Blog by: John Hayman
President Truman established the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) on July 1, 1949.[1] This combined multiple government agencies, including the Public Buildings Administration, into one singular federal agency.[2] In 1962, Daniel Monynihan authored the so-called “Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture” (hereafter “the Principles”).[3] First, he wrote that federal office buildings must provide “efficient and economical facilities for the use of Government agencies.” Second, and perhaps most critically, federal buildings must “provide visual testimony to the dignity, enterprise, vigor, and stability of the American Government.”[4] The directive discouraged the adoption of an “official style,” arguing that “design must flow from the architectural profession to the government, and not vice versa.”[5] By 1985, the GSA began providing “government-wide policy oversight and guidance for federal real property management,”[6] and by 1994 had established the “Design Excellence Program,” created to streamline the way architects and engineers construct, renovate, and repair federal buildings.[7]
In the early 20th century, the federal government pushed for a style that would announce the “federal presence” of a government-erected building, i.e., neo-classical architecture.[8] Since the implementation of the Design Excellence Program in 1994, only six of the seventy-eight federal buildings have been built using a classical or traditional style.[9] On December 21, 2020, President Donald Trump issued a controversial Executive Order “[O]n Promoting Beautiful Federal Civic Architecture.”[10] The order expressed a preference for traditional or classically styled architecture and was subject to harsh criticism.[11] The New York Times Editorial Board responded to the order by posing the question “What’s so great about fake roman temples? A spectacular campaign to elevate the design of federal buildings is under threat from small-minded classicists.”[12]
The modern style of Federal architecture, especially as practiced since the 1970’s, has been the subject of harsh criticism.[13] Even the GSA themselves admit that “[m]any buildings of this era represent a Federal office building style that is massive, severe, and disengaged from its surroundings.”[14] Indeed, “ordinary people often looked on the results with dismay,” and “more and more people wondered whether what they had lost was matched by the new world being created by modernism.”[15] This was the case then and is still the case today. In 2020, a study found that Americans generally preferred courthouses with the following attributes: columns, pediments, a white color, and use of symmetry.[16] Likewise, a 2010 study found that the “radical changes” to the concept of “openness” in federal courthouse architecture since the 1990s, pushed largely by a group of well-known architects, was largely divorced from what ordinary people tended to think on the matter.[17] In October of 2020, a study conducted by the National Civic Art Society found an overwhelming preference for traditional architecture in federal buildings, with over 7 in 10 (72%) of Americans preferring it to modern architecture.[18] This majority held up when accounting for age, sex, political party, race, education, and income.[19]
But, aside from the sheer beauty and splendor associated with the traditional styles of architecture, these styles are also more sustainable. There is an argument to be made that, because “the most sustainable buildings will stand for a very long time because they are well built and…their design reflects enduring human preferences,” neoclassical and traditional architecture should be favored over modern designs.[20] While traditional and classical architecture may carry with it a higher initial price tag,[21] the inherent beauty associated with styles allows them to adapt to new functions, thus lasting longer and being more sustainable in the long run.[22] These critics argue that “sustainability in architecture” is not just about “recyclable materials and resource-saving techniques.”[23] Instead, we should think about “what actually guarantees buildings a high degree of sustainability in terms of a long life.”[24] Indeed, “structures like stone boundaries can endure a thousand years or more with very minimal or almost no maintenance,” while “today’s modern architecture designs tend to last only a generation or less before calling for costly maintenance.”[25]
