Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-04-16
Fight Mapped
To End Threat
To S|um Plans
Amendment Limits
Federal Gronts for
RedeveIopment
By George Beveridee

by 0eoF9e beverage
A major effort will be made in
the Senate next week to kill OF
change a House provision Off
Gals fear threatens redevelop-
ment projects both here and
throughout the country.
The provision, voted on the
House floor on March 80 as ar
amendment to a housing appro-
pria tons bill. forbids use of the
appropriations as Federal grants
to redevelopment projects con-
tanning nonresidential features
that are ruled to be not NOR
mally essential for residential
uses"
Thus. such nonresidential fea-
lures as schools. streets and
parks. might be approved as
normally essential" to the sur
rounding residential areas. But
the language throws a shadow
over such structures as office
buildings, theaters and opera
houses.
Representative Phillips. Re-
publican. of California, who
backed the amendment in the
House. said it was not intended
to affect any project that clearly
would be legal under existing re-
development laws. He said it
was meant to make sure provi-
sions of the laws requiring that
the accent in redevelopment be
on housing and related features
are followed.
Fear Threat to Plan.
Asked about Washington's re-
development proposals, Mr.. Phil
lips said he did not know of any,
thing Objectionable about them
and that they would not be af-
fected by his proviso.
But the amendments language,
Federal and city officials fear,
constitutes threat to the multi
million-dollar program proposed
for Southwest Washington by
the New York firm of Webb g.
Knapp. While residential use
makes up more than half the re-
development area in the New
York plan, it also calls for Office
buildings, a national music hall,
theaters and other nonresident
tial features.
In addition, some officials feel,
1t might even jeopardize parts of
Project Area B. Southwest Wash
ington's pilot. 76-acre slum clear
ance and redevelopnent pro-
gram, on which planning. land
acquisition and rehousing is we'll
under way.
One source estimated the
amendment. which resulted
originally from complaints about
a New York City coliseum prof.
ect, could be interpreted to affect
as many as two-thirds of the
projects in planning stages
throughout the country
District officials at first felt
that House debate indicated the
District projects would not be
affected by the ban. Since then,
however. they have expressed
sharp concern in letters to Sem
ator Saltonstall, Republican of
Massachusetts.
Up for Action Wednesday.
The housing money bill will
come before Senator Salton-
stalls Appropriations subcom-
mittee Wednesday, when the
major effort is expected to be
made to kill the provision.
The committee has scheduled
New York Mayor Robert F. Wag-
ner, New York Construction Co.
ordinator Robert Moses and Fed
eral housing officials to testify
AL OppOoiLlOI1'
A number of other Would-be
witnesses including William
Zeckendorf, Webb & Knapp
president-have been asked to
file opposition statements,
committee aide said. He said
some complaints have come in
about the proviso from as far
as San Francisco.
The hassle over the redevelop-
ment projects began last month
when a House Appropriations
subcommittee, headed by Mr..
Phillips. sharply criticized ap-
proval of redevelopment funds
for a coliseum at New York's
Columbus Circle.
The subcommittee, in a re-
port, said the section of the
1949 Housing Act under which
the project was approved pro-
vided for "predominantly resi-
Dental uses" It suggested an
amendment designed to cor
rect without any question
any situation of this nature
that might arise in the flu
ture
How it Reads.
The amendment, as changed
on the House floor, reads:
that no funds in this
act shall be available for pay
ment of capital grants under
any contract involving the de-
velopment or redevelopment of
a project for predominantly resi-
dental uses where incidental
uses are not restricted to those
normally essential for residential
uses"
The language has officials I'M
certain as to its exact effect.
The reason is that Federal loans
and grants can be made for slum
clearance and redevelopment,
under the 1949 act. under either
one of two alternative situations:
/. If the existing Slum area
to be cleared and redeveloped
is predominantly residential in
character, the finished product
..~L1roY41AL 1~~L s~A&