Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-03-13
MONROE OVERPASS
PROJECT OPPOSED
AS BAD ECONOMY
Col. Grant Believes Michigan
Avenue Crossing Should Be
Eliminated Instead.
REGARDS REBUILDING
AS UNNECESSARY LOSS
Declares Plan Would Add New
Hazard With Introduction
of Sharp Turn.

The dangerous grade crossing at
Michigan avenue and the tracks of the
metropolitan branch of the Baltimore &
Ohio Railroad should be eliminated
without delay rather than expend money
for the reconstruction Of the Monroe
street overpaSs, nearby, Lieut.. Col. u. S.
Grant, Sd, vice chairman and execu-
tive officer Of the National Capital Park
and Planning Commission, informed
The Star in response to a request for
his views on the much-mooted Michi-
gan avenue grade-croSsing problem.
A study by the commission has sug-
gested that the hazard might be elimi-
mated by the construction of an ade-
! Quate overpass on Michigan avenue.
which would be Strengthened, a little
to the north of the present line at the
grade crossing. Pending before the
House Appropriations Committe for in
sertion in The District appropriation
bill, which is expected to be reported In
couple of days. is a District govern
ment proposal for $l45,000 to recon.
struct the overpaSs at Monroe street and
provide for the closing Of the Michigan
avenue grade crossing and the con-
struction of q pedestrian underpass
there.
Would Mean New Hazard.
In expressing the opinion that the
present Monroe street crossing is ade-
Quate for this street for many years to
come, Col Grant made 1t clear that he
did not wish to be put in the light OF
attacking the District government for
its stand in proposing to go forward as
soon as funds become available and re-
construct the Monroe street overpass.
Col Grant insisted that to rebuild the
present Monroe street crossing will de-
stroy a perfectly good investment with
out any benefit equivalent to the ex-
penditure," and asserted that this con-
struction cannot be adequate as q
crossing for Michigan avenue in the
route Of which 1t will introduce a new
and unnecessary danger" in the shape
Of sharp turn.
Col Grants statement follows:
an reply to your question as to the
substitute proposed for separation OF
grades at the Baltimore & Ohio Rail-
road crossing of Michigan avenue. I
can only reply as follows:
81. Michigan avenue Is one OF the
principal thoroughfares leading out of
the city to the edge of the District Of
Columbia. Because it skirts the Sol
diers' Home and Catholic University
properties which interpoSe large area
not traverSed by streets, and thereby
rigidly limit the number of thorough
fares obtainable in this section of the
city, Michigan avenue is particularly
important as an arterial highway.
"2. It is understood that the esti-
mated cost of the desired crossing Is
now found to exceed the appropriation,
and that permission is asked to rebuild
the Monroe street crossing instead. 1t
seems to me that to do this would be a
grave mistake, and will ultimately prove
an extravaganza, as basic mistakes uSu-
ally do.
Present Crossing Held Adequate.
"3. The present Monroe street cross
ing is adequate for this street for many
years to come. To rebuild 1t will destroy
q perfectly good investment without any
benefit equivalent to the expenditure
It cannot be substituted for crossing
in the line of Michigan avenue, as 1t
will require sharp right-angle turn to
get back into the latter. To introduce
into an arterial highway an unnecessary
right-angled turn Is to fly in the face
of all experience, to decrease the traffic
capacity Of the major street, and at the
same time to increase congestion and
impede traffic on Monroe street. But,
worst Of all, it will set up new danger
point in the thoroughfare system Of the
city.
a. IL Is acknowledged, i DcueVes py
those who advocate this change in plan
that the Monroe street crossing will not
be a permanent solution, but is merely
to provide temporarily for trafflc cross
ing the railroad in this neighborhood.
It will then be necessary, even in their
opinion, to come back in a few years
and spend the greater sum requisite for
the proper solution of the problem.
There does not appear to be any econ
omy in this, since the cost Of the correct
solution will not be decreased by the
delay. If past experience Is a guide. 1t
will be increased materially, and the
expenditure made this year on rebuild
ing the Monroe street crossing will have
been largely lost.
IS. If the District Of Columbia can
not afford to go through this year with
the solution authorized last year and
build the Michigan avenue overpaSs IN
the line Of Michigan avenue, 1t would
appear to be the part OF wisdom to wait
until this is possible. The District Is
now spending more than 100000 to
straighten out one kink in Michigan
avenue citywards of this crossing. Can
the expenditure Of twice this sum be
justified to put sharper curve into the
route trafic will have to takeP
Rebuilding Considered Too Expensive.
IS Rebuilding the Monroe street
crossing is too expensive Joo 10 DC
considered a temporary expedient. 1t
cannot be adequate as a crossing Tor
Michigan avenue, in the route Of which
II will introduce a new and unnecessary
danger. 1t will materially decrease the
trafic capacity of both streets, and 1t
will practically throw away whatever
value the present Monroe street over
pass has besides multiplying the dement's
of the 500 900 or more being expended
to straighten Michigan avenue farther
downtown.
From the standpoint Of city plan
ming, the proposed change In plan ap-
pears most regrettable and inconsistent
with ultimate economy in the cost OF
There may. of course, be important rea-
sons for it which have not come to my
notice"
9"