Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1953-02-02
Highways VS.. Parks

There always has been and probably there
always will be conflicting views between park
conservationists and highway builders over
plans for traffic relief. The steady encroach-
ment on scenic park areas by busy highways and
bridges and grade-Separation structures has
been resented, and UNDERSTANDABLE so, by those
concerned with preserving the natural beauty
OF Washington It is not surprising therefore,
that subcommittee of the Committee of 100
on the Federal City has taken an extremely dim
view of the Highway Departments construction
program for the immediate and near-future
traffic needs. Unfortunately highway improve
mentS cannot be avoided or left to future
generations.
The committee properly is on the alert
against any unnecessary construction projects
that would tend to mar the landscape of the
city and its environS. The report it has re-
ce1ved from its highway subcommittee reflects
this tendency to resist further invasion of park
lands as much as possible. Thus, the Highway
Departments plan for broad parkway through
Rock Creek Park to serve as an approach of the
BODYBUILDING Washington National Pike from
Frederick is opposed in principle So is the
proposed arterial highway through the Glover
Archbold Parkway. The chief target of the
critical report, however, is the proposed bridge
across the Potomac River along the line of E
SGIccC. Ills new cOnneCClOn Win virginia,
designed to relieve bottleneck conditions on the
Fourteenth street, Memorial and Key Bridges,
would have one terminus in the Rock Creek-Po-
tomac Parkway area, would. cross part of the
wildlife sanctuary on Theodore Roosevelt Island
and would have its Virginia terminus on the route
of the George Washington Memorial Parkway
This project already has aroused the wrath of
Federal park authorities some members of the
National Capital Planning Commission and the
Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Commission. The
NCPC recently voted not to actively oppose a
centrally located bridge, although it would pre-
fer bridges at Alexandria and in the Nebraska
avenue area.
The subcommittee accused the Highway
Department of concentrating on immediate
traffic relief-a charge of which officials of that
department probably could be found guilty.
But that is the departments job-finding means
of relieving todayS bottlenecks, while looking
ahead to future needs as well. The department
undoubtedly would much prefer to do sweep
Ing reconstruction job of the type advocated by
the subcommittee, but it is limited by appro-
priationS and legislative restrictions. 1t must
do the best it can with what funds are made
available, from year to year, trying in the
meantime to so design the piecemeal projects
that they will fit into long-range highway
program. And in meeting the urgent demands
of today's generation of citizens for immediate
traffic relief, it is inevitable that some park
properties will be invaded from time to time
Until the park protectors offer some more
reasonable alternatives to highway construction
than they have on many occasions in the past
the pressure for traffic action will grow too
great for the Highway Department or the Com
miSsionerS or Congress to resist
Certainly the objections cited by the sub
committee in its strongly worded report should
not be lightly brushed aside at the District
Building. Every possible consideration should
be given to the commendable efforts being made
by many groups and individuals to safeguard
Washington'S beauty. And whenever and wher-
ever it is possible to adopt practicable alterna-
tives to park DETACHMENT or destruction, such
alternatives should be adopted without question
The problem of reconciing the divergent
schools of thought is difficult one calling for
dispassionate conferences and study by all
concerned.