IONAL CONFER*
r PLANNING
Jpresentefc to
Xibrarp
of tbe
of Toronto
V
:
271
PROCEEDINGS
OF
THE FOURTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
CITY PLANNING
PROCEEDINGS
OF THE
FOURTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE
ON
CITY PLANNING
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
MAY 27-29, 1912
BOSTON : MCMXII
EDITORIAL NOTE
THE precedent of former volumes has been followed in
presenting the chief papers read at the Conference in full
and condensing or summarizing the discussions.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
ADDRESS OF WELCOME. Hon. JOHN F. FITZGERALD, Mayor of Boston 1
REMARKS BY OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVES FROM SEVERAL CITIES
Dr. DANA W. BARTLETT 5
MUNSON HAVENS 6
F. L. FORD 7
THE PROGRESS IN CITY PLANNING. FREDERICK L. OLMSTED, Fellow
American Society of Landscape Architects 9
THE MEANING OF CITY PLANNING. ARNOLD W. BRUNNER, Fellow Amer-
ican Institute of Architects, New York City 22
THE ATTITUDE OF THE ENGINEER TOWARD CITY PLANNING. GEORGE F.
SWAIN, Professor of Civil Engineering, Harvard University; Member
of the Boston Transit Commission 30
Discussion
THE WORK OF A PLANNING COMMISSION
FREDERICK L. OLMSTED, Chairman 34, 37, 42
C. W. KILLAM, Cambridge, Mass 36
ARNOLD W. BRUNNER, New York City 37
J. R. MORSE, Tacoma, Washington . . . 38
A HOUSING CODE !
Mrs. ROLLIN NORRIS, Ardmore, Pa 39
F. L. OLMSTED 39
LAWRENCE VEILLER, New York City 40
A. N. PIERSON, Westfield, N. J 41
W. F. BURDETT, St. John, N. B 42
PAYING THE BILLS FOR CITY PLANNING. NELSON P. LEWIS, Chief
Engineer of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, New York
City 43
PAYING THE BILLS FOR CITY PLANNING FROM A BOSTON VIEWPOINT.
Hon. JAMES A. GALLIVAN, Street Commissioner, Boston 57
Discussion
Hon. LAWSON PURDY, New York City, Chairman 68, 79
L. L. TRIBUS, Borough of Richmond, New York 69
ANDREW WRIGHT CRAWFORD, Esq., Philadelphia 70
R. A. POPE, New York City 73
[vii]
CONTENTS
PAGE
Hon. FREDERIC C. HOWE, New York City 73
F. L. OLMSTED 75
NELSON P. LEWIS 76, 79
J. P. HYNES, Toronto, Canada 79
W. TEMPLETON JOHNSON, San Diego, Cal 80
Round Table Talks
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER, JOHN NOLEN,
Fellow American Society of Landscape Architects, Cambridge ... 83
CITY PLANNING IN SMALLER CITIES. A Suggested City Planning
Program. E. C. HILL, City Plan Commission, Trenton, N. J. ... 84
The Situation in Bridgeport, Conn. C. D. DAVIS, Business Men's
Association, Bridgeport, Conn 85
City Planning in Calgary, Alberta
G. W. LEMON, Secretary City Planning Commission 86
JOHN NOLEN, Chairman 88
RICHARD B. WATROUS, Secretary American Civic Association,
Washington, D. C 89
CITY PLANNING IN BROOKLYN, NEW YORK. WOODRUFF LEMMING,
President of the Brooklyn Chapter of American Institute Architects 90
CITY PLANNING IN PHILADELPHIA. W. F. GLEASON, Secretary of the
Philadelphia Comprehensive Plan Committee 91
METROPOLITAN PLANNING IN PHILADELPHIA
Mrs. ROLLIN NORRIS, representing Main Line Housing Associa-
tion, Philadelphia 92
THE CHAIRMAN 93
B. A. HALDEMAN, Philadelphia 93
CITY PLANNING IN OTTAWA, CANADA. Hon. CHARLES HOPEWELL,
Mayor of Ottawa 94
PROCEDURE IN CONDEMNING LAND FOR PUBLIC USE
FRANK B. WILLIAMS, Esq., New York City . . 95
FLAVEL SHURTLEFF, Esq., Secretary of the Conference 95
THE COORDINATION OF MUNICIPAL EFFORT
THE CHAIRMAN 97
L. L. TRIBUS, Consulting Engineer of the Borough of Richmond,
New York 97
CITY PLANNING AND HOUSING. ELMER S. FORBES, Boston 98
THE PROBLEM OF THE BLIGHTED DISTRICT. J. RANDOLPH COOLIDGE,
Jr., Fellow American Institute of Architects, Boston 100
Discussion
F. L. OLMSTED, Brookline, Mass 106
Hon. LAWSON PURDY, New York City 107
Dr. DANA W. BARTLETT, Los Angeles 109
FRANK B. WILLIAMS, Esq., New York City 110
