Evening star., 1902-02-13
HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS.
Citizens Express Opposition to Pro
posed Change of Law.

The proposition to reduce the limit Of
height to which buildings may be con-
structed in Washington Is opposed In
number of communications to the editor OF
The Star. The writers of the letters feel
that the present law Is sufficient and eff
fective, 1t being the result of exhaustive
controversy and compromise between
those persons who would allow builder
to build as high as he chose, and those
persons who wanted to unduly restrict the
height to which buildings might go. The
writer's feel that the law as it stands to-
day protects the city from distlgurement
by disproportiOnately tall structures ana
yet leaves ample latitude to builders. I'm
der the law building 13O feet tall may be
erected on a business street or avenue that
is 100 feet wide; on business thoroughtares
of less width than 16O feet the height-li
for buildings is 10 feet, and on residence
streets the limit is 80 feet. 1t Is proposed
to restrict the height Of buildings to ~
feet en-. residence street and to 1OO feet on
business streets.
A merchant who contemplates the erec-
ton of large building on G street writes
to The Star today as follows:
Nov that we have few creditable high
and modern structures and now that a
number are projected Immediately 1t Is
proposed to put into force new rules reduc-
ing the height limit. The enactment of a
law reducing the height limit Of freproof
buildings below the present standards would
do injury to every business man and prop
erty holder, and such drastic measures
would have tendency to keep away capt.
talists from our city. and these we neca
more than narrow minded rules The Even
ing Star building, Wizards Hotel and the
Bond building are as much of an orra-
ment to the city as are public buildings
Why make laws that would prohibit other
such imposing structures?
"a Property Holder" writes:
Tha Of m
up permits, and this is tantamount to their
denial, for the erection of a number or
magnificent structures. office buildings and
apartment houses. fireproof and OF steel
Construction, which were intended to adorn
the city and serve the interests Of its in
habitants.
1.-THE reasons advanced for this display Of
authority are amusing and unjust. In
brief 1t is feared that any handsome build
ings in the neighborhood of the government
departments would serve to draw attention
from the latter. The law givers, 1t will be
seen. are believers in the efficacy of con-
gains dignity from its proximity to lst
street west, have concluded to treat the
neighborhood of other public buildings in
the same manner. There are other reasons
advanced, but all Will be found equally
ridiculous. They read strangely In the
twentieth century, reminding one of the agi-
tation over half century ago against the
railroad.
s'The law relating to the height of build
ings as 1t stands was reached after mature
deliberation. and it has resulted only, in
benefit to the city. The proposed new regu-
lation, restricting the height Of buildings to
seventy feet on residence streets and 100
feet on business streets, would result In
irreparable harm to the community, and It
behooves the citizens of Washington to
bestir themselves and, by an unmistakabie
declaration of sentiment. show the Commis-
soners and Congress that the build ng reg
ulations that have given us The Star and
Bond buildings, the New Willard, and the
many convenient and imposing apartment
houses scattered through the residence dis
tricts are the regulations best calculated to
insure the progress and importance of the
city, and that they must stand without
amendments