Evening star., 1921-09-30
CITY HEADS DENY
ACTION HOSTILE TO
WHARF commerce
Desire That Channel Be Used
to Maximum Capacity,
Says Letter Issued.
ONLY rRANSSHIPMENT
ON WHARVES THEIR PLAN
Commissioners Object to Certain
Kinds of Work on Water Front.
Public Use Is Wanted.

The District Commissioners today
declared in unmistakable terms that
they have no intention of abolishing
commerce along the water front of
Washington channel or of converting
the District side of the channel into
a'parkway.
The city heads made clear their
position on all phases of the wharf
ing to the National Rivers and Har-
bors Congress, the Merchants and
Manufacturers Association, the WASH
ington Board of Trade, the Coal Mer-
chants Board of Trade and the Ran
die Highlands Citizens Association.
Declare Wharf Unsafe.
The letter addressed to the rivers
and harbors congress follows:
In further response to the letter
of September %, 1921, signed by you
and Mr.. S. A. Thompson, concerning
the use of the water front of the
Washington channel for commercial
purposes. the Commissioners of the
District Of Columbia beg to advise
you as follows:
The recent action of the Commits
sioners in refusing to renew the lease
with the j. Maury Dove Company was
wharf was so badly decayed as to be
unsafe. Mr.. Dove has occupied this
part of the water front for many
Years, his last lease expiring on
June 80. About six months before
it's expiration, Mr.. Dove was notified
that the lease would not be renewed,
So that he has had ample opportunity
TO move his business elsewhere.
The only other change of water
front occupation that is contemplated
at this time is embodied in the notice.
dated August IL, 1921,.to the Roberts
Lumber Company and L. A. Clarke &
Son to yacate, on or before October
81, the water front occupied by them
This notice contained a statement
that it was the intention Of the Com
missioners to no longer rent this
property for commercial purposes.
which has been construed to mean
that it was no longer the intention Of
the Commissioners to permit It's use
for commercial purposes. On the con-
trary, the effect ofdthe proposed order,
so far as this wharf is concerned, will
be merefysel.chango1H privately con-
trolled: wharf to public wharf, open
to all carriers on equal terms.
Only for Transshipment.
I'm connection with the proposed
changes on the water front, the Com
--isSiOnars have voiced their objec-
I on to the use of water front property
the washington channel for pur-
loses other than the transshipment
CT freight, between water and land
carriers or vice versa. They object to
The maintenance on this waterfront
Nnertv of mills for the conversion of
,cordwood into kindling; for the main
. ..4lCc OF garages and stables and
/ use as general storage site.
AS the leases for the water front
sTroperty expire, it is the intention
tf the Commissioners to renew them
cnly upon condition that the objec-
tionabIe uses cited above shall be
discontinued.
Many of the existing buildings on
the water front project some twelve
feet beyond the established building
line, SO that a further condition In the
Cf that portion of existing structures
which project beyond that line.
Want Channel to BE Used.
Neither the action in the case of
the wharf at the foot of 10th street,
nor that in the case of the Maury
Dove wharf can properly be consid-
cred as an effort on the part of the
Commissioners to interfere with
water-borne commerce. On the con-
trary, they fully realize the large
sums that have been expended by the
federal government in the improve
ment of the Washington channel. and
1t is their desire to see that channel
used to its maximum capacity This
can be done only through logical and
appropriate use of the water front
property.
"When the city was zoned the
Georgetown water front and large
section fthe Anacostia water front,
were zoned for. industrial purposes.
but the Washington channel water
front was zoned for commercial pur-
poses. and in the opinion of the Com
missioners. wood-sawing and cutting
machinery and garages and stables
should be eliminated from the COM
mercial water front. The Commission
ers have no desire to restrict the char
acter of materials transshipped on
the washington channel, nor do they
object in any way to the establishment
of loading or unloading devices which
will facilitate the transshiprnent OF
freight. i.
referring to the last paragraph of
YOUR letter, the Commissioners have
no thought of converting the city side
of the Washington channel into pub
lie park"