Park Service: Trump Arch Would Harm 37 Historic Properties

The National Park Service has identified 37 historic properties that it says would be adversely affected by the 250-foot arch President Trump wants to build in Memorial Circle, the traffic roundabout just below Arlington National Cemetery.

The document, released this week, marks a rare note of concern from inside Trump's own administration. "The significance of these properties derives not only from their individual architectural or commemorative importance, but also from their spatial, visual, symbolic, and ceremonial interrelationships," the report reads.

The findings are part of a review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires federal agencies to weigh the effects of their actions on historic properties and try to minimize harm. The assessment says the arch would interfere with the deliberate connection between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington House, the former home of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee. The bridge alignment and its ceremonial landscape, the report says, were "intended to physically and symbolically unite North and South." The Park Service says harms would extend to the National Mall, the U.S. Capitol and the Washington Monument and its grounds.

At 250 feet, the arch would be more than double the height of the nearby Lincoln Memorial.

A group of Vietnam War veterans has sued to block construction, arguing the arch would be a visual affront and requires congressional approval — which Trump denies and has not sought.

The White House told NPR the arch is a "fitting addition to the monumental axis between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington House" and says it will "enhance the visitor experience at Arlington National Cemetery." An Interior Department spokesperson said the structure "will offer stunning views of Washington, D.C. from its observation deck" in a spot that is "currently a barren piece of grass."

The Park Service and Interior did not answer NPR's questions about whether other sites were considered. The Section 106 review began only in June, after the design had already won approval from the first of two federal arts commissions — a sequence Ed Stierli of the National Parks Conservation Association called unusual. "It feels like more of a box-checking than an actual, legitimate process," he said.

Greg Werkheiser of Cultural Heritage Partners said opponents object to "the absurdity of locating an arch this size and of this design in the middle of what is almost a civil sacred landscape."

David Maloney, D.C.'s state historic preservation officer, wrote to the Park Service in June proposing an alternative: a newly created traffic oval near the Frederick Douglass Bridge over the Anacostia River in southeast D.C.