Heritage talks end over Trump’s proposed Washington arch

The US Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has ended negotiations aimed at reaching an agreement over President Donald Trump’s proposed triumphal arch in Washington, moving the project towards formal comments to the Interior Secretary. [2] [3]

The decision on 24 September does not authorise construction or complete the historic-preservation review. The council must still submit its comments, and the Interior Secretary must consider and respond to them before making a final project decision. [2]

The arch is proposed for Memorial Circle on Columbia Island, at the western end of Arlington Memorial Bridge in Washington, DC. Its main structure would rise about 166ft, with statues taking the total height to approximately 250ft — 76 metres. [3] [5]

Historic views at issue

The National Park Service determined that the project would adversely affect 42 historic properties through changes to views, sightlines, settings and the relationships between historic landscapes, the preservation council said. [3]

The council’s letter records the Park Service’s position that alternatives to avoid or reduce those effects would fundamentally change the project and prevent it from achieving its goals. The Park Service also considered further negotiations on the existing proposal unlikely to produce an agreement. [2]

Virginia’s Department of Historic Resources criticised both the consultation and the proposed mitigation. In a letter reported by ABC News, it said its comments had not been directly addressed in a way demonstrating an effort to seek agreement, and that the mitigation failed to address the severity of the adverse effects. [9]

A separate planning process also remains open. The National Capital Planning Commission approved preliminary plans on 9 July, requesting a justification for the arch’s height and more information on traffic impacts and aviation lighting before final review. Final commission approval was still outstanding on 24 September, ABC reported. [5] [9]

Questions over military use

Trump added another dimension to the proposal on 20 September, saying in a Truth Social post that he had agreed to turn the arch into a combined monument and military complex. He described facilities for storing and rapidly deploying drones and snipers from the roof and plaza, alongside ammunition storage. Trump said the US military had requested the change; the Pentagon declined to comment to ABC News. [8] [9]

Two days before that announcement, the Federal Aviation Administration said the proposed arch would not pose a hazard to aircraft after reviewing airspace and operations around Reagan National Airport and nearby airports. Its determination included marking conditions involving an eternal flame above the structure and floodlights to make it visible to pilots. [4]

Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth has asked whether that assessment considered military use. In a letter to Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and FAA administrator Bryan Bedford, reported by CBS News on 25 September, she urged them to reject the military-complex proposal and asked which military entity had requested it and what threat assessment supported the request. [10]