[ viii ]
CONTENTS
PAGE
E. K. MORSE, Pittsburgh, Pa Ill
WALTER B. STEVENS, St. Louis, Mo 112
J. RANDOLPH COOLJDGE, JR 115
THE PUBLIC STREET SYSTEMS OP THE CITIES AND TOWNS ABOUT BOSTON
IN RELATION TO PRIVATE STREET SCHEMES. ARTHUR A. SHURTLEFF,
Fellow American Society of Landscape Architects, Boston 116
STREET PLANNING IN NEWTON. EDWIN H. ROGERS, City Engineer . 125
STREET PLANNING IN WATERTOWN. WILBUR F. LEARNED, Town
Engineer 129
Discussion
NELSON P. LEWIS, Chairman 132, 137
Major JOSEPH W. SHIRLEY, Baltimore, Md 134
E. P. GOODRICH, New York City 135
H. J. KELLAWAY, Boston 136
A. W. CRAWFORD, ESQ 136
Mrs. ROLLIN NORRIS 137
THE LEGISLATION NECESSARY FOR INTELLIGENT CITY PLANNING. Street
Planning and the Law of Massachusetts. WILLIAM F. WILLIAMS,
City Engineer, New Bedford, Mass 138
Sufficiency of City Planning Legislation in New York City. G.
W. TILLSON, Consulting Engineer to the Borough of Brooklyn,
New York 141
The City Planning Powers of Toronto. J. C. FORMAN, Assessment
Commissioner 142
Discussion
F. L. OLMSTED 145
ANDREW WRIGHT CRAWFORD, Esq 147, 149, 150
JOHN IHLDER, New York City 149
A. L. SCHAEFFER, Borough of the Bronx, New York 150
R. N. CLARK, Hartford, Conn 150
THE REGULATION OF THE HEIGHT OF FIREPROOF COMMERCIAL BUILD-
INGS. ARTHUR C. COMEY, American Society of Landscape Archi-
tects, Cambridge 152
Discussion
GEORGE DUDLEY SEYMOUR, New Haven, Conn 153
W. T. JOHNSON, San Diego, Cal 154
How A WORCESTER, MASS., BANK DISCOURAGES THE "THREE-DECKER"
HOUSE. ALFRED L. AIKEN, President of the Worcester County
Institution for Savings 156
Discussion
JOHN P. Fox, Utica, N. Y 160
R. A. POPE, New York City 161
[ix]
CONTENTS
PAGE
H. J. KELLAWAY, Boston, Mass. 161
W. F. BURDETT, St. John, N. B 162
G. S. WEBSTER, Philadelphia, Pa 163
PRACTICAL VERSUS IDEAL CITY PLANNING. AMOS L. SCHAEFFER, Con-
sulting Engineer to the Borough of the Bronx, New York .... 164
Discussion
VINCENT S. STEVENS, Akron, Ohio 167
POPULARIZING THE CITY PLANNING PRINCIPLE
GEORGE B. FORD, New York City 168
Mrs. ROLLIN NORRIS, Ardmore, Pa 169
W. F. GLEASON, Philadelphia, Pa 170
JOHN NOLEN, Cambridge, Mass 170
G. D. GALLUP, Boston, Mass 171
THE CONTROL OF MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT BY THE "ZONE SYSTEM"
AND ITS APPLICATION IN THE UNITED STATES. B. ANTRIM HALDE-
MAN, Assistant Engineer, Bureau of Surveys, Philadelphia 173
Discussion
Hon. JOHN E. REYBURN, Philadelphia, Pa 188
C. F. PUFF, Jr., Newark, N. J 189
W. T. JOHNSON 191
REMARKS AT THE DINNER GIVEN BY THE BOSTON CITY CLUB .... 192
Hon. JOHN F. FITZGERALD, Mayor of Boston 192
Dr. NEWELL DWIGHT HILLIS, Minister of Plymouth Church,
Brooklyn 198
Hon. FREDERIC C. HOWE, Director People's Institute, New York
City 210
Hon. JOHN E. REYBURN, Ex-Mayor of Philadelphia 218
PROCEEDINGS AT THE BUSINESS SESSION 221
RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE CONFERENCE 221
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE PROPOSED STUDY IN CITY
PLANNING 222
THE ORGANIZATION OF THE FIFTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CITY
PLANNING 229
ADDRESS OF WELCOME
HON. JOHN F. FITZGERALD
Mayor of Boston
IT is a happy custom that leads the chief national
societies to move the seat of their conventions each year
from one city to another. In this way the members become
better acquainted with their own country, and even for
men of large experience and wide travel, like yourselves,
there is instruction to be derived from personally observing
the evidences of growth and change that are constantly
going on. This circulating habit is, I should suppose,
particularly useful to the members of the City Planning
Conference because every new city that you visit affords
a local illustration of the problems that you are seeking
to solve.
