The Washington herald., 1922-01-15
WARNS ERECTORS
TO WATCH PLANS
On. RESTRICTIONS
Story Told Wherein Many
Purchasers Were Fooled
BY Developer.

Sometimes private restrictions DO
not protect. A remarkable instance
occurred in Brooklyn recently.
About twenty-five years ago q de-
veioper owned both sides OF a prom
Using Flatbush street for three
biocks 1t was then sparseIy set
tiled but in the line OF good de-
velopment. He printed circulars
containing maps and described the
property as highly restricted for
one-famiiy detached houses.
Home builders took deeds from
him. containing restrictions against
everything but high class one fam
lily detached homes and built ac-
cording to the n strictions. consid-
erine that they were well protected.
The corner lots. however, were held
at a higher price and did not sell
SO readily. After . time, however,
the neighborhood being well built
up with private homes, the corner
lots became highly eligible for
apartments. and the developer con-
veyed them without restrictions.
The home builders had made a
mistake not to require the developer
to put similar restrictions on his
unsold land. but like many others
they had assumed that the entire
locality would be restricted. Apart
ment houses went up rapidly on
the corners entirely altering the
character of the neighborhood. All
the home owners were injured. One
OF them. the widow of the original
builder. moved her house away just
in time to escape having its re-
movsl blocked by new Apartment
houses. She then had a vacant plot
100 by 100 restricted, however, to a
one-family detached house.
On the ground that the character
of the neighborhood had changed
she appealed to the courts for a de-
cree removing the restrictions and
placing her land on an equality
with the two adjoining corners COW
cred by apartment houses. A party
Interested in one of the apartment
houses resisted her application on
the ground that the original de-
veloper had imposed one-family de-
tached house restrictions on her
land in order that future apart
ment houses on the corners might
have an abundance OF light and air
The court OF hrst resort agreed
with this obiector and was sus-
tanned by the Appellate Court
In that case the restrictions were
perpetual II they had been for
twenty or twenty-five years the
owners Of some OF the corners
would have postponed building I'M
til the restrictions expired when
they would have put up apartment
houses. Frequently when restric-
tons are about TO expire home
owners will allow their houses to
run down in order TO sell their land
for apartments Afterwards. Private
restrictions were never used to any
great extent TO prevent factories in
business districts or tenement
houses in block-house districts. As
rule their usefulness was con-
fined to private residential devel-
opment and their effect was tenn
porary.
Since New York adopted the RON
ing resolution property owners do
not feel the need OF private re-
strictions so much as before. The
coming Is both more permanent and
more elastic. Il covers the entire
city and protects against height
bulk and use. II stabilizes every
where and prevents improper ex-
pIoitation Of built-up localities
Private restrictions are contracts
and can only be altered by the par
ties or by the courts. The protec-
ton OF coming. however, being
based on the police power can be
easily changed in proper cases by
the city Itself.