Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-01-29
THICKNESS OF WALLS
SUBJECT OF. COMPLAINT TO DIS
TRICT COMMISSIONERS.
Local Builders Ask That Section ~ Of
Regulations Be Repealed
or Amended.

"A large number OF prominent builders ana
real estate men of the city have united in
a petition to the Commissioners. asking for
the repeal or change of two sections of the
building regulations.
The petitioners say they ask these
changes to correct what they believe to
be, in the first case, an unnecessary re-
Quirement in many instances. and. in the
second. an Inconsistency and discrimination
which works unreasonable hardships upon
the petitioners and Is calculated to tn5ure
property in many sections of the city.
The petitioners request that q wall which
Is more than fifty feet long, which by
reason of its length and not its height Is
at present required to be thirteen inches
thick, may be built nine inches thick. pro-
vided there be chimney or other projections
OF not less than thirteen inches on each
side Of the wall. They believe that such
projections, IL on both sides Of the wall
whether opposite each other or not will
be effective In preventing the swaying OF
the wall from the vertical line.
They invite the attention of the Commits
sioners to section II of the regulations,
which provides that the height of buildings
shall be computed from the level Of the
curb, or where this Is impracticabie, from
point three feet above the bottom OF the
footings.
Continuing, the petitioners say:
your petitioners assume that. in limit
ing the height Of buildings with nine-rncE
ton to permit the erection Of three-story
houses with walls of this thickness. yet In
fixing the points from which to measure
the height such a building Is made pos
sible in some cases and impossible In
others.
TT can be seen II three-story building
with cellar Is situated upon a terrace its
height will exceed thirty-five feet above
both points of measurement, while in the
case of no terrace it is easily possible
to erect the same building within thirty-fve
feet above the curb.
Discrimination Against Terraces.
The objection Of your petitioners to this
rule Is that 1t operates as a discrimination
against terraces, which does and will work
hardships upon many citizens, and will
tend to discourage the use Of terraces by
placing premium upon their abolition.
They believe that the enforcement OF
this regulation will result in greatly damag-
ing property in many sections where ter
races are an established feature by their
abrupt and unsightly breaks In the grade
Of the parking and impairing the symmetry
and beauty Of the entire square.
'They admit the fairness of the rule of
computing from the curb In the business
sections, where terraces are not used, but
the residence sections, where terraces are
regarded by them as necessary for the best
artistic and architectural effects"
The petitioner asks that the relief sought
in regard to the fifty-foot wall may be
granted, and that section II of the regula-
nit all three-story buildings of the same
height from the first floor Of joists to be
erected with walls of the same thickness,
whether situated upon terrace or not
Through their attorney, F. 8. Key Smith.
the petitioners ask that hearing may be
granted them.