The D.C. Freeway Revolt and the Coming of Metro Part 5 After the Court Revolt Table of Contents Considering the Three Sisters Bridge ............................................................................................. 2 The U.S. Court of Appeals Acts ..................................................................................................... 3 Reaction .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Searching For a Way Forward ...................................................................................................... 12 Chairman Natcher’s Views ........................................................................................................... 22 The Kluczynski Hearing ............................................................................................................... 28 Martin Luther King, Jr. ................................................................................................................. 50 Seeking Elusive Compromise ....................................................................................................... 52 A Layman’s Guide ........................................................................................................................ 54 National Capital Planning Commission’s Future ......................................................................... 63 The City’s View ............................................................................................................................ 72 Return of the Freeway-Subway Rift .............................................................................................. 76 The Administration’s 1968 Act .................................................................................................... 78 Planning for the District ................................................................................................................ 83 Mandating the Freeways ............................................................................................................... 86 Senate Committee Action on the 1968 Act ................................................................................... 93 Congressional Action .................................................................................................................... 96 Completing the 1968 Act ............................................................................................................ 104 The Conference Report ............................................................................................................... 111 Two Bills in One Day ................................................................................................................. 118 Senate Action .............................................................................................................................. 122 Awaiting Presidential Action ...................................................................................................... 128 To Veto or Not to Veto ............................................................................................................... 129 Action on the 1968 Act ............................................................................................................... 137 Negotiating with Lame Ducks .................................................................................................... 143 Air Rights For City Streets .......................................................................................................... 144 The District Plan ......................................................................................................................... 146 Reaction to the draft Major Thoroughfare Plan .......................................................................... 151 The Public Speaks, December 3-4, 1968 .................................................................................... 155 NCPC and the City Council Act ................................................................................................. 160 Taming the Highway Bulldozers ................................................................................................ 167 The Final Days of the Johnson Administration .......................................................................... 173 The Baltimore-Washington Parkway Gambit ............................................................................. 175 Part 5 After the Court Revolt Considering the Three Sisters Bridge By late January, Deputy Mayor Fletcher was meeting with Secretary Boyd on the fate of the Three Sisters Bridge. “We hope to have something within the week,” he told reporters. On the basis of those talks, Chairman Kluczynski had agreed to hold off introducing his bill requiring construction of the bridge. He gave the city and Secretary Boyd until the end of the month to announce a “reasonable” solution. He defined “reasonable” as including construction of the bridge. At month’s end, Fletcher said negotiations would require another week. “The problem is hugely complex. The solution, to be a good one, must not satisfy anyone completely. The solution requires a give and take on all sides.” [Hoagland, Jim, and Carper, Elsie, “Three Sisters Bridge Impasse Seen Broken,” The Washington Post and Times Herald, “January 25, 1968; Hoagland, Jim, “City Defers Proposal on 3 Sisters Span,” The Washington Post and Times Herald, January 31, 1968] When NCPC met on February 9, it considered a proposal for a design team, similar to the Interstate design team reviewing Baltimore’s comparable problems with routing of I-95. The team would develop a comprehensive highway plan, including alternatives for the Three Sisters Bridge and North Central Freeway. NCPC members discussed the proposal in a lengthy executive session outside public view, but did not vote on it. Chairman Rowe refused to talk with reporters about the discussions, but Flor’s sources told him “that she tried unsuccessfully to get the commission to adopt a new transportation plan, to settle the highway dispute, that would have been a clearcut victory for opponents of the highway program.” One reason for delaying the vote was that the NPS representative protested a decision until he had discussed it with Interior Department officials. Flor wrote that the “intended effect of the action, apparently, was to put the planning commission back into the controversy over freeways.” In recent months, NCPC appointed members had been sidelined while the freeway debate had been dominated by Members of Congress, District officials, and representatives of Cabinet-level departments. Flor also reported that Deputy Mayor Fletcher and Council Chairman Hechinger, who both attended the meeting, “discussed proposals developed by the District government which call for retention of plans for the Three Sisters Island Bridge.” In public business, NCPC gave final approval for the National Fisheries Center and Aquarium in East Potomac Park. The approval did not cover the Ponte Vecchio-type bridge across Washington Channel. NPS officials told NCPC they had been unable to attract a bidder to develop the bridge. NCPC had given up hope for the associated underground parking lot beneath the 10th Street Mall overlook. Design of the aquarium was underway, with construction expected to begin in mid-1969 if budget cutbacks resulting from the Vietnam War could be resolved. NCPC heard a presentation from landscape architect Halprin on his master plan for the Anacostia Park and Kingman Lake swimming lagoon near D.C. Stadium. The plan included locks to keep polluted Anacostia River water out and chlorinating the lagoon. The Post reported: One feature of Halprin’s master plan calls for a change in alignment of the pending East Leg of the Inner Loop highway system. Instead of an exposed right-of-way to the east of the stadium, Halprin suggests a tunnel to the west. He also said NPS and District highway officials were studying his master plan. In addition, NCPC gave final approval to addition of the Spacecraft Operations Building at Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The center’s current 6,779 employees were already complaining about traffic problems on the interchange between the Baltimore- Washington Parkway and the Capital Beltway. More employees in the new operations building would worsen the problems. NPS Director Hartzog suggested that BPR compel the Maryland State Roads Commission to take over the Federal portion of the parkway so it could handle Interstate traffic. [Lewis, Robert J., “Planners Final Okay Given for Aquarium,” The Evening Star, February 9, 1968] Elsewhere on February 9, the President’s Advisory Council on Historic Preservation adopted a resolution calling for a halt to new highway construction near the Potomac River until alternatives could be studied. The council was concerned that the Three Sisters Bridge would affect several historic sites, including the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, the Georgetown waterfront, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Potomac Palisades. The Post article about the resolution concluded: Mayor Walter E. Washington and [Secretary] Boyd are working on a compromise proposal in an effort to satisfy Rep. John C. Kluczynski . Kluczynski threatened to introduce a bill in Congress to force the building of the Three Sisters Bridge if Boyd continues his opposition. [“Historic Sites Unit Opposed Roads Plan,” The Washington Post