facilities, has recently interested itself in the improvement and expansion of transit facilities, as shown by its recent purchase and plans for modernization and extension of the Hudson & Manhattan Railroad Co. The Tri-State Transportation Committee has been formed to study and provide for a balanced transportation approach for the New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut areas around the city of New York. Similar organizations have been established in Boston, Philadelphia, and elsewhere to study urban transportation requirements as a whole. În addition, plans are being prepared for the expansion of existing systems in Chicago, Cleveland, and Philadelphia. St. Louis and Pittsburgh have recently formed agencies to unify and coordinate existing transit facilities and to plan for the modernization and expansion of these facilities in relationship to the highway facilities. The need for balanced transportation systems in urban areas also is recognized in our neighboring country to the north, Canada. Toronto, after 10 years' experience with an extremely successful 44mile subway system, is now constructing additional lines which will triple the mileage. Recently, a Metropolitan Toronto and region transportation study was inaugurated to study and provide plans for coordination of all private and public transportation. In Montreal. which has been very active in the improvement of highway facilities in recent years, the city now is building a 9-mile subway system. We believe that most, if not all, of those concerned with metropolitan transportation planning now recognize the need for balanced systems. It is only human nature for us to have differences of opinion on the proper place and importance of each mode of travel. It is encouraging to note that in Washington individuals who are specialists in the various modes of transportation have come together to resolve differences of opinion and develop a sound plan. It includes a substantial mileage of private right-of-way, grade-separated rail rapid transit. We regard this as a very important advance in balanced transportation planning. Respectfully submitted. DAVID Q. GAUL, Executive Secretary. JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION FOR METROPOLITAN Hon. BASIL L. WHITENER, WASHINGTON, D.C., November 6, 1963. Chairman, Subcommittee No. 6, House District Committee, DEAR MR. WHITENER: The Joint Committee on Transportation for Metropolitan Washington appreciates this opportunity to comment on the modified rapid rail transit proposal embodied in H.R. 8929. A few months ago, the Joint Committee on Transportation for Metropolitan Washington was formed by four impartial organizations concerned with the well-being of the Nation's Capital: the Metropolitan Washington Board of Trade, the Federal City Council, the Washington Board of Realtors, and the National Capital Downtown Committee (Downtown Progress). Because the city's snarled traffic conditions are becoming increasingly intolerable, these four groups joined together to help achieve a balanced transportation system for Metropolitan Washington. The daily tide of vehicular congestion is constantly rising because the ingress of new people to this area and the formation of "war babies" into new families are creating an almost insatiable demand for housing on the perimeters of the city, and the dozens of office buildings being added to the Washington skyline are further taxing our facilities for moving people. Projections indicate that Metropolitan Washington will have a population of more than 3 million in 1980 and about 5 million by the year 2000. It is estimated that there are presently 176,000 persontrips to and through Washington during each morning's rush hour, and this number is expected to reach 254,000 by 1980. The evidence is overwhelming: To provide for the growth and development of the area in an effective and orderly manner, the Nation's Capital needs a balanced system of transportation which includes well-planned freeways and a rapid rail transit system augmented by adequate feeder bus lines. Because the system proposed by H.R. 8929, together with the proposed interstate highway system, would relieve Washington's transportation difficulties, we enthusiastically endorse this legislation. H.R. 8929 has several advantages which we hope will earn for it early enactment. No transportation system for the city can succeed unless it is capable of quickly and efficiently distributing tens of thousands of people throughout the downtown employment area. The most feasible method for achieving this dispersal is through a rail subway system. The downtown subway system proposed in H.R. 8929 would be the "central nervous system" of transportation for the National Capital In addition to serving the city's commuting workforce, the system would provide a convenient means of travel for downtown shoppers and for the internal circulation of people during the day to and from business, commercial, and governmental centers of activity. It would alleviate traffic congestion by removing thousands of commuters from the streets and bringing them into town underground. Another advantage of this proposal is that it gives the system flexibility which would make it possible to expand the facilities if the need warrants. This bill would lessen the burden on Federal and local taxpayers by relying on users of the system to pay most of its cost. Government forecasts indicate that all of the operating costs and most of the capital costs would be met by revenue from users of the system. The routes proposed in section 1 of H.R. 8929 would serve areas of the greatest need and, presumably, the greatest use, thereby offering the greatest prospects for revenue. It is estimated that the system would serve 80 percent of the downtown employment centers projected for 1980. In planning for any type of urban transportation, due regard must be given to the families and businesses which might be dislocated. Since much of the track would be underground or over existing rightsof-way, the program proposed by this bill would require a minimum of this disruption. Because it is a practical, businesslike approach to a complex problemr which requires immediate attention, the Metropolitan Washington Board of Trade, the Federal City Council, the Washington Board of Realtors, and the National Capital Downtown Committee urge the enactment of H.R. 8929 as soon as possible. Respectfully, MILES COLEAN, Chairman.. LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FALLS CHURCH Hon. BASIL WHITENER, FALLS CHURCH, VA., October 21, 1963. DEAR MR. WHITENER: The League of Women Voters, Metropolitan Washington Council, was one of the civic groups which testified at the hearing held by your committee on the administration bill regarding the National Capital Transportation Agency development for area transportation. Our testimony at that time presented the support of the leagues listed below for a coordinated metropolitan transportation system which includes rapid rail transit with construction of a downtown Washington subway as an initial