The meeting was convened by videoconference at 9:00 a.m.
Members participating:
Hon. Billie Tsien, Chair
Hon. Hazel Ruth Edwards, Vice Chair
Hon. Bruce Redman Becker
Hon. Peter Cook
Hon. Lisa Delplace
Hon. William J. Lenihan
Hon. Justin Garrett Moore
Staff present:
Sarah Batcheler, Assistant Secretary
Chris Berger
Kay Fanning
Daniel Fox
Carlton Hart
Vivian Lee
Tony Simon
(Due to the absence of Secretary Thomas Luebke, Assistant Secretary Batcheler represented the staff.)
I. ADMINISTRATION
A. Approval of the minutes of the 17 April meeting. Assistant Secretary Batchelerreported that the minutes of the April meeting were circulated to the Commission members in advance. Upon a motion by Mr. Moore with second by Mr. Becker, the Commission approved the minutes.
B. Dates of next meetings. Assistant Secretary Batcheler presented the dates forupcoming Commission meetings, as previously published: 18 June, 17 July, and 18 September 2025. She noted that the June meeting is scheduled on a Wednesday because of the federal holiday on 19 June, and that there would be no meeting in August. The proposed meeting schedule for 2026 will be presented in the coming months for the Commission’s review.
C. Anniversary of the establishment of the Commission of Fine Arts, 17 May 1910, and the Shipstead-Luce Act, 16 May 1930. Assistant Secretary Batcheler acknowledged the Commission’s two anniversaries in May: the 115th anniversary of the Commission’s establishment, and the 95th anniversary of the Shipstead-Luce Act, which established a key jurisdiction for the Commission’s review of private-sector development in areas of federal interest.
II. SUBMISSIONS AND REVIEWS
A. Appendices. Assistant Secretary Batcheler introduced the three appendices for Commission action. Drafts of the appendices had been circulated to the Commission members in advance of the meeting.
Appendix I – Government Submissions Consent Calendar: Mr. Fox said the consent calendar includes seven items, as well as the reporting of five delegated items that have been approved by the staff; one project has been removed from the draft delegated items list that had been circulated to the Commission. Upon a motion by Mr. Cook with second by Dr. Edwards, the Commission approved the revised Government Submissions Consent Calendar.
Appendix II – Shipstead-Luce Act Submissions: Ms. Lee said the appendix includes thirteen projects. One case has been held open for review in a future month (case number SL 25-087); other changes to the draft appendix are limited to minor wording changes and the notation of dates for the receipt of supplemental materials. The recommendations for two projects are subject to the receipt of supplemental materials and further coordination with the applicants, and she requested authorization to finalize these recommendations when the outstanding issues are resolved. Upon a motion by Mr. Moore with second by Ms. Delplace, the Commission approved the revised Shipstead-Luce Act Appendix.
Appendix III – Old Georgetown Act Submissions: Mr. Berger said no significant changes have been made to the draft appendix, which includes 23 projects. Upon a motion by Mr. Lenihan with second by Mr. Becker, the Commission approved the revised Old Georgetown Act Appendix.
B. D.C. Public Library
CFA 15/MAY/25-1, St. Elizabeths East Campus, Parcel 18, 1304 Alabama Avenue, SE. New Parklands-Turner/Congress Heights Library. Final. (Previous: CFA 19/SEP/24-3)
Assistant Secretary Batcheler introduced the first item on the agenda, a final design submission for the new Parklands-Turner/Congress Heights Library, to be constructed on Parcel 18 of the St. Elizabeths East Campus at 1304 Alabama Avenue, SE, on a site adjacent to the Congress Heights Metro Station. The design, by Perkins & Will with landscape architecture firm Parker Rodriguez, will replace the existing Parklands-Turner Library, which is located in a nearby strip mall. She said the proposal is for a one-story building composed of two triangular wings, each with a small courtyard, and connected by a central spine that would have entrances from both the north and south. Proposed exterior materials include a fritted glass curtainwall system, wood and metal panels, and board-formed concrete. The proposed landscape design would transform the existing site by increasing green space and adding trees, shrubs, and low plantings. She noted that the Commission had approved the concept design in September 2024, characterizing it as simple, elegant, and accessible, and recommending the addition of more canopy trees where feasible. She asked Jaspreet Pahwa, director of capital planning and construction at the D.C. Public Library (DCPL), to begin the presentation.
