Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1916-05-15
ORIGINAL PLAN
IN THE D. C..PARK SYSTEM
Or. Harvey W. Wiley Discusses Pro-
posed Improvement Contiguous to
Connecticut Avenue Bridge.
To the Editor Of the Star:

On my return to the city my atten-
ton has been called to a report in The
Star of the 18th instant of a moro or
less informal discussion of the park
way system of Washington before Rep
resentative Page.
During the course of the hearing Col.
Harris, the engineer officer in charge Of
public buildings and grounds. initmat-
ed that the inclusion in the connecting
parkway plan of the strip contiguous
to the Connecticut Avenue bridge,
abutting on goth street and Ashmead
place, is advocated solely by and in the
interest of owners of property. 1t Is
true that the. owners of the houses on
Ashmead place and Goth street have
had number of meetings for the pur-
pose of preserving the original plan.
In so far as know, not a single owner
of the property included in the original
plan has ever attended any OF these
meetings or taken any interest there
in. The property owners who have at
tended these meetings have nothing to
sell, but are interested naturally in
the maintenance of the plan originally
proposed. Many of them. like myself,
purchased their houses after inspect
ing the plan and map on file in the
District building, and had full faith in
the intention of the government TO car
ry that plan into effect.
Regarded as "Hardly Fair"
1t is hardly fair to US to be classed
with those whose interest in the park
is purely mercenary. There must be
thousands Of the good citizens of
Washington who are intensely in ear
nest in the preservation of the natural
beauties of the parkway connections,
and especially in seeing the magnif1-
cent bridge over Rock creek, on Con-
necticut avenue. unobstructed to public
view.
AS the law now stands the strip of
land referred to is included in the con-
Meeting parkway (see section %. sun
dry civil bill of March 4, 1919. The
plan recently submitted by the Rock
Creek and Potomac parkway commits
sion really calls for the repeal pro tan
to of that law.
Whether or not it will or should have
any bearing upon the action of Con-
gresS, there is an ethical obi legation as
well as a moral duty on the part of
Congress to give effect to the existing
law unless some real reason be urged
for not doing SO.
Fears Impairment of Original Plan.
1t is clear that the modification pro-
posed by the rkway commission will
very seriouslXfmpair the original plan
and adherence to the plan on the part of
Congress is essential to the harmonious
and successful working out of the
whole scheme and to the protection of
the view of the Connecticut Avenue
bridge and of the new Rock Creek
bridge, which must of necessity be
constructed at an early date. The mat
ter, therefore, is one of moral obliga-
ton and civic duty and not one of the
attitude of adjacent property owners.
If the original plan of Congress cannot
stand on its own merits as being in the
public interests it is immaterial wheth-
er or not few citizens owning proper
ty in the vicinity are to be helped or
harmed. That the original plan of Con-
gress is far more meritorious than the
modified plan now proposed by the
parkway commission, in so far as the
taking of property between the Con-
necticut Avenue and Rock Creek
bridges is concerned, is indicated by the