The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation is considering amendments to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act that could streamline reviews and speed construction of a proposed 250-foot Triumphal Arch at the Arlington Memorial Bridge. The $100 million granite monument has drawn legal challenges and public opposition, with critics saying the rule changes could weaken protections for historic places. Supporters argue the updates would modernize a rule set last revised in 2004.
Federal Preservation Agency Eyes Rule Changes That Could Fast-Track Trump's Proposed 250-Foot D.C. Arch
Agency packed with Trump appointees looks to bypass federal regulations to speed up construction of his DC arch
An independent federal advisory body, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), is weighing revisions to longstanding preservation regulations that could accelerate construction of President Trump's proposed 250-foot Triumphal Arch in Washington, D.C.
An independent federal agency packed with Donald Trump appointees has been looking to bypass long-standing federal regulations to speed up construction of the president's Triumphal Arch in Washington, D.C. (AFP via Getty Images)
What The Proposal Would Do
The draft amendments under consideration would alter how Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act is implemented, potentially giving federal agencies broader discretion in preservation reviews. Supporters say the changes would streamline an aging regulatory process; critics contend they would prioritize mitigation over avoiding harm and reduce expectations that agencies meaningfully consider alternative designs or locations.
The latest of Trump's passion projects, the 250-foot arch would sit at the end of the Arlington Memorial Bridge and reportedly cost an estimated $100 million (AFP via Getty Images)
Project Details And Timeline
The proposed granite monument would sit at the end of the Arlington Memorial Bridge, opposite the Lincoln Memorial, capped by a gilded winged figure and flanked by two golden eagles. Media reporting places the estimated cost at roughly $100 million. Federal documents cited by CBS News indicate the project could be built on an accelerated schedule with extended workdays — reportedly up to 20 hours — and a target completion window of two to three years if approved.
Fifty-two percent of Americans voiced opposition to the arch, compared with 21 percent who favored it in a poll (Getty Images)
Process, Politics, And Legal Challenges
ACHP vice chair Travis Voyles emailed members on July 17 asking them to vote on draft revisions by a coming deadline; at least seven of the council's 24 members were appointed by President Trump. The National Capital Planning Commission, chaired by Trump appointee William Scharf, has previously voted to advance the project.
ACHP Spokesperson: Revising Section 106 is part of a government-wide review of regulations; the rules were last updated in 2004 and a review could improve and streamline the process.
The White House has told reporters it "has and will follow all legal requirements in constructing the Triumphal Arch." Meanwhile, three Vietnam War veterans filed suit in February seeking to stop the project, arguing proper approvals were not obtained.
Public Reaction
Public opinion appears skeptical: an April Washington Post/ABC News/Ipsos poll found 52% of Americans opposed the arch while 21% supported it. The proposed rule changes and the project itself have sparked debate about preservation, executive priorities, and how historic sites around the capital should be protected.
Why It Matters: Changing how Section 106 is applied could reshape preservation review for a wide range of federal projects, not only this monument, making the ACHP's decision consequential for future developments near historic sites.
Help us improve.
