Senator METCALF. I have also received a letter and accompanying statement from the National Capital Downtown Committee, Inc., which I would like to include in the record at this point.

Senator RANDOLPH. Without objection it will be entered in the record.

(The documents referred to follow:)

Hon. LEE METCALF,

U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

DOWNTOWN PROGRESS, Washington, D.C., June 18, 1964.

DEAR SENATOR METCALF: In view of your current consideration of the proposed tunnel of the center leg freeway west of the Capitol, we should like to reaffirm the strong support of the National Capital Downtown Committee, Inc., for this proposed freeway as planned by the District of Columbia Department of Highways and Traffic.

Enclosed is a brief statement which indicates some of the reasons for our position on this vital matter.

You have our deep appreciation for your continued interest in solving the many problems of our Nation's Capital.

Sincerely,

KNOX BANNER, Executive Director.

The center leg freeway is essential to the successful revitalization of downtown Washington and to the healthy growth of the entire metropolitan area. The center leg freeway can

1. Provide a good bypass for the 59 percent of downtown's traffic which is presently on our business streets only because there is no better route

available.

2. Increase the development potential adjacent to the freeway and, by use of air rights, permit development above the freeway, thereby increasing the value of the area through which it passes.

3. Provide the setting for high-rise apartment houses both to increase the available housing supply for residents of the District of Columbia and to attract new residents back into the central city.

Attrac

4. Improve the appearance of the area through which it passes. tive sections, such as the Mall and Capitol Hill will be unaffected by the roadway. Other areas, which are anything but attractive, will benefit from the parklike setting of the new freeway.

5. Promote the efficiency of Government and private business operations by reducing traveltime.

6. Make the entire central business district more accessible to more people in the National Capitol region.

Senator METCALF. If you want to make any comments after you have read the entire letter, I ask permission that that be done. The Midtown Business Association writes this letter in opposition to the construction of the center leg. They say they strongly oppose the construction of the proposed inner loop in the heart of the Nation's Capital. One of the things they say is "As any map of the Washington metropolitan area will show, the Capital has more and broader highways leading into the downtown area and the Mall than any other city of similar size and population, particularly traffic coming into the city from the northeast."

Then are enumerated the various routes coming in. "What other city then can boast of so many and such broad routes into the heart of the city?" Would you comment on that? Doesn't that answer the chairman's statement that we are behind in the construction of interstate approaches?

Senator RANDOLPH. I didn't say that. That is the statement of Mr. Whitton.

Senator METCALF. Your response to the chairman's question indicates we are behind.

Mr. WHITTON. It is my opinion that we are behind in this area in the construction of approaches to this city. I would like to have the opportunity of reading that letter and replying to it formally.

Senator METCALF. You said in your statement that if this inner loop were not constructed, and I suppose if permission is not granted that the tunnel

Mr. WHITTON. Senator Metcalf, are you talking about the inner loop now or are you talking about the center leg?

Senator METCALF. I am talking about the center leg.

Mr. WHITTON. Yes, sir.

Senator METCALF. If it were not constructed there would be an extra travel distance. Now how much is it going to cost to construct the center leg?

Mr. WHITTON. Senator Metcalf, I don't have that accurate figure. We could ask General Duke or we could ask Mr. Airis at this point if you would like to.

Senator METCALF. In hearings before the District of Columbia Committee, it was reported that it would cost $71,150,000 for the construction of, I believe, 1.8 miles.

Mr. BARNETT. How much?

Senator METCALF. $71,150,000. Now isn't there some formula you have in the Bureau of Public Roads to determine the feasibility of such a program?

Mr. WHITTON. Yes, sir. We have what we call the cost-benefit formula that we apply to various construction jobs; yes, sir.

Senator METCALF. Now have you made a survey of the extra travel distance and so forth to justify the extra cost of $71 million?

Mr. BARNETT. That, sir, will be the economic data that the District submits to the Bureau of Public Roads as part of their justification for this expenditure.

Senator METCALF. None of that has been submitted?

Mr. BARNETT. Sir, it is not only the extra travel distance. It is also the fact that if this isn't built, you then have to increase the capacity of the belt to take the additional traffic, or you increase the capacity of the streets to take the additional traffic. There is no question that we are having a steady increase of about 6 percent per year in the travel on all our streets. In fact, right now it is getting more difficult to travel through the central area of the city of Washington in the nonrush hours than it is in the rush hours.

The pattern of developing traffic is getting so that the traffic is spread over the entire day now simply because it is impossible to get through in 1 hour or 2 hours, and there is no question that 20 years from now the situation will be just impossible, even though we assume a complete mass transit system built in the city, and that is brought out in both these reports to which Mr. Whitton referred prepared by the National Capital Planning Commission and the National Capital Regional Planning Council, because the requirements of the freeways in those reports assume a mass transit, and you need both.

There is no question about that.

Senator METCALF. Now this would all be part of an economic study to be submitted to you on the cost-benefit relationship of this justifying this expenditure of $71 million?

35-210-643

Mr. BARNETT. Yes, sir.

Senator METCALF. And it has not been submitted?