Ms. Pahwa said the new Parkland-Turner/Congress Heights Library is intended to serve as a model for collaborative, mission-driven, and transit-oriented library development. She said DCPL worked with the community to create the building program, which would be contained in distinct areas around which the proposed “butterfly” biomorphic building form has been developed. She said the library is intended to be a civic destination that is designed to evolve with the needs of the community. The design draws on neuroscience-based evidence that indicates biophilic placemaking supports human health, elevates mood, and increases cognitive capacity. It is also guided by the belief that building materials can support people’s well-being and imbue a sense of respect and care. She said the mass timber structure would be constructed from trees harvested in responsibly managed forests. This commitment to sustainability would also be made visible by photovoltaic panels on the roof, which would help elevate the public discourse about sustainability in the community. She asked architect Carl Knutson of Perkins & Will to present the design.
Mr. Knutson said the existing site is composed of a parking lot and bus turnaround; this transportation infrastructure would be reorganized to incorporate a bus loop on the north and east sides of the library, with the library’s primary public facades facing Alabama Avenue and 13th Street, SE. He said the butterfly building form was inspired by the idea of the metamorphosis or transformation that would result from the introduction of a new library into the community. The library would connect the two neighborhoods of Parklands-Turner and St. Elizabeths East; the incorporation of two building entrances is intended to invite the community into the St. Elizabeths East campus beyond. The building would be approximately twenty-eight feet tall and would incorporate shading devices into the fenestration on the south and west sides; the north side would have less shading to allow more daylighting of the interior. Each wing would feature open-air courtyards accessible from within the building—valuable amenities that are not common in other DCPL facilities. Each wing would have complementary support spaces opening to the lobby.
Mr. Knutson presented a view of the library from Alabama Avenue illustrating the transparency through the primary circulation corridor and into the campus. The material palette includes metal panels, board-formed concrete, wood, and glass, and is intended to be compatible with adjacent buildings. He said the exterior design is based on a composition of tonal and textural qualities of the metal panels and the concrete, complemented by the glazing. The concrete base would elevate the library out of the flood plain. The primary exterior materials would be a smooth brick-red composite metal panel system, accent metal panels with a “shark fin” texture of vertical ribs, and glazed openings with champagne-colored mullions. Exterior-grade wood finishes at both entrances would give a sense of warmth, encouraging people to enter, and would reference the mass timber structure, which is visible from both inside and outside the building. The glazing system would include a bird-safe frit and a linear frit that would echo the appearance of the textured metal panel. He noted that geothermal wells are proposed and that the building is intended to achieve net-zero status.
Mr. Knutson summarized the landscape design. Although the one-story library building would occupy most of the parcel, its edges would be landscaped for the enjoyment of library patrons and transit users. A paved walk would connect the entrance plaza at the southeast with the other entrance at the north. Planted landscape features include bioswales at the corners of the site; other areas would have robust perennials able to survive the stresses of an urban site.
Chair Tsien thanked Mr. Knutson for his thorough presentation and invited questions and comments from the Commission members. Mr. Becker commended the design team for designing a beautiful project and for its responsiveness to the Commission’s previous comments; he said the sustainability objectives and features are also noteworthy. He said the rooftop mechanical screen could be an acceptable architectural element, but he questioned its necessity and suggested that it might reduce the energy production of the rooftop solar panels by casting shadows. Noting the proposed geothermal systems, he asked what mechanical equipment would be located on the roof. Mr. Knutson responded that there would be equipment related to the proposed dedicated outdoor air system and that screening is required by zoning; to minimize the visual impact of the screen, perforated metal is proposed. Mr. Becker suggested lowering the height of the screen wall or sinking the air handling units into the roof. He concluded that the design is elegant, and he commended the team for using mass timber construction and reducing the extent of the glazing.