Traditional architecture may also prove to be more sustainable due to its preference for locally sourced and available resources.[26] According to some scholars, “[m]aintaining the ingenuity of traditional design in the modern age promotes sustainability, reducing the use of fossil fuels.”[27] Indeed, for “thousands of years,” construction of architectural projects primarily relied on “locally-sourced materials…designed to suit the particular climate, geography, and…cultural customs.”[28] Modern architectural trends have failed to yield a more sustainable or environmentally friendly building practices. In 2020, the United Nations found the building sector to be responsible for “38% of all energy-related CO2 emissions.”[29] The building sector would need to halve its current output to meet emissions goals. Further enhancing the need for locally centered traditional architecture is the recent spate of natural disasters that cost the United States tens of billions of dollars in 2021 alone.[30] If current practices continue, these destroyed structures will likely be rebuilt from reinforced concrete, which has a lifespan of only fifty to one hundred years.[31]
By contrast, “well-constructed buildings are humanity’s greatest recycling industry.”[32] Comparatively, materials used to construct modern buildings are among “the most ubiquitous and environmentally destructive” materials available.[33] Building even a two-bedroom house creates over 80 tons of carbon- about 40 times greater than the average household uses per year.[34] The process to make concrete produces around 180kg of CO2 per ton.[35] Steel is even worse, coming in at a whopping 1.85 tons of CO2 per ton produced. [36] Sandstone, by contrast, has a carbon footprint of 77 kilograms per ton.[37] Wood is potentially carbon neutral.[38] Why, then, do we continue to build structures that nobody wants, destined to be destroyed in the coming decades? Our civic architecture is meant to fulfill a greater purpose than mere utility. The obsession with “form over function” ignores a crucial component of human life – that we crave, even need things with no functional purpose whatsoever.[39] Instead of embodying the “majesty” of the law, these federal courthouses built in the modern style express “contempt for ordinary taste.”[40] Such structures are anti-democratic at best. At worst, they will inevitably contribute to environmental calamity as they are continually torn down and replaced. Our federal architecture should embody the values of the American people. It should not serve as an experiment for the pipedreams of a sheltered elite. While this author would not go as far as to impose an official style on all new federal buildings, it appears the Principles have outlived their usefulness. Instead of federal design flowing from the architectural sector to the government, it should flow from the people to the government.
[1] Our Mission’s Evolution, U.S. Gen. Serv. Admin., https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/mission-and-background/our-missions-evolution (last visited Nov. 9, 2022) [https://perma.cc/S8F5-QJAL]. x
[2] Id.
[3] Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture, U.S. Gen. Serv. Admin., https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-and-construction/design-excellence/design-excellence-program/guiding-principles-for-federal-architecture (last visited Nov. 9, 2022) [https://perma.cc/PC4S-J4U9].
[4] Id.
[5] Id.
[6] U.S. Gen. Serv. Admin., supra note i.
[7] Design Excellence Program, U.S. Gen. Serv. Admin., https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-and-construction/design-excellence-program-overview/design-excellence-program (last visited Apr. 17, 2023) [https://perma.cc/SR67-WDN6].
[8] Daniel Brook, A Blueprint For The Future, Legal Affairs, https://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/November-December-2005/feature_brook_novdec05.msp [https://perma.cc/933G-4D5V] (last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
[9] American’s Preferred Architecture For Federal Buildings, Nat’l Civic Art Soc’y (Oct, 2020), https://www.civicart.org/americans-preferred-architecture-for-federal-buildings [https://perma.cc/4TAC-FVVH].
[10] Executive Order on Promoting Beautiful Federal Civic Architecture, The White House (Dec. 21, 2020), https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-promoting-beautiful-federal-civic-architecture/ [https://perma.cc/LUJ5-PCCH].
[11] Id.
[12] What’s So Great About Fake Roman Temples?, N.Y. Times (Feb. 7, 2020), https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/07/opinion/federal-buildings-classical.html [https://perma.cc/YFM6-YG4L].
[13] See Hannah Simonson, The ‘70s Turn 50: Divergences in American Architecture, do.co,mo.mo_us (Aug. 17, 2020), https://docomomo-us.org/news/the-70s-turn-50-divergences-in-american-architecture [https://perma.cc/7RR9-YLCH].
[14] Marcel Bruer, Growth Efficiency & Modernism, GEN. Serv. Admin. (1979), https://www.gsa.gov/cdnstatic/GEMbook.pdf [https://perma.cc/T9WU-DB4K].