Mr. BARNETT. Not formally. The plans, specifications, and estimates in their final form have not been submitted to us yet. But as

a practical measure, while legally we can wait until the plans, specifications, and estimates are completed before we tell a State (in this case the District of Columbia), approved or disapproved. That would be a very poor way of administering a program of this character.

Instead we have a division engineer in each State, including the District of Columbia, who works closely with the highway department during all the development stages.

Senator RANDOLPH. And we have that in the States.

Mr. BARNETT. Of course.

Senator RANDOLPH. Yes.

Mr. BARNETT. It would be an impossible situation if they waited until the last minute and then took all the time necessary to review what a State does. They work right along with the State and more or less give them tentative approval in each State.

In the particular case tentative approval of the center leg has been given ever since 1955 when it was first designated.

Senator METCALF. Now you do have then some information upon which you can base feasibility?

Mr. BARNETT. Yes, sir.

Senator METCALF. And can you supply that information as against your formula for the record?

Mr. BARNETT. I am sure the District can, and I am sure that our division office has it. I don't have it.

Senator METCALF. Mr. Whitton, as the chairman has suggested, has frequently told the State of Montana that a certain route or a certain underpass or a certain cloverleaf isn't justified because of the traffic situation or the saving doesn't justify the extra cost. Whether he tells it after a formal presentation or informally as a result of approximate figures, he makes that decision for every one of our States, and you must have made that decision for the District of Columbia, or you wouldn't be in here.

What I am trying to find out is how you can justify such an expenditure of $71 million for 1.8 miles. It seems to me it takes a lot of extra travel, and a lot of rerouting, especially in view of this contention of the Midtown Business Association that there are more routes into the heart of this city than any other city of comparable size in the United States.

Mr. WHITTON. We will furnish that information for the record. (The supplementary information referred to follows:)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS,
Washington, D.C., July 1, 1964.

Hon. JENNINGS RANDOLPH,

Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Roads,

Committee on Public Works,
U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Pursuant to the request of the subcommittee at the recent hearings on H.R. 10392, I am pleased to furnish for the record General Duke's letter of June 22, 1964, to me commenting on the objections of the Midtown Business Association to the inner loop. This letter is accompanied by an

enclosure entitled "Impact of Highway Program on Real Estate Tax Revenues." I trust this is the information you desire, and if we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call on us.

Sincerely yours,

REX M. WHITTON, Federal Highway Administrator.

GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

EXECUTIVE OFFICE, Washington, D.C., June 22, 1964.

Mr. REX M. WHITTON,

DEAR MR. WHITTON: I am pleased to comment on the June 16 letter to Senator Lee Metcalf from the Midtown Business Association indicating their objections to the proposed inner loop.

Since the objections contained in the 10 numbered paragraphs are somewhat repetitive, I will summarize the main points raised, rather than attempt to categorically answer each paragraph.

In regard to the value of the inner loop, I would like to point out as I did in my recent testimony that the inner loop is an essential link in the Interstate Freeway System. The inner loop here in the District has received the approval of the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads and it is a comparable facility to similar inner loops being constructed in most other major cities in the United States. Specifically, the inner loop will serve to distribute traffic destined for the District into the downtown area, thereby relieving the city streets from the choking traffic congestion which otherwise will continue to worsen. We feel its construction will be of value to Washington businessmen and residents, and that it is definitely in the overall public interest.

Since all highway construction is financed from users taxes (gas tax, etc.), the statement that Washington residents and business will bear the cost is in error. Although there has been some opposition to the center leg from a few organizations, the overwhelming majority, including all of the official agencies responsible for transportation planning, have been in favor of the project.

In connection with Mr. Markowitz' comment on the tax loss due to the inner loop, I would like to point out his belief is contrary to actual experience of other cities and it is specifically contrary to our experience to date in areas adjacent to our Southwest Freeway and the so-called "Foggy Bottom" area adjacent to elements of the Potomac River and E Street Expressways.

Our experience in this respect was recently furnished Subcommittee No. 6 of the Committee on the District of Columbia, House of Representatives, in hearings held on May 18 and 25, 1964. The data appear on page 55 of the hearing record, and since it succintly summarizes experience to date here in Washington, I am appending an excerpt for ready reference.

I am in agreement with Mr. Markowitz that the District has a number of serviceable arterial streets, but there is no refuting the fact that they are presently heavily congested with traffic and will become more so unless proper additional facilities are authorized and built.

In regard to the comment on displaced families and businesses covered by this improvement, I would like to note that the District government is dedicated to holding the number of such cases to a minimum by studying all practical alternative routings. Once the route is adopted, however, we will lessen the impact on those affected by all means at our disposal. In this connection, we see a tremendous potential for minimizing displacement and increasing the tax base through development of the use of air rights over freeways.

In conclusion, I would like to point out again that the inner loop and the center leg in particular, have the solid support of the great majority of the District organizations such as Downtown Progress, the Washington Board of Trade, and others, and that we are convinced that this improvement is definitely in the overall public interest.

Sincerely yours,

Enclosure.

C. M. DUKE, Brigadier General, U.S. Army, Engineer Commissioner.