In Boston, for example, you will find a city relatively
old and not consciously designed for the transaction of
the enormous volume of business which now flows through
it. As Mayor Collins said in his picturesque way: "Over
a million and a half of people are trying to carry on their
work on one square mile of territory." You will find the
suburbs of the city under thirty separate governments,
which are unable to get together with one another or with
the capital itself. It is only when the state steps in, as
was the case with the metropolitan water, park, and sewer-
age systems, that we are able to take something like
concerted action. This is an unfortunate condition and
a difficult one, rendered more difficult, I am sorry to say,
by the obtuseness of the local authorities in many of the
surrounding towns. There have been attempts to remedy
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
it, under the guidance of some of the best minds in Boston.
We had a Metropolitan Improvements Commission a few
years ago, and only a year or two since a Metropolitan
Planning Commission was formed by action of the Legisla-
ture to report an outline which might form the basis of
federated action between the separate units that go to
make up what is called Greater Boston. Its members —
Mr. E. A. Filene, Mr. J. Randolph Coolidge, Jr., and
Mr. John Nolen — are, as I need not say in this assemblage,
men of the highest public spirit and great professional
ability. Their report was progressive, yet moderate and
guarded in its recommendations. It would have enabled
us, for example, to build a system of highways connecting
town and town — the so-called circumferential or con-
centric roads — equal to the radial lines, the spokes of
the hub, as it were, which now connect Boston with the
outlying centers of population.
Would you believe it, gentlemen, that report has been
nullified, or at least set aside temporarily, not because of
political opposition but through the hostility of the sub-
urban places like Newton, which claim to have all of the
intelligence and most of the virtue which abide in this
neighborhood. Whether they feared that it might lead
to closer political union with Boston or not, I cannot say,
but I submit that their attitude shows very little enlighten-
ment and suggest that the environs of Boston afford an
excellent missionary field for the labors of your association.
The plan outlined by the commission, of which these gentle-
men were the members, was too broad and far-sighted for the
grasp of men accustomed to deal only with problems that
are purely local in their character and affect small popula-
tions. That is the difficulty which you will have to meet
in endeavoring to bring about a more enlightened form
of city planning. You must first get out the blackboard
and give a few primary lessons, and in this way inculcate
the metropolitan spirit as against the parochial attitude
which now prevails.
[2]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Long ago President Eliot pointed out that as far as
policing and fire protection were concerned the whole of
Greater Boston was essentially a single city. Recently
we have had another illustration showing how our hands
and feet are tied with red tape when we attempt to move
forward toward the dawn of a better day. Boston, as
you are all aware, is very largely built of wood, and a
wooden city is not only exposed to a high percentage of
fire loss and under the necessity of maintaining an expen-
sive fire department, but is, in the very nature of things,
a more or less shabby city. Its houses need repainting,
reshingling, repairing and constant repatching. The
apparent, I will not say the real, cheapness of wood
presents a temptation to the speculator to erect three-
apartment houses, built not to live in but to sell, and one
of the curses of this city is the mushroom growth of this
type of house, colloquially known in this vicinity as "three-
flatters." We have had an ordinance in the city council
for a year or more which aims to widen the zone of pre-
scribed brick or fireproof construction, but the real estate
men tell us that as long as the cities and towns just over
the border permit wooden construction it will go on. The
three-flatters will merely shift their position and gather
beyond the city line. Now the danger is just as great
under these circumstances because Boston and its suburbs
are practically continuous. Only a few years ago a great
fire in Chelsea — then a city of wooden dwellings —
leaped over the intervening creek and threatened the whole
of East Boston. The remedy for this condition is united
action by all the metropolitan cities, and yet when such
action is suggested we find not zeal and harmony for the
common cause but the old condition described by the Latin
author: "As many minds as men."
