US Census Bureau Headquarters / SOM


Architects: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP
Location: Suitland, Maryland,
Project team: David Childs, FAIA / Gary Haney, AIA / Peter Magill, AIA / Elias Moubayed / Anthony Fieldman, AIA / Rod Garrett, AIA / Mark Igou, AIA / Aybars Asci, AIA / Kim Van Holsbeke / Takuya Yamauchi / Magd Fahmy / Noppon Psjutharnon / Devawongs Devakul Na Ayudhya / Joyce Ip / Michael Carline
Interior Design Team: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP: Stephen Apking, AIA / Peter Magill, AIA / Nazila Shabestari Duran, AIA / Nestor Santa-Cruz / Donald Holt / Dale Greenwald / Nicholas Cotton / Mary Broaddus / Catherine Haley / Cynthia Mirbach / Elizabeth Marr, AIA / Amber Giacometti / Ya Ching Hsueh / Celine Jeanne / Jennifer Lee / Ashley O’Neill / Michele Pate / Jeremy Singer
Total Building Area: 2.5 million gross square feet
Project Cost: $331 million (total of two phases)
Project year: 2004-2007
Photographs: Eduard Hueber/Arch Photo, Inc. / Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP

1253047619-auditorium-pod-and-facade 1253047642-cb-cafeteriadiningarea 1253047665-census-i0202 1253047702-cs-0404

ground floor plan
ground floor plan

Client/Owner: U.S. General Services Administration (GSA)
Tenant: U.S. Census Bureau
Structural Engineers: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP
Design Civil Engineer: Wiles Mensch Corporation
M/E/P Engineer: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP
Design/Build Contractor: Skanska USA Building Inc.
Design/Build Architect: HKS Architects, Inc. (Architect of Record)
Design/Build Structural Engineer: Walter P. Moore & Associates
Design/Build M/E/P Engineer: Soutland Industries / GHT Limited
Design/Build Civil Engineer: A. Morton Thomas and Associates
Associate Interior Architect: Metropolitan Architects & Planners (Programming and Space Planning)
Construction Manager: DMJM/Heery a Joint Venture
Planning/Landscape & Environmental Analysis: EDAW, Inc.
Fire Protection: Rolf Jenson & Associates
Cost Estimating: Project Management Services, Inc.
Vertical Transportation: Lerch, Bates & Associates, Inc.
Curtain Wall Consultant: CDC, Inc.
Security: Sako & Associates
Parking: Carl Walker, Inc.
Blast: Hinman Consulting Engineers
Food Services: Hopkins Food Specialist, Inc.
Lighting Design: Domingo Gonzalez Associates (base building) / Cline, Bettridge, Bernstein Lighting Design (interiors)
Telecommunications: Shen Milsom & Wilke
Audio, Visual & Acoustical: Polysonics, Inc.


Background & Overview

Situated on 80 wooded acres of the Suitland Federal Center near downtown Washington, D.C., the new 2.5-million-square-foot headquarters for the U.S. Census Bureau houses all the Bureau’s 6,000 employees. The Bureau’s previous workplace model was a 1930s ideal with offices arranged along long corridors – a model so highly codified for government workplaces that entire building typologies (finger buildings, etc) were created to accommodate the idea. ’s goal in designing this new headquarters for Census was to bring the very best and latest thinking on architecture and the corporate workplace from the business world and apply it to a government agency.

To minimize this necessarily large building’s presence in its natural setting, the design team limited the office program to eight stories of height and used a variety of other architectural and sustainable-design strategies to reduce the real and perceived impact on the site. In the end, the large corporate campus explores an architectural expression that celebrates and heightens its relationship to the landscape.

section B
section B

Given the size of the building and the need to update the Bureau’s organizational system, SOM had to develop a series of innovative techniques for the architecture, space planning and way finding. Also included in the program is an assortment of amenities, such as medical facilities, library, an auditorium, dining area, a credit union, and a gymnasium.