Chair Tsien noted that in its previous review the Commission had suggested planting more shade trees. Ms. Delplace agreed that more shade trees on the south side had been recommended. She said an additional reason to consider planting more shade trees is that planting a tree suggests both a belief in heritage and a confidence in the future, which are concepts the library could embrace. She said historic libraries in Washington, particularly the Carnegie libraries, have large and majestic trees gracing their entrance approaches. She acknowledged that trees are small when they are planted and thus can sometimes obscure an entrance, but they still represent an investment in the future—a concept fundamental to libraries. She expressed support for the revisions and reiterated her advice to plant additional shade trees. Mr. Knutson responded that increasing the number of trees had been studied, and that the Metrorail tunnel beneath the site presents a particular challenge.
Ms. Tsien commended the introduction of wooden louvers on the library’s interior, which she characterized as consistent with the use of the mass timber. She said the overall effect would be the sense of being within a beautiful box of wood.
Chair Tsien suggested a consensus to approve the final design. Upon a motion by Mr. Moore with second by Dr. Edwards, the Commission adopted this action.
C. D.C. Department of General Services
CFA 15/MAY/25-2, Metropolitan Police Department 7th District Headquarters, 2455 Alabama Avenue, SE. New police station. Concept.
Assistant Secretary Batcheler introduced the second and final item on the agenda, a concept design submission for the new 7th District Metropolitan Police Department headquarters building at 2455 Alabama Avenue, SE, designed by Shinberg Levinas Architects with Bradley Site Design. The new structure would be constructed on the current facility’s parking lot; the existing headquarters building would then be demolished and replaced by a new parking lot. She said the proposed design for the new three-story white brick building would feature ribbon windows and alternating projecting courses of brick, punctuated by larger vertical areas of glazing to indicate the locations of double-height interior spaces, and a third-floor terrace at the building’s southeast corner. A public entrance at the northwest corner would be adjacent to a new public plaza that would include seating and public art. An officer’s entrance would be accessed from the parking lot. In addition to the entrance plaza and parking lot, the proposed site design includes new street trees and shrubs. She introduced Salo Levinas of Shinberg Levinas Architects and Evan Timms of Bradley Site Design to present the design. Chair Tsien recused herself in advance from voting on the motion.
Mr. Levinas presented the built context, which includes Garfield Elementary School, two churches, and numerous three- and four-story multifamily residences. On the south end of the site is the existing police headquarters building, with its parking lot to the north. Zoning for the new building allows a maximum height of forty feet. He said most people would arrive at the building in vehicles, and the primary roadways are Alabama Avenue to the west and Knox Street to the east; Hartford Street is located at the north and James M. McGhee, Jr., Street is to the south.
Mr. Levinas presented the proposed floor plans, noting that areas in green indicate secure building areas. The building is intended to be net zero and would therefore have a compact design. Officers would park in the new lot and enter through a double-height space, while the public would enter through a separate double-height space at the northwest corner. The building would have a green roof with solar panels, and mechanical equipment would be placed at the center of the roof and would be screened. He said the three-story structure would be forty feet tall, comparable to several surrounding buildings. The material palette includes brick, which is a common throughout the area, with other materials including vision glass and privacy glass with an interlayer of metal mesh. He said the use of this mesh at the public entrance, where additional security is required, would introduce texture and shade at an entrance that is meant to appear inviting while also retaining a sense of privacy; he added that both entrances must be bulletproof.
Mr. Levinas said the primary facade, facing Alabama Avenue, would have long, horizontal windows with recessed extensions in brick, which together would echo the movement of cars down the roadway. A subtle projecting band at the top and bottom of the ribbon windows would complement the precast stone used for the facades base, sills, and cornice. To create a sense of dynamism along Alabama Avenue, these projecting brick bands would overlap across the asymmetrical composition of the facade. The two upper stories would have alternating projecting and recessed brick courses to give the facades texture and a sense of horizontality. The brickwork on the first floor would be flat to differentiate it from the upper stories and give the impression that they are floating. A two-story area of glass at the northwest corner would enclose the double-height lounge area for officers and employees, and another two-story glass area in the center of this facade would identify a multiuse area for the community and police.
Mr. Timms presented the landscape design. He said there would be a wall around the perimeter of the parking lot to make it secure. The planted materials would be either native or adaptive species, and a majority of the existing street trees would be preserved; he noted that the street trees on Hartford Street and Alabama Avenue are smaller species and are located beneath power lines. In the area between the sidewalk and the parking lot wall, the existing trees would be supplemented with shade trees, ornamental trees, and understory plantings. Some of the new trees would be street trees, but most would be shade trees selected for a light, airy appearance. He noted that views into the building and interior areas are an important design consideration, both to complement the architecture and to aid in visibility.
