Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-12-07

I'VE need a comprehensive
at least IS or 20 years."
He mentioned five areas of t
mated to offset a "haphazard
future public building program. I"
Development here, he said, could
include public and private activ-
tiles and make for IAN even more
beautiful National Capital"
The areas are the Northwest
Urban Renewal Area. the East
Capitol street area, the Central
Business District, Foggy Bottom
and the Independence avenue
area.
The planning commission head
contended that arguments for
dispensing Federal agencies based
on the H-bomb threat reply on
an assumption mo longer valid. ;"
He cited the H-bomb's wide po-
tential radius of destruction.
Mr.. Bartholomew added that
If the H-bomb is to be taken seri-
ously to the point of. dispersal,
the decentralization would have
to go far beyond the Capital.
Mr., Bartholomew also said in
his talk that recent accusations
that the planning commission
has used delaying tactics" in
reaching decisions regarding re-
development projects and con-
struction of a new Potomac
River bridge are grossly unfair. :"
Named No Names
He named no names. but it
seemed apparent from his speech
that he was referring to the
recent criticisms of commits
sion actions by ]. N. Robertson,
city highway director, and James
c. Wilkes. attorney for the
Potomac Plaza Corp.
Mr.. Robertson charged last
week that indecision and lack of
cooperation by the NCPC is
costing District taxpayers mil
lions Of dollars.
Mr.. Wilkes charged that pri-
vate developers in the Foggy
Bottom area haven't been
brought in on the commissions
road planning enough to know
what the effect Of a possible
switch from the once-approved
plan would have on their prof.
ectS.
Mr.. Bartholomew said last
night that commission members
feel that there is a very great
misunderstanding on these issues
and that the commission has
been placed in a false light"
Gives Two Illustrations
He cited two illustrations-the
plans for a new bridge and the
Southwest Redevelopment pro-
gram.
He said it took less than a
year from September, 1853,
when he took office, to June,
l954-for the commission to set
tie the "impasse" over where the
bridge should be located. Con-
stitution avenue was decided up
on.
THE bridge is not yet built to
be sure" he added, but it
Is deliberately unfair to blame
the planning commission for
subsequent lack of action"
He credited it to disputes over
where to locate approach roads
and a subsequent suggestion for
tunnel. Both of these pro-
posals were promptly acted
upon the commission" he said
With regard to the Southwest
Redevelopment program, he ha Z
the following to say:
A detailed study Of the real
facts in this case again demon
strate that an accusation of de-
laying tactics upon the part of
the commission is grossly I'M
fair"
He said the plan was first
publicized by the proposed de-
veloper in February, 1854. but
1t was not until December of
that year that "schematic plan
was first submitted" for the
commissions consideration.
Conflict Found
The plan, however, was found
. to be in conflict with that of
Area B and other projects previ-
ously approved by the commits
sion and the District Commits
sioners.
Obviously" he said. "it need
ed further study" and mean
while, there was extreme pres
sure on the commission to give
a rubber-stamp approval to the
plan"
He pointed out that sit was
not until June. 1865, that the
developer finally set up a staff
-. Of technical persons to work
with the various Govern
ment departments and STATS to
reconcile the differences.
He said IL took less than 30
days at the next meeting of
the commission, to approve a
new plan.
He said we are now moving
ahead on the Foggy Bottom
and George Washington urban
renewal areas. including a hous-
ing survey being made by the
Redelevopment Land Agency and