Evening star., 1927-11-27
CONTROL OF APPEARANCE SOUGHT
AS PART OF BUILDING PROGRAM

that the parkway was beneficial to
adjoining property and that adioin.
ing property owners should reciprocate
by making their buildings add to-
rather than detract from. the appear
ance of the parkway. The regulation
was found to be popular. The builder
took comfort from the thought that
his building would not be injured b.
an adjoining building which careless
~ threw aside al esthetic considers.
ton He felt safe in making his
building as attractive as possible. with
the assurance that other builders
would do the same thing. II was
mutually agreeable regulation and il
IS be lieved that all such regulations
would in the end be agreeable and adj
vdntaG"ous to all concerned.
y X x
The ShipStead bill. introduced in ,he
last Congress. came as pleasant s1ir.
prise to many of those who were hone.
fully agitatinS what it provided Sen.
ator ShipStead introduced his hill nm
his own hook. as it were and il found
host of enthusiastic hackers. AS
framed last Y II. the hill really goes
further than is considered necessarv
at this time. for the Senator's pro.
poSal IS TO control the exterior appear.
ance of all private structures within
200 feet of a Government building.
His bill might he interpreted as ap-
plying not only to important Govern
ment projects downtown, but TO fire
engine houses. police stations and
schools. and this would cover a lot
Of territory of minor importance. Ad-
vOCates Of the legislation are inter.
ested particularly just now in the
north side Of PENNSYLVANIA avenue.
They are anxious lest some enthusi-
astic builder and some wild.eyed archi-
tect conSpire TO erect a structure fac
ing the triangle group of Government
buildings which will detract from the
appearance of The Government build
in9s and lead to unkind remarks
about the beauty OF the Capital As
the Government is going to an enor-
nous expense in improving the Ave
nue triangle, it is not considered wise.
sensible or just that it's investment
should be in part endangered. Pro-
ponents Of the legislation do not con-
template any great legal difficulty.
The Constitution has invested Con
gress with such exclusive control over
the District that it's hands are vir-
tually free to do what it will. In ad.
dition. after the creation of the Dis
triCt, and when certain property own
land. a stipulation was inserted in the
retransfer agreement stating that the
title to land was given back ION such
conditions as thought reasonable by
the President for regulating the
method and manner of the buildings
and improvements generally within
the said city"
* X X y
But the theory behind this legisla.
ton which should appeal most strong.
ly to property owners is that approval
Of the Fine Arts Commission would
tend to increase. rather than detract
from. the value of private buildings.
Under this legislation the Fine Arts
Commission. for instance. might see
fit to lay down, informally general
plan for the treatment of buildings on
the north side of Pennsylvania avenue.
| The builder would only be required
to make the plans for his building con-
| form to this general plan. He would
have the advantage Of securing free
of charge. the advice of qualified con.
sulting experts on the Fine Arts Com
mission. and it is reasonable to sup
pose that he would regard this adj
| vice as something to he sought rather
than as something to be resented.
The builder would receive. in effect. Il
guarantee that the value of his own
property would not suffer by reason
of the appearance of his next
door neighbor's property The legiSla-
tion should he considered more in the
light of a safeguard. both for the Gov.
ernment and the private citizen. than
as an attempt to dictate on the sub
iect of aDDea rance