Architecture and Sustainability

Due to the shear size of the project and the sensitivity of the site, a unique, holistic architectural language was developed. Sustainability was interpreted in formal as well as mechanical terms. Two separate buildings grow from one single mass, cleaved apart to create a central garden that integrates the building with its landscape, while maintaining one cohesive vision.

By eroding the mass, and developing materials to camouflage the edges of the enclosure, SOM developed a concept that breaks down the enormous scale of this building, makes it permeable and blurs the boundaries between building and landscape. The curved office buildings have two enclosures. The outside edges that face the woods are covered in a brise soleil of laminated, wooden pieces that create dappled patterns of shadow and warm light inside the offices, suggesting a forest interior. Their size and frequency is determined by the scale of the human body; occupants can view the exterior clearly while being shielded from the sun. The FSC-certified wood – marine-grade, white oak – is harvested according to sustainable guidelines.


Underlying this “wood veil” is a system of green tinted precast spandrels and glazed vision panels that match the cast of the landscape. The inside edges that face the courtyard are bare and fully glazed to maximize daylight. A finely fritted veil of curving lines echoes the wooden sunshades.

The façade of the building that faces the central courtyard has large windows strategically placed at intervals which protrude from or are recessed into the building. Clad in Brazilian Ipe, these windows indicate the location of support nodes, containing office-related spaces such as lounges, conference meeting areas, etc. – program elements that support the work areas. Sunlight and views to the landscaped courtyard penetrate the building at these locations.

The adjacent parking garages are sheathed in a green, wire armature for ivy. When fully grown, this “ivy veil” will comprise a ‘skin’ of leaves that filter light, increase oxygen content within the garages, and allow for natural ventilation.

To achieve a silver rating from LEED, the designers incorporated many other sustainable techniques, including water reclamation, recycled building materials, minimal energy consumption and natural daylighting into the design. In addition to these prescribed sustainability measures, the building’s shape, massing, and cladding create a new language for sustainable architecture.


With its wood-clad offices and ivy-draped parking structures, the Census Bureau blurs the distinction between the building and landscape by camouflaging both the structures and their scales.


The interiors team worked very closely with the architectural team to create one fluid space, despite the fact that the structures are divided both in plan and in terms of phasing. First, the client’s program requirements were analyzed to develop criteria for the interior architecture and base-building design. At a macro level, the anticipated sizes for user groups determined the logical break points in the massing between the two buildings. At the floor scale, a scheme was developed to determine the lease span depth and the location of support areas, as well as a concept for the shared nodes, located in the window boxes. Other criteria developed during this analysis include ceiling heights, loading requirements, long-span construction and environmental criteria. As the base building design developed, the interiors group rigorously tested each proposed scenario for compliance with the established standards.

Not only did the building need to comply with the area requirements, it had to be carefully planned to provide a functional and efficient workplace for the Bureau’s employees. After researching international best practices in office spaces, the interior team selected an open office plan that brings in optimum natural light – a fairly major change for a government agency. Throughout the entire building, open workspaces with low partitions surround the perimeter to allow for natural light exposure and easy communication. Offices with glass fronts and internal support rooms are located in the core, easily accessible to each work group.

For maximum flexibility, the work areas can be organized either horizontally or vertically. However, most directorates are organized in a series of two story units, each with similar components, but adaptable to the mission-specific requirements of each directorate. The units are connected vertically by an internal stairway linked to support nodes. These nodes provide pantries, lounges, copy centers and gathering spaces, where employees can have chance meetings with their colleagues.


Lastly, the team developed and employed three major unifying and wayfinding concepts: the Street, the Boxes and the Color Spectrum. The Street is the main passageway to access the amenities, such as the café, the fitness center, the auditorium, etc. – in effect making it the public highway through the campus. Special attention was paid to drawing the maximum amount of natural light into this underground area – by providing views of the outside through portals. Reiterating the subterranean level of the Street, it is lined with a tectonic rockwall, which hides service stations and activates this public space, and is illuminated by spectrum lighting from one end to the other. . The amenities off the Street are housed in individual Boxes, branching off the core of the building and engaging the surrounding landscape.