In sounding this note of admonition I have no desire to
discourage you or to express any discouragement on my
own part. Looking at the situation broadly, we have had
great success in recent years in simplifying the tortuous
[3]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
plan of our ancient city. One by one we haye inserted
necessary links in our complicated street system. The
whole Park Square area, which you must have seen lying
like a desert in the heart of our most flourishing section,
is soon to be developed by a street system of its own,
which represents the joint action of the city government
and the owners of the land. New studies for the rearrange-
ment of Copley Square will be exhibited in the art room of
the Public Library, which is your headquarters. Avery
Street will soon be widened and open up the shopping
district, providing access from the Boylston Street station
of the subway. Our new subways themselves, which are
merely underground streets, are an interesting study and
I hope you will find time to take the ride under Beacon
Hill and over the new causeway in the West End. In such
achievements as these we find inspiration and reason for
hope that another half-decade will see our beloved city
completely transformed. For the impetus to this move-
ment I believe you gentlemen deserve particular credit. You
have in you something of the engineer and something of the
philanthropist, the cool precision of the one and the ardor
of the other, and I do not know any happier combination.
As Mayor of the city I am proud and honored to have
such distinguished company sitting at this table as our
official guests, and know that whether we frankly lay our
difficulties before you or modestly point to what we regard
as our successful achievements, in each case our words will
fall upon sympathetic ears.
REMARKS BY OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVES FROM
SEVERAL CITIES
Following Mayor Fitzgerald's welcome there were brief
remarks by official representatives from several cities. Mt.
Vernon, N. Y., was represented by Mayor E. W. Fiske;
Hartford by the City Engineer, Roscoe N. Clark; Detroit
[4]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
by the Chairman of the City Planning Commission, Charles
Moore; New Haven by its Consulting Engineer, Frederick
L. Ford; Los Angeles by a member of the City Planning
Commission, Dr. Dana W. Bartlett; Cleveland by the
Secretary of the Chamber of Commerce, Munson Havens;
Pittsburgh by a member of its City Planning Commission,
E. K. Morse. City Planning Accomplishment was the
special theme of Dr. Bartlett, Mr. Havens and Mr. Ford.
DR. DANA W. BARTLETT:
Ours is a growing city, and every city that is growing
needs a definite plan. We, have been working on this matter
for several years, thanks to Charles Mulford Robinson. His
report started us in this direction. We have had so many
big things in hand that we have not been able to finance
them all, but we have been gradually working out some
great propositions.
You all know what it must mean to a city to bring water,
as we are doing, two hundred and seventeen miles from the
Sierras, with two hundred and twenty-seven thousand
horsepower of electricity, besides securing a great harbor,
where the municipality owns the docks and tide lands,
and we are now preparing for a great municipal railway,
and generally laying the foundations for a great industrial
city on the Pacific Coast. We feel that we must work not
for a commercial city, an industrial city, primarily, but
for an out-of-doors city, typical of the life of the Southwest.
We are in the making, and so it means something more
to make plans for Los Angeles than for an Eastern city.
Our present city is but a dot on the map beside the great
city that is coming, and our slogan is, " Los Angeles in
1920, a city of a million people and without a slum."
It is going to be possible to work that out. We are start-
ing with a city that is naturally beautiful. Of course,
we cannot live without commerce, but we want to make
a delightful city to live in, and that is our one great
thought in working it out.
[5]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
MR. MUNSON HAVENS:
It is an exceedingly great pleasure to be here today
instead of a week ago today, because a week ago today
I could not have told you what I can now tell you, that
Cleveland on Tuesday voted the last bond issue to
erect the last of the four pivotal buildings of our group
plan. This assures the successful consummation in the very
near future of that dream we have been dreaming, as the
Mayor has said, for ten years. We are working along
lines designed by Arnold Brunner of New York, to whose
inspiration we owe so much. With this bond issue we
shall complete the public library building, the fourth build-
ing of the group.