Mr. Timms said the plaza at the public entrance would be the gateway between the community and the police department. The plaza would have linear seat walls that would also create a secure perimeter. Robust foundation plantings would highlight views of the building while creating a sense of separation between the street and plaza. Special pavers would have a similar appearance to the building’s brickwork. Lighted bollards and several bicycle racks would also be installed. A wide stairway would lead from Alabama Avenue to the plaza, while the grade from Hartford Street would be flush to provide barrier-free access between the sidewalk and entrance; both connections would be ten to twelve feet wide. The plaza also would include space for a public sculpture. A walk along the north building facade parallel to the public sidewalk would have several seatwalls and would also connect with the sidewalk via stairs. He added that there would be one accessible parking space for the public, with a curb ramp to the primary sidewalk.
Chair Tsien welcomed questions and comments from the Commission members. Mr. Cook thanked the design team for its presentation, characterizing the proposed building as handsome and citing the economical use of materials. He observed that the facade design establishes a datum between the first floor and the upper floors through a change in materials. However, both appear to be the same color, and while Mr. Levinas had said the design intent is to have the upper floors appear to be floating, the lack of color differentiation works against this goal and instead anchors the building, causing it to read as a more monolithic three-story structure. He suggested distinguishing the ground floor from the upper floors through a change in brick color, in addition to texture or detailing, to achieve the intended floating effect.
Mr. Becker expressed support for Mr. Cook’s comments, commenting that design is elegant and its horizontality is appropriate. Noting that the new building is within a primarily residential neighborhood and would be adjacent to a church, he suggested lowering its height, perhaps by reducing the floor-to-floor dimension. He said that depending on the structural system, it is possible that as much as six feet could be removed from each floor, which would bring the overall height more in line with the main roof of the nearby church. He added that this change might also reduce the project cost.
Mr. Becker asked whether the material for the parking lot perimeter wall would be the same brick as the building. Mr. Levinas confirmed the same brick would be used, reiterating that the first story of the building would be differentiated from the second and third by using a more textured brick for the upper stories.
Mr. Becker noted that new public buildings in Washington must meet net-zero energy goals, and cautioned that the rooftop screening may cast a shadow on the proposed solar panels. He also commented that the mechanical screen would add height to the building, especially when seen from a distance. In addition, he said that if a geothermal system is used, less equipment on the roof may be required, and therefore it may not be necessary to have the mechanical screen run the full length of the roof; instead, the remaining equipment could occupy a smaller area or be partially recessed.
Mr. Becker noted that many police departments are switching to electric police cruisers, and he suggested installing charging stations in addition to the gas pumps. He said that if it more solar panels are necessary, canopies with additional panels could be constructed above the parking spaces, which would also shade the cars. He concluded that the project is beautiful and that it accomplishes the difficult task of being integrated into the residential neighborhood, and said he appreciates the neutral palette and the efforts to minimize what could potentially be a complex design.
Mr. Moore agreed that this would be a well-designed public building. He noted that some features, such as the provision of community rooms, are programmatic requirements; he commended the effort to create a welcoming connection with the community at the corner entrance through the use of glass for transparency and the addition of a planted plaza. He suggested considering further refinements to the first floor and the perimeter wall through material, articulation, or color variation to make them more engaging; he emphasized that the facility would occupy an entire block, and that while the design considers the perspective of drivers, it is equally important to create a compelling design for people walking along the street. He expressed support for the use of brick for the long perimeter wall and said the landscape would be richly planted.
Ms. Delplace said she finds appearance of the long wall to be harsh. While acknowledging security concerns, she said the wall should be sympathetic to pedestrians and its visual scale could be reduced, particularly through the addition of large trees. She questioned the large expanse of unshaded pavement proposed for the walled parking lot, which would be very hot, and advised creating enlarged parking islands with trees to offer some relief and improve the project’s green area ratio. She observed that most of the proposed plantings have an informal arrangement that would present an attractive contrast with the building design, with the jarring exception of one curving line of trees within a small lawn in the parking lot, and she asked if there is a specific reason this arc was included; Mr. Levinas responded that the arc is not necessary. Ms. Delplace emphasized the importance of retaining the concept of informality throughout the landscape plan.
