Evening star., 1951-10-10
Council Weighs
Cemetery Issue
On Re|1earing
$50 Argue For or
Against Project
On Wilkins Truct

w
Fate of the hotly disputed
Montrose Cemetery proposal. de-
Tended as a necessity and at.
tackled as a nuisance, was in ths
hands of the Montgomery County
Council today.
The council must decide whether
the cemetery would be valuable
economic and scenic asset to the
county, as contended by the
would-be operators. or a threat
to desirable residential develop
ment of suburban Montgomery
and to the value of adjoining
real estate, as contended by op.
ponents.
Some $50 persons argued the
issue before the council yester-
day at a re-hearing, scheduled
after opponents brought in a Pc
tition signed by some 1850 per-
sons who said they did not want
a cemetery on the 409-acre Will
kins tract. bounded roughly by
Viers Mill road, Randolph road
Rockville pike and Halpine road
First Hearing in August.
The council held the first hear
ing on the application of North
Washington Cemetery, Inc, to put
a cemetery on the middle go
acres of the tract last August 13,
A hearing also was held at that
time on North WaShington'S ap-
plication to amend the zoning law
to permit cemeteries in residential
zones, under certain conditions
That amendment was necessary
before the application for a spe-
cific site permit could be con-
sidered.
However, it was later discovered
that the first amendment hearing
had been improperly advertised, sc
it was reheard September II. The
council then approved the amend
ment and refused to rescind thai
action as requested by the petit
ton signers.
A battery of hired experts LED
the fight for the cemetery associa-
ton.
One Of them, Earl S. Draper
landscape engineer from Bethesda
said he had never seen a piece
of property more perfectly suited
for the memorial park type Of
cemetery which the applicant
plans to establish"
Tax Issue Raised.
Not only will the burial park be
a scenic asset to the county. Mr.
Draper asserted, but it will pro.
vide tax money without the in
vestment in streets and drainage
facilities which a subdivision
would require.
Mrs. Stella B. Werner council
member, said, however, that nc
taxes are now collected from any
cemetery in the county and it is
questionable whether the proposed
Montrose Cemetery would be
liable to taxation.
Leading spokesman for the op-
position was Attorney James R.
Miller, who preferred to refer to
the cemetery as a graveyard. He
said it is IAN imposition on the
people who have come out to
Montgomery to settle down and
make their homes"
Attacking assurances by North
Washington that the cemetery
would be of a memorial park type,
Mr.. Miller declared:
THE council well knows that ii
has no authority to tell the appli-
cants what they can do with their
land after the application is
granted. This is a lucrative COM
mercial enterprise. and if more
people want tombstones than don't
want tombstones, they'll put in
tombstones because it will put
money in their pockets
Residence Requirement Cited.
Mr.. Miller, who represented
three adjacent property owners
and the Bulls School of Silver
Spring, which plans to build a new
school next to the Wilkins tract
also charged that the Montrose
site does not suit the county re-
quirement that no more than 10C
persons live within 500 yards OF
the cemetery.
The site also would violate the
requirement that a cemetery moi
be within 500 yards of any school
the attorney asserted. He said
Montrose Elementary School is
now within that radius as the pro-
posed Bulls prep school will be
when it is built.
Other opponents of the applica-
ton include the Maryland Ma.
tional Capital Park and Planning
Commission, the Montgomery
County Civic Federation, Alliee
Civic Group of Silver Spring Route
240 Citizens Association, Twin.
brook Citizens Association anc
several adjoining property own.
erS.
Supporters of the cemetery in.
clude the county real estate board
whose spokesman said it will no
depreciate adjoining propert,
values; the Rockville Pike Busi
ness Association and some ad
joining property owners.