Several cities in Ohio besides Cleveland are doing work
along city planning lines, and the interest of Toledo,
Akron and Dayton is evidenced by their representation
at this meeting.
I want to bring to the other cities here one message,
because it is a message that comes home to our own hearts
in Cleveland. One of the great dangers that cities must
avoid in connection with this movement is that of thinking,
dreaming, talking and not doing. And if you will permit me,
and it will not be regarded as an intrusion, I wish to quote
just a few lines from the foremost living English poet which
seem to me to hit the nail precisely on the head.
Jubal sang of the wrath of God,
And the curse of thistle and thorn —
But Tubal got him a pointed rod,
And scrabbled the earth for corn. *
Jubal sang of the new-found sea,
And the souls its waves divide —
But Tubal hollowed a fallen tree
And passed to the farther side.
Jubal sang of the golden years
When wars and wounds shall cease —
But Tubal fashioned the hand-flung spears
And showed his neighbors peace.
Jubal sang of the cliffs that bar
And the peaks that none may crown —
But Tubal clambered by jut and scar
And there he builded a town.
[6]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
MR. F. L. FORD:
New Haven is interested in this important subject of
city planning. Only a short time ago a most creditable
report was published by the Civic Improvement Com-
mission of that city, dealing with the future growth and
development of that, the largest city in Connecticut, along
intelligent, comprehensive and far-sighted lines. This re-
port was based upon a thorough, detailed and exhaustive
study by our honored president, Mr. Frederick Law
Olmsted, and Mr. Cass Gilbert, and represents a high
ideal toward which the future New Haven can work.
At the present time New Haven is starting upon the
expenditure of six million dollars for the construction of
a magnificent railway terminal. You who are acquainted
with and interested in New Haven know that a terminal
station and re-arrangement of railway tracks and other
facilities in that vicinity have been pressing needs. Know-
ing that the approaches to a city give the first impression
to a visitor, and believing that that impression is usually
the most lasting one that a person gets in connection with
any of our American cities, we have been convinced that
New Haven should lay out and develop a thoroughly
dignified approach from the station to the heart of the
city, and we are now at work upon such an approach. We
are going to try to have that approach — which will be
about 2500 feet long and which will go through a built-up
section of the city — commodious, convenient and attractive,
with suitably wide sidewalks and roadway, so that the great
crowds which come to New Haven for the games and on
other occasions may proceed from the station with the
least amount of resistance and trouble. In order to be
convenient, the approach must connect as directly as
possible with the heart of the great city and must be
so connected with the secondary streets that the crowds
that attend the great athletic contests may be easily
handled. We intend to make that approach serviceable
by paving it well and keeping it clean, and in order to
[7]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
make it additionally attractive we shall probably attempt
to control not only the height but the architecture of the
buildings that will occupy conspicuous locations along it.
New Haven is intending to apply to the next Legislature
of Connecticut for an act similar to the one creating a
permanent city planning commission for the city of
Hartford. That commission will have permanent and very
broad authority, will be able to condemn outside of the
lines of main approach, and it is proposed to have a pro-
vision so that such restrictions may be imposed as the
commission wishes in connection with the sale of surplus
land. A commission is desired that shall work along such
lines over a great many years. This is the first practical
step in city planning that New Haven has attempted since
the excellent report to which I have referred was pre-
pared and published. The railroad improvements and
those to be carried out by the city will cost in the neighbor-
hood of six million dollars. We believe, and I think you
believe, that the best way to go about city building is to
apply to any and every problem as it arises in our
American cities the fundamental, underlying principles of
city planning, guarding against the gross mistakes we
have made in laying out the older sections and applying
these new principles to the new sections. We do not hope to
reconstruct all the older sections of the city, but it will
be a great shame if we go on and repeat the blunders
made for many years.
[8]
THE PROGRESS IN CITY PLANNING
MR. FREDERICK L. OLMSTED
Fellow American Society of Landscape Architects
I HAVE been asked by the Executive Committee to open
this Conference by a general discussion of recent progress
in city planning.
