Evening star., 1953-07-01
Roads Agency
Studies Next
RI. 24O Move
Maryland Planners
Vote, AZ, for Use
Of Park Section
By George Beveridqe

County fight over a Washington
bound expressway through parts
of Rock Creek Park were
Squarely up to the State Roads
Commission today.
While the commission pom
dered action, these new develop
mentS intensified the already
red-hot controversy over the
proposed extension of U. S.
Route 240:
l. The Maryland National
Capital Park and Planning Com
mission. by AZ vote. gave
authority to use park sections
under its control for the disputed
route. The group, splitting
sharply with the National Cap
ital Planning Commission. asked
the NCPPC to reconsider its
opposition.
2. Chairman Case of the Sem
ate District Committee opposed
construction of an expressway
through Rock Creek Park. In a
brief letter to the NCPPC. he
asked to be advised in case it
considered approval of such a
move "in order that the Senate
committee might conduct a
hearing in the matter"
How 1t Stands Now.
Here is the way the WASH
ington areas biggest highway
fight in years stands at the
moment:
The roads commission program
calls for U. S. Route 240 to fork
northwest of Washington. A
west leg would continue to the
Potomac near Cabin John. A
southeast leg would cross Wis
consin avenue and enter Rock
Creek Park near Grosvenor lane.
At this point. the leg would
connect with a proposed circum-
ferential freeway, running from
east to west across Montgomery
and Prince Georges Counties. 1t
also, however, would leave Rock
Creek after a short distance,
cross diagonally through North
Chevy Chase and re-enter Rock
Creek Park near the East-West
highway. The ultimate inten-
tion is that the high-speed ex-
preSSway would continue through
Rock Creek Park to downtown
Washington when the District
Highway Department constructed
the city section.
Part Not Involved.
Not involved in the current
fight is the northern part of the
southeast leg, to the point it
connects with the inter-county
belt road. Also, use of Rock
Greek Park for the inter-county
road has been indorsed by both
the Maryland and National Plan
ming Commissions.
The NCPPC last week, however.
strongly opposed continuation of
the radical expressway toward
Washington. The NCPPC argues
that it-along with the Mary
land planning group-has au-
thorlty to block the road because
it passes through park lands
near the East-West highway.
The Maryland planners in
dorsement, conflicting directly
with the NCPPC, had only two
strings attached to it. One was
that it be able to approve de-
tailed plans later. The other
was that it be able to regulate
truck traffic that would use the
route. The Roads Commission
has agreed TO both.
The Maryland-NCPPC action
yesterday constituted sharp
split among the commission it.
self. Dissenting we're two of the
three Montgomery County mem
bers. Richard F. Green and
Sidney M. Oliver.
Voting for the plan were DON
aid E. Gingery of Montgomery
County and Prince Georges
County members Robert M.
Watkins, commission chairman:
Herbert w. Wells and Carlton
E Pyles.
In effect, resolution adopted
by the group backed up road
commission arguments that the
proposed expressway is the most
sound solution to serious traffic
congestion on arterial streets
now used by commuters.
In a dissenting statement, Mr..
Green and Mr.. Oliver protested
that the resolution was not sub
mitted prior to the meeting and
that the majority members re-
fused to hold it over until
another meeting.
ID. C. Delay Feared.
Mr.. Watkins said the Roads
Commission would be urged to
work closely with the District
Highway Department to get the
Washington part of the route
finished as fast as possible.
A substantial amount of OPP
position involved in the dispute,
however, has centered around a
fear that the expressway would
dead end Washington bound
traffic at the East-West highway
for years before the Washington
section was built.
Meanwhile, John A. Remon,
acting NCPC chairman. said he
saw mo reason why we should
not reconsider our action in view
of the Maryland peoples re-
quest"
There was no expectation from
any source queried. however, that
the NCPC would reverse its stand
of opposition.
Thus, despite approval from
the Maryland planning group,
the roads commission still faces
the legal hurdle posed by the
The roads commission in
sistS it never has surrendered
sovereign rights" to build roads
they are needed.
But the big question it must