The Color Spectrum is the final element that pulls the campus together. Based on the Bureau’s desire to incorporate nature into the building, the color scheme was designed to resonate from natural hues and sun lighting into vibrant, energetic colors. Color tones in the areas near the curtain wall are calm and natural, since the exterior acts as a natural way finding mechanism. However, when one travels towards the core of the building, the support nodes and the Street, bright, vibrant colors are used as a graphic, spatial tool. Further, the color schemes differ both horizontally and vertically. As one passes from one end of the building to the other, the color spectrum is revealed horizontally. In addition, as one passes from the ground floor to the top floor, the patterns in elevator corridors become darker and increasingly prominent.

Cite: "US Census Bureau Headquarters / SOM" 21 Sep 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed 29 May 2015. <>
  • C.C.C.P.

    so so.

  • Emerson Gámez B.

    I like.

  • cm_scirocco

    “Their size and frequency is determined by the scale of the human body; occupants can view the exterior clearly while being shielded from the sun.”

    Notice how the picture below this line pretty clearly disagrees with what their saying… Never believe the hype.

    • Tuf-Pak

      Haha, That sure is a lot of sun not being shaded.

      I’m stunned by how projects in the US (particularly big bureaucratic projects, both governmental and corporate) get the spirit just pounded out of them. Even when, as this project seem to project, there’s a real interest in something new.

      I can imagine that the conceptual work for this project was strong…and the idea is meritorious. But the result is sort of soulless like any other “High Design” U.S. project: it’s just one with less “tech-y” aluminum and more “kicky” wood.

      I’m saddened that often when architecture is discussed you have to tag on “…pretty good for an American project”.

  • victor a.

    I do not remember well but i have seen this facade before in archdaily, i guess some project in Spain maybe. I thought that SOM was going to be more creative and innovative. So boring facade, too repetitive ……..

  • oscar falcón lara

    I think it reflects a very corporate, governmental ideal of a work space, other than that I like the facade finish, it’s unique but I think it is a very standard 70′s big box building. If that is what they were going for than well done, if not, maybe having so many people work on a project like this is not such a good idea. I know they are a high standing respectable firm, nothing against them, it’s just that they have designed many buildings better than this one IMHO.

    • Tom in London

      Imagine going to work here every day. I’d rather be dead.

      • SecondRate

        Tom in London,
        My friend worked in this building shortly after it’s completion and she said the same thing…only it was because she was working for the F*&^ing cencus bureau. Sticks or no sticks, it’s still much nicer than the box she was in prior to this and even though I’m not real excited about this project, it sure beats every other american suburban office building owned by Uncle Sam.

  • Shropshire Architect

    I like the organic nature of the exterior, which is linked with the floor and some wall finishes.

  • Archandy

    “its wood-clad offices and ivy-draped parking structures, the Census Bureau blurs the distinction between the building and landscape by camouflaging both the structures and their scales”

    From one or two specific viewing points outside, maybe this works, but from inside it just looks like bent jail bars. Not great symbolism for office workers.

  • tk

    standard american office park architecture. the money would have been better spent on employee health insurance.

  • robert

    how do you clean those windows?

  • budi rawakopi

    good shading solutions

  • Matt

    I like the natural light resources used here.

  • max

    Hate the wood cladding. I’m sure the people in the offices do too. Looking out at those? Come on…

  • ARQmilo

    I can´t imagine how will be the facade´s elements maintenance.

  • Zied

    Right, the facade is cool and well designed, but you really look at the provided typical floor plan…..Wow, how can people work in such conditions, those cubicles in such arrangment are devastating, coz the deal is park your brain outside dude as tom peters says.

  • Eric

    I first drove by the building 3 weeks ago and I enjoyed the architecture. However, as I now drive by it everyday I realize that this building turned its back to the neighborhood. So many workers are there everyday it could have easily brought more development to the area and money. I was taught that a good design has a relationship to its surroundings or can at least help improve them. This was a HUGH wasted opportunity in taking a step in transforming a neighborhood. Anyone would understand this if the took photographs of the entire site. FAIL.