Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-02-14
.Wreckers Urqe
Licensing for
All Contractors
Air Grievances
At Meeting With
District Officials
BY MIRIAM GUTENBERG

A demand that all general
contractors should be licensed
and made financially responsible
for their work was aired today
as spokesman for the big wreck
ling companies laid their problems
before District officials.
| The wreckers met with Cabell
Gwathmey. director of licenses
and inspections. for guidance on
how they can operate under a
new demolition order issued last
week by Mr.. Gwathmey.
Mr.. Gwathmey told the group
he had issued the order after
the collapse of wall on P street
January % pointed up the neces-
lsity of acting at once on meas
ures which had been under con-
ISideration for many months.
On the score of licensing, Mr..
Gwathmey told the men there
+ had been agitation for some time
| in the building industry and
among civic groups to require
licensing and bonding of general
contractors.
He said he was definitely in
favor of licensing and bonding
wrecking firms and was inclined
ito favor" licensing of all con-
TRACTORS.
General Licensing Asked
Frank Wolfsheimer of the
Hechingef Engineering Corp,
who attended the meeting along
with representatives OF five
wrecking companies. called for
licensing of all general con-
tractors on the same basis that
plumbers and electricians are
licensed now.
Citing the p street wall, Mr..
WolfSheimer said in that case
it was a contractor rathe.' than
wrecker who installed the bolts
which failed to anchor the old
wall to a newer one.
Mr.. Wolfheimer mentioned five
cases where building collapsed
or a foundation caved in. In all
five cases, he said, a contractor
rather than a wrecker was re-
sponsible.
Harry MilZman of the General
Wrecking Co.. complained that
nobody seems to know who is
responsible for making safe a
wall shared by two buildings. He
said he had never been able to
get a ruling on whether the
owner Of the property being
razed, the owner of the property
next door or the wrecker himself
was responsible for seeing that
a wall left standing was securely
tied into the remaining property.
I'VE paid a $4,000 judgment
for something that wasn't our
fault because it wasn't clear who
was responsible" one of the
wreckers said.
Court Decisions Conflict
Several others nodded and re-
ported they had had suits, too.
They told Mr.. Gwathmey five
court decisions on the subject
were contradictory.
Mr.. Gwathmey told them
changes in the building code are
now in the works and invited
them to make suggestions on
how to make certain that party
walls are made safe in demoli-
ton operations.
I'VE don't mind doing the
work if everybody has to do the
same thing" Daniel j. Goodman
lof the Ace Wrecking Co. told
him
Mr.. Gwathmey warned that
1.-THE new regulations will be re-
lstrictive and run up the cost of
demolition. but he added:
I'VE can't continue to start
tearing down walls and let one
thing lead to another. That's
what we've been doing for years
and its got to stop"
The wreckers then got down to
cases on how to meet the re-
Iquirements for permits to rae
any building where a wall will
be left standing.
The other wrecking companies
represented at the meeting were
fABC Demolition Corp. Arrow
Wrecking and Lumber Co. and
1 A n