Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

For the bitter truth of the matter is, there is nothing planned for them in the immediate future. Later on, maybe. But not now.

The answer is depressingly predictable.

The first subway line, it has been decided, has to be built out mostly white, middle-class Connecticut Avenue. Not 14th Street. Not 7th Street. Not Georgia Avenue.

Surely no one is suggesting that the people who live on Connecticut Avenue need cheap, fast transportation more than do the people who live in the Shaw urban renewal area or someplace like it.

The reason why Connecticut Avenue has to be first apparently lies with the Congress.

Some of the people connected with the National Capital Transportation Agency are known to feel they never could have got Congress to go along with the subway system, if they had insisted that initial digging start where it is needed mostin predominantly Negro areas of Washington.

This means, for one thing, that the Shaw urban renewal area-a project designed to improve the quality of life in a dismal area of center Washington— is going to take shape without definite plans for a subway.

It also means that the festering areas of Cardozo and Anacostia, heavy with welfare recipients, unemployed, and the residual bitterness against what the power structure has wrought, will continue to do without an easy path from ghetto to job.

In the northeastern United States, 60 per cent of the new industrial construction in the last five years has taken place in the suburbs, which offer the bigger sites needed for the horizontal, sprawling plants built these days.

Washington's suburbs are getting and will continue to get their share. But it seems that the Negro who lives in the middle of Washington will be unable to compete for those jobs unless he has a car.

The people at the NCTA are well aware of what good transportation could mean for the people who live in the center of Washington.

Right now, two separate plans for the kind of subway system Washington might need in the year 2000 are under consideration--and both of them show a line going up Seventh Street and out to suburbia.

But the year 2000 is a long way off.

So, while the subway planners plan, while the urban renewal people renew, while all sorts of schemes and dreams are proposed for a Washington of the 21st Century, the problems that were not solved in the 20th Century continue unabated. There's another concern, too.

Suppose the Connecticut Avenue line is a flop? Suppose the suburban whites and Northwest Washingtonians don't use it in the way the NCTA hopes?

Will all the antisubway forces in Congress then merge in a chorus of "I-toldyou-so" and make the neat conclusion that this town never needed a rapid transit system in the first place?

No matter what happens, Washington remains impressively ingenious in its ability to avoid serving the people who need city services the most.

To return to the charge made by LIFE Magazine that funds designed for the urban poor are diverted to projects like middle-class housing-the SW Urban Renewal Project where Vice President Hubert Humphrey lives in a classic example of this.

The Federal Government helped take this 530-acre site in 1953 with the massive infusion of over $100,000,000 into the Redevelopment Land Agency of the District of Columbia.

The promise was made that over 40% of the housing units built would be lowincome and moderate-cost housing for people in these income categories. Not one single unit of this promised housing has ever materialized. Instead, the housing units provided rent for up to $500 a month. Luxury housing and commercial office buildings are seen everywhere.

Over 23,000 people were displaced and created new overcrowding, and new slums, in other areas of the city.

70% of the displaces were low-income Negro citizens.

Now, the subway, which was originally designed to serve the urban poor of the District is to be diverted, under the provisions of H.R. 11395, to serve the commuters of the suburban metropolitan areas.

Subways, historically, in other cities, are designed to serve all the people. This will be the only subway in history to serve the classes instead of the

masses.

I would like to include as part of my remarks a number of items for the newspapers in support of the views we have expressed.

I would also like the record to include the text of an open letter to Congressman Basil L. Whitener which reflects a growing consensus of citizens who live and work in north Central Washington which says:

AN OPEN LETTER TO CONGRESSMAN BASIL L. WHITENER:

We, the undersigned, call on the House D.C. Committee to oppose H.R. 11395, which would delete the Columbia Heights Line.

