Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-08-07
Commissioners Decide Not Yet
to Alter Permit Schedule.
FEW MONTHS TEST FIRST
Cant He Put Nail in Fence Without
Payings Asks E. Frisby.
OTHER QUESTIONS
ASKED
But Is Referred to the Regulations
for the Information He Could
Not Find There.

The question is not so much the
paying of 81 talthough that is bad
enough), but the nuisance OF compelling
me to get a permit if I want to nail a
board on my own fence to keep my
property from tumbling down. l pre-
diet there will be more dilapidated
buildings and fences in the futufe than
now"
This is the comment of Edgar Fris-
by of 1907 31st street upon the present
schedules of permits for repairs to
fences and houses. He wrote to the
Commissioners to protest against the
charge of 81 for repairs to his porch,
which cost 1926.
After considering this and other pro-
tests against the new schedule, the
Commissioners have decided to wait a
few months to test the practical work
ing of the schedule before taking up
any proposition to make changes.
Frisby Asks Vexing Questions.
In his letter Mr.. Frisby declares he
paid 81 for a permit for repairs to his
porch. The front board that goes around
the porch was wearing out with some
portions of the sill, and the work was
to repair a few wornout boards.
Now for the questions says Mr.. Fris-
bic, after stating his case.
Have / not the right to repair my
property without interference when l
make no changes whatever?
Has the inspector transcribed his au-
thority?
rs such regulation legal?
Il understand the new regulation went
into effect on the 18th; the work was
commenced on the 14th. What right had
= no tpc~ 70 int
Now, is it a fact that every time
want to nail a board on my back fence
or anywhere else I must get a permit
and pay $1?"
Referred to the Regulations.
UpAh the recommendation of Building
Inspector Morris Hacker the writer will
be informed as follows:
He has not the right. according to our
regulations, to repair his porch without
a permit if such repairs are to be made
to the exterior of his building, or If to
the interior they involve any change In
the structural parts. stairways. elevators,
fire escapes or other means of COMMUNE
cation. or ingress or egress. light or ven
tilation.
1.-The inspector did not transcend his
authority in this case, as under the regu-
lations. whether it was before July 10 or
since, the writer should have had per-
nit to do the work. This regulation has
been in effect for a long time. was not
changed by tho new schedule of fees and
is believed to be proper and legal regu-
lation.
I'm answer to the last question. would
invite attention to section 10 Of the regu-
lations. which requires that permit be
obtained in advance for all alterations,
repairs, ETC.; also to section 81, which
requires a fee of at least 81 for all per-
mits and certificates. There is no change
now in the regulations, but there Is this
difference between the present schedule
of fees and the old one-while permits
were required to repair entrance steps.
fences and other minor exterior work, no
fee for this class of work was charged
prior to July Is, 1907
Hacker Sees No Other Way.
In further comment on the building
permit schedule, Building Inspector Hac-
ker says:
THE minimum fee is now 81. I do not
believe a less fee should be charged. But
I can see no objection to the omission of
the requirement for permits to build or
repair wooden fences where no inspection
will be necessary.
It believe a permit should still be re-
CURED and a fee secured for any repair
or alteration to the exterior of a build
of cases where inspection would not
really be necessary, as the repairs would
be minor. But it Is impossible to draw
repair to a building. 1t should not be
left to the police department to deter
mine whether the alteration made was
sufficient to require permit or not.
Where clerical work in the Office or
inspection in the field Is necessary, a
n -.
cured. l see 10 other practical solution
to the question, in view of the new law
directing the Commissioners to make the
Office self-supporting.
1T is estimated that the present sched-
ule of fees will do this. and this estimate
is based on the anticipated receipts from
all sources named. 1t should be borne
in mind that if certain of these fees are
ably be necessary to increase them fur
Their on other classes of work..
Will Try Out Schedule.
Acting Engineer Commissioner Will
liam Kelly approved this view Of the
case, and recommended to the Commits
sioners that the new schedule be al
lowed to remain in force long enough to
test 1t.
II am willing to wait for a reason
able time, not exceeding six months. in
order to test the practical working Of
the schedule of fees for permits" COM
mented Commissioner Mcfarland today,
before pressing my proposition for a
reimbursement Of the fees that would
prevent what / regard as excessive
charges for permits for repairs"
Commissioner West does not believe
that six months will be required to test
the new schedule. but that after
shorter period the necessary changes
will have been pointed out.
WOMAN SHOOTS HUSBAND.