I want to make clear, at the outset of my paper, that I
shall not attempt a detailed and comprehensive catalogue
even of the more notable recent steps in the progress of
city planning. The slender and ill-defined organization of
Executive Committee, Chairman and Secretary, by which
the life of these Conferences is carried over from year to
year, exists only for the purpose of arranging these annual
markets for the exchange of ideas, and has been quite with-
out any means for systematically collecting or disseminat-
ing information during the intervals between them. The
facts, therefore, upon which my discussion rests are, frankly,
very fragmentary, in view of the vastness of the field. We
are not here to serve up and assimilate the predigested
material resulting from a year of work by a limited staff
of special investigators or experts: we are here on the
common footing of perplexed but earnest students of an
intricate group of problems, for the exchange of information
and ideas. My duty is merely to put the ball in play.
Of the many kinds of activities that may properly be
considered under the head of city planning, by far the
most important group, because of the number of cities
concerned, the volume of work done as measured by expend-
iture for salaries and so forth, and the immediate practical
effect of the work upon the physical aspect of the cities,
[9]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
is that of the regular and often long-established bureaus
or departments in which are made the plans that actually
determine, for better or for worse, what form shall be taken
by the various sorts of development coming under the
control of the executive departments of the cities. Even
though the action of the several parts of a given municipal
government may seem disconnected, short-sighted and un-
cooperative in making the decisions which in the aggregate
fix the city's plan, the decisions are not made by the toss
of a coin, they are really the result of planning after some
fashion; and it is only a question of degree how far
the planning looks ahead, how far its several parts are
correlated, how skillful and intelligent it is, what it
leaves to chance and the discretion of individuals in the
future.
No sane person dreams of a city plan that shall fix every-
thing in advance, even tentatively. For my own part I feel
perfectly clear that in some respects the methods of street
planning now frequently in vogue give too little latitude
of choice to the individual investor who has his own ideas
as to the most desirable size and shape of lots and of
buildings for his purposes. What I suppose this Conference
stands for is merely this: that it would pay to exercise a
stronger and more far-sighted control over some of the
features of a city's physical growth than is now usual,
that the plans for different classes of features could
profitably be coordinated to a greater degree than is now
usual, and that we are all in great need of light both as to
principles and as to details of practice which will help to
make the planning that is done more effective.
It is a distinction of degree or of method or of scope
or of point of view, not at all a distinction of kind, which
separates the work of a City Plan Commission from the
work done by a park department in laying out parks, or
by a school department in choosing sites for new schools,
or by a street department in determining upon new streets
and widenings, or by a traction company or a public service
[10]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
commission in passing upon plans for improvements in
a street railway system.
I say, therefore, that by far the greater bulk of all the
city planning that is being done today, especially of that
particularly important class of city planning which stands
some reasonable chance of being carried into execution, is
being done by regular and generally long-established plan-
ning agencies which form a part of the executive depart-
ments of the cities or are closely attached to those depart-
ments. Each planning agency is in general working on a
fairly narrow part of the whole field and troubles itself
very little about the aims of the other planning agencies;
many of them are working in a short-sighted way, but each
is pegging away at its own job and making or adopting
plans that do get carried out. It would therefore be par-
ticularly interesting and illuminating if we could have a
reliable and comprehensive critical review of the work of
city planning that is done in this manner; if we could
trace in it the evidence of progress and note the chief
opportunities for further advance. Unfortunately I am
far from having at my command the data for such a critical
review. With perhaps a dozen cities I have had to do
sufficiently to form some distinct personal impression of
the local situation, even though based on fragmentary
observations. Our Secretary, Mr. Shurtleff, in the course
of some studies he has been making of the methods of
acquiring land for municipal purposes, has visited other
cities and has confided his observations to me. Concerning
some few others I have formed an impression from reports
of one or more departments; although, as you all know,
the reports of municipal departments seldom afford very
safe or complete evidence of just how their work is done.
With the warning that you must take my general impres-
sions thus formed for no more than they are worth, I will
put them before you.
Adopting the customary divisions in the work, and leaving
aside for the present all question of the correlation of
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
those divisions, the most fundamental is street .planning.
In nearly all municipalities there is at least a nominal
official control over the development of the street plan.
There is a bureau or official who is supposed to exercise
technical skill and foresight in planning streets and whose
approval of a plan is a regular preliminary to the accept-
ance or laying out of any street. In theory the authority
of this street plan bureau, as I will call it, varies consid-
erably, but in practice its influence varies enormously more.
