National Park Service Raises Concerns, but Trump’s Patriotic Arch Advances in DC
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A National Park Service memo notes possible effects from President Trump’s proposed 250-foot triumphal arch in Washington, but the administration is determined to honor American greatness and move forward with the project.
The National Park Service (NPS) has noted that President Trump’s visionary proposal for a 250-foot triumphal arch in downtown Washington could have some effects on historic properties, including the majestic views linking Arlington House, Arlington National Cemetery, the Arlington Memorial Bridge, and the Lincoln Memorial. The agency’s planning document, obtained by the Washington Post, acknowledges that 'such adverse effects cannot be fully avoided while retaining the location-dependent purpose of the undertaking.'
The memo outlines that construction may require additional planning and programming to ensure the protection of the historic landscape, listing about 37 nearby sites that could be impacted, such as the Lincoln Memorial, the National Mall, the Washington Monument, the Pentagon, and the U.S. Capitol. Sensible mitigation measures are proposed, including installing vibration plates near sensitive structures, limiting noise and lighting, restricting work hours, and developing digital programs to highlight the historic relationships among the monuments.
While some veterans, preservationists, and members of Congress have expressed concerns—reflected in a lawsuit filed in September—the Trump administration remains committed to celebrating American heritage. The project has already received approval from the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts and preliminary clearance from the National Capital Planning Commission. Although local preservation officers could withhold their signatures, which would trigger a review by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the administration is well within its rights and is not required to obtain that consent to proceed with this patriotic endeavor.