Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-08-17
THINKS IT'S ALL RIGHT
Building Inspector Defends
the Schedule of Fees.
PERMITS FOR REPAIR WORK
Regulation Requiring Them Re-
garded as Necessary for Safety.
RESIDENT SUGGESTS CHANGE
Argues That Owners Should Be
Permitted to Make Minor I'm
provements Without Charge.
RESIDENT SUGGESTS CHANGE

Necessary for the safety and comfort
of the community are regulations requH
ing that permits be obtained for minor re-
pairs to buildings, according to reply OF
Building INSPECTOR Morris Hacker to an
attack on the new schedule of building
hermit fees by Edward S. Steele of l'22
street.
..The streets are strewn with deadly
banana peels unchecked" wrote Mr..
Steele, but if a lava biding citizen wishes
TO make his backsteps safe he must trot
to the municipal building and pay dol
lar for the privilege"
Mr. Steele suggests change IN the Id"
regarding building permit fees which Will
allow persons to keep their fences
porches and exterior parts OF their struc-
lures in good repair without the neees-
sty of securing a permit.
Il wish to enter my protest against |
certain provisions of the building laws
brought forward in an article in the
Evening Star of August in connection
with a Mr.. Frisby. said Mr. Steele at
the opening of his letter
Il deny the necessity for requiring
permit for small repairs about the premi-
ses which do not alter the plans or any
/ structure or increase its extent. Your IN
spector admits that in certain cases per
nit would not need to be required 1t only
the line could be drawn. The plea is not
good one: the line can be drawn
Suggests New Provision.
! a nrovision something like the follow
ing would meet the case:
Provided that no permit shall be re-
ouired for the maintenance in order of
fences. steps, sheds or porches outside
the walls of the building or other wooden
structures. the erection of which has
been duly authorized.
The fea- that any harm would come
from granting this freedom is bugaboo
If any man takes advantage of IT to
erect an unlawful structure the police
can order its removal If it be argued |
that they will not know, | reply that
they will not know anyway: The per
functory issue of permit does not In
form the inspector what Is actually done
Besides that, there is nothing in the
world to hinder any one from making
small repairs even with the law as II IS
The policemen generally will know moth
ing about 1t except in case OF something
in front of the house.
These unnecessary restrictions tend to
create a contempt for the law: to me
they are simply exasperating. If l wish
to nail up some loose boards in my back
, fence or replace some rotten ones in the
back steps there is no occasion for the
District to interfere.
Such interference is. paternalism with
a vengeance.
Time, Vexation and Expense.
But the case is far worse when in
addition to the expense of time and vex
alton involved in getting q permit we
are charged a dollar for the right to
keep our place in order. 1t would be far
more rational to fine us a dollar for not
keeping up needed repairs. This exac-
ton will have the effect to keep real es-
tate in a down at-the-hee condition. 1t
will be harder than ever for tenants to
get landlords to keep the premises in
decent state Of repair.
Expressions in the article referred to
| seem to indicate that the Commissioners
are already somewhat sensible of the in
congruity of imposing a tax on trifling
repairs. | do not see that several months
should he required to remedy an abuse
| which is already glaring.'
| Building Inspector Hacker thinks it is
| impra to allow all minor repairs
to be made without a permit.
Experience Noted.
1T is the experience of this office that
it is not practicable to do what the
writer suggests, except possibly to re-
pairs to fences as the building owners
will not if allowed to do work without
a permit confine themselves to purely
minor REPAIRS he has said to the Com
missioners
The requirement complained of is also
in a measure police protection and it
is believed very necessary one. The
suggestion of the writer, if carried out,
would shift the responsibility of deciding
whether or not a structure requires
building permit to the police department,
and this is surely bad administration.
The issuance of a permit means
hat NO is nv
department and the inspector knows
what is actually done. For the writer.
who is doubtless lawabiding citizen.
the regulation may appear exasperatinS,
but experience has shown that such reg
ulations are necessary for the safety and
comfort of the community
An amendment to the building regula-
tons prohibiting the issuing Of permit
for the construction repair of any
building which is to be used for pur
pose for which the consents Of adjoining
property holders are required. until such
consents have been obtained has been
recommended to the Commissioners by
Commissioner Mcfarland.
Reason Advanced.
Il think that in every case where the
consent of residents Is required for the
esta blshment and maintenance of any
business in advance of the issuance of the
permit for erection or repairing a build
| ing for the purposes of that business
said Commissioner Macfarand to his col
| leagues 1.-The requisite consent should be
obtained and exhibited to the inspector
| of buildings. | therefore suggest the
adoption of the regulation drafted for me
by the corporation counsel and herewith
| transmitted
The proposed regulation provides that
no permit shall be issued for the cree
| ton. alteration or repair of any building
except upon compliance with all condi-