Trump appointees ask about White House ballroom’s design and scale — and want to see models

Some of Donald Trump’s handpicked appointees who have a say in his White House ballroom project raised questions Thursday about its “immense” design and scale, while still broadly endorsing the president’s vision for a massive expansion.

During the Commission on Fine Arts discussion, which included a review of mostly negative public comments, commissioners showed no immediate opposition to Trump’s overall plan. However, the meeting highlighted the political controversy surrounding the project since the president approved the demolition of the East Wing and unveiled designs that would more than double the White House’s previous square footage.

“This is an important thing to the president. It’s an important thing to the nation,” said the commission’s new chairman, Rodney Mims Cook Jr., in the panel’s first public hearing on Trump’s proposal.

Cook acknowledged longstanding concerns about White House event space, noting, “You can’t have the United States of America entertaining people in tents.” He emphasized the challenge was determining “if we can do this in a way that this building remains” true to its fundamental character while addressing “what the president wants us to do.”

After lead architect Shalom Baranes presented renderings during the online meeting, commissioners requested 3D scale models of the White House complex with the proposed addition for a future in-person session. Baranes confirmed the models would include the U.S. Treasury Department building and the Eisenhower Executive Office Building that flank the presidential mansion.

The scale of the project has raised significant concerns. Baranes confirmed the total addition would be almost 90,000 square feet, with the ballroom itself accounting for 22,000 square feet. For context, the White House was approximately 55,000 square feet before the East Wing, originally built in 1902 and expanded in the 1940s, was demolished.

Thomas Luebke, the commission’s executive director, reported that public comments received ahead of the meeting were “almost all” negative “in some way,” criticizing either the process, the design, or both. Even comments that praised certain design elements still noted that “the scale appears oversized, making the main structure dominated.”

Addressing these criticisms, Baranes emphasized that current plans call for setting back the addition’s north boundary from the existing North Portico, with the top of the new structure aligned with the primary facade of the White House residence. This design choice aims to preserve the view of the White House from Pennsylvania Avenue.

“It’s immense,” Cook told Baranes regarding the proposed 10-column, multistory porch on the south side of the addition that resembles the Treasury Department more than the White House. “If the president just wants cover, do you think you might be able to tone down that element?”

The architect responded: “We looked at ways of covering it at different scales with different numbers of columns, and there’s a president’s desire to proceed with this one.”

The meeting was part of a series with the Fine Arts panel and the National Capital Planning Commission, both of which play critical roles in approving federal construction projects in Washington.

Meanwhile, historic preservationists have taken legal action to halt the $400 million project. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon heard arguments Thursday from attorneys representing the government and the National Trust for Historic Preservation but didn’t issue an immediate ruling. Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, indicated he hopes to decide on the request for a preliminary injunction next month, though he acknowledged his decision will likely face appeals.

The plaintiff’s attorney, Thad Heuer, argued that the president—a temporary occupant of the White House—required congressional approval before initiating a project of this magnitude and cost. “He isn’t the landlord,” Heuer said. “He is a steward.”

In response, government lawyer Jacob Roth contended that the president possesses statutory authority and broad discretion to modify the White House. He warned that halting the project midway would create problems, including security concerns for the president. “I don’t think there’s any question that this modernization is in the public’s interest,” Roth told the judge.

While the legal challenge progresses, the Trump administration remains committed to the project. White House spokesman Davis Ingle stated, “President Trump is working 24/7 to Make America Great Again, including his historic beautification of the White House.”