Evening star., 1953-07-09
The WrongIe Over Route 24O

On the opposite page today The Star has
attempted to outline, as fairly and as under
standably possible, the more important pros
and cons of the debate over Maryland's planned
extension of Route 240 to the outskirts of
Washington.
There is merit in the contentious advanced
on both sides of the controversy. 1t is not
controversy that is going to be settled in the
public interest, however, if the merits continue
to be obscured by name-calling, attribution of
ulterior motives and the sort of emotonalism
that has become so conspicuous part of this
fight.
What is needed more than anything else at
this point is determination by the chief
antagoniSts-the Maryland State Roads Com
mission and the National Capital Planning
Commissioning sit down together and reach
an agreement in the public interest that is
based on hard fact. The public suffers when
two bodies of experts, whose Jurisdictions over
lap, find themselves in deadlock.
The Star does not believe that Maryland's
State Roads Commission and other highway
building agencies with which it is allied are
composed of ruthless vandalS seeking to "de-
stroy" Rock Greek Park. What they are trying
to do is to find the most logical, the least ex-
pensive and the least injurious route by which
fine new express highway, now nearing COM
WashingtonS borders. At the same time they
are working to reduce the traffic congestion in
and out of Washington over inadequate road
ways. The congestion is bad now, but in few
years it will become intolerable.
The Star does not believe that the National
Capital Planning Commission or the Interior
Department. which control Rock Greek Park
and, indirectly, its Maryland extensions, and
are opposing the Maryland Roads Commission
plan, are made up of dreamy viSionaries whose
preoccupation with preserving the parks" has
blinded them to the realities of rush h-hour
traffic in and out of Washington. Nor does it
believe that the property owners in one small
section of Montgomery County, aggressively
opposing Route 240s extension because it af-
fectS their own immediate interests, are any
more selfish than any other group of property
owners would be in the same circumstances.
Marylands State Roads Commission has
the money to de- what it has decided is the
only thing to be done in extending the final leg
of Route 240 to the District line Other sections
of Maryland, needing better highways would
like to have this money. If the money remains
unspent on WaShingtons borders, because of
legal and other distractions, it may remain un-
spent for many years to come in so far as this
area is concerned. The roads commissions
anxiety to proceed Immediately is perfectly
understandable. Opposition from property
owners is no new experience to those who must
build highways. Private developments along
its proposed right of way cannot be held up
Indefinitely. If they are not held up however,
highly expensive condemnation in a rapidly
developing area will make an eventual solution
far more complicated than it is now. The po-
Sition of the roads commission, in these cir
cumstances, demands sympathetic understand
ing by those who seek to block its plans.
Much of the official resistance-by the
Interior Department and the National Planning
CommlSSlon-to the road plans stems from
their jurisdiction over Rock Creek Park in the
District and its extensions into Maryland For
the controversial section of 240 not only makes
use of part of the Maryland extension of the
park, but presupposes a connection with a
future highway through the Districts Rock
Creek Park.
A highway through the Districts Rock
Creek Park would not destroy" that park.
Such a roadway, properly landScaped might
even improve the park by restoring qualities
that are being lost now because of heavy traffic
over winding park roads that were never de-
signed for such purpose. In future years such
highway may be constructed and some
authorities believe it would be sensible move
that will become inevitable as the need becomes
more evident
The important point is that this highway
through the District park is not going to be
built in the near future. And this brings into
question the wisdom of terminating Route 240
at the Maryland gateway to the Districts Rock
Greek Park. This question should be capable
of decision on the basis of aScertainable facts
as to the effect traffic without the Rock
Creek Park connection.
AS for the use for highways of sections of
Marylapd'S Rock Creek Park, the Planning
Commission has already agreed to such use for
a belt highway. But as The Star points out
the prospect of two four-lane divided highways
Route 240 and the belt highway-running
parallel short distance through narrow part
of MarylandS Rock Creek Park was never
understood by the planning agencies when they
agreed to the belt highways use of the park.
This plan certainly requires reconsideration by
the Maryland Roads Commission and will not
be easily defended. For that plan would, indeed,
destroy" that section of Maryland'S Rock Greek
Park for park purposes.
There is little or no controversy over the
proposed belt route (shown on the mapp and
the Maryland Roads Commission has the money
to begin land acquisition for parts of it now
There is little controversy over the proposed
west leg of 240, ending near Cabin John Bridge
and designed for connection with q future
Potomac bridge and Virginia highway. These
two undertakings, however, are planned for