White House pressure on ballroom review may 'short circuit' crucial step: expert

Pressure on a review of the White House ballroom blueprints could "short circuit" the whole process, an expert has warned.

A "refinement" process has been established for the ballroom, and while it's a "foregone conclusion" that the plan will be approved, pressure from Donald Trump's administration is still present. Phil Mendelson, chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia and an ex-officio member of the commission, suggested the ballroom project will be fast-tracked and will falter as a result.

He told CNN, "What I’m concerned about is that so much has happened without any review, which I think is inappropriate, and that this is going to be fast-tracked with a lot of pressure to just approve what the White House wants without any planning thought."

"I have seen project after project after project where the refinement as a result of feedback leads to a better result. And I’m concerned that the pressure will be to short-circuit that. … That’s part of what worries me, that … they don’t really care what NCPC (National Capital Planning Commission) thinks. They just want to go through the steps. They’ve got the votes, design be damned."

Bryan Clark Green, an architectural historian appointed to the NCPC by Joe Biden, suggested there is a "critical difference" at play between how the White House should react to the ruling, and how they are responding to the review.

Green said, "All of your arguments about all the things that would normally restrain you in a conversation about alternatives, they’re gone. They’re swept away. This is not how the process works. It’s not supposed to be like this."

He added that it's "a foregone conclusion" that the ballroom review would pass, despite some critics voicing their concern.

Despite this conclusion, the White House are still putting pressure on the NCPC to pass the review. Green said there are questions that must be brought up during this process that Trump's administration may not have considered.

He said, "Could this function be accomplished in a building that is more appropriate in scale to the White House? When is the last time you had a seated dinner for 1,000?"

"What’s the size that you would actually need? Could you accomplish this function in a way that the building is lower down in the view shed? Could the footprint be smaller?"