Folks, I’m sipping my coffee and reading about President Donald Trump’s proposed 250-foot triumphal arch, and I’ve got to say, it’s quite a story. The National Park Service has found that the arch will have “adverse” effects on dozens of historical landmarks, but they’re still saying it’s got to stay at the proposed site on the banks of the Potomac River. Apparently, the project is “inherently location dependent” and “not interchangeable” with any other placement, so it’s going to alter the “design continuity” of iconic Washington settings and change views of surrounding monuments.
The report from the National Park Service is a whopping 133 pages long, and it’s got all sorts of details about the potential effects of the arch on the surrounding area. They’re talking about how it will affect at least three dozen historical landmarks, with the most serious “adverse” effects concentrated on six landmarks near the arch, including Arlington National Cemetery and the Lincoln Memorial corridor. And let me tell you, when this thing is finished, it’s going to be visible from all the way to the US Capitol, the Georgetown waterfront, and the Pentagon.
Now, I know some folks are going to be upset about this, and I can understand why. I mean, who wants to see a big ol’ arch messing up the views of these historic landmarks? But at the same time, I’ve got to wonder, what’s the big deal? It’s just an arch, right? But I guess that’s not the point. The point is that this arch is going to be a big change to the landscape of Washington D.C., and some people are just not okay with that.
The National Parks Service is saying that they considered different alternatives, like a smaller arch or relocating it altogether, but none of those options worked out. And now, they’re proposing all sorts of efforts to “mitigate” the effects of the arch, like creating a meadow management program for nearby Lady Bird Johnson Park. But I’m not sure that’s going to be enough to calm down the critics.
I’ve got to say, I’m a little amused by the whole thing. I mean, it’s just an arch, but it’s causing so much controversy. And the language they’re using, like “adverse effects” and “mitigation measures,” it’s all so formal and serious. But I guess that’s just the way it goes when you’re dealing with Washington D.C. and all its historic landmarks.
The project was approved by the Commission of Fine Arts and has a preliminary green light from the National Capital Planning Commission, but the NCPC hasn’t given final approval yet. And it looks like the final decision might not be made until sometime after September, since it’s not on the agenda for the upcoming meeting. So, we’ll just have to wait and see what happens next.
In conclusion, the story of President Trump’s proposed arch is a complicated one, with lots of different opinions and perspectives. While some people see it as a great way to honor the president, others are worried about the potential effects on the surrounding area. And as for me, well, I’m just going to sit back and enjoy the show, with my coffee in hand, of course. After all, as they say, “you can’t make this stuff up” – and I’m pretty sure that’s going to be the case with this arch. 🙄
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.
