Evening star., 1935-03-27
The Airport Report.

location and development of an ade-
quate airport for Washington.
One of these is for Congress to
exercise its undisputed authority in
the matter, take the initiative that
circumstances demand, select a site
and appropriate, in a manner fair to
the District, the funds necessary for
its development.
The other is for Congress to delegate
such authority to an independent COM
mission, furnish the commission with
the necessary funds and give the COM
mission free hand.
The report of the subcommittee of
the House District Committee which
has conducted a lengthy investigation
Of the airport problem is fair and
practical up to a certain point. 1t
creates a commission which is given
authority to spend money appropri-
ated on a basis that would doubtless
be considered fair to the District and
within the financial resources of the
District. But it unfortunately destroys
the advantageous principles represent
ed in the selection of an Independent
commission by eliminating from the
commissions choice of sites the pro-
posed Gravelly Point development, for
reasons that are not altogether eap-
vincing and on grounds that remain
highly controversial. furthermore.
there is eliminated from membership
on the commission the agency which
naturally should possess strong voice
in solution of the airport problem
the National Capital Park and Plan
ming Commission. The fact that the
Park and Planning Commission has
favored Gravelly Point in he past
should not bar 1t from membership.
But the only reasonable interpreta-
ton of its having been ignored is
because of its conviction that Gravelly
Point Is the best available site.
1t is unfortunate, therefore, that
the subcommittee did not carry out in
full the independent commission prin-
ciple, make its membership adequately
representative of all the agencies con-
cerned and leave to the commission
the full and unprejudiced choice Of
the site. If the Park and Planning
Commission were outvoted by disin-
interested opinion, the Gravelly Point
issue would be settled. One fears
that the nature of the report and
proposed legislation accompanying it
does not dispose of the Gravelly Point
issue.
Gould not the legislation be amend
ed to remove these objections? The
committee finds that: The need for a
proper airport serving the District of
Columbia is immediate. An airport
is required that can be developed in
the least possible time for the least
cost, having in mind safety, proximity
to the center of Washington, and
adequate technical facilities" With
these statements there is no disagree
ment. But while the Washington Air
port could doubtless be enlarged, as
the committee suggests, more rapidly
than Gravelly Point could be devel-
oped, it Is by no means certain that
the unfortunate and continued delay
which has dogged development of an
appropriate site will not be continued
by the unnecessary elements of con-
troversy that the committee has in
jected into an otherwise good report.
Early this month Frederic A. Delano.
chairman Of the National Capital
Park and Planning Commission, wrote
to Chairman Randolph of the sub
committee:
Your committee may inquire why,
with such repeated Endorsements of
the Gravelly Point site, no action has
as yet been obtained. TN answer is
simple Whenever legislation for Grav-
ely Point is before a committee of
Congress and its many obvious
advantages have been presented those
desiring to sell other sites to the
Government intervene, request inspec-
ton of their sites and have on several
occasions asked for q special commits
sion to investigate and report later.
Before the committee can make these
inspections and complete hearings
Congress is adjourned.
That is unfortunately true. The
House District Committee is now in q
position, however, to 60 forward with
legislation on the basis of its SUBJ
committees report, but to include the
National Capital Park and Planning
Commission on the proposed Wash
ington airport commission and give to
that commission free hand in max
ing the final selection of whatever