step. We are delighted that you are presenting the subcommittee with a plan to begin construction of a downtown subway. We congratulate you on your initiative and support your efforts toward the development of a more comprehensive metropolitan rapid transit system. May we respectfully request that your subcommittee present its report to the full District Committee and then to the House as rapidly as possible? Sincerely yours, Also for: JOAN C. GENDREAU The League of Women Voters of Arlington County. President. The League of Women Voters of the District of Columbia. NATIONAL CAPITAL LOCAL DIVISION 689, AMALGAMATED ASSOCIATION OF STREET, ELECTRIC RAILWAY & MOTOR COACH EMPLOYEES OF AMERICA Hon. JOHN L. MCMILLAN, WASHINGTON, D.C., October 30, 1963. Chairman, Committee on the District of Columbia, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN MCMILLAN: I have your letter of October 24, 1963, enclosing a copy of H.R. 8929 and inviting my comments on this bill, which your letter and the enclosed explanation make clear is a modification of H.R. 7249. This modification does not correct any of the defects in H.R. 7249 which I covered in the statement I submitted on July 29, 1963, to Congressman Whitener's subcommittee, then considering H.R. 6633, a bill identical to H.R. 7249. The primary defect in H.R. 8929, from the point of view of the organizations I represent, continues to be the failure of this bill to provide any labor relations policy to be applicable to the operation of the transit facilities that the NCTA would be authorized to construct and acquire. In my statement of July 29, 1963, I pointed out why it is imperative to implement section 205(a)(2) of the National Capital Transportation Act of 1960 by now establishing a specific labor policy for the operation of any transit facilities that are constructed or acquired a labor policy in which labor is free to organize, in which wages and working conditions are determined through free collective bargaining, in which all disputes are submitted to arbitration, and in which job rights of all employees are protected. We believe that the need to establish the details of such a policy as part of any legislation authorizing the NCTA to construct and acquire transit facilities is just as critical in the case of the more limited facilities contemplated by H.R. 8929 as it was in the case of the more extensive facilities contemplated by H.R. 6633 and H.R. 7249. The specific elements of the labor relations program we deem essential are set forth in an appendix to my statement of July 29, 1963, referred to above, and that proposal is part of the record before Congressman Whitener's subcommittee. I urge that those provisions be incorporated as an amendment to H.R. 8929, and unless such amendment is made, the groups I represent cannot support this bill. Very truly yours, WALTER J. BIERWAGEN, THE NORTHWEST COMMITTEE FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING Re H.R. 8929. Hon. JOHN L. MCMILLAN, WASHINGTON, D.C., November 5, 1963. Chairman, Committee on the District of Columbia, DEAR CONGRESSMAN MCMILLAN: On behalf of the Northwest Committee for Transportation Planning, I would like to request the privilege of submitting the enclosed supplemental statement for inclusion among the materials considered by your committee in its deliberations on the proposed transit development program. The enclosure supplements the testimony of Mr. George Siefert, which is already included in the printed hearings on this proposed legislation. The Northwest Committee is gratified by the leadership demonstrated by you and Congressman Whitener in supporting this needed legislation. We hope the bill can receive speedy approval by the Congress in order that the long overdue construction of a modern subway system for the Nation's Capital can be started in 1964. Respectfully submitted. PETER S. CRAIG, Chairman. NOVEMBER 1963. SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT BY NORTHWEST COMMITTEE FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ON PROPOSED TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (H.R. 8929) The Northwest Committee for Transportation Planning urges that prompt action be taken by Congress authorizing a start of construction of the rapid transit system proposed by the NCTA. For this reason, the Northwest Committee urges that H.R. 8929, authorizing completion of the first 5 years of subway construction recommended by the NCTA, be enacted this year. In supporting the bill, the Northwest Committee assumes that in later years consideration will be given to further legislation authorizing completion of the entire rapid transit system. The urgent need for this legislation is well documented in the prior hearings conducted by the House District Committee in 1959, 1960, 1962, and last summer. We will not repeat the findings and recommendations of the Northwest Committee made on those occasions. We would, however, like to supplement these prior submissions with some additional relevant facts bearing upon criticisms raised by a handful of opponents to the legislation at the hearings in July. As we interpret the testimony of these critics, they advocate two propositions: (1) that the NCTA has overstated anticipated public acceptance of rapid transit because of the assumed preference of area residents to commute by automobile, and/or (2) an all-bus transit system would meet the transit needs of the area as well as a subway system. Both propositions were advanced to support a continued all-highway solution to the area's transportation needs. Aside from the fact that Congress (in 1960) and the planning agencies (in the 1959 transportation study, the 1961 "Year 2000 Plan," and the NCTA's 1962-63 reports) have already rejected the all-highway solution as no solution at all, the underlying factual propositions are demonstrably false. The all-highway solution first gained currency in an article by Harold L. Aitken, member of the American Road Builders Association Executive Committee, in an article entitled "Mass Transit-The American Way," appearing in the July 1962 issue of the American Road Builder. The thesis of this article was "Americans have shown their preference for highway travel. Let's give them what they want mass transit on our highways." Accompanying photographs featured pictures of D.C. Transit buses. Subsequent articles appearing in the Highway User, AAA's American Motorist, and other highway lobby organs echoed the same refrain. Although the thesis of the District Highway Director was not adopted by the District Commissioners, it apparently has found support in some of the local bus companies and in the agency which regulates them. Contrary to Mr. Aitken's thesis, a majority of America's commuters do not prefer highway travel. In the only five metropolitan areas where they today have an alternative of rapid rail transit, over 60 percent of those who have the choice prefer to commute downtown by rapid transit. Furthermore, bus travel, while convenient to many, cannot effectively compete as the sole alternative to auto commuting. Surface |