In a great many cases it is hardly too much to say that it
acts merely as a draughtsman, surveyor and clerk for those
who want to put land upon the market. " Subdivisions,"
planned independently of each other and by or for their
respective owners, are submitted for approval, and are
accepted without much question unless they transgress
a few accepted and more or less arbitrary canons of
the office, the most usual relating to a minimum width of
street and to the avoidance of dead-end streets. Each
plat submitted comes up as a brand-new problem.
There is often a more or less conscientious effort to con-
sider the plat upon its merits in relation to any general
public requirements which the officials in charge for the
time being happen to think of upon the spur of the moment,
or may happen by chance to have had upon their minds
before. But there is no general scheme of main thorough-
fares planned in advance in the general interest of the
city, with which to compare the local subdivision plats
and on the basis of which to ask for modifications in them.
This method is really a censorship upon private street plans,
not a means of creative planning; but it is generally
associated with an irregular succession of spasms of creative
planning which design specific street improvements in the
public interest, and endeavor to push them through to
execution while the spasm is still active. The initiative for
these creative spasms seems generally to come from outside
of the official bureau, although the latter sometimes leads
and is often sympathetic and cooperative when a project
[12]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
is actively pushed by a mayor or councilman or by active
outsiders. In some places the creative spasms are frequent
enough to give a semblance of continuity and comprehensive-
ness to the planning and to achieve some notable results,
but in principle the machinery is like an explosion engine
without a flywheel. It takes very frequent impulses to keep
things moving, and there is apt to be enormous waste
through repeatedly starting and stopping without accom-
plishing much work.
With the addition of certain other kinds of city planning
effort, the above may be regarded as generally typical of
the street planning of the Boston Metropolitan District,
and I think it is typical of the great majority of cities
throughout the country. A decided step in advance, so far
as concerns the mechanism of street planning, is exhibited
by those cities in which the official bureaus prepare complete
street plans for large districts on their own initiative in
advance of the proposals of land owners, and generally im-
pose their plans, with or without modification, upon the land
owners. Of course there is no sharp line dividing cities
which do this from cities whose street-planning bureaus
follow in the wake of private initiative. In Boston, for
example, although it has been rather by fits and starts,
a good many subdivisions have been platted entirely on
the initiative of the public authorities and in advance of
any proposals from the land owners. The difference be-
tween the first class of street plan bureaus and the second
class is largely a matter of appropriations, for the best
will in the world cannot keep the extension of a city's
street plan much ahead of the actual growth without
adequate funds for the work; but there is usually also a
difference in point of view. A great many people are really
averse to the idea of the city's taking a strong initiative
in the matter. This aversion has some basis in certain
objectionable results that are to be seen in much of the
street planning that has been done by the more active,
aggressive and forehanded bureaus. In the past the whole-
[13]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE'
sale street planning of such bureaus has often been done
in a rather perfunctory manner and with more regard to
the point of view of land surveyors, and of mere brokers
in real estate technically ignorant of the practical details
of development, than to the point of view of broad-gauge
engineers with a sense of responsibility for the total net
results and costs in execution. It has tended to a mechanical
uniformity of treatment. It has shown almost as much
timidity as the work of the stand-pat bureaus in the pro-
vision of adequate main thoroughfares, which ought to be
boldly designed as traffic routes for the benefit of the whole
city with little regard to the details of land subdivision;
and on the other hand it has failed to recognize that great
and important economies are possible by differentiating
from the thoroughfares those streets which are needed only
for local purposes and treating them as such.
The cure for the evils of injudicious and perfunctory
official street planning is in better planning, not in a return
to laissez faire methods or to the method of a halting
censorship of fragmentary plans made on private initiative.
And it is an extremely healthy sign that the stronger and
more aggressive street-planning bureaus are improving their
methods, and adapting their means to the varied ends before
them more skillfully and intelligently. I am inclined to
think that progress is upon the whole more marked in this
respect than in the advancement of old, timid, conservative
bureaus into the aggressive class.
Another gratifying sign of progress is the tendency, upon
the part of some at least of the strong and aggressive
bureaus, to give a greater and more intelligent recognition
to esthetic considerations in the development of street plans,
both in the endeavor to avoid the needless destruction of
agreeable natural features which might be put to use in
the streets themselves or in parks or on the lots of suburban
districts, and also by recognizing that the appearance of
the street scenes and vistas of the future city is worth
considering and is largely dependent upon the street plan
[14]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and the location of summits and valleys thereon. I cannot
say that this tendency to regard esthetic considerations
on the part of the regular street-planning bureaus is wide-
spread, nor has it brought out much latent artistic talent,
nor has it gone so far in most cases as to seek eagerly for
the cooperation of architects and landscape architects.
