Evening star., 1927-11-27
By BEN NckELWAY.

Announcement that the National
Capital Park and Planning Commits
sion will include in it's legislative pro-
gram this year Endorsement of the
Shipstead bill. or one like it. giving
the Commission of Fine Arts power of
approval of exterior plans for COM
mercial buildings adjacent or in prox-
unity to Government buildings will
awaken a wide interest throughout
the United States and the fate of the
proposed legislation will receive the
close attention of scores of cities.
Control Of appearance, or official con-
sideration of the subject of esthetics.
is causing a lot of talk and conjecture
these days. In some minds the logi-
cal extension of the coming principle
is it's wider application to a control of
appearance Today in Washington,
and in other cities as we'll, real
estate man may go to time and eX-
pcnSe to plan particularly artistic
group of row houses. for instance.
But he is prevented from putting them
up beca,fse zoning specifies detached
houses for the area. SO. while he is
prevented from erecting his artistic
| row houses, there is nothing to pre-
vent his building a series of detached
| houses so horribly ugly that the po-
! lceman on his beat will detour around
! them, and children will cry when they
see them. The theory is. Of course,
| that coming, which now concerns itself
with the height, use and area of build
| ingS, might wisely be made to include
the appearance of buildings. In some
Of the decisions upholding the prin-
| ciple of zoning the courts have hinted
| that in time the police power over
| health safety and public welfare may
| logically be exercised to include the
considera ton Of esthetics. But that
| time has hardly arrived. Those who
| have studied the effect of coming, and
| the wide increase in it's popularity.
| hesitate at this time to experiment
with so radical an enlargement of it's
| principles. They feel that it would
be unwise to jeopardiZe the established
J success of coming by combining it
with so delicate a matter as public
control of the appearance of private
! buildings. They prefer that coming
stand as it is, and that the experiment
Of subjectng private buildings TO the
scrutiny of experts. who may disagree
| with the owners as to what cOnSti-
| tutes correct appearance, be Consld-
cred az a separate proposition and al
| lowed to stand or fall on its own mer-
| it's. Nevertheless. should the consid-
Grafton of esthetics become an ac-
| cepted part of a city's control over
buildings. it is only natural to suppose
| that in time it will be considered as n
part Of the general principle of zoning.
| Here in Washington there is pre-
sented q particularly well equipped
| laboratory for experiments in control
ling the appearance OF commercial
| buildings and the Shipstead bill, or
similar Legislation, backed by such or
ganiZations as the Park and Planning
| Commission, the Commission of Fine
Arts and others interested in develop
| ing the beauty of the Capital. will set
| the TEST tubes boiling at this session
| of Congress. The Theory behind the
! legislation is sensible and there is al
ready a precedent for it. In Philadel-
phia. for instance, no private building
| is allowed to be erected fronting on
| the Fairmount Highway until its
| plans have been submitted to- and APP
| proved by the Philadelphia Art Jury.
| This regulation has been in effect for
some time and is yet to be contested.
| 1t is based on common sense. The
city. using taxpayers money, went to
much expense in building the Fair
mount Parkway. It was contended
that the successful Investment of this
money should not he jeopardized by
allowing any Tom. Dick or Harry who
owned abutting property to build
thereon some weird. uncouth. struc-
ture which would destroy the appear.
ance of the parkway. 1t was argued