WASHINGTON — The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, a panel made up of President Trump’s appointees, on Thursday approved his proposal to build a ballroom larger than the White House itself where the East Wing once stood.
The seven-member panel is one of two federal agencies that must approve Trump’s plans for the ballroom. The National Capital Planning Commission, which has jurisdiction over construction and major renovation to government buildings in the region, is also reviewing the project.
Members of the fine arts commission originally had been scheduled to discuss and vote on the design after a follow-up presentation by the architect, and had planned to vote on final approval at next month’s meeting. But after the 6-0 vote on the design, the panel’s chairman, Rodney Mims Cook Jr., unexpectedly made another motion to vote on final approval.
Six of the seven commissioners — all appointed by the Republican president in January — voted once more in favor. Commissioner James McCrery did not participate in the discussion or the votes because he was the initial architect on the project before Trump replaced him.
The ballroom will be built on the site of the former East Wing, which Trump had demolished in October with little public notice. That drew an outcry from lawmakers, historians and preservationists who argued that the president should not have taken that step until the two federal agencies and Congress had reviewed and approved the project, and the public had a chance to provide comment.
The 90,000-square-foot ballroom would be nearly twice the size of the White House, which is 55,000-square-feet, and would accommodate about 1,000 people, Trump has said. The East Room, currently the largest room in the White House, can fit just over 200 people at most.
Commissioners offered mostly complimentary comments before the votes.
Cook echoed one of Trump’s main arguments for adding a larger entertaining space to the White House: It would end the long-standing practice of erecting temporary structures on the South Lawn that Trump describes as tents to host visiting dignitaries for state dinners and other functions.
“Our sitting president has actually designed a very beautiful structure,” Cook said. “The United States just should not be entertaining the world in tents.”
The panel received mainly negative comments from the public
Members of the public were asked to submit written comment by a Wednesday afternoon deadline. Thomas Leubke, the panel’s secretary, said “over 99%” of the more than 2,000 messages it received in the past week from around the country were in opposition to the project.
Leubke tried to summarize the comments for the commissioners.
Some comments cited concerns about Trump’s decision to unilaterally tear down the East Wing, as well as the lack of transparency about who is paying for the ballroom or how contracts were awarded, Leubke said. Comments in support referenced concerns for the image of the United States on the world stage and the need for a larger entertaining space at the White House.
Trump has defended the ballroom in a recent series of social media posts that included drawings of the building. He said in one January post that most of the material needed to build it had been ordered “and there is no practical or reasonable way to go back. IT IS TOO LATE!”
The commission met Thursday over Zoom and heard from Shalom Baranes, the lead architect, and Rick Parisi, the landscape architect. Both described a series of images and sketches of the ballroom and the grounds as they would appear after the project is completed.
Trump has said the ballroom would cost about $400 million and be paid for with private donations. To date, the White House has only released an incomplete list of donors.
A lawsuit against the project is still pending
The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued in federal court to halt construction. A ruling in the case is pending.
In comments it submitted to the commission, the privately funded group recommended that the size of the ballroom be reduced to “accommodate and respect the primary historic importance of the original Executive Residence.”
At the commission’s January meeting, some commissioners had questioned Baranes, Trump’s architect, about the “immense” design and scale of the project even as they broadly endorsed Trump’s vision. On Thursday, Baranes described changes he has since made to the design, and the commissioners said they welcomed the adjustments.
The ballroom project is scheduled for additional discussion at a March 5 meeting of the National Capital Planning Commission, which is led by a top White House aide. This panel heard an initial presentation about the project in January.
Superville writes for the Associated Press.
Panel reviewing Trump’s White House ballroom project will vote on it April 2
WASHINGTON — A federal panel reviewing President Trump’s plans to build a ballroom at the White House has set April 2 for a final vote on the project, the chairman said as the agency prepared to give additional consideration to the construction plans.
Will Scharf, chairman of the National Capital Planning Commission and a top aide to the Republican president, made the announcement Thursday at the start of the panel’s March meeting.
The panel will hear additional details about the project from the White House as well as its own staff, and had been expected to vote on Thursday.
But Scharf announced that the vote was switched to April to give every member of the public who wants to comment a chance to do so. More than 100 people had signed up to comment at Thursday’s meeting, which was being conducted online as a result.
The panel has also been flooded with scores of written comments about Trump’s plans to build a 90,000-square-foot addition where the East Wing of the White House once stood. Trump has said it will cost about $400 million and be paid for with private money. Trump had the East Wing demolished in October.
Scharf said the meeting was being conducted online to ease the public testimony portion, which he said was likely to extend into Friday given the number of people who had signed up to speak.
“They are taking time out of what I presume are busy schedules to join us,” he said. “One way or the other, we are going to make sure that members of the public have the opportunity to be heard on this project.”
Critics of the project have argued that Trump should not have demolished the East Wing until the National Capital Planning Commission and a separate panel, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, had reviewed and voted on his plans. The fine arts panel approved the project last month.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a private, nonprofit group, asked a federal judge to temporarily halt construction until the White House submitted the plans both to federal panels and to Congress for approval, and allowed the public to comment.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon rejected the request last week, and the trust has said it plans to file an amended lawsuit.
Superville writes for the Associated Press.
Source link
Arts panel made up of Trump appointees approves his White House ballroom proposal
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, a panel made up of President Trump’s appointees, on Thursday approved his proposal to build a ballroom larger than the White House itself where the East Wing once stood.