Mr. Becker said he supports Ms. Delplace’s comments about the landscape, and suggested giving some visual relief to the perimeter wall as is done on the building, such as through recessed brick courses and variation of relief along the length, to create some variation and shadow lines. He said such details on the parking lot wall would help it avoid the appearance of a fortress. In addition, noting that bicycle storage would be in the building’s sally port, Mr. Becker suggested creating a bike lane or path to separate bike traffic in front of the building.
Chair Tsien suggested a consensus to approve the concept design. Upon a motion by Mr. Becker with second by Mr. Lenihan, the Commission adopted this action.
Chair Tsien noted that the four-year terms of four Commission members will soon end, including her own. She said that serving on the Commission following her appointment by President Biden has been a great privilege and learning experience, providing the opportunity to serve the country in support of good design.
Mr. Moore said today’s meeting is his last as a Commission member. Acknowledging the Commission’s 115-year anniversary this month, he observed that the Commission has existed for nearly half of the nation’s history, shaping American design and the design of the capital city, Washington, D.C. He said that making a small contribution by serving on the Commission has been an honor, with tangible and valuable results that will be experienced in the future in places such as the National Mall or a neighborhood library. He noted the past contributions of the Commission’s diverse membership of architects, landscape architects, and artists, who have provided an American story of incredible people and the creation of remarkable places. He expressed his appreciation to the current and recent Commission members he has served with, citing the enjoyable learning opportunity provided by serving with people from different disciplines and experiences, fulfilling the Commission’s purpose of providing a variety of perspectives.
Mr. Moore also thanked the Commission’s staff and the people from other agencies and project teams for their commitment, hard work, and creativity in achieving good design; he acknowledged the difficult work of facing many challenges and working together to solve problems. He said design is an important tool for developing intelligent, creative, and beautiful solutions that reflect our society’s varied backgrounds, cultures, and heritage; design addresses issues of how we use and share our space, along with many other issues such as being good stewards of the environment. He concluded by emphasizing his appreciation for all the work that is done to make Washington and our nation better.
Mr. Cook joined in describing service on the Commission as a great honor and in acknowledging the valuable contributions of the other Commission members; he commended the leadership of Chair Tsien and Vice Chair Edwards in bringing together the varied perspectives of the Commission members to support the important work. He recalled that the views of the Commission members have usually agreed but sometimes diverged, which is a healthy outcome; the process has involved listening to each other, working together with respect, and finding a path forward with collegiality. He said that ideally, the result has been to provide the Commission’s best advice on the important projects that are reviewed.
Mr. Cook also expressed appreciation for the commitment and professionalism of the Commission’s staff under the extraordinary leadership of Secretary Luebke, whom he described as a thoughtful, honorable, and dedicated public servant. Mr. Cook noted that his own term is ending soon, and he expressed hope that the Commission will continue to celebrate the nation’s diversity, conduct its work with a sense of civility, embrace a spirit of innovation, and look forward instead of backward to find new possibilities.
Dr. Edwards agreed that serving the nation as a Commission member has been a great honor and a delightful experience. Noting her love for the city as a native Washingtonian, she expressed appreciation for serving with the other Commission members in reviewing the many projects that would make the city better; she said serving on the Commission has improved her understanding of Washington, and she emphasized the Commission’s involvement in the many projects recently or currently being built across the city. She said she has learned much from her fellow Commission members and hopes to convey this learning to her students. She also joined in expressing appreciation for the staff and especially to Secretary Luebke for his leadership.
Chair Tsien said the Commission members concluding their terms have given valuable insights to their experiences of the past four years. She asked Assistant Secretary Batcheler to provide an update on Secretary Luebke’s status. Ms. Batcheler noted that Mr. Luebke has led the staff for over twenty years but has been asked to step down from the position of Secretary. In this time of transition, she conveyed the staff’s sincere appreciation for Mr. Luebke’s guidance in the work of the Commission and in shaping the national capital. [Secretary Luebke subsequently returned for the June 2025 meeting.]
Chair Tsien summarized that the Commission can move forward with hope as several of its members depart.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:18 a.m.
Signed,
Sarah Batcheler, AIA
Assistant Secretary