New-York tribune., 1921-11-25
5th Ave. Height
Amendment Is
For Favored
Proposal to Reduce Eleva.
ton Restrictions i'm That
Section Endangers Zon-
ing Scheme, Says Builder

William Douglass Fitzpatrick. builder
and operator, is one of many who is op-
posed to the zone amendment proposed
for changing the building height limit
on Fifth Avenue, opposite Central Park.
Mr.. Fitzpatrick said yesterday:
"The proposed amendment to the
coming law, which comes before the
Board of Estimate to-day, chang
ing the height limit between Sixtieth
and Ninety sixth streets, from Fifth
Avenue to with Zoe feet Of Madison
Avenue, would be, if adopted, the most
serious blow the zoning law has ever
received, and would virtually end its
usefulness. The proposal is to reduce
the existing limitation of $50 feet on
Fifth Avenue and the wider streets to
rs feet and from 90 feet to rs feet on
the narrower side streets.
'The strength of the zoning law is its
stability, and such stability will come
to an abrupt ending when five miles of
streets in the finest and highest-priced
residential location in the United
suddenly radically changed, their util-
ity harnlfully limited and values seri-
ously damaged.
'It is automatic that any restriction
(no matter what its intent) which lin
its the utility Of land limits values.
| This Fifth Avenue section has received
it's high values from the various uses
to which the land could be devoted.
! The proposed amendment practically
restricts the land to but one use, and
such use to an extremely limited num-
ber OF purchasers, persons of great
! wealth. Competition being all but elm
mated by restrictions as TO use and
buyer, it is obvious that q heavy de-
crease in land values will ensue.
''The proposed amendment is not
only stupid and vicious but utterly for
egn to the intention and purposes Of
the law.
"The zoning commission in 1916
carefully considered and reconsidered
the heights limits in this section, and
after examination and deliberation
adopted the present height limit of
one and one-half times the width of
the streets Certainly since 1916 moth
ing whatever has occurred to warrant
in the slightest degree any such
change in the law as is contemplated
by the amendment limiting heights
to rs feet
'That the law contains minor errors
is freely conceded by the commission
In work of such gigantic size it is
inevitable that mistakes would occur
and provisions were made for their cor
rection.
The proposed change implies a
grievous error on the part of the
zoning commission in improper height
limitation. Such implication that the
commission, composed of men of signal
stability, keen knowledge, ripe expert
ence and wisdom, had erred seriously
in the height limiting Of this unique
conspicuous, nationally known residen'
tial section Of our great city, to put it
mildly, is weird, inexplicable, or is it
unreasoning?
'The proposed change is a elarine
instance of the unholy persistence OF
a few notoriety hunting reformers, act
ing under the guise of benefting the
city, who don't care two whoops in
Gehenna who is hurt or what havoc is
created just so lang as their selfish
ideas are put into practice.
'.It is unlikely that the Board of Es'
innate will act favorably upon this pc,
tition, which, TO all intent and purpose
affects the permanence and stability OF
the zoning laws to such an extent as te
nullify the entire instrument"