[15] Nathan Glazer, From a Cause to a Style 2-3 (Princeton Univ. Press 2009).
[16] Jack L. Nasar, What Should Courthouses Look Like? Architexturez: ‘Patterns’ Digit. Libr. (2020), https://patterns.architexturez.net/doc/az-cf-206835 [https://perma.cc/EAQ6-2HUU].
[17] See generally Debajyoti Pati, Et Al., Occupants’ Perceptions of Openness in Federal Courthouses, 27 J. of Architectural Plan. and Rsch. 257-269 (2010).
[18] Nat’l Civic Art Soc’y, supra note ix.
[19] Id.
[20] Catesby Leigh, Why America Needs Classical Architecture, City J. (2019), https://www.city-journal.org/america-needs-classical-architecture [https://perma.cc/3VT6-4YK2].
[21] Amir Mehdi Shodja et al., The Relationship between quasi neoclassical façade and Sustainable Architectural Principles intended to Optimize Energy Consumption (Case Study: Tehran Region 1), 3 J. of Energy Mgmt. and Tech. 42 (2019).
[22] Vickie Isabella Westen, Beautiful Buildings Are More Sustainable, ScienceNordic (Feb. 23, 2018), https://sciencenordic.com/architecture-denmark-design/beautiful-buildings-are-more-sustainable/1454273 [https://perma.cc/T974-UPV4].
[23] Robust - Durability, usefulness and beauty as criteria for sustainability, Royal Danish Acad. (Dec. 10, 2017), https://royaldanishacademy.com/news/robust-det-holdbare-det-brugbare-og-det-skonne-som-baeredygtighedsparameter [https://perma.cc/MRF8-J2FL].
[24] Id.
[25] Traditional Architecture vs Modern Architecture, Foyr, https://foyr.com/learn/traditional-architecture-v-s-modern-architecture/ (last visited Nov. 10, 2022) [https://perma.cc/V59Q-4TRS]. (last visited Nov. 10, 2022)
[26] = Traditional architecture: The “Original Green”, Univ. of Notre Dame School of Architecture (Sep. 17, 2009), https://architecture.nd.edu/news-events/news/sustainable-architecture-the-original-green/ [https://perma.cc/VUC3-EMXA].
[27] Id.
[28] Kimberly Mok, How Traditional Architecture Is Inspiring Tomorrow’s Climate-Responsive Hotels, trip savvy (Aug. 29, 2022), https://www.tripsavvy.com/traditional-architecture-inspiring-climate-responsive-hotels-6502233 [https://perma.cc/FVT7-RS76].
[29] Building sector emissions hit record high, but low-carbon pandemic recovery can help transform sector – UN Report, UN Env’t Programme (Dec. 16, 2020), https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/building-sector-emissions-hit-record-high-low-carbon-pandemic [https://perma.cc/42DE-SBTL].
[30] Billion – Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters, Nat’l Ctr. for Env’t Info. (2023), https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/events/US/2021 [https://perma.cc/568A-N5MK].
[31] Guy Keulemans, The problem with reinforced concrete, The Conversation (June 17, 2016), https://theconversation.com/the-problem-with-reinforced-concrete-56078 [https://perma.cc/YR89-PXVZ].
[32] Andrew Hunt, Not built to last, The Critic (Oct. 15, 2021), https://thecritic.co.uk/not-built-to-last/ [https://perma.cc/436L-VTR9].
[33] Id.
[34] Id.
[35] Id.
[36] Id.
[37] Id.
[38] Hunt, supra note xxxii.
[39] Roger Scruton, Why Beauty Matters (BBC Two 2009), https://vimeo.com/549715999.
[40] Andrew Ferguson, Trump’s Beautiful Proposal for Federal Architecture, The Atlantic (Feb. 20, 2020), https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/the-case-for-making-federal-buildings-beautiful-again/606829/ [https://perma.cc/BC8D-XM7Y].