Terrorism, espionage and international diplomacy rarely factor into building designs. But for a small cadre of architecture firms that design U.S. embassies, those issues indeed present challenges.

Starting in 2000, Patrick Boyle, an architect now with Hennebery Eddy Architects, worked on four major embassy projects while employed by ZGF Architects.

“Trying to connect the priorities of the people trying to serve a mission in a foreign country with the people who are tasked with maintaining that entire pool of properties and buildings is tough,” he said. “It was a difficult client, not from the people side of it but the process side of it.”

One of the ZGF projects was a new embassy in Suriname, in South America.

“This is the fun part,” Boyle said. “You get a call from the (U.S. State Department) asking if you would be interested in working on a project in Suriname. In your head, you are trying to figure out where that is.”

Few firms are on the State Department’s list of those approved for indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts. After being vetted thoroughly, firms are on the IDIQ list for five years. The State Department three weeks ago initiated the latest round of evaluations for firms interested in being added to the list.

“The Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO) selects architecture and engineering teams through an established process that complies with federal procurement laws and regulations,” said Christy Foushee, OBO director of external affairs.

For each project, Foushee said, prospective firms are evaluated. Officials examine firms’ portfolio submissions, qualifications of the proposed multidisciplinary teams and subcontractors. Also, key personnel are interviewed.

A firm that manages to make it through that process then has to navigate a myriad of regulations and paperwork that can total hundreds of pages.

There are reasons why firms must jump through so many hoops. When the U.S. decided to build an embassy in Moscow during the Cold War, Russian designers and construction workers were allowed to work on the project, according to a story in The New York Times.

The U.S. believed that American officials on the ground would be able to easily detect any listening devices planted in the structure and remove them before occupancy, the newspaper reported. But the completed embassy was riddled with bugs, some even woven into cement. The structure was so compromised that it was never occupied.

“Security at an embassy construction site is tighter than when it is completed,” Boyle said. “You can do a lot of bad things then.”

But for firms that end up working on embassies, the rewards can be substantial and long-lasting.

“For me, it’s great to actually be able to go somewhere and do something that makes people’s lives better,” said Nels Hall, a principal at Yost Grube Hall Architecture. “Making their life safer and engaging the local culture is great.”

YGH Architecture has been involved with international work since the 1990s. After 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. embassy in Pakistan became a busy place. YGH was chosen to work on an expansion.

“That was an existing large building that tripled in size,” Hall said. “That cost almost $800 million in construction and lasted for six years.”

Years before, in 1999, the State Department adopted Standard Embassy Design (SED) model of construction. It called for generally squat, unremarkable structures that could withstand blasts from 2,000 pounds of TNT, surrounded by green lawns. They were often built far from city centers, in areas that planners hoped would be safe from would-be attackers.

Page Southerland Page, a national firm, has worked on embassy designs since the 1980s. James Wright, a principal with the firm, said that reduced construction times and costs were benefits of the SED model. However, it soon lost favor.

“The SED never quite blossomed into what the State Department wanted,” he said. “They wanted a three-sizes-fits-all design for large, middle and small embassies.”

The problem was that oftentimes the template didn’t fit the area context.

“We were the first to implement it in Phnom Penh (Cambodia),” he said. “It had to be seriously modified.”

Restrictions on everything from walls to window size were also a challenge, Wright said.

“One of the long lead items is the windows,” he said. “So what the government decided to do was to preorder them. Designers were stuck with two or three basic windows.”

The result was that U.S. embassies around the world looked nearly identical.

Following the election of Barrack Obama as president, the SED model was scrapped in 2009. The State Department adopted a philosophy of emphasizing design excellence. In addition to security, high priority was given to openness, transparency and civic engagement.

“We have seen a complete evolution,” Wright said. “Where we are (design wise) is not that different from where we were 30 years ago.”

The new philosophy comes with a high cost. The new U.S. embassy in London has a price tag of $1 billion – nearly $100 million over budget. Use of unique, blast-proof glass contributed substantially to that result.

“The pendulum tends to swing one way and now it has swung back,” Boyle said. “We are trying to put forth the image and values of the United States.”

Balancing security with embassies’ many other functions isn’t limited to the building architects. Landscape architects have to address the same challenges when trying to figure out the types and configuration of plants to use.

“When it is most challenging is when there is a high security threat,” said Marilee Hanks, a principal at Anderson Krygier Inc. “The State Department takes great precautions to make sure we obey security policies. Sometimes we can’t travel outside a certain boundary, which can make the research of native plants a challenge.”

Despite such challenges, U.S. government officials expect top-quality design, Hanks said, and plans are reviewed meticulously.

“In terms of design review, I have never experienced anything like it,” she said. “It’s about as tough as you can get. You have sometimes three different panel reviews.”

Despite all the headaches, embassy and consulate projects remain favorites for many architects who work on them. They afford designers a chance to visit remote parts of the world and experience foreign cultures.

“There is the inspiration of the people that have really dedicated their lives to the mission of diplomacy overseas,” Boyle said. “They were trying to represent the United States and work diplomatically to make the world a better place.”

The post Designing buildings like no others appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.