The National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Society of Architectural Historians (SAH), and the National Organization of Minority Architects (NOMA), Docomomo US, and the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) have joined the American Institute of Architects (AIA) in voicing deep opposition to a proposed executive order under consideration by President Donald Trump that would mandate classical architectural styles for federal buildings. 

Major architecture groups align against Trump's Executive Order

The cascading statements come as the draft text of the statement is published by major media outlets. 

In a statement posted to the National Trust website, for example, the group writes: "While the National Trust values -- and protects -- traditional and classical buildings throughout the country, to censor and stifle the full record of American architecture by requiring federal buildings to be designed, and even altered, to comply with a narrow list of styles determined by the federal government is inconsistent with the values of historic preservation." 

The statement adds, "The draft order would put at risk federal buildings across the country that represent our full American story, and would have a chilling effect on new design, including the design of federal projects in historic districts."

The Society of Architectural Historians followed up with their own perspective via a statement on their website: "The Society of Architectural Historians (SAH) expresses strong opposition to the proposed Executive Order “Making Federal Buildings Beautiful Again. [...] since our inception in 1940, we have come to understand that most significant public architecture in the United States has resulted from the intersection of monumentality, permanence, and aesthetic significance and the specific local demands of site and community. While we appreciate and encourage the attention paid to new federal courthouses, federal public buildings in the national Capitol region, and all federal buildings in the U.S. with budgets in excess of $50 million, we nonetheless remain convinced that the dictation of style—any style—is not the path to excellence in civic architecture."

Following that, NOMA released a statement of their own indicating that the group "stands squarely behind the statement issued by the [AIA] in opposition to the potential Executive Order requiring that all Federal architecture be designed in a neoclassical style." NOMA added, "While we, as an organization of architects and designers, are capable of appreciating buildings designed in a classical style – both existing and new – the idea that all Federal architecture would be restricted to neoclassical expression is particularly troubling in its cultural exclusivity and imposition of substantial limitations on design thinking."

The NOMA statement continues: "Given the historical significance of NOMA, rooted in the African-American experience, we are especially cognizant of the notion that for many of our members, such buildings in certain contexts stand as symbols and painful reminders of centuries of oppression and the harsh realities of racism. As architects, we are called to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. We have a duty to advocate for design that reflects the values of the people we serve: ALL of the people. The proposed Executive Order, if enacted, would signal the perceived superiority of a Eurocentric aesthetic. This notion is completely unacceptable and counterproductive to the kind of society that fosters justice, equity, diversity and inclusion. Freedom of architectural expression is a right that should be upheld at the highest levels of government."

In their own statement, Docomomo US offered their own rebuttal of the proposed executive order, stating, "The draft executive order [...] would roll back Federal architectural policy by nearly sixty years and set a dangerous precedent for how we value our nation’s architectural diversity and history." The statement continues, "We, along with our colleagues at [AIA], oppose this change in policy to promote any style of architecture over another for federal buildings across the country. This decision could create long standing issues with new and also existing facilities that have achieved significance since the 1960s."

The ASLA echoed these sentiments in a statement published on the group's website. The statement reads: "The American Society of Landscape Architects has profound concerns about a proposed executive order that would impose uniform style mandates on federal building projects. Our nation’s design professionals are admired around the world for their creativity, innovation, and diversity of thought. Designers of the built environment should not be confined by arbitrary constraints that would limit federal building projects to a single style.  ASLA believes that the public interest is best served by a collaborative place-based process that continues to produce federal projects that reflect the unique needs and values of each community and its citizens."

Reading the Text

The proposed executive order, titled Making Federal Buildings Beautiful Again, would specifically require not just that new federal buildings be designed to invoke "the classical architecture of democratic Athens and republican Rome," but would also snuff out input from all design professionals with regards to the planning and design of federal building projects. According to draft text for the executive order first published by the Chicago Sun-Times, the order would scrap the existing design review panels employed by the General Services Administration to guide the design and planning of federal facilities with public comments and new design review panels "composed of the public to hear their views on the proposed design."

The text goes on to state that "with respect to the public panels, participants shall not include artists, architects, engineers, art or architecture critics, members of the building industry or any other members of the public that are affiliated with any interest group or organization involved with the design, construction or otherwise." 

Not only that, but the order could potentially spur the demolition or drastic renovation of existing federal buildings that do not meet the order's strict stylistic mandate, as the National Trust anticipates. For example, the text reads: "When renovating, reducing, or expanding applicable Federal public buildings that were not constructed in a preferred architectural style the feasibility of redesign in a preferred architectural style should be examined. Where feasible and not economical such redesign should be given serious consideration, especially with regard to the building's exterior elevations."

The National Trust continues their statement: "As preservationists, we know that the country has been well served by that standard, evidenced by the rich architectural record represented in the diverse portfolio of federal buildings, and by the expertise of architects, engineers, builders, and artists who would be excluded from critical decision-making roles by the executive order. We strongly oppose any effort to impose a narrow set of styles for future federal projects based on the architectural tastes of a few individuals that will diminish, now and for the future, our rich legacy of federal architecture."

In addition to the above changes, the executive order envisions a new executive committee made up of people hand-picked by the president to prepare a report "recommending updates to the Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture (Guiding Principles) to reflect" the new emphasis on classical aesthetics. "Such report shall," the text states, "explain how the recommended updates [...] promote the construction and/or renovation of applicable Federal public buildings that command respect by the public for their beauty and visually."