Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-09-21
zOning Advisers
Vote Condemns
Lewis Proposals
BY GEORGE BEvERIDGE


A subcommittee report LAM
basting consultant Harold M.
Lewis preliminary coming pro-
posalS for Washington has been
overwhelmingly approved by the
Commissioners Zoning Advisory
Committee
The committee, headed by
banker Thomas j. Groom, voted
33 to 2 in favor of the report
at a meeting yesterday, attended
by only about half the adj
visory groups membership.
The report goes to the Com
missioners after more than 30
months Of wrangling over a re-
vision Of Washington's outmoded
coming code. II represents the
advisory groups official position
on controversial proposals Mr..
Lewis presented last spring for
striking changes in coming and
land use.
Even so, the report signals the
end Of only the first round in the
coming fight.
Lewis Rewriting Proposals
Mr.. Lewis already is re-writ-
ing his proposals. based at least
in part on citizen reaction He
will submit final report on Mo-
vember 9, with indications Of
major changes in prospect.
Sometime after that, the Com
missioners again will call on the
Groom Committee to review the
final report. After round of
public discussion, the District
Zoning Commission expects to
hold formal public hearings on
the proposals by early June. The
commission has final power to
adopt a new coming code.
The extent and depth of the
Groom Committees criticism
of Mr.. Lewis first report raised
sharp questions about whether
his final effort will be supported
by the advisory committee. even
with major changes.
Basic Ideas Challenged
In a number of cases, the re-
port approved yesterday chal-
lenged Mr.. Lewis basic ideas
about how Washington should
develop in the future, as well as
the restrictions proposed in his
technical coming language.
The Groom Committee dis
cusSed the report of its subcom-
mittee. headed by Attorney James
c. Wilkes, for only about Is
minutes before voting.
The two dissenting votes were
cast by John K. Hoskins, of the
Washington Housing Association,
and Mrs. Harold B. Hinton of the
Georgetown Progressive Citizens
Association.
Mr.. Hoskins. in a statement,
charged that the Wilkes report,
in validating Mr.. Lewis propos-
ais, "over-emphasized financial
and monetary considerations (af-
fecting Washington to the ex-
clusion of the major purposes of
good coming"
Partial Agreement
Specifically, he said, the Wilkes
committee should have paid more
attention to adequate, healthful
housing standards and the COM
munity facilities needed for
wholesome family life" At the
same time. however, he agreed
that some of Mr.. Lewis proposals
were excessive and should be
changed.
I'm summary" his statement
said, VIVA supports the general
detectives of the Lewis recon-
mendations and believes that his
proposals are essentially sound. 4"
Mr.. Groom, summarizing his
committees 80 months of ac-
tivity, said he is highly salts
fled that it has performed a use
full service to the CITY,"
Reports that Mr.. Lewis in
tends to water down" some of
his most controversial proposals,
Mr.. Groom said, indicated to
him that Mr.. Lewis has pos
sibly taken some of our recon-
mendations into consideration. Z"
The chairman said he also
thought. a National Capital
Planning Commission report on
the Lewis proposals supported
some Of the criticism voiced by
his group.
The Wilkes report documented
objections raised by business and
professional lea ders against
nearly every phase of the Lewis
program and listed alternate
recommendations on each issue.