This line would serve 500,000 people in North Central Washington, its deletion would be a catastrophe. The deletion of this line would deprive the people of the inner city area of access to jobs. Its deletion would destroy the jobs potential sought in the Comprehensive Plan for 1985. Employment centers, 20,000 jobs, 5,000 of them Federal jobs, would be lost, as would badly needed housing. NORTH CENTRAL WASHINGTON WOULD BECOME A GHETTO. We see nothing that makes sense in subsidizing a subway for the affluent suburbs, and denying such a system to the low-income areas of north central Washington.

Signed: Mrs. Sarah E. Ellis, for Committee for the Rights of DC Businessmen
S. A. Abbott, Committee on the Emergency Transportation Crisis
Frederick P. Mascioli, Delegate from Adams-Morgan Community Council
Lester Clark Lewis, Assistant Minister, All Souls Church

Johnie D. Wilson, Lamond-Riggs Civic Association

Ruth R. Webster, CHANGE, Inc., president

Chauncey Thomas, CHANGE, Inc.

Luther R. Bruner, Jr., Mt. Pleasant Neighbors

Rev. Fred D. Morris, Temple Church of God in Christ

Howard Dratch, VISTA

Rev. Michael Fury, Sacred Heart Catholic Church

Donald D. Gartenhous, Garterhaus Furs

R. B. Ruddle, Rock Creek Gulf Service Station

John Jarboe, President, 18th & Columbia Road Business Ass'n

Alfred J. Stein, Columbia Heights Businessmen's Ass'n

John R. Immer, President Federation of Citizens Associations of the
District of Columbia

Herbert M. Pilzer, Columbia Heights Businessmen's Association

In conclusion, I would like to incorporate into my remarks the text of the thought-provoking statement of the Ad Hoc Committee For The Retention of the Columbia Heights Subway. A copy is attached.

I thank you for your patience in hearing our presentation.

Mr. WHITENER. Also there will be included the statement of the Federation of Citizens Associations of the District of Columbia. (The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF THE FEDERATION OF CITIZENS ASSOCIATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, BY JOHN R. IMMER, PRESIDENT

The D.C. Federation of Citizens Associations, on the recommendation of its Transportation and Public Utilities Committees, urges that steps be taken to start construction of the authorized basic system of the District of Columbia subway as soon as it becomes practicable, subject to further suggestions for changes in design and construction as the need develops and conditions warrant. This general endorsement does not mean complete concurrence in all particulars with the details of the basic system, but gives encouragement to any efforts to move forward with construction on the authorized portions for which the need is apparent.

Approved at a regular meeting on May 11, 1967.

A. S. TRASK, Transportation Committee. C. A. BECHOEFER. Public Utilities Committee.

Mr. WHITENER. And finally, a statement on behalf of the American. University Park Citizens Association.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY PARK CITIZENS ASSOCIATION BY ALFRED S. TRASK, PRESIDENT, AUgust 23, 1967

We endorse the change in the basic subway plan contemplated by H.R. 11395. The single line on G. St., requiring multiple switching junctions for diverging lines, materially decreases the capacity of the downtown section of the subway. The NCTA has recommended that the downtown lines cross at 12th and G Sts. N.W. (at different levels), similar to the 1962 plan, rather than being switched into one line, to increase the capacity and provide access to the new southwest building complex. It is also proposed to eliminate the authorized Columbia Heights branch, which is essentially a cross-town feeder rather than a trunk line and is more properly served by buses with stops closer together.

While initial construction could proceed under either plan, since the G St. line is common to both, early resolution of this question is important since completion of plans for the station at 12th and G Sts. is contingent on whether it is to have one or two levels. Downtown Progress reports that "Detailed designs still are in process for the Downtown station at 12th and G Streets, N.W."

The construction of both the Connecticut Ave. and Silver Spring lines is essential since these are heavily patronized and provide transportation for workers from the central city to employment centers in the respective suburbs and vice versa.

If the Columbia Heights branch is retained, it would preclude later construction of the 7th St. or 14th St. radials now being considered by the Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority under tentative Plans A and B respectively dated March 24, 1967.

