Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1896-04-09
BUILDING REGULATIONS.
ALEXANDRIA. Va, Apr
To the members Of the City Council o.
alexandria Va.

To the members OF the CITY Council OF
alexandria IA.
Gentlemen As it is very probable
that the subject of new building regu-
lations will be considered at your next
meeting, respectfully suggest, in the
interest of the property holders, certain
additions and corrections to the print
ed copy have seen.
In view of the fact that the inspector
is given the rather unusual authority to
enter upon the premises of property
owner to pull down certain work and
also to furnish materials and employ
labor to perform certain repairs, all at
the expense of the owner, it seems but
just that proper provision should be
made for the protection of the owner,
that the inspector should be underoath
and bonded. A section reading thus
might answer the purpose:
'The inspector of buildings shall, be-
fore entering upon the duties of his of
fee, take and subscribe al oath or affir-
nation, before a duly qualified officer,
that he will faithfully perform the du-
ties of said Office; also he shall, be-
fore entering upon the duties of said
Office, execute bond to the
Mayor and City Council in the sum of
two thousand dollars with two sureties
to be appoved by the city attorney, con-
ditioned for the faithful performance of
duties ofsaid Office by himsnd his agents,
which shall be for the benefit of all par
ties aggrieved by his acts or neglect.
Oath and bond to be filed with !he
proper city official.
Another very important matter is the
failure to provide for an acting inspec-
tor. AS it now stands, the absence Of
the inspector or his sickness would pre-
vent any one wishing to build from pro-
ceeding with the work, unless he vio-
lated the law and subjected himself to
the penalties of said ordinance.
The proposed fee is out of all proper.
ton. For instance, a dwelling costing
5000 would call for an IS fee and
building $3.50 fee of S5. In the Dis
trict of Columbia a fee of only 81 is
charged for new building without re-
gard to cost. The public should be en-
couraged to make improvements, thus
increasing the city returns from taxes,
and not hindered by excessive and
unnecessary fees. As the city will not
be put to any additional expense in the
way of salary, the happy medium it
seems would be 81 for any new struc-
ture and 80 cents for any repairs; these
amounts would amply repay the city
for the trouble of writing q simple
permit.
Section V. page % relative to height
of ceilings should be omitted. For in.
staucA, person wishing to erect busi-
ness or manufacturing structure one
story with 9.inch walls could only have
a height of 8 feet unless he makes
the walls of an unnecessary
thickness, thus losing floor area.
The height of ceilings and thickness
of walls should be left to the discretion
of the Inspector the circumstances Of
etch individual case varying with the
location and surroundings.
In determining the thickness of walls,
face brick, wnen laid with blind hea.
ers, should not be considered. Para
graph of section vi is entirely wrong.
1t calls for faulty construction, in
fact, impracticable, as every architect
and builder will acknowledge. The
idea of splaying the ends of a joist at
an angle of As degrees is unreasonable,
and as to rafters, the latter must be
cut to suit the angle of roof rs also the
style of construction and not at an ar
bitrary angle.
At the present day all authorities
agree that flues having only Al enclos-