Evening star., 1953-06-30
Road Planners
Seek Decision
On Route 24O.
May Heal Split
On Use of Park
For Highway !
BY George Beveridqe


Maryland planners, repeatedly
split on the controversial plan
to extend U. S. Route 240
through parts of Rock Creek
Park. will attempt to take
stand on the hot issue at a /
pm. meeting today.
Chairman Robert M. Watkins
of the Maryland National Capt.
tai Park and Planning Commis-
sion, indicated at least one
resolution already has been pre-
pared to be put before the group.
A majority of the members,
one source reported, favor the
project. But definite objection
is expected to be raised to the
plan, which has stirred hornets
nest of opposition for months
among one group of North Chevy
Chase residents.
The Section Involved.
Involved is the State Roads
Commission proposal to bring
the southeast leg of 240 through
part of North Chevy Chase and
a section of Rock Creek Park
near the East-West highway.
This route is designed to extend
eventually through the District
part of the park. Not involved
in the dispute is the northern
most portion of the southeast
leg, which would meet the pro-
posed east-weSt inter-county belt
road in a narrow section of Rock
Greek near Wisconsin avenue.
The Capper-Cramton Act of
1880 gives the Maryland plan
nerS and the National Capital
Park and Planning Commission
control over development of the
park portions involved in the
fight.
The NCPC already has re-
jected the Maryland plan. and
insists the 1880 act gives it the
right to block the proposal. If
advance indications are carried
out, the Maryland planners may
well split with the NCPC on the
issue.
Legal Powers Challenged.
The roads 'commission-obvi-
ously anticipating the NCPC op-
pcsition-already has challenged
its legal powers to block the
plan. There is no indication
as yet, however, as to whether
1t plans a fast court test.
Meanwhile, another planning
body, the National Capital Re-
gional Planning Council, yes
terday backed off from a stand
In the 240 dispute.
Mr. Watkins, also chairman of
the council. had told the council
that I'VE don't want you in the
fight" But he had suggested
that the council might want to
name a committee to study the
"baSic question of the utilization
of park lands for roadways."
However, the group also decided
against this.
Mr.. Watkins tried to keep
arguments on 240 completely out
of the discussion, but succeeded
only partially.
Cites Lack Of Land.
Donald E. Gingery, a Mont
gomery County member of the
Maryland planning body as well
as of the council, said the issue
arose because of a lack of any
land but park land available to
accomplish the purpose" of the
route planned to bring COM
muter traffic through the length
of Rock Creek Park.
I'VE have to come to grips
with problems" he asserted. If
we're wrong on proposal, we
stop planning it. If we're right.
we take the hell that goes with
the planning"
Blair Lee III, executive secre-
tary of the NCPC, argued that
the planners had more to con-
slider than impact of the route.
on the parks. He contended it
was logical to improve Wash
ington streets and build the Dis
trict section of the expreSSway
toward Maryland, rather than
dead-ending Maryland traffic at
the District line.
That's like building a house
by putting the roof on first" he
declared.
Restates Stand for Bridges.
In other actions, meanwhile,
the council:
/. Decided to make no change
in an earlier position calling for
new Potomac River bridges both
at Jones Point, Alexandria, and
at some point between the Me-
mortal and Key Bridges.
The matter came up because
of a resolution from the Northern
Virginia Regional Planning Com
mission, opposing a central area
bridge-aS proposed by the Dis
trict Highway Experimentation
urging improvements to existing
spans and new bridges at Jones
Point and Nebraska avenue. The
question was argued, but no ac-
ton was taken.
2. Formally named new off,
GERS to serve until September /,
1854. They were: Robert M.
Watkins, chairman: District En-
gineer Commissioner Louis W..
PrentiSs, vice chairman, and C..
Luekett Watkins of Alexandria,
second vice chairman.
3. Adopted a general-worded
program for the future. 1t called
for studies Of land use in the
area. economic characteristics,
transportation problems. public
works facilities, natural re-
sources. planning regulations and
administrative codes in each
jurisdiction and community IA
cilitieS-such as schools, hoSpi-
tails and Fairgrounds.