the World Center Building (1950, Robert O. Scholz) at Sixteenth and K Streets, and later with the juxtaposition of classical and modern design seen in the National Geographic headquarters complex at Sixteenth and L Streets, which contains buildings designed by Edward Durell Stone (1964) and Skidmore, Owings and Merrill (1985) (Figure 14).

Figure 14. Sixteenth and K Streets, looking southwest, showing National Geographic complex (Google).

MASSING: The building’s massing is expressed through its somewhat cubic form and underlying planar exterior wall surfaces. The use of vertical, projecting, blade-like metal panels serves to de-materialize the mass in a manner similar to earlier expressions of New Formalism. This approach is not incompatible with the architectural context of the Sixteenth Street Historic District, and Embassy Row corridor, both of which contain significant modernist buildings that contribute to the character of the District and exhibit similar massing. Examples include the AFL-CIO building at 815 Sixteenth Street, N.W. (1955), 905 Sixteenth Street (1959), and 1500 Massachusetts Avenue (1950) (Figure 15), all of which contribute to the historic district. The building also features expressed bays on both its Massachusetts Avenue and Sixteenth Street facades, an element seen in much of the area’s pre-World War II architecture.

HEIGHT: The proposed total height of 98 feet, 4 inches for the Embassy comports with the height of neighboring buildings such as Johns Hopkins University’s Benjamin T. Rome Building at 1619 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. (103.4 feet), 1 Scott Circle, N.W. (105.5 feet), 1315 Sixteenth Street, N.W. (99.5 feet), and 1400 Sixteenth Street, N.W. (94.5 feet) (Figure 16). Therefore, its height is consistent with buildings found within the Sixteenth Street Historic District and along Massachusetts Avenue. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 17

Figure 15. Clockwise from upper left: 815 Sixteenth Street, 905 Sixteenth Street, 1500 Mass Avenue (Google)

Figure 16. Aerial photograph illustrating heights of neighboring buildings (Bates Smart) Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 18

MATERIALS: The exterior materials proposed for the new Embassy include grey-tinted glass cladding offset by vertical treated copper alloy, or similar material, “blades.” This glass-and-metal material scheme is a standard modernist approach that is represented in other noteworthy buildings located along Sixteenth Street and Embassy Row, such as the previously mentioned National Geographic complex, the Benjamin T. Rome Building at 1619 Massachusetts Avenue (1961, Keyes, Lethbridge and Condon), and 1126 Sixteenth Street, N.W. (1954). The architects propose to further enhance the texture and visual appearance of the metal blades by utilizing a treatment to create a color gradient that reveals the rich, burnished tones of the material. This treatment, although contemporary in nature, is not dissimilar in spirit to the applied ornament used to decorate other buildings in the Sixteenth Street Historic District designed in Classical and Revivalist styles (Figure 17). The proposed landscape design for the new chancery also draws on

Figure 17. Clockwise from top: detail of proposed facade for Australian Embassy, 1126 Sixteenth Street, N.W., 1619 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. (Bates Smart, Google) Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 19

materials, such as bluestone paving and wall features, and plant and tree species, such as Zelkova and Oak street trees, that are featured throughout the Sixteenth Street Historic District and Embassy Row.

COLOR: While utilizing contemporary materials, the proposed color scheme for the new Embassy is largely compatible with that of the surrounding historic district and Embassy Row in that the design presents a palette of natural color tones. The building’s copper-colored metal blades and the beige-to-grey coloration of the natural timber and stone interior materials (visible through the semi-transparent exterior glazing)

Figure 18. Detail of copper alloy material proposed for exterior blades (left) and rendering of exterior (Bates Smart)

Figure 19. Rendering of interior atrium (Bates Smart) recall the limestone, brick, and concrete used to face many of the historic district’s contributing structures. These materials also reflect the warm reds and beiges that are characteristic of the Australian landscape (Figures 18-19). Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 20

ROOF SHAPE: The proposed Embassy design features a flat roof, which is the predominant roof shape found in the historic district and the immediate section of Massachusetts Avenue in which it is to be constructed. This roof form is typical of much late nineteenth-century urban architecture and remained in use throughout the twentieth century. While the design does include a penthouse, its setback, combined with the proposed parapet height, will render it minimally visible from street level.

DETAILS AND ORNAMENTATION: The design of the proposed Embassy reflects the influence of the Modern Movement of the twentieth century as expressed through contemporary nationalist themes. As such, its exterior aesthetic is largely derived from its industrially produced building materials, which lack the level of applied ornament seen in the eclectic and revivalist architectural styles that feature prominently in both the historic district and Embassy Row. The design, however, utilizes the materiality of the metal blades to present patterns of texture and color. These patterns represent a contemporary expression of architectural detail. Further, such traditional components as a porte-cochère extending from its south elevation is roughly proportional to those found on neighboring pre-war buildings. And, as discussed, the design’s contemporary aesthetic is reflected in other significant examples of the International Style located in the historic district, in addition to other modernist diplomatic buildings in Washington, such as the Chancery of Brazil (1973, Olavo Redig de Campos), the Chancery of Finland (1994, Heikkinen-Komonen Architects), the Embassy of Italy (2000, Sartogo Architetti Associati), the House of Sweden (2006, Gert Wingårdh and Tomas Hansen), and the new hyphen at the Embassy of South Africa (2014, Davis Brody Bond), all of which present nationalist expressions of the Modernist aesthetic (Figure 20).

