New-York tribune., 1896-01-03
LIMITING HIGH BUILDINGS.

The consideration by the Chamber of Com
mcrcc of plan, 10 secure legal restriction OF the
height of buildings in this city Is timely. There
f. danger that with the present easy methods OF
running mp high structures. for the permanent
safety 0f which there Is no guarantee. the
temptation 10 make small plots Of land bring
excessive rentals may work serious injury 10
the appearance of the city. make the fighting Of
fire unduly difficult and render our streets dark,
damn and unhcalthful. Where structure is
erected like The Tribune Building on an open
su,llrc. and entirely of enduring brick and stone
which are proof against corrosion and fire. no
liml, Of height is necessary In such Il building
the lower floors are we'll lighted and aired and
nrc not a menace to the health Of those who
occupy them. 1t does not cut It's ncghbors Off
from air and sunlight or darkcn the streets. II
has no iron columns 10 warp under heat from
another building which may be burning and
prove its lrcproof character n mere pre,encc.
But the ease IL different with the new struct-
urcs so frequently put up downtown, which
threaten 10 convert our streets into dark canyons.
They tend - injure nelghboring property by
cutting off light to an unreasonable extent.
Good Offices are frequently rendered tcnantless
for no other reason than that on the opposite
side Of narrow street somebody has erected
a towering we'll \ landowners only protection
against such damage IS 10 run his own building
up high and II the whole Of downtown New
York + 70 follow that example all that portion
Of the territory which is within fifty feet Of the
earth will become about as desirable rs sub
cellars are now, and persons who are compelled
to travel there will find the streets little better
than tunnels. These tall buildings extend be-
yonl the reach OF the iremcn's ladders, and de-
pend entirely for safety on their ability TO ward
OF fire. But il j. by no means yet certain that
any considerable coniagraion would not so
warp their frames rs to throw down their floors
and sheathlng and cause terrible destruction.
The Chamber Of Commerce Committee proposes
10 limit the height Of buildings In proportion to
the width Of the adjoining streets. and 10 allow
no building over eighty feet high to occupy more
than So per cent of the lot on which It stands
The limit Of height talked Of is two and Il half
times the width Of the widest street on which
n building fronts. This would permit buildings
in lower Broadway to be about 200 feet high
in the narrower part Of Wall-st. about ITO feet
in Nassau-st about 90 feet. and in parts Of Pine
ST no, more than S feet
Such restrictions may seem hardship to own
crs of small plots who want to make the most
Of them but il must be remembered that in the
long run such building is likely 10 be overdone
and when all buildings are high with many un
desirable floors. their value Is likely to be less
in proportion to the money invested than less
lofty structures we'll lighted and ventilated
throughout Other cities have regulations sim
liar to those proposed In Chicago buildings may
not now be built over 130 feet high, In Boston
the heigh, Is limited 10 two and Il half times
the width Of the street. In Berlin to the width
Of the street in Paris to once aud half the
width. and St Louis has just had under dis
cusson proposition to place the limit at two
and half times the width Of the street, or l25
feet in any case In this city 1t may be an open
question where the limit should be placed. The
peculiar situation and restricted area OF New