Privately funded $200-million East Wing expansion by Clark Construction and AECOM proceeds amid questions over design review and preservation standards
Demolition crews began work Oct. 20 on the East Wing of the White House to clear space for a privately funded 90,000-sq-ft ballroom addition valued at roughly $200 million at the behest of the president.
The project, announced July 31 by the White House, will be built by Clark Construction Group with AECOM as engineer and McCrery Architects as designer.
Officials said it will create a larger venue for state and ceremonial events, financed entirely by President Donald Trump and “patriot donors.”
The addition marks the most substantial change to the Executive Residence since the Truman Reconstruction of 1948-52. Renderings depict a limestone-clad structure with tall arched windows, ballistic-resistant glazing and interiors described by the White House as “ornately designed.”
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters when announcing the plans that the new hall will hold about 650 guests, with capacity potentially reaching 900.
RELATED
White House Picks Clark and AECOM for $200M State Ballroom
The design calls for the addition to remain structurally distinct from the residence while echoing its neoclassical form. The press office said the ballroom “will be substantially separated from the main building… but its theme and architectural heritage will be almost identical.”
Diagram showing the White House complex with the planned ballroom addition (outlined at right) extending east from the existing East Wing beyond the Jacqueline Kennedy Garden. Image by Belbury, based on prior work by Sushiflinger and ZooFari/CC BY-SA 3.0
The now-former East Wing, completed in 1942 to house the first lady’s office and support staff, presents significant engineering challenges. Any addition must maintain structural independence while protecting the historic building’s load paths, vibration limits and façade integrity.
Engineers expect foundation isolation and redundant mechanical systems to ensure uninterrupted White House operations.
“The proposed ballroom will be the first major change to [the White House’s] exterior appearance in the last 83 years,” the Society of Architectural Historians said in an Oct. 16 statement urging careful review.
Regulatory filings show that as of Sept. 4 no submission had been made to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), which reviews major federal projects in the capital region.
Commission Chairman Will Scharf, who also serves as White House staff secretary, said during a public meeting that “what we deal with is essentially construction, vertical build,” explaining why demolition and site-preparation work began before NCPC review. The interpretation leaves design oversight unresolved, even as groundwork proceeds.
Under the Presidential Residence Act, the White House is managed by the National Park Service and operated by the Executive Office of the President’s Facilities Management Division.
While Section 107 of the National Historic Preservation Act exempts the executive residence from mandatory review, Executive Order 11593, issued in 1971, directs federal agencies to consult with the Interior Dept. before altering historic structures.
Past administrations have voluntarily submitted major projects for review by the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. These measures, while not legally binding, form the preservation framework that has guided White House alterations for decades and remains relevant even for privately funded work.
Timeline Graphic by Bryan Gottlieb/ENR
Quiet Build, Big Questions
Architectural organizations have pressed for transparency. In a letter to the Committee for the Preservation of the White House, the American Institute of Architects said, “The ballroom project may have secured private funding, [but] the White House is not a private building… Any modifications must strictly adhere to established federal processes for public buildings.”
The AIA emphasized that new construction on historic federal property should comply with the secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation, which require that “new additions… not destroy historic materials” and “be compatible with the historic features, size, scale and proportion.”
Site work began in September with tree removal and grading along the South Lawn. Excavators were later seen dismantling sections of the East Wing façade. Consistent with the project’s private-funding model, no design documents, subcontractor lists or federal contract filings appear in public databases.
Unlike the Truman reconstruction, which relied on congressional appropriation and formal oversight by the Commission of Fine Arts and NCPC, this expansion is proceeding under the notion of executive authority over the residence.
“Under existing federal law, alterations to the executive residence fall under presidential authority, subject to advisory review by federal planning agencies,” according to the National Archives’ description of White House governance and the National Capital Planning Commission’s enabling statute.
Congress retains indirect leverage through appropriations for operations and security but plays no direct approval role when private funds are used. Federal agencies such as NCPC, the CFA and the Committee for the Preservation of the White House serve advisory functions and cannot block a president’s decision without new legislation.
McLean, Va.-based Clark ranks No. 19 on the ENR 2025 Top 400 Contractors list. Dallas-based AECOM is No. 1 on ENR’s 2025 Top 500 Design Firms.
