I’m sipping my coffee and reading about the latest drama surrounding President Donald Trump’s “Triumphal arch” in Virginia, and folks, it’s a doozy. A county board in Virginia is suing to stop the construction of this 250-foot project, and I’m not surprised. I mean, who wouldn’t want to stop a giant arch from being built in their neighborhood? The Arlington County Board is arguing that the arch would “dramatically worsen traffic in an already-busy corridor,” and I can see why they’d be concerned. I’ve been stuck in traffic in that area before, and it’s no fun.
The lawsuit, which was brought with the help of the nonprofit group “Democracy Forward,” claims that the National Park Service only did a “cursory and conclusory” review of the impacts of building the arch. That’s a fancy way of saying they didn’t do their due diligence. The study failed to look at factors like how construction could harm public safety in Arlington, such as by “clogging thoroughfares needed for emergency transport services run by the county.” That sounds like a pretty big deal to me.
Arlington County Board Chair Matt de Ferranti said, “The Arlington County Board has filed this lawsuit because our community has the most to lose from this egregious and unlawful proposed project.” I can understand why they’d feel that way. The proposed site of the arch, Memorial Circle, is an island technically in Washington, DC, but it’s right next to the Virginia and Arlington county border. Traffic flows into the circle from Virginia into DC and from DC to Virginia, and there are running and bike paths that crisscross the site. It’s a pretty busy area, and adding a giant arch to the mix could make things even more chaotic.
The Trump administration has been fast-tracking the approval process for the arch, which has raised some eyebrows. A National Park Service report acknowledged that the arch would have “adverse effects” on dozens of historical landmarks and sightlines, but I guess that’s not a big concern for the administration. They’re driving towards the goal of building the president’s arch before he leaves office, and it’s starting to feel like a bit of a rush job.
Last month, an analysis known as a Section 106 review was abruptly ended without consensus, which effectively evaded the federal historical preservation law that’s been in place since 1966. That seems like a pretty big deal, and I’m surprised it didn’t get more attention. The administration is now eyeing the next National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) meeting, scheduled for November 5, for final approval of the arch. The project has previously been approved by the Commission of Fine Arts (CFA), but I’m not sure that’s going to be enough to get it built.
The arch is also the subject of another high-profile lawsuit brought by Vietnam Veterans and preservation groups, so it’s clear that there are a lot of people who are opposed to this project. I’m not sure what the outcome will be, but I’m definitely going to be keeping an eye on it. And who knows, maybe one day we’ll have a giant arch in Virginia that’s just a symbol of… well, I’m not really sure what it’s supposed to symbolize, but I’m sure it’ll be a great spot for selfies.
In the end, it’s just another day in the world of politics, folks. There are lawsuits, controversy, and a giant arch that maybe, just maybe, will get built. And I’ll be here, sipping my coffee and watching it all unfold with a healthy dose of skepticism and amusement. After all, as they say, “you can’t make this stuff up” – and I’m not even going to try. 🙄
Armchair patriot. Believes in the free market, cold beer, and that there’s always a guy named George behind every CNN segment.
Former remote-throwing champion turned #1 couch commentator on liberal panic in the media. Born in Texas (or so his mug says), he earned a degree in Fake Newsology & Beer Philosophy from YouTube University.
⚖️ ENTER THE LEGALIZER
Think the government has no idea what it's doing? Put your case before the Federal Case Terminal and find out.