The "bobtailed" plan for the District only is unworkable as to headways both as to local lines and as the core of a regional system. Following the general downtown plan proposed in 1962 including the southwest line is essential if the system is to give adequate and efficient service for a long time to come. We therefore urge approval of the bill.

(Subsequently, the attached statement was submitted by Mr. G. M. Koockogey :)

STATEMENT OF G. M. KOOCKOGEY

My name is G. M. Koockogey. I was president (6 yrs.) and vice president (3 yrs.) of the Kalorama Citizens Association and have been a delegate to the Federation of Citizens Association for the past 11 years, where I am a member of the Transportation Committee, under the chairmanship of Mr. Trask.

I was president of the Kalorama Association during our fight to save our fine streetcar system and am known to many members of the District Committee from having appeared at numerous hearings on transit and urban renewal matters. We didn't save the streetcars, but we did bring about a Joint Hearing of the House and Senate District Committees, out of which came the original suggestion for a subway system. So I am very much interested in that.

Therefore I feel compelled to say that the Kalorama Citizens Association has not had a meeting since May, although the constitution calls for monthly meetings unless voted otherwise, which has not been done.

On the date of the February meeting a sort of a mass meeting was held at the Hilton Hotel, with a large attendance-about two-thirds being outsidersat which a panel discussion was held, largely on the subject of a branch subway up Columbia Road. But no action was taken.

Now as to the Federation: Mr. Trask called a meeting of our Transportation Committee on the subway problem and invited the City Planning Committee to sit in. Somebody invited some outside persons, who argued for a Columbia Road subway. In the midst of the confusion, our Transportation Committee retired to an anteroom and adopted the resolution which Mr. Trask will present, and is the official position of the Federation as of now.

Any testimony to the contrary is a gross misrepresentation, and, if not thrown out, should be accepted only as the opinion of the individual offering it. My only motive for performing this unpleasant duty is my high regard for the District Committee and the reputation of the Kalorama Association and the Federation. Respectfully,

G. M. KooCKOGEY.

Mr. WHITENER. Now, Mrs. Ruth Webster, president of CHANGE. Inc.

STATEMENT OF MRS. RUTH WEBSTER, PRESIDENT, CHANGE, INC., ACCOMPANIED BY NORMAN KILPATRICK

Mrs. WEBSTER. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I have submitted a statement that was submitted to Mr. McCarter last week asking for the retention of the Columbia Heights leg of the subway.

My colleagues and I had a conference with Mr. McCarter last week. I have a covering letter which I had submitted hopefully for the record. I will not take your time to read it. I have, however, a statement that I would like to make, and I have heard the written-the members of the businessmen's association and other community people who have made up the Ad Hoc Committee for the Retention of the Columbia Heights Leg of the Subway have all given voice to much of the sentiment of the citizens of the entire Cardozo area which makes up the central city of the District of Columbia.

My statement is written testimony dealing in words. We have to come alive with explanation. Having a hearing for a purpose is one thing, but having the members of the Committee interested enough to listen to the opposition's views is most important. I note there are 10 persons, Members of the Congress, on this committee. We have been honored with four who would listen to our testimony. They show by this action they do not wish to learn all the facts, or they have already made up their minds. When the people of the District seek a hearing, they do not wish to be patronized. They want a genuine hearing. Congress is our city council. It should at least listen with respect to the people of the District as they would if they were their own constituents.

Mr. McCarter feels that Congress must protect the Federal interests. I agree. But the Federal interests in this city means not only Federal employees but the citizens of the District of Columbia for whom they have a responsibility. The purpose of the subway is not only to expedite traffic and get people to jobs rapidly, but to give the people in the area a mobility. It is unrealistic to believe that a Congress who is reluctant to pay $56.5 million for the Columbia Heights leg of the subway would appropriate much, much more for an independent line through the ghetto of which they have demonstrated lack of interest or that Mr. McCarter does not believe will bring the 652-percent return expected of the modified line.

