Evening star., 1952-08-30
Bridge Relief Is Urqent

It would be unfortunate If another bridge
controversy between the District Highway Depart
ment and the National Capital Planning Com
mission should delay the traffic-congestion relief
which motorists who cross the Potomac River
are demanding. They have right to expect
some effective measure of relief at the earliest
practicable date. Additional bridges are badly
needed, as all the surveys and as everyday
experiences of harassed motorists have clearly
shown. The only question at issue is the loca-
tlon OF the new crossing or crossings. The
motoring public undoubtedly will support the
Highway Departments contention that the next
bridge should be centrally located-where it could
bring immediate easing of peak congestion on
the other heavily loaded bridges.
DiSagreements between the highway engi-
neers and the city planners over bridge sites is
an old story here. The planning commission
opposed two Fourteenth street bridges preferring
one bridge there and another at Alexandria. It
opposed the East Capitol street bridge, urging
instead one along the line of Massachusetts
avenue. Congress resolved both disputes in
favor of the Highway Department, which
presented persuasive traffic studies in support
Of their proposals
In the present case, the National Capital
Planning Commission as yet has taken no
formal stand. It has before it, however, report
by consulting engineer firm, Harland Bartholo-
NEW and Associates, recommending against any
more bridges in the central downtown area and
indorsing the commissions past proposals for
bridge at Alexandria and one above Key Bridge.
The fringe" bridges would be links in the
commissions long-range plans for peripheral
highway to carry traffic around Washington's
business district. The Highway Department is
in general agreement with this long-range
program, but, on the basis of recent traffic
origin n-and-deStination studieS insists that pri-
ority should be given to an additional river
crossing between the Memorial and Key Bridges
The Bartholomew report contends that the
building Of any new bridges in the central area
would only bring more traffic into the congeSted
downtown section and thus complcate the
traffic situation there. This argument will be
puZzling to motorists who must move into and
out of the downtown section, whether there are
more bridges or not. The provision of an extra
bridge would mean only that they could make
their trips more conveniently, more quickly and
with less danger of accidents. In this connection
some statistics cited by the report of Modjeski
and Masters, favoring bridge at E street and
New Hampshire avenue is pertinent This firm
told the Highway Department that studies show
that even if outlying bridges were built "82 per
cent of the 1852 traffic as we'll that of the next
several years would use Highway, Memorial, Key
and street bridges and cannot be diuerted to
outlying bridges. The remaining 18 per cent
would be divided among the Chain Alexandria
and Nebraska avenue bridges"
If these estimates are approximately correct
the argument for another bridge between central
Washington and Arlington is logical and sound.
Relief for today's bottlenecks cannot be put off
for 10 or 20 years in the hope that the dispersal
program and outer-ring boulevards, with appro-
pirate bridges, will eventually ease the strain on
existing bridges. The Alexandria and the
Nebraska avenue bridges will be needed eventu-
ally, as the District, Virginia and Maryland
make progress on pending outer-belt highway
plans. But today's bridge congestion-and that
Of the near future-deserves immediate attention.