NCPC Approves Preliminary Plans, Defers Height Decision
The National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) voted to advance President Donald Trump’s 250-foot-tall triumphal arch proposal, marking a key milestone before its final approval. The commission, led by Trump allies, approved preliminary site and building plans for the structure, which is set to be constructed on Memorial Circle—a traffic circle between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. However, the panel deferred a decision on whether the 1910 Height of Buildings Act, which limits federal structures to 130 feet, applies to the project. The vote, which passed 8-4, followed a staff recommendation to revise the arch’s design to comply with the height law. The commission suggested reducing the mezzanine and observation level to 130 feet and 20 feet, respectively, while allowing the 60-foot Lady Liberty statue on top to remain. If approved, the arch would be nearly twice as tall as the Lincoln Memorial and 30 feet taller than the world’s current tallest arch, Mexico City’s Plaza de la República.
Design Details and Location Controversies
The arch’s design, created by Harrison Design, features a 250-foot-tall structure with a 60-foot golden Lady Liberty statue atop it, flanked by two grey birds. The firm, which includes architect Nicolas Charbonneau—a key figure in the project—initially proposed the concept in April 2025, with sketches later shared by Trump during a White House fundraiser. The proposal’s location on Memorial Circle has drawn sharp criticism, as the space is a historically significant vista symbolizing the reunification of the North and South after the Civil War. Opponents argue the arch would disrupt the carefully curated view between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington Cemetery, a site of national mourning. The National Park Service (NPS) manages the federal land where the arch would be built, and the project has faced concerns about traffic safety, pedestrian access, and the impact on ceremonies at Arlington.
Legal and Process Controversies
The arch’s approval process has raised questions about legal compliance and transparency. The Department of Interior argued in a June memo that the Height of Buildings Act does not apply to federal buildings, but the NCPC historically has enforced the law. The commission’s staff recommended adjustments to the design to meet the 130-foot limit, but the vote to defer the height issue has sparked debates over whether the project is circumventing federal regulations. Additionally, the arch’s design selection bypassed traditional open competitions, which have historically chosen architects for Washington’s iconic memorials, such as the Washington Monument and Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Harrison Design was not selected through a widely advertised competition, and the project’s swift approval has been criticized as a departure from decades of planning precedents. The Commission of Fine Arts, a separate federal agency, had previously approved the arch’s design in May, though its review occurred without public input or congressional oversight.
Public and Expert Opposition
The proposal has faced significant backlash from historians, veterans, and community groups. Critics argue the arch’s scale and location prioritize political symbolism over historical preservation. Cynthia Morrison, a Gold Star mother, called the project “offensive,” emphasizing the symbolic importance of the Lincoln Memorial-Arlington Cemetery vista. Michael Lemmon, a Vietnam veteran and lawsuit plaintiff, warned the arch could interfere with Arlington’s operations, including burials and ceremonies. Charles Birnbaum, founder of The Cultural Landscape Foundation, criticized the project as an example of “a small little club of people that have a fairly narrow lens,” highlighting the lack of public review. The National Capital Planning Commission received over an hour of testimony from opponents during its meeting, with many urging Congress to intervene. Trump has repeatedly dismissed the need for congressional approval, stating, “We don’t need anything from Congress.”
Next Steps and Unanswered Questions
The NCPC has not set a date for the final vote on the arch, but the commission’s chair, Will Scharf, indicated a decision could come in September. The project also requires approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which must assess its impact on flight paths near Ronald Reagan National Airport. The NPS has requested revisions to pedestrian accessibility, lighting, and traffic infrastructure, including 32 proposed traffic poles and eight stanchions. Construction, if approved, would follow an aggressive schedule, with federal officials seeking 20-hour-per-day work over two years. The White House has not disclosed the arch’s cost estimate, though it has acknowledged that some public funds may be used. Meanwhile, the project’s reliance on Trump’s allies in key agencies—such as Rodney Mims Cook, who approved the arch as head of the Commission of Fine Arts—has drawn scrutiny. As the debate continues, the arch remains a polarizing symbol of the intersection between presidential ambition, historical preservation, and federal governance.
Find more reporting in our News section.