Figure 20. Clockwise from top left: Chancery of Brazil, Embassy of South Africa, Chancery of Finland, House of Sweden (Google) Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 21

LANDSCAPE FEATURES: Landscape features associated with the proposed Australian Embassy consist of a strip of “parking,” featuring shrubs and small trees, additional small-to-medium-sized trees located along Sixteenth Street and Massachusetts Avenue, and the formal stone-paved entrance plaza, or forecourt, and porte-cochère located along Massachusetts Avenue (Figure 21). These are features repeated throughout the historic district, and are therefore compatible.

Figure 21. Rendering, with street trees removed, looking west from Sixteenth Street, showing landscape elements (Bates Smart)

In summary, the proposed design for the Australian Embassy exhibits a setback and orientation seen throughout the Sixteenth Street Historic District and Embassy Row. Its scale and proportion are also comparable to many of the nineteenth and twentieth-century buildings located in these districts. While demonstrating compatibility, the design does not seek to duplicate existing buildings, but rather stands as a product of its own time. Yet it also contributes to the established rhythm created through the architectural variety found along Sixteenth Street and Massachusetts Avenue. Through its massing, height, materials, color, roof shape, details, and landscape features, the design relates to the existing architecture. The design presents appropriate nationalist expression, while communicating the architectural evolution of Sixteenth Street and Massachusetts Avenue.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards The design is in accord with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. Specifically, the new construction will be differentiated from the historic architecture within the historic district, yet it will also be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing found throughout the district to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 22

PROPOSED DESIGN MEETS D.C. AND FEDERAL STANDARDS As discussed, the proposed design is compatible with the Sixteenth Street Historic District under the design principles contained in the D.C. Historic Preservation Guidelines for new construction in historic districts. It also meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.

The design is also consistent with the architecture of Embassy Row. Its contemporary aesthetic contextualizes with other modernist embassy structures located along Massachusetts Avenue. Examples include the Embassy of Philippines at 1600 Massachusetts Avenue (1993, Tower Group), the Embassy of Indonesia addition at 2020 Massachusetts Avenue (1982, The Architects’ Collaborative), the previously discussed Chancery of Brazil at 3006 Massachusetts Avenue (1973, Olavo Redig de Campos), and the Embassy of Finland at 3301 Massachusetts Avenue (1994, Mikko Heikkinen, Marku Komonen). Like the proposed Embassy of Australia, these buildings all feature contemporary building forms and incorporate industrially-produced modern materials in their construction.

Furthermore, the design enhances the character of the Sixteenth Street Historic District. The facade, featuring a mixture of materials, colors, and textures, adds variety to both the Sixteenth Street and Massachusetts Avenue streetscapes. The overall design is dynamic, offering a greener, more landscaped approach from Scott Circle, a more formal “civic” approach from Massachusetts Avenue and Scott Circle, while presenting a more solid, urban feel when approached from the north along Sixteenth Street.

CONCLUSION The proposed design for the Embassy of Australia, to be located in the Sixteenth Street Historic District, is subject to review under both D.C. and federal historic preservation regulations and guidelines. Based on an analysis of the design using the critical framework provided within the D.C. Historic Preservation Guidelines for New Construction in Historic Districts and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, EHT Traceries has found that the design meets the test of compatibility, particularly given the well-established architectural context for modernism which exists within the historic district and Embassy Row. A product of contemporary design trends, the proposed design contributes to the architectural richness and variety of the Sixteenth Street and Massachusetts Avenue streetscape, while reflecting the architectural evolution of these prominent thoroughfares. Embassy of Australia EHT Traceries August, 2017 Page | 23

REFERENCES CITED Department of the Interior. National Park Service. Technical Preservation Services. “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties,” https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards. htm (Accessed April 17, 2017).

District of Columbia. Building Permits, 1877-1949. Record Group 351. National Archives, Washington, D.C.

District of Columbia. Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978. D.C. Law 2-144, as amended. § 8 (New Construction), codified at D.C. Code, § 6-1107.

District of Columbia. Office of Planning. Historic Preservation Office. District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites. Washington: HPO, 2009.

District of Columbia. Office of Planning. Historic Preservation Office. DC Modern: A Context for Modern- ism in the District of Columbia, 1945-1976. Prepared by Robinson and Associates, January 2009.

District of Columbia. Office of Planning. Historic Preservation Office. District of Columbia Historic Preser- vation Guidelines. “New Construction in Historic Districts,” https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/ files/dc/sites/op/publication/attachments/DC%20New%20Construction%20Reformatted.pdf (Accessed April 17, 2017).

District of Columbia. Office of Tax and Revenue. Recorder of Deeds, https://countyfusion4.propertyinfo. com (Accessed April 2017).

Kousoulas, Claudia D., and George W. Kousoulas. Contemporary Architecture in Washington, D.C. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1995.

United States Congress. Public Law 97-241. Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse. Chapter 53, Authorities Relating to the Regulation of Foreign Missions. U.S. Statutes at Large 96 (1982): 286, codified at U.S. Code 22, § 4306.

Washington Evening Star, 1852-1981, http://infoweb.newsbank.com (Accessed April, 2017).

Washington Post, Current and Historic, 1877-2000, http://search.proquest.com (Accessed April 2017). 440 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20001 | www.traceries.com