New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-09-10
DFFFCTS or THE BUILDING CODE.


II has been well understood that the Building
Code Commission was entirely competent 10
look after the interests Of the Croker flreprool-
ing business even at times when MI croker
himself might be In hiding. But there has been
some doubt about the ability of that Colninls-
sion 10 draft building code which would prop
orlv puard the interests of the great body OF
neonIo who are not contractors with pulls or
land owners anxious for renting space at the
expense of the light and air due their tenants
II Mr.. WELLER. the secretary or the IeheiieH'
House Committee of the Charity organization
Society is correct in his Interpretation OF the
new building code the lack OF pubic conn
dence In the Commission was not unreasonablc
This Commissions work has been commended
10 favor on the ground that ii embodied the
Charity Organization SOCetys recent admiraDle
suggestions for the safety and healthfulness OF
tenement houses but Mr.. WELLER shows that the
most important ana even essential recommends
tons of the society, which have been approved
by the New-York Chapter of the American IN
stitute of Architects and by the Architectural
League. have been entirely ignored, while minor
provisions. which have been accepted with a
great show of virtue and zeal for reform are
robbed Of their value by apparently slight but
actually destructive changes.
The essential demand of the Tenement House
Committee Of the Charity organization Society
was for more light and air in tenements. Inc
present narrow damp wells which pass for
courts in tenement houses are an unmltigated
evil which no tenderness for the avarlce or
landlords should permit the city longer 10 toll
erate The committee asked that all houses
erected hereafter should be required TO have
the courts not less than six feet wide ut every
noint and 10 contain al area Of not less than
40 SQUARE feet This was a reasonable rule. 1t
reached the greatest evil of the tenement house
In the only possible way We must endure the
old buildings already in existence, but there Is
no reason why we should pretend TO reform
tenement house construction unless we make
the one requirement Of new buildings without
u.bich NOT ono Of them is really fit for human
habitation. 1t is mere chdshness, or worse. TO
fuss over dumbwaiter shafts and width or
stairways and other things of that kind while
negecting the vital question Of light and ventl-
lation. Yet the Building Code Commission has
ignored II. and has absolutely failed to say
word on the subject, but is ready to let every
crashing landlord go on filing this city with
structures which are condemned by everybody
but the rent RdlHeTeT.
MANY other recommendations of the commit
fee which the Commission pretends to have
adopted It has only mutllated. Everybody who
knows anything about tenement houses knows
that the dumbwaiter shaft is the easy avenue
for the spread Of dangerous fires. The commit
fee asked that the shafts he freproOf. The
code as drawn permits them 70 be of wood II
they do not extend more than three stories. Az
It is the three story tenement which generally
mas least protection against fire in other ways
that is the one which specially needs the safe
guard at the dumbwaiter. The five story
building with freproOf first story such as the
code requires is much less liable to fire from
dumbwaiter shaft wooden in the upper stories.
No fire in the basement where such nres
usually originate, would easily be commune
Gated up the freproof part of the shaft 10 the
wooden section. But when the lower stories are
| subject to fires wooden shaft becomes most
| dangerous contrivance. Another tenement house
danger Is from basement staircase nreS pelhg
| carried up through the house. The committee
sought TO avoid this by fOrbdding the location
| of the basement staircase under the others. Inc
| Commission emasculates this rule by adding
| This shall not be done where not pracucaDle
Imagine a builder anxious to save ten square
| feet OF renting space unable 10 prove that II u
| mot practicable" particularly If he had Tam
many friends in the Building Department.
One Of the most humane Of the committees
suggestions was that walls be carried up beyond
| the roof for n few feet. so as 10 make safe
places for children 10 play upon. This would
not add unreasoDably to the cost. and would he
a great blessing to the families whose children
must otherwise play in the damp dark shafts
or amid the dangers Of the street Yet the
Commission refuses to institute this reform Mr..
WELLER points out many other instances or the
| COMMISSIONS failure to care for the safety OF
tenants The whole code he considers piece
OF loose lawmaking. with lOOphOles everywhere
which offer opportunity for speculative build
ers TO go on putting up unsanltary and UNSAFE
tenement houses. 1t is evident that the work
Of the Commission which Is now IN the hands
OF the Board Of Aldermen needs careful scru-
tiny before 1t s permitted to become operative