CHANGE, Inc., represents those people that would like to know, is the Congress interested in the area that does not wish to remain a ghetto area? All its residents have worked to prove that they themselves can work out of such a situation, but we have to have the support of the Congress of the United States.

I thank you.

Mr. WHITENER. Now, this statement that was handed in to the staff that you did not make, do you want to make it a part of the record? Mrs. WEBSTER. I do.

Mr. WHITENER. All right.

Well, thank you very much. We appreciate your presence and expression of your

Mrs. WEBSTER. I did not read the statement because I had distributed it to each of the Congressmen.

Mr. WHITENER. We will have it as a part of the record, and we will read it.

Mrs. WEBSTER. Thank you.

Mr. WHITENER. Thank you very much. (The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF MRS. RUTH WEBSTER, PRESIDENT OF CHANGE, INC., AND CHAIRMAN, AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR THE RETENTION OF THE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS SUBWAY

Mr. Chairman:

My name is Ruth Webster, and I am here today on behalf of the Ad Hoc Committee For The Retention of the Columbia Heights Subway, a committee representing business, civic and religious organizations in the Columbia Heights area. We would like to urge your rejection of H.R. #11395, which bill's major effect is to strip the proposed Washington subway system of its only low income line and to add a far more expensive chain of stations near certain Government offices in Southwest.

We firmly believe that the public good is best served by retaining the approved Columbia Heights line. This is especially true since, in many respects, the Congress is our city government and thus the welfare of all Washington citizens is clearly a Federal interest. To remove the Columbia Heights line would be to break faith with the 500,000 low income residents of the city. We submit that the 1962 report to the President and the Congress by the National Capital Transportation Agency, which recommended that the first subway line built be from Columbia Heights to Anacostia, both low income areas, is sound.

On the other hand, from a talk with Walter McCarter, the current Administrator of N.C.T.A., one gains the definite feeling that he has no understanding of the Federal interest in Washington's residents, especially its low income residents. Mr. McCarter speaks of turning off the subway system at night, which would clearly handicap blue collar workers with "shift" and night jobs. Mr. McCarter states that Washington's subway riders must pay a larger share of the total cost of their system than riders in other cities and that all lines in his system must be "economic". He claims bus service will easily transfer the Columbia Heights riders to the Connecticut Avenue line with little delay, yet he would not have the subway run at night.

His staff talks of a line up Seventh Street, N. W. to suburban Maryland, but such an expensive line would likely not be "economic", since the suburban part of this indefinite proposal could join the approved subway line at Silver Spring and still leave Cardozo unserved by rapid transit.

Finally, Mr. McCarter claims evening crime will partially justify closing the subway at night which surely indicates an attempt to avoid, rather than solve, the problem of subway security. He states that Columbia Heights cannot support a subway line. Columbia Heights can support a subway, for our average population density is the highest in Washington's, almost 45,000 per square mile. This is, for example, over 4 times the average density of the District of Columbia. The population of the area to be directly served by the Columbia Heights line is, in fact, equal to some 20% of the population of North Carolina's entire tenth Congressional District.

Already, a newly located store near Park Road and 14th Street, N.W. has indicated great concern that you may take away the Columbia Heights Line. We ask you, then, to read the attached report and to affirm your judgment and the results of many years of careful planning, by voting unfavorably on H.R. #11395 and allowing work on the approved Washington subway system to press ahead.

In addition to the attached, two other points might be raised when considering H.R. #11395. First, the growing population of Northern Virginia and Maryland must have increasing numbers of construction workers, clerks, watchmen, maids, etc. Many of these persons cannot, because of race and/or economic status live near these areas of employment. A subway system that serves Columbia Heights will allow such workers to easily reach these Virginia and Maryland jobs. This will benefit the employers and other suburban residents, while reducing welfare and unemployment in Columbia Heights. Surely, the

« ForrigeFortsett »