Evening star., 1954-04-17
Alley Dwelling
Renoyators Get
Council BACKING
Advisory Unit Votes
To Request Repeal
Of Ban on Homes

Washington's alley dwelling
renovators have won the support
of the Citizens Advisory Council
in their fight to wipe out the
long standing but unenforced
prohibition against alley homes
Of any kind here.
Adding to a generally hearten-
ing day for the alley set yester-
day was a legal opinion from
Corporation Counsel Vernon E.
West, who raised questions
bearing on the constitutionality
Of the law, and indications that
Commissioner Samuel Spencer
favors repeating the law.
The council, which advises the
commissioners. decided after a
two-hour meeting to recommend
that the city heads ask Congress
to repeal the Alley Dwelling Act.
This law requires abandonment
Of all alley dwellings after July
l. 1855. It has been on the
books for decades. but repeated
poStponementS Of its effective
date have resulted in no en-
forcement.
Doubtful q Leaglity.
Council Chairman william E.
Leahy reported that while the
advisory group deplores slum
conditions, long rampant in al
leys, it feels grave doubt" as to
the legality of the alley dwelling
prohibition. The council voted
that way. z to /, a complete re-
verSal Of its earlier stand favor
ing enforcement of the law after
July l. 1855.
Mr.. Leahy pointed out that
much housing improvement leg
islation has gone into effect since
passage Of the Alley Dwelling Act,
Proposed new legislation that
would give authorities greater
enforcement powers to improve
or raze buildings condemned as
unsanitary is pending even now
Mr.. Leahy added.
These developments, the
chairman said, will give ade.
quate authority to the Commis-
slonerS for solving the problems
intended to be met heretofore
by the Alley Dwelling Act"
Would Close LO0phole.
The council specifically urged
Congress. to pass the proposed
amendment to the condemna.
ton laws to close a loophole
through which owners of con-
:, demned unSanitary buildings
may let the structures stand un-
occupied. unimproved and un.
razed for years.
The councils grave doubts
over the constitutionality of the
Alley Dwelling Act stemmed
from Mr.. Vests formal opinion
on the subject. Mr.. West OBJ.
served, in his long analysis, that
he knew Of no cases where g
legislature or a municipality has
sought to prohibit the use oi
property because its access is
from a narrow thoroVghfare.
Under the local law, an alley is
defined as a thoroughfare less
than 80 feet wide.
Mr.. West said that what com:
plicates the question of legality
is that, under District zoning
regulations, property located ir
areas designated as residential.
is limited to residential use.
If the Alley Dwelling Act pro-
hibition were enforced, he said
the effect would be "substan-
TALLY to deprive the owner OF
alley property lying within a
reSidential-use district of the
right to use his property for any
purpose, since the act prohibits
the use for residential purposes
and the zoning regulations for
bid the use for purposes other
than residential. This, he said
would violate the Fifth Amend
ment to the Constitution, which
guarantees against property de-
privation without due process OF
law.
Would Keep ZOning.
Commissioner Spencer said he
interprets Mr.. Vests opinion as
a reason for asking Congress tc
repeal the Alley Dwelling Act
He said that to change the zon-
ing laws to permit widespread
development of business in res
idential areas would alter the
whole coming concept here.
Mr.. West touched on one 9TH
er major point: The suggestion
by the alley home renovators
that the Alley Dwelling Act be
amended to permit all homes
rehabilitated by the 1855 dead
line to remain in existence sc
long as they met certain stand
ards and to prohibit rehabilita-
ton efforts after that deadline
He said this amendment woulc
| ,,:11o&o 4t,oI (Ioref;kY,fioya