Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-02-10
TO EXTEND FIRE LIMITS
PROPOSITION IN FAVOR OF
LEXINGTON CONSIDERED.

Much discussion has obtained in the Dis
trict building during the past few days.
and likewise among residents in and about
lexington, regarding the proposition to ex-
tend the city fire limits as to include
practically all of that suburb. 1t has been
pointed out that the moving northward OF
the fire limits would undoubtedly go far
toward preventing possible CONGREGATIONS
in the neighborhood affected, but 1t Is also
regarded as almost certainty that the
provision of the regulations which pro-
hibits construction of frame buildings Oh
any description within the fire limits would
tend to seriously check real estate I'M
provement.
extend the fire limits to lexington was re-
ouested by the executive committee of the
North Capitol and lexington Citizens As
ISOLATION, but on account Of menace to
property interests and on account of cer-
tain ambiguity in the wording of the COM
mittees letter the proposition was referred
back to the citizens association by the
Commissioners, the latter asking Tor an eA-
act description of the proposed boundaries
Of the fire limits, together with an assur-
ance that majority of owners OF prop
erty in the section were in favor OF the
matter.
Boundaries Described.
In the committees letter the advocated
extension of the fire limits was thus de-
scribed: From I'd street northeast. east
to the Baltimore and Ohio railroad, ana
north from street northeast up TO ana
including the north side of Rhode lslano
avenue northeast" and 1t was stated IN
explanation of the request that the terri
tory living within these bounds is KNOWN us
lexington and was exempted from the mle
limits some years ago to allow the JUN
ing Of cottage homes. but owing 10 tEe
change in the railroads In TINS cl.s LIZ
"a a possibility of erecting large Ware
houses. which, in the opinion or this com
mittee. should be constructed of some ma
terial other than wood.
After securing from Assistant BulId4ns
Insnector A M Poynton statement TO
the effect that the present nre limits 81.
tend from Michigan avenue SCUM oh %
street to 7 street, east on street ~ ~ ~
street south on I'd to street ana east "
r street. to the Baltimore and Ohio railroau
tracks. Building Inspector Ashford gave d
careful analysis of the whole SITUATION.
Inspector Ashford's Statement.
Tn the course of his communication ne
said:
..It is not quite clear from the wording
of the petition whether the proposed limits
would extend north on 4th street 10 Rioue
Island avenue or along the railroad fisn'
of way to Rhode Island avenue, put pre-
s,,noa n is meant to extend to and along
the tracks. Such an arrangement Wouio
undoubtedly result in general benent al
the future, and If extended now Will proo
ably prevent CONGREGATIONS In that par VI
the District. But as that section Will IN
eyitably become a business secuon tne
property risks are to be considered rathe,
than a question of security to lie anu
limb, as the resident property Will receoe
or be displaced .by business structures.
'sI would invite your attention TO eAIacl
from proclamation of President Monroe,
dated January IA, 1918, through Samuei
Lane then commissioner of buildings Inc
comments of the President were dlrected
to the regulations of 1901, requiring the
outer walls of brick, all buildings TO De CON
structed of brick or stone The proclama-
tion in mart saws: - And whereas
the above recited articles have been found
by experience to impede the improvements
of the city, for which cause the operation
thereof has been suspended by several acts
of the President of the United States. from
June g. 1895, to January, 1878, and the
benefits of such suspensions having been
experienced, 1T is deemed proper to revive
and continue the same.
'I would therefore recommend that the
fact be ascertained beyond doubt that
majority of the property owners In the
squares affected are in favor OF the ex-
tended limits. for temporarily 1t Will re-
suit In retarding improvements. l would
recommend a public hearing on such SUD-
iect and would recommend that the limits
be extended in accordance with the sense
of such meeting"
The Commissioners wrote letter to the
effect suggested by the building inspector
to the citizens association, but reply has
not yet been received.