Donald Trump’s Interior Department is scrambling to come up with a reason why his proposed “triumphal arch” shouldn’t have to respect a federal law limiting the height of most buildings in Washington, D.C.
Critics of the president’s 250-foot-tall vanity project have argued that it runs afoul of the Height of Buildings Act of 1910 (HBA), which limits most building heights in Washington, D.C., to the width of their street plus 20 feet, with a maximum height of 130 feet.
The law was designed to address fire safety and preserve the city’s low-slung neoclassical character.
But in a new, unsigned memo published by The Washington Post, the Department of the Interior has argued that “federal buildings are not subject to the HBA,” despite more than a century of interpretation to the contrary.
“The HBA is just a local zoning ordinance and does not apply to the United States,” the memo claims.
The law, however, was passed by Congress and explicitly states, “No building shall be erected, altered, or raised in any manner as to exceed the height of 130 feet,” without providing an express exception for federal construction.
The main exception is that buildings constructed along Pennsylvania Avenue between the White House and the Capitol building—where most of the lots are owned by the federal government—can be 160 feet tall.
The Interior Department’s memo nevertheless argues that the HBA is “similar” to a local zoning regulation, and that since the federal government is generally immune from local zoning laws, it doesn’t need to follow the HBA either.
As “evidence,” it pointed to the fact that the HBA was also codified in Washington, D.C.’s local zoning laws in 1929.
Congressional Democrats, however, have pointed out that the HBA is a federal law that exists independently of the local zoning regulations, meaning only an act of Congress can reverse it.
There’s also the fact that the city of Washington, D.C., couldn’t change the HBA even if it wanted to, as The New York Times pointed out during a debate about whether the height restrictions should be lifted.
Trump’s hand-picked chair of the National Capital Planning Commission—which must sign off on the arch—has nevertheless been trying to argue that the HBA shouldn’t apply, the Post reported.
Will Scharf asked the Interior Department to draft a memo confirming as much, even though the commission’s own website says the HBA is “implemented through the District’s Zoning Regulations for private property and through NCPC’s review of development proposals on federal property.”
In a report issued earlier this month, career staff on the commission noted that the NCPC has “consistently taken the position” that the HBA applies to federal projects, “reserving Washington’s picturesque, horizontal character.”
The arch itself would be 166 feet tall and topped with almost another 100 feet of “gilded wing statuary,” according to the report.
The president has said he has no plans to seek approval from Congress, which has not authorized the project.
The planning commission, which Trump has packed with loyalists, is set to review the arch at its July 9 meeting.
The Interior Department told the Daily Beast, “Great nations build beautiful structures and works of art that cultivate national pride and love of country. In this tradition, Secretary Burgum is thrilled to champion the United States Triumphal Arch which will be a project that all Americans can be proud of.”
The arch is deeply unpopular with Americans, who oppose the project by more than 2-to-1. A group of veterans has also sued to block the arch’s construction, arguing that the structure would block “historically significant reciprocal views” of Arlington National Cemetery and Memorial Bridge.
The Interior Department told the Daily Beast the arch would “enhance the visitor experience at Arlington” by “serving as a visual reminder of the noble sacrifices borne by so many American heroes throughout our 250-year history so we can enjoy our freedoms today.”
