Evening star., 1926-09-09
10-FOOT SIDE YARDS
STRONGLY OPPOSED
Greater Space Between De-
taChed Houses Favored in
0Imsted Report.

Opposition to the 10-foot minimum
space now required between detached
dwellings in the District In favor of
greater space Is contained in a
memorandum prepared by Frederick
J.. Olmsted Of Brooklne Mass, a
member OF the National Capital Park
and Planning Commission. which to-
day was sent to Lieut.. Col. j. Fra nix
lin Bell, Engineer Commissioner Of
the District. Such small spaces ne.
tween buildings. he points out, are
practically useless.
His report also recommends a
change in the zonlng regulations so
as to hermit tne building Of single
family residences in groups Of eight,
the whole TO appear as one struc-
ture. with adequate yard space for
the end buildings. He suggests the
districts which might he used for
this treatment, and strongly RECON-
mends that in zOning for this kind
Of construction that the areas should
he absolutely restricted against apart.
ment buildings.
Mr.. Olmsted points out that the
value OF yard space between dwell
ings. as to whether any design of any
group OF buildings Is in fact such as
TO give the appearance OF single
narrow width, and above 10 feet the
value increa ses after the width be-
comes sufficient to give rea soma bly,
Va tisfactory degree OF light. air and
privacy.
Would Review Rulings.
The report also includes recon
menda ton for an amendment to the
zOning regulati tions which would ma he
the rulings Of the inspector Of build
ings. as to appearance OF single
building, subject to review 10y some
suitable board of appeals, presumably
the Ioning Commission. Rulings OF
the inspector OF buildings, he points
out further, now are subject to review
by the courts, but under the recon-
mended change the inspector, back
up by the commission. and acting
with the help of tn" Architects Ad-
visory Council. would be able to exert
considerable educational pressure TO-
ward securing groups OF really unified
and good looking single buildings as
contra sted with the monOtonous or
meretricious repetitive designs cut Oft
by the yard"
Mr.. Olmsted says that II would he
very desirable to OBTAIN from Con
gress an amendment to the Zonine
ena bling act for the District authOriZ
ing the Zoning Commission or some
other suitable administrative hoard to
approve, on appeal in cases Of special
hardship, the issue Of building permits
for structures not conforming to the
precise letter Of the regulations. pro
vided they conform 10 the general pur-
pose and intent OF these regulations.
and specifying the method o. apply
ing for relief through the courts by
cert iorari instead OF mandamus pro
csedings. using the approved wording
for granting such powers 10 boards
of appeal as used in the model coming
ena abling act issued under authority
OF the Department of Commerce.
Report Made After Study.
The report was a result of a study
Of the coming conditions in the Dis
tricf. made personally by Mr.. Olmst ed
and NJ. r. Medary. Of Phila delphia.
another member of the commission,
following the last meeting of the Ma
tional Capital Park and Planning Com
mission. Commissioner Rel broacheti
the subjec; st the meeting and sa i'd
that he would like to have such q
study made. although the commission
'iN i'V' 'INCt III "SupIN hitI tlut
prepare forms! report but impaired
his ideas and the results of his study
10 Commissioner Bell.
There is a real need in Washing
ton for type of residential zoning
districts ada pied especially TO the con
struction OF economical single family
dwellings arranged in groups or rows
Of moderate length with enough side.
yard open space between successive
groups to produce an airy, open. cheer
full effect ard avoid the nonotonOus
crowded shut.in effect that results
from the erection Of unbroker rows
of great length or even OF shorter
buiidine masses when separated from
each othe" only by occa sionaI side
yards of the minimum size permit ed
under the present zoning regulations"
the report says.
II is probable that the areas
which could most advantageously be
zoned with a view to providing for
development Of the sort above indi.
Gated lie within areas now Zoned in
part as A restricted. in part as r
restricted and in part as A and p
hut the precise ALLEGATION Of such
areas OF course needs careful and
comprehensive study throughout the
District. and I am not prepared to
make any off hand suggestions as to
the proper loca tons" it adds
Exceptions Are Stated.
The report then continues:
The sort Of Development above in
dicated would he permitted and en-
couraged in any such district by
making It's area reGula tions CORE.
spocd with those of the present "A
and a restricted districts. with the
following very simple exceptions:
''ta) Require side yard on each
side OF each building.
"fb) Provide that a group q: not
more than tsay) eight single family
dwellings, so designed as to give the
appearance o. single building and
erected simultaneously may, for the
purpose OF determining side.yard re.
auirements under this section Of the
zonng regulations. be regarded as
building. and that in such case
side yard shall! not be required In con-
nection with any other Of the dwell
ings constituting said group. except
the end dwellings thereof, provided
there shall be side yard on the same
lot with the end dwelling at each end
of said group Of the same width that
would be required for building of
the same length as the entire srouph
This requirement at present is for
side yard not less than 2 inches
wide for each foot Of building length
Possible Saving In Cost.
Under the provisions suggested the
possible saving in cost Of building
construction az compared with any.
thinE except Ions rows Is marked.
and the cost of such construction in
excess OF that Of long rows is slight.
The cost for frontage dand and street
costs, would he, in the case Of eight
dwellings. II per cent less than ths Il
for detached houses, S per cent more
than for semi.detached houses with
side yards only : feet wide 40 feet
between buildings, and the same as