Evening star., 1928-03-24
BY n0N 8. WARREN.

Restrictions on the heights of build
bia have been liberalized several times
since zoning regulations were eStab-
l;S3se6 here, resulting in definite
changes IN the skyline Of the city and
further petitions for raising the height
limits no doubt will continue 10 come
before the zoning commission. For this
reason The matter is one Of Importance
- Washington and IS being given study
by city planners and zoning officials.
There are those who confidently be-
lieye that the time must come when
WaSaincton. growing rapidly toward
the million population mark, must have,
because Of economic factors. higher
BUILDINGS as the congeSte6 section of the
CITY IS Improved. Year after year sees
onc-tin7e residential sections near the
present section az the city give away 10
Office buildings and other larger modern
structures.
Favor level" Type City.
There are those. on the other hand.
who believe that the prevailing order
should be that Of 4 more or less level
tyTpe city. with the height OF buildings
strictly limited 10 an extent that the
Federal buildings nov standing and the
many classic structures yet 70 be erect
e6 may not be overShaGowed by private
projects. Milton 3. AiedaTy, member OF
the National Capital Park and Plan
ming Commission and power III the
American Institute Of Architects. stat
ed recently at a meeting OF the opera
tive Builders Association Of Washington
that hs felt the level" conception OF
Washington should maintain.
There have been concessions made TO
the advocates of higher buildings, how
ever. and during the past year an
amendment vas added 10 the Zoning
code Of the District providing for set
hacks" in the upper stories OF tne
higher buildings, a plan proving nlghlN
popular in New York and other larger
cities having "Skvscrapera" which
which makes possible the erection OF
buildings i30 feet high here, with the
exterior walls Of such building set baG
6 inches for each foot OF height above
the ii0-foot level.
This amendment. added tu Section
XIII Of the coming regulations. READS:
IN the 1Io-foot height district build
srzs NAV bea erected 10 a hight not
exceeding $50 feet. or Il stol les. pro-
vided such buildings face o. abut
street or streets not less thar 10 feet
wide between the building lilies, and,
provided further. that above the no.
foot level all outside walls are set back
6 inches for each foot Of heii;nt above
this level"
Advantages of Plan.
The advantage of this style Of build
srz il has been explained, is that.
while il permits buildings % feet
higher than we're possible b'.fore the
amendment went into effect the upper
stories. being set back from the ex-
terror lire Of the walls Of the main
portion OF the building. makes for more
light and air for adjoining builders
tran would be possible II the exterior
walls of the building were not re-
cessed. Also. from a perspective point
@ view. il creates an entirely ol1erent
appearance, tending 10 minimize the
bulk Of tE1e building and ooYiate top
heavy feeling IN the structure, IL Is
explained.
Aitno3el this style Of buildings il
Washington was made permissible al
2 comr3arat;yely recent date, number
os builders have planned structures
along this principle.
Problems 10 be encountered IN higher
buildings, however. are outlined IN
statement on the subject recently sub
rafs;ed 70 the District zo1ing office for
consideration By Frederic A. Delano.
member Of the National Capital Park
end Planning Commission.
High buildings are comparatively 2
recent development in our American
CITIES" he stated In his memo, but
they are coming very fast, and IN their
train z lot o4 unforeseen problems IL
might be wise for Washington, BE-
cause II Is the Capital City. and not &
ggg-egy commercial clty. 70 put a re-
/. Eznkufzg of NHstsr-
fngs. An ounce Of prevention is worth
pound Of cure, and. while the time
may corne when We shall require two
stcrse6 K.reets and slbwaya. II might oe
wise 70 defer those modern improve
x1erts' as long ss possible
Question Of Property Values.
II IL generally conceded BY qualified
persons and perhaps may be deter
mined precisely, Mr. Dei2ro added. that
II We we're 70 limit buildings 10 mod
crate height al oger the city fioTeTs,
fseepseE. etc. KOt included. We would
undoubtedly limit the values of some
property bt1f II the same time TN
aance the value of much other prop
ertv. Ii other words. he said, We
-zos!ld AVOID q great disparity between
fSe high and soB values. set maintain
the general average.
II seems ogYlo3ls" his report con-
clu6ec. that nl2n buildings IL 80 far
20 they multiply available floor space,
tend to increase street congestion N
f2ose parts q the clty where tbey are
permitted Congestion puts burdens on
1oe enfage city which must be met, on
ine ORE hand, by regulatory devices; on
. fne ocaer hand, by additional or else
w9def avenues q communication, In
some cities these aodeG avenues haye
required s}sn costly devices rs elevated
gesos sUp8ays. ctr.
"StBs.eS 9y fi1e committee On tbe re-
a1orszl plan II Ee% YORK indicate that
lgn buildings IN that city haYing a
cay population capacltY IA some cases
~ 1000 Or more PER acre, while max
agag for very nigh values IN some dis
aricts. nlake 3gr impoverished conci-
F4ons arc BgN values l4 ne4gAoor2ng dis
sr.cts. t1ge facls also clearly sigO8 that
sseW Yorx tH spite II It's gery hlgn
bujcl4gs. iaas ~ average - " height u
tei1lGsa2S approximately ibe same as
grHScsg ans paris with 26~tgot limits
"Cos ernuerial buildings 10 be- erect