Built in 1971 and designed by Araldo Cassutta, a partner in the internationally acclaimed firm I. M. Pei & Partners, the Third Church of Christ, Scientist at 900 16^th Street, NW, is a unique church sanctuary and ancillary office tower that won both accolades and criticism from the very beginning.  At issue with the design was, and continues to be, its “brutalist” architectural expression.  Exposed, poured-in-place reinforced concrete, minimal glazing, and a deliberately inward-looking design—trademarks of design at the time—are now considered by many to be “out of fashion.”  The complex, however, has been cited for its architectural innovation and excellence by the United States Commission of Fine Arts, Architecture Magazine, and prominent architects and architecturally historians around the country.  It is considered one of the finest examples of this rare style of architecture in the nation’s capital.

Recognizing its architectural importance, the Committee of 100 filed an application for landmark designation of the church property, which was joined by the DC Preservation League.  After a public hearing in 2007, the DC Historic Preservation Review Board by unanimous vote designated the building a landmark and declined to grant a demolition permit requested by the church (see Designation Order under “Resources” below).  The church then appealed this ruling to mayoral appointee Harriet Tregoning, the Director of Planning, who was designated as the Mayor’s Agent to preside over an administrative hearing to determine whether the Church could meet its burden of economic hardship that would justify the demolition.  All such prior hearings of this nature had been conducted by an independent, professionally qualified administrative law judge.  Furthermore, Neil Albert, the DC Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, Tregoning’s immediate superior, had publicly supported development proposed for the site, which would require the church’s demolition, and DC Mayor Adrian Fenty, to whom the Deputy Mayor reported, made a similar public statement.  The Committee of 100 and the DC Preservation League requested that Tregoning recuse herself from presiding over the hearing, but she refused.

At the hearing, the Church argued that it could not afford to operate and maintain its building with its current and projected resources.  The Church, however, had made no effort to sell the building and move elsewhere, as other churches with declining congregations have routinely done.  The Church had made no effort to generate income by leasing its mostly vacant auditorium/sanctuary, unlike the Third Church of Christ, Scientist in New York City, which under similar circumstances had successfully undertaken innovative measures to generate income that preserved its building.  Instead, the Third Church had entered into an agreement with ICG Properties, a development firm, by which the Church would reap an enormous profit if the church building could be demolished and a mammoth office building erected on the site.  The Church would simultaneously construct a smaller building on the site for its use.  (See Proposed Findings of Fact under “Resources” below.)

Harriet Tregoning ruled that the Church had met its burden of economic hardship and granted a demolition permit for the building, but only on condition that the Church first obtain a construction permit for its new building on the site (see Mayor’s Agent Decision under “Resources” below).  The Committee of 100 and the DC Preservation League appealed her ruling to the DC Court of Appeals on several grounds, principally that the Church had failed to meet its burden of economic hardship (see Brief under “Resources” below).  In the meantime, the Church filed a lawsuit in the US District Court to overturn the building’s historic landmark designation, claiming that the designation violated the Religious Land Use Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  The Church also persuaded DC Council members to introduce bills in Council that would exempt not only the Third Church but all churches retroactive to 1966 from historic designation and compliance with the DC Historic Preservation Act.

Update

In view of these threats, the Committee of 100 and the DC Preservation League entered into settlement negotiations with the Third Church and ICG Properties.  As a result, the Committee of 100 intends to diismiss its court appeal if and when the following conditions, which are summarized below, are met:

• Third Church suspends all efforts to advocate the above-referenced legislation in the City Council and not initiate or sponsor any similar legislation for the next 25 years;
• Third Church and/or ICG obtain construction permits for excavation, sheeting, and shoring necessary for construction of the new buildings on the site;
• Third Church and/or ICG obtain construction permits for the new buildings on the site;
• Third Church and/or ICG obtain demolition permits for the landmarked buildings on the site;
• Demolition of the buildings on the site actually commences; and
• Third Church dismisses its lawsuit in the US District Court and also its lawsuit in the DC Court of Appeals seeking relief from Tregoning’s condition requiring a construction permit prior to a demolition permit.

The DC Preservation League separately negotiated a written agreement with the Third Church and ICG that includes the conditions stated above in more specific detail but also includes a substantial monetary settlement to the League in return for the League’s dismissing its court appeal and meeting other specified conditions (see Settlement Agreement under “Resources” below).  ICG and Third Church plan to apply for a Planned Unit Development on the site, which would allow greater density, and that, in addition to other preparation, hearings, and approvals, will be a lengthy process.  The Committee of 100 will participate in any review of the plans for the new buildings as they proceed through this process.  In the meantime, ICG has secured financing for its building and has announced the choice of Robert A. M. Stern, a nationally acclaimed architect and Dean of the Yale School of Architecture, as architect for its proposed building.  Ironically, Stern had earlier written a letter praising the Third Church building as “an outstanding work of architecture” and urging its preservation (see Letter from Stern under “Resources” below).