Veteran Architect Accepts High-Profile White House Ballroom Commission
Shalom Baranes, a 75-year-old architect with an esteemed career in Washington DC, has agreed to design President Donald Trump's privately funded $400 million ballroom addition to the White House. The project, which will add 90,000 square feet of space, has immediately sparked controversy within architectural circles and among preservationists.
Impressive Resume Meets Controversial Project
Baranes brings a formidable portfolio to the table, having overseen critical projects including repairs to the Pentagon after the 9/11 attacks and modernization of the Treasury Building. His firm has constructed numerous offices and residences throughout the nation's capital, establishing him as one of Washington's most respected architectural figures.
However, this particular commission has proven exceptionally contentious. The previous architect, James McCrery, abandoned the project over disagreements with Trump regarding the ballroom's size, leaving behind a trail of legal obstacles and preservationist complaints.
Colleagues Express Bafflement and Concern
The architectural community has responded with widespread skepticism. Twenty-nine architects signed a letter urging Baranes to decline the project, describing the proposed ballroom - which would be approximately twice the size of the White House's main building - as "the tail wagging the dog."
Nancy MacWood, a prominent DC preservationist, stated she was "totally baffled why he would take this on," while David Schwarz, a fellow Yale School of Architecture alumnus and prominent DC architect, questioned "why he would put himself in such a hot seat right now."
High-Risk, High-Reward Proposition
The White House ballroom represents both extraordinary risk and potential legacy. With only three major alterations to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue over the past 115 years, successfully completing this addition would cement Baranes's architectural reputation for generations.
Some speculated financial pressures motivated Baranes's decision, but the architect dispelled this notion during an interview at his $8 million Georgetown home, stating "No, we're not laying people off right now." Bound by a nondisclosure agreement, Baranes declined to reveal his compensation for the project.
Political Ironies and Professional Pragmatism
The appointment carries particular irony given Baranes's background and previous political positions. A Jewish-Libyan refugee who fled antisemitic riots in Tripoli after World War II, Baranes wrote a Washington Post column in March 2017 decrying Trump's travel ban, stating "My hope is that the Trump administration will take actions to ensure that the travel ban is indeed temporary."
Yet Baranes has demonstrated consistent willingness to work with demanding developers focused on maximizing property size and profitability - qualities Trump has exhibited throughout his real estate career. This professional pragmatism may explain his acceptance of the commission despite political differences.
Design Compromises and Continued Criticism
Baranes has already implemented design modifications aimed at addressing concerns. He informed the US Commission of Fine Arts in January that his plans include removing a large pediment over the ballroom's portico to reduce its visual profile, though the structure will still accommodate approximately 1,000 guests - significantly more than the initial 650-person estimate.
These adjustments have placated some critics, but opposition remains substantial. Paul Goldberger, former architecture critic for The New York Times, recently described the ballroom as "a huge, dumb box" and suggested Trump essentially serves as the primary designer with Baranes making only nominal contributions.
Support Amidst Skepticism
Not all colleagues have condemned Baranes's decision. Richard Nash Gould, a New York architect and Trump supporter who attended Yale with Baranes, told The New York Times "If I had to pick who would do this job, it would be Shalom." When asked why Baranes accepted the commission, Gould responded "Why wouldn't he? It's an incredibly interesting job."
Other industry observers suggest Baranes may believe he can execute the project more successfully than his predecessor, bringing his considerable experience with complex Washington developments to bear on one of the most scrutinized architectural projects in recent memory.
The president remains closely involved with the ballroom project, regularly meeting with Baranes, and the two reportedly have established a functional working relationship despite the surrounding controversies. As construction proceeds on the site where the East Wing stood until its sudden demolition in October, all eyes remain on whether this veteran architect can navigate the extraordinary pressures of expanding America's most iconic residence.