The seven-member panel is one of two federal agencies that must approve Trump’s plans for the ballroom. The National Capital Planning Commission, which has jurisdiction over construction and major renovation to government buildings in the region, is also reviewing the project.
Members of the fine arts commission originally had been scheduled to discuss and vote on the design after a follow-up presentation by the architect, and had planned to vote on final approval at next month’s meeting. But after the 6-0 vote on the design, the panel’s chairman, Rodney Mims Cook Jr., unexpectedly made another motion to vote on final approval.
Six of the seven commissioners — all appointed by the Republican president in January — voted once more in favor. Commissioner James McCrery did not participate in the discussion or the votes because he was the initial architect on the project before Trump replaced him.
The ballroom will be built on the site of the former East Wing, which Trump had demolished in October with little public notice. That drew an outcry from lawmakers, historians and preservationists who argued that the president should not have taken that step until the two federal agencies and Congress had reviewed and approved the project, and the public had a chance to provide comment.
The 90,000-square-foot ballroom would be nearly twice the size of the White House, which is 55,000-square-feet, and would accommodate about 1,000 people, Trump has said. The East Room, currently the largest room in the White House, can fit just over 200 people at most.
Commissioners offered mostly complimentary comments before the votes.
Cook echoed one of Trump’s main arguments for adding a larger entertaining space to the White House: It would end the long-standing practice of erecting temporary structures on the South Lawn that Trump describes as tents to host visiting dignitaries for state dinners and other functions.
“Our sitting president has actually designed a very beautiful structure,” Cook said. “The United States just should not be entertaining the world in tents.”
The panel received mainly negative comments from the public
Members of the public were asked to submit written comment by a Wednesday afternoon deadline. Thomas Leubke, the panel’s secretary, said “over 99%” of the more than 2,000 messages it received in the past week from around the country were in opposition to the project.
Leubke tried to summarize the comments for the commissioners.
Some comments cited concerns about Trump’s decision to unilaterally tear down the East Wing, as well as the lack of transparency about who is paying for the ballroom or how contracts were awarded, Leubke said. Comments in support referenced concerns for the image of the United States on the world stage and the need for a larger entertaining space at the White House.
Trump has defended the ballroom in a recent series of social media posts that included drawings of the building. He said in one January post that most of the material needed to build it had been ordered “and there is no practical or reasonable way to go back. IT IS TOO LATE!”
The commission met Thursday over Zoom and heard from Shalom Baranes, the lead architect, and Rick Parisi, the landscape architect. Both described a series of images and sketches of the ballroom and the grounds as they would appear after the project is completed.
Trump has said the ballroom would cost about $400 million and be paid for with private donations. To date, the White House has only released an incomplete list of donors.
A lawsuit against the project is still pending
The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued in federal court to halt construction. A ruling in the case is pending.
In comments it submitted to the commission, the privately funded group recommended that the size of the ballroom be reduced to “accommodate and respect the primary historic importance of the original Executive Residence.”
At the commission’s January meeting, some commissioners had questioned Baranes, Trump’s architect, about the “immense” design and scale of the project even as they broadly endorsed Trump’s vision. On Thursday, Baranes described changes he has since made to the design, and the commissioners said they welcomed the adjustments.
The ballroom project is scheduled for additional discussion at a March 5 meeting of the National Capital Planning Commission, which is led by a top White House aide. This panel heard an initial presentation about the project in January.
Superville writes for the Associated Press.
Source link
Fine Arts Commission approves Trump’s ballroom plan
Feb. 19 (UPI) — The Commission of Fine Arts has unanimously approved plans for President Donald Trump‘s almost 90,000-square-foot White House ballroom plans, the first hurdle in starting the building project.
The commission, whose members were all appointed by Trump, including his executive assistant, Chamberlain Harris, 26. The original architect of the ballroom recused himself from the vote. Trump fired all the previous members in October.
But now, the project must win approval from the National Capital Planning Commission, which could vote on March 5.
“This is a facility that is desperately needed for over 150 years, and it’s beautiful,” The Washington Post reported Commission Chair Rodney Mims Cook Jr. said.
But the CFA’s secretary said comments have been negative.
“In two decades of casework here, I’ve never seen as much public engagement on this. We’ve literally gotten, in the past week or so, more than 2,000 various messages,” said Thomas Luebke, CFA secretary, CBS News reported. “The vast, vast majority is negative, in general.”
Trump initially said the construction would cost $200 million and would be funded by private donations. He later said the project could cost twice that amount, but donors would pay for it. Officials from the National Trust for Historic Preservation challenged the construction in federal court and sought an injunction to stop the build. The judge refused the injunction but ordered the administration to undergo a review process.
The Capital Planning Commission is led by Will Scharf, a White House staff secretary appointed by Trump. Two other White House officials — James Blair and Stuart Levenbach — are also on the commission.
Luebke read a summary of the comments to commissioners, CBS reported. He cited demolition without permits or oversight, a scale that will “dwarf the White House,” lack of transparency in funding and contracts and a “fundamental miscarriage of democratic principles.”
“The ballroom seems to shout power,” one commenter wrote, Luebke said.
Harris responded, “This is sort of like the greatest country in the world. It’s the greatest house in the world and we want it to be the greatest ballroom in the world.”
The public comments, Luebke said, were “overwhelmingly in opposition — over 99%.”
Source link