EDITOR鈥橲 NOTE: 小萝莉影视 marks one year of President Donald Trump鈥檚 second term in office with a look at the physical and political changes he鈥檚 brought to the D.C. region.
Since taking the oath of office last January, President Donald Trump and his administration have brought about several physical changes to D.C. Some of those changes were seen as controversial, including the demolition of the East Wing of the White House and the addition of Trump’s name to both the Kennedy Center and the U.S. Institute of Peace.
But are these alterations part of the normal changes that come with a city evolving, or something different?
Lisa Benton-Short, professor emerita of geography and the environment at George Washington University, said the changes, and even the addition of presidential banners on some federal buildings, have grabbed attention because they are a departure from long-standing norms.
鈥淥bviously, the biggest change has been the demolition of the East Wing and the proposed construction of this new ballroom. That certainly is probably the most significant physical change, not only to the White House grounds, but to the whole of the access of the National Mall,鈥� Benton-Short said.
Benton said the work on the East Wing was a diversion from the norm because the project didn鈥檛 go through the traditional review process and the work was done with little public input.
“The White House, even though it’s kind of considered separate grounds, it’s still really contiguous and part of the National Mall,鈥� she said.
She described the National Mall not just as a collection of landmarks, but as a carefully designed public space that reflects national identity 鈥� from the Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial, intersected by the axis connecting the Jefferson Memorial, the Washington Monument and the White House.
It’s true that cities constantly build and unbuild, and D.C. is no exception. But even small changes can carry big meaning in the District because it’s the nation’s capital.
鈥淲hen we change buildings and structures, and when we change things that are symbolic, that symbolize something, we’re really changing the way that we’re understanding our history, our identity and what this space means to Americans,” Benton-Short said.
Some of the changes made, namely the presidential banners and the addition of Trump’s name to the sides of buildings, do not alter the structures. But Benton-Short said the symbolism can shift public space even when the bricks stay the same.
While most construction on the National Mall is subject to multiple layers of review, the White House ballroom project has sparked several legal challenges. Preservation groups note that the demolition at the White House is exempt from the National Historic Preservation Act鈥檚 Section 106 review process, a provision that normally governs changes to historic properties.
The National Capital Planning Commission does have 鈥渞eview authority鈥� over new construction, according to the National Trust for Historic Preservation.
鈥淭he Trump administration did not really follow existing protocol that many presidents have in the past, which is to submit their plans to the federal agencies, who have oversight over any kinds of changes on the mall,鈥� Benton-Short said.
She said how someone views the changes will depend on their political beliefs.
鈥淚f you’re a supporter of this administration, you might think that the changes you’re seeing on the National Mall and the monumental core are fantastic, that you know investment is happening and that you know you see this as a positive change,鈥� Benton-Short said.
Nonsupporters, she said, may see it differently.
鈥淥thers might see it as egotistical changes that are being, you know, wrought on the Mall by someone with the political power to do so, but also the political power to ignore the traditional processes for such approvals,鈥� Benton-Short said.
She said the changes, though, no matter where a person falls politically, are 鈥渉ard to ignore.鈥�
Supporters of the alterations have argued that past presidents also made major changes to the White House and the National Mall. Benton-Short said that鈥檚 true, but she said that comes with an important distinction.
鈥淭here’s been changes over time, for sure, but they’ve largely taken place in a slow-moving bureaucracy that really carefully looks at the plans. Rarely do they approve plans without some revisions to them,鈥� Benton-Short said.
She pointed out large-scale historical projects such as the 1902 McMillan Plan and the creation of major memorials as examples of expert-driven, commission-based planning.
鈥淭he bureaucratic process that moves slow also allows us to really think and contemplate what these changes mean in the short term and in the long term,鈥� Benton-Short said.
Moving forward, she cautioned that it is too early to know how the changes will be viewed over time.
With the East Wing, Benton-Short said functional needs may ultimately shape how the ballroom is judged.
鈥淭he old ballroom was probably insufficient in space for the kinds of state dinners that most presidents in the last 20 years have been hosting,鈥� she said.
Benton-Short also notes many National Mall projects were controversial at first, saying the Vietnam Veterans Memorial was controversial when it was announced, but she said opposition faded once the memorial opened and people experienced it for themselves.
She said it’s possible that the same holds true for the new ballroom.
鈥淚t鈥檚 possible that people will look at this new construction over time, once it has become a longer part of the fabric of Washington, D.C., and they might appreciate it,鈥� Benton-Short said.
But she also points out that not every controversial project succeeds.
鈥淪ome things don’t really quite ever become what they were planned,鈥� Benton-Short said.
Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.
漏 2026 小萝莉影视. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.
