The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1913-05-14
BOARD OF SAFETY
HEARS EVIDENCE
Takes Up Appeal From Buffers
Decision, Which Refused Per-
NIT to'Rcpair Building.
GOES OVER UNTIL TO-DAY
Property at Northwest Corner of
Ninth and Broad Again
in Dispute.

Much testimony was heard by the
noon on m appeal from the decision
of Building Inspector Butler in regard
to repairs TO the old frame houses at
the northwest corner Of Ninth and
Broad Streets. T.. 0. Wendenburg,
counsel for the Habliston estate. which
owns the buildings, announced his de-
sire to argue tho case. and he will be
hoard this morning at 1880 o'clock in
the Mayors reception room.
According TO the eviCencc. the houses
are In bad state of dilapidation and
decay. so much so az To render them
pants and to passer5-by Tho question
Mt issue is whether they may be re-
paired, whether they must be re-
moved altogether
Probped III ON BnrrcIs.
Last February the attention Of
building Inspector Butler WAS called
TO the buildings. ana he and several
or the deputies OF his Office made crit
ical inspections The foundation walls
were found to be crumblinH, the houses
settled out OF plumb. the wooden sup-
ports and floors rotten and dccaycd and
n section of tho rear wall propped up
on barrels and sticks in a most dan
Rerous condition. The case Was re-
ported To the Police Court. where the
tenants were represented by Gilbert *
Pollock. who secured series OF con-
tInuances for Some months Justice
Crutchneld finally attempted 10 dis
pose OF the case by ordering repairs
satisfactory TO tho Building Inspector,
TO be made In specified time This
action was taken by the court without
hearing the report OF City Engineer
Charles e. Boiling. who has been called
~ Inc too at
cstcd expert, and asked TO make an
examination and report Mr. Boiling
read his report TO the board. Of which
he Is y member, yesterday. stating that
he had not had an opportunity OF being
heard in Police Court He confirmed
nll that had been charged about the
dilapidated condition OF the building
including the statement that a portion
OF tho rear wall is resting on kegs
and pieces of timber. lie added that
the Kegs were rotting away toward
the ground, that the stnircases were
unsafe. the front areaways dangerous
the chimneys out OF plumb and In
need Of repair. and n few other Items
finding nothing to commend. but adj
hitting that behind the rotten wealth
cr boarding. which he had not removed
TO make y complete examination. there
might he some good joists. though some
OF these appeared to be decayed near
the Noor.
Wants to Repair II.
The owners some weeks ago filed
plans for the repairs Because th-v
were vague and indefinite. Building In
spector Butler refused permit, and
second set OF plans were filcd by
Peter J. White. az architect and con
tractor. Mr. Butler again refused a re-
pair permit. relying on section Sc OF
the Building Code. which gays that a
frame building within the fire limits
may not be repaired or rebuilt when
the repairs aggregate more than one
half Of It's actual value exclusive Of
foundations, but must he removed Mr..
White testified that the present build
Ing was worth fully $4,000. and could
be repaired for from s 1000 10 $1,000.
The Building Inspector and his depu-
ties didn't think the building as it
stands. exclusive Of foundations and
aot WAS worth $1,000. and that the re-
pairs would exceed that amount
The case viii be argued this morn
Ing by Mr.. Wendenburz. for the prop
erty owners. and City Attorney Pol
lard, for the city.
Conflict Of Evidence.
There is direct conflict OF evidence
between Contractor White and Deputy
building Inspector Smith. They went