During a time of great political divide across the nation and widespread distrust of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., can architecture offer a practical solution to partisan politics?
Deadlock continues to fester on Capitol Hill. Congress’ approval rating ended the year at a meager 17%, and has hovered below the historic average (31%) since mid-2009. President-elect Donald Trump has stated that he plans to work with those on both sides of the aisle in Congress to accomplish his goals. Observers and experts predict Trump will have a tough go at it, even with a GOP-controlled Congress.
This begs the question, Is the “aisle” part of the problem in Washington? I’m not referring to the metaphorical divide between political parties, rather the physical layout of legislative spaces.
From K-12 schools to offices to universities, building owners across practically every sector are retooling their spaces to meet the needs of today’s innovation economy. Why not legislative spaces?
“In such a tumultuous period, shouldn’t we be questioning whether these spaces are working?” wrote New York Times architecture writer Allison Arieff, in a Nov. 2 opinion piece.
So much has changed in the business of governing—social and mass media, electronic voting, global convenings—yet the vast majority of spaces for political congregation remain virtually untouched, “frozen in time,” wrote Arieff.
She points to a study by Amsterdam-based creative agency XML that breaks down the design of 193 legislative buildings across the world. The most prominent layouts—opposing benches, classroom, and semicircle—were developed 165–215 years ago and remain intact with little modification. When updates are required, governments tend to restore these spaces, rather than rethink the layout.
There are outliers, though, including a meeting hall with zero tables and chairs for the European Union Council in Brussels. The layout, designed by XML and Jurgen Bey, utilizes blocky, interlocking furniture pieces that encourage council members to mingle. Check out XML’s report here.
Related Stories
Building Team | Jan 10, 2019
Skilled labor shortages continue to make off-site fabrication and construction attractive
But the AEC industry’s “culture” impedes greater acceptance, according to a recent National Institute of Building Sciences survey.
Building Team | Jan 7, 2019
2019 outlook: Firms not betting on another record-setting year
Despite the positive indicators for the market, AEC professionals remain largely cautious when it comes to growth prospects for 2019.
Building Team | Jan 4, 2019
Design-build delivery is setting new parameters for project management
FMI paper provides clues to what makes these contracts click (or not).
Building Team | Dec 11, 2018
And then there were two: HQ2 sites, in hindsight, seemed obvious
The two cities already had the greatest number of Amazon employees outside of Seattle.
Building Team | Oct 16, 2018
Dead lobby syndrome: An affliction only experience can cure
The competition for great tenants has rarely been as fierce as it is today.
Building Team | Aug 21, 2018
Five habits that are keeping your digital strategy from working
Strategies are always created with the best of intentions for improving business, the effort involved in executing the strategy – especially ones involving disruptive digital capabilities – is greatly underestimated.
Building Team | Aug 17, 2018
Silicon Valley is here. Get over it.
AEC firms continue to have angst about a tech-industry takeover of the market. One expert’s advice: “Embrace technology. Do not fear. You can shape it.”
Sponsored | Building Materials | Aug 1, 2018
Building for now... and the future
Metal building systems are often selected for large-sized structures, and with good reason.
Building Team | Jul 30, 2018
Construction tech is the new investment darling for VC funds
In the first half of 2018, venture capital firms invested $1.05 billion in global construction tech startups, setting a record high.