‘You can start tonight’: How Trump exploited the rules to bulldoze the East Wing

Washington: Donald Trump could hardly believe his luck. The lifelong real estate developer had spent decades dealing with zoning restrictions, environmental reviews, community boards and local politicians. But when it came to building a ballroom at the White House, he would face none of that.

“I said, ‘How long would the process take?’ Because I’m so used to zoning,” Trump recently told a White House dinner for wealthy corporate donors who have pitched in for the ballroom.

“They said, ‘Sir, you can start tonight.’ I said, ‘What are you talking about?’ ‘You have zero zoning conditions, you’re the president.’ I said, ‘You’ve got to be kidding.’ You mean I can actually do something that I really want?”

President Donald Trump told a donors’ dinner he was stunned to discover there were no zoning restrictions at the White House.Credit: Bloomberg

Trump’s astonishment has now become Washington’s, and the world’s. Within just a week – and without notice – bulldozers knocked down and cleared away the White House’s historic East Wing, which had stood in its current form since 1942. The people’s house was irrevocably changed.

Anyone who has dealt with development authorities – be they in New York or London, Sydney or Melbourne – would have to wonder the same thing: how can the president demolish a third of the White House without a single planning permit?

Many commentators have seen the East Wing demolition as a metaphor for the Trump presidency: putting a wrecking ball through America’s institutions in pursuit of power and glory, with no regard for due process.

But, like other aspects of Trump’s agenda, it is America’s institutions themselves – through their complex and vague governance structures, and reverence for the president – that have allowed this to happen.

“The legal status of the White House is extremely weird,” says Neil Flanagan, a Washington architect and public historian. “There’s really nothing like it, other than maybe the Capitol. It’s a fully federal jurisdiction. When you do federal projects, they do the permitting themselves. The system has functioned on a system of trust and norms. This president is more than happy to break all trust and norms.”

The process began in July, when Trump removed Joe Biden’s appointees to the National Capital Planning Commission, which oversees zoning and building in Washington. In their place, he installed not experts but nakedly political operatives, including, as chair, his assistant and White House staff secretary, Will Scharf.

Trump watchers would recognise Scharf as the man who regularly hands executive orders to Trump in the Oval Office and describes their contents. Alongside him, Trump appointed deputy White House chief of staff James Blair and an aide to the powerful Office of Management and Budget, Stuart Levenbach. All kept their day jobs.

At the time, speculation was that Trump might be using the commission to pile pressure on Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell over an expensive renovation of the Fed’s headquarters. Writing in Politico, Michael Schaffer mused that it “seemed like a strange use of senior officials’ time”, noting that the commission’s next meeting dealt with matters such as “lighting plans for a Smithsonian building and guidelines for protecting pollinating insects”.

But Trump soon unveiled his plans to build a $US200 million ($305 million) ballroom at the White House – now $US300 or $US350 million, he says – and it became clearer why it might be handy to have friendly lieutenants running the NCPC.

Trump holds a rendering of the planned White House ballroom, which he now says will cost $US350 million.Credit: Bloomberg

This was a pet project from Trump’s first term, and not without reason. As he frequently points out, the White House lacks a large event space for state visits and the like. They are typically held outside, utilising the Rose Garden or tents on the south lawn, and when it rains, people have to “shlop” around in the wet.

Sensitive to the historical significance of the building, Trump pledged the ballroom wouldn’t touch the existing building. This was difficult to fathom given the scale of what he was planning.

But, on September 4, there was little fanfare about the project during a public meeting of the NCPC in central Washington. Chairing proceedings in a small, featureless room resembling a council chamber, Scharf took aim at a “deceiving” article in The Washington Post that he said mischaracterised the agency’s role.

Trump appointed his assistant Will Scharf (left) to be chair of the National Capital Planning Commission.Credit: AP

“This commission does not have jurisdiction – it has long denied that it has jurisdiction – over demolition and site preparation work for federal buildings on federal property. What we deal with is essentially construction – vertical build,” Scharf said.

“Any assertion that this commission should have been consulted earlier than it has been – or than it will be – is simply false and represents a misunderstanding of this commission’s role in that project.”

That was a harbinger of what was to come. Six weeks later, the White House began tearing down the East Wing, without any official input from the NCPC.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt pointed out previous presidents had made extensive changes to the building.Credit: AP

Asked about this last week, Trump’s press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the White House was under no legal obligation to consult the commission about demolition, only about “vertical construction”.

She was quickly asked the inevitable question: Does that mean the president can tear down anything he wants without oversight? Can he demolish the Executive Residence? Can he bulldoze the Jefferson Memorial?

Leavitt’s answer was essentially: yes. “It’s not the president who came up with that legal opinion himself,” she said. “That’s a legal opinion that’s been held by the NCPC for many years. It’s written, so we can get you that background and that research if you wish.”

This masthead asked the White House for that document and was referred to the NCPC, which is closed due to the government shutdown. The White House did not respond to a follow-up request.

The White House dinner for donors who had contributed to the ballroom. Trump says it will be entirely privately funded.Credit: AP

Some former members of the NCPC have also disagreed with that assessment. Preston Bryant, who chaired the commission for nine years and was appointed by former president Barack Obama, told CNN: “The demolition element is inherent in the overall project. Demo is not separated from construction. It’s part of it.”

It is true, though, that the White House (along with the Capitol and Supreme Court building and grounds) is exempt from the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act, which would otherwise compel an impact assessment for any sale or alteration of a historic federal building.

Convention has ensured that previous presidents generally sought out that advice. “What we’re seeing is that once someone breaks out of those social norms, the system really falls apart,” says Flanagan.

The White House says it will submit construction plans for the 8300-square-metre ballroom to the NCPC. But critics say demolishing the East Wing in advance changes the dynamic. Flanagan calls it “stake-driving”, made famous by 20th-century New York developer and powerbroker Robert Moses. Get the ball rolling and others will have to fall into line. Seek forgiveness rather than permission.

The East Wing was demolished within a week.Credit: AP

Priya Jain, chair of the heritage conservation committee at the Society of Architectural Historians, notes the NCPC is now much more limited in the changes it can recommend.

“They can no longer tell them to go back to try to fit this project within the existing East Wing,” she says. “All those design options that existed previously are now gone because there is a hole in the ground.”

Jain says the ballroom could have been placed underground or somewhere else. “This idea that it’s either the tent or the ballroom is so false. As any design professional knows, there are multiple ways to do this. This was not the only option. So where is that work and that analysis and that design process?”

For his part, Trump is promising an “appropriate” design that will be sympathetic to the existing building – or what remains of it.

“It’s going to be very much in keeping with the White House,” he told the donors’ dinner on October 15. “A new thing [in construction] is you build a super-modern building next to an old-fashioned building, and I think that’s good, but I don’t have the courage to do that with the White House. It’s good for a lot of places, it’s not good for here.”

Guests at the Jacqueline Kennedy Garden as part of a one-year anniversary event for first lady Melania Trump’s Be Best initiative in 2019.Credit: AP

Trump’s undertakings did not convince legal secretary Diana Vidutis, who was peering through a fence at the demolition site on Monday evening after work.

“I’m just appalled by what was done under cloak of night with no permission,” she said. “The president of the United States does not own the White House. He’s a temporary resident. He has no right to do whatever he just did, and I’m very upset about it.”

Vidutis says the demolition of the East Wing is also anti-woman. “It was the first ladies who had their offices there. It was also the site where we all went to enter the White House for Easter egg rolls and Christmas decorations. So, personally, we feel a loss. And there’s no reason for there to be a Costco-sized ballroom next to the White House.”

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.