The Connecticut labor news., 1922-02-10
RAILROAD LABOR BOARD HANDS
 DOWN B DECISIONS, BUT ONLY
 SIX IN FAVOR OF THE WORKERS
Master Builders { Continued from Page One.)

as a wall that supports any load other
 than it's own weight, the contractors
 would have made specific to include
 side walls which arc actually bearing
 all the weight. The classification Of
 under section IS which defines what
 is residence, public or business
 building is all awry according 10 the
 builders and should "be carefully con
 sidered and discussed" These classi- fcations govern hreproohng, style
 and strength of construction and are
 pretty strict and to the point. With more leeWay in their interpretation Ii might be possible to get away with cheaper work
 In this respect Class B which pro vides for fire probing of church spires if they exceed 75 feet the con tractors want inserted that unless they exceed 75 feet they need not be fire proof.
 In Class D of buildings which gov erns residences tenement houses and all other residences it is provided that all over 40 feet high must have the | floor over the cellar f1reproof. This should be seriously considered" aver the master builders.
 Class l. which covers factories, office buildings, print shops. ware | houses, stables, stores, and the like provides that the floor over the low est story must be tireproof If the l building is of ordinary construction, The builders want mills left out or l want to know if the floor over the ] cellar must be hreproof
 Class F which covers car barns, power plants, garages, and the like
 and which make 1t compulsory that
 they be of ONLY freproof con-
 struction, the contractors want
 amended so that garages shall be
 taken out of the class and put it in l Class E where only the first floor
 must be hreproof,
 l In section 2I, paragraphs two and
 and depth of foundation walls tic
 contractors do not think severe
 enough for safety especially if being built in sandy soil. The deeper they
 go and the thicker they are the more ] they cost apparently.
 l Section B which covers buildings
 built on piles and provides that such
 piles shall be cut off at permanent water leveP the contractors want
 made to read mean high water level'' l stating there IS no such thing as
 'permanent water level" and perhaps they are right Section 24 which deals with concrete pile IS called to general attention but no suggestions offered for it's amendment unless some member may have had some experience with this line that might give him the idea it should be amend l ed
 l Section 25, clause ? which pro- vides that all walls shall be properly bonded with mortar joints and built
 to a line carried up, plumb and straight might be made embarrassing should some future building inspector |. decide that it included the offsettine of chimneys, fireplaces and the like , Clause of the same section provides that face brick in walls must be laiC at the same time as the back brick i to be considered part of the thickness ]; of the walls and the contractors wan this made SO that face brick 'bondec with wall ties or blind bond" will be
 perfectly all right no matter whcr laid
 Section % which covers the thick ness of walls is wrong in many ways the contractors believe, clauses three
 nine, II, I2, B, I5 and IS being III
 for discussion. These rules are pret ty strict as to bearing walls for safety
 in the future and "should be thor , oughly discussed" say the master
 builders. Section B which provide: I curtain walls must be ''at least I:
 inches thick and anchored" should
 not be compulsory, the master build CTS say. Section B which provide: . for the thickness Of fire walls" |
 ,,,t1 1.
 section B which covers parapet wall ,, being the same thickness as the bear
 ing walls, should not be so and thu
 thickness of the parapet should no be so governed, is the claim. : Section 34 covering terra colt; 7 blocks, is o. K. the master bulder : agree but conflict with parts of thu ? code requiring special thickness o l the web. In clause which prohibit 2 the use of tiles after 5 feet il l heighth and the thickness must b. g the same as brick walls, is eXcessiv' ;, while section relating to use of tile i should include dwelling the contrac s tors claim.
 = The final attack so far is made o1 l section 34 clause II which provide s that all hollow terra cotta block e must be rigidly inspected, shall be no [ less than I5-I6 of an inch in thick l ness nor shall exceed 50 per cent il the open space, The contractors de clare the thickness to be excessiv
 nda almost unobtainable and gives l. monopoly to certain makers of tn :, blocks.
 That's all they have in mind so ia but seen to have done very we'll il l. having reached the thirty-fourth sec q ton while the code consists of 35 sections embodied in I8o pages o > type. If the proportion keeps up tn code will soon be shot to pieces f the aldermen allow it.
 + Baltimore, Feb. Io-A cossack bil . has been introduced in the Marylant V legislature. It provides for arrest 7 without warrant