Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-02-07

1.-THE successful operation Tor
eight years of an Architects Ad-
viSory Council established in the
National Capital by the Washing
ton Chapter of the Institute has
demonstrated the advantages of
such service to the public and to
the profession, and the establish
ment of a second council in Gin
cinnati, in cooperation with the
Art Institute, has indicated the
feasibility of extending similar
service in other Cities" it is as
serted in a resolution adopted by
the Board of Directors of the In
Stitute.
Outlines Purposes of Council.
The plans of the institute are de-
scribed by Horace w. Peaslee of WASH
ington, a director of the institute, who
has been an active participant in the
work of the Washington Council. Mr..
Peaslee outlines the purposes of the
Washington Council and adds:
las to the effect on building gen.
orally. it is a matter of common OBJ
servation that the quality of speculative
building in the National Capital has
made tremendous improvement within
the last half decade. Where organized
opposition to the-council existed at its
beginning, we now find cooperation be-
tween architects and builders.
THE architects by their freely given,
constructive criticism. not too detailed,
but rather general in character, have
given service for which they have re-
ceived no direct compensation, and have
improved the character of the work of
operative builders. On the other hand,
the work of the architects themselves
has been improved by constructive
criticism.
For eight years. once a week, three
architects, drawn from jury panel,
have criticized constructively all plans
filed for building permits in the Dis
trict of Columbia. One new man goes
on the jury each week, one former
juror dropping off, the term OF service
being three weeks.
Find Work Worthwhile.
when it was proposed last Sum-
mer that because of the heat ana vaca-
tions the service might be dropped for
a coupe of months, those architects
scheduled for Summer service unani-
mously agreed that under no circum-
stances would they take advantage OF
the situation. 1t would seem, therefore,
that in so far as the architects them
selves are concerned, they have found
the effort interesting and worth while
They see what other architects are
doing, how other architects handle their
problem. They discuss these problems
with their peers, and in return have full
and frank discussion of their own prob
lens in the earlier stages.
The jury, in reviewing the plans
before it, groups them into five classes:
Distinguished, outstanding among
buildings of its type; commended,
40
ARDS which should be maintained for
private buildings in the National Can
ital; approved, meeting the standards
which should be maintained for private
buildings in the neighborhood; average,
a building which does not tend to i'm
prove the neighborhood; disapproved,
the type of building which Is considered
below average and to be discouraged.
No Delay in Permits.
''Where a building seems eligible for
the distinguished architecture award, or
commentator, this particular project
is referred to board OF review COM
posed of the elders of the tribe, who
meet at six-week intervals. Their
function is to insure continuity IN
the classifications, and especially TO
make final decision as to whether q
building warrants the distinguished
rating. In any event, no distinguished
award may be made except on COM
pleted project.
There is no delay whatever in the
issuance of building permits, even
though the council meets only once a
week On the day of the meeting all
plans received since the previous meet
ing are placed before the council,
whether or not permits have been
granted. It is frequently too late to
make radical changes; but 1t Is never
too late to simplify, and that is usually