But so far as it has gone it is a distinct sign of progress.
Parks come next to streets in the percentage of city area
they occupy, and, like the streets, they need to be constantly
extended and reduplicated to keep pace with growing popu-
lation. For the most part parks are acquired as the result
of particular spasms like those which often carry through
specific thoroughfare improvements, each on its own merit
without much regard to a general plan. Looking back over
a long period, there is perhaps a little more tendency today,
especially in the case of newly created park commissions,
to regard the parks of a city as an organized system, and
to consider with the aid of experts what will be required to
make the system perform its function adequately for the
whole of the city as the latter grows. But such compre-
hensive studies are the exception and are usually made
on the initiative of a new commission not yet burdened with
troubles of detail or else at the instance of some outside
agency. The inducement to make such comprehensive plans
for park development is even less than in the case of streets ;
because private capital seeking speculative return from
land stands ready if it must to pay for most of the streets
required in a proper street plan, whereas practically the
whole cost of parks must usually be extracted from the
reluctant general tax-payer by a constantly changing city
council, or raised in some analogous way, and the supply
of funds from such a source for anything but the absolutely
unavoidable annual expenditures is so utterly undependable
from one year to another as to discourage all idea of system
and continuity in the plans for park acquirement and
improvement, and to force a policy of hand to mouth
opportunism.
[15]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
It is this same disheartening difficulty, even more than
any lack of understanding or of technical skill on the part
of the street bureaus which makes their planning as weak
as it is in the matter of main thoroughfares. They say,
"What 's the use? It will never be done."
What is true about parks and main thoroughfare im-
provements is true in perhaps greater degree about public
buildings and the sites for them. The planning for these,
in the sense of city planning, is almost perforce spasmodic.
It is probably least so in the case of schoolhouses, which
in our larger cities are so numerous, so rapidly increasing
and so closely dependent on the distribution of popu-
lation that the spasm of providing for them tends to
become a continuous function and so to systematize them-
selves. The results are to be seen in the notable increase
of practical and artistic efficiency in the school buildings of
large cities of recent years, notably here in Boston for
example.
I will not stop to discuss other city-planning activities
going on continuously or spasmodically all the time in
the regular bureaus, but in regard to the correlation
of these activities I may cite the case of sewers and
drains.
In view of the direct effect of the plan and grades of
the streets upon the efficiency and economy of sewers and
storm water drains and the great cost of supplementing
the latter when they are planned inadequately in the first
place, I have been astonished to find how generally the
planning of sewers and drains lags even behind the planning
of streets in American cities and how little the relations
of the two are regarded in street planning.
In one city, which is distinctly among the leaders both
in devising its tentative plan of streets well in advance of
private developments and in its reasonable attitude of
modifying and accommodating those tentative plans, in their
non-essentials, to the wishes of land owners, and in which also
the planning and construction of sewers and storm drains
[16]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
has of recent years been handled in an unusually com-
prehensive and far-sighted way, the process of street and
sewer planning is something like this:
The street-planning bureau makes topographical surveys
and then prepares tentative street plans without fixing any
grades. The grades are studied sufficiently to see that it
is not impracticable to construct the streets without too
excessive cuts, fills or gradients, but the proposed grades are
not made a part of the plan and they may even not be
recorded. When the streets come into existence, usually
by dedication, the profiles are established by a different
bureau, having no connection with the first except that
their respective heads are both appointed by the mayor.
Then the streets are turned over to still another bureau
which has independent discretion as to the cross sections
of the street and the method of construction and which
disposes of the storm water in the easiest way it can under
the limitations imposed by its predecessors, discharging
the water into the most convenient natural water courses
or into storm drains if they happen to exist in the district.
The locations and grades of storm drains and sewers are
determined by still another independent bureau, generally
subsequent to the determination of the streets, but occa-
sionally as to main drains in advance. I do not mean to
imply that there is no cooperation between these several
bureaus. They do consult more or less, or the situation
would be intolerable; but they are in fact practically
independent and there is no strong force other than personal
good will to overcome the inevitable centrifugal tendency
of departmental jealousies.
It is needless to add that streets laid out by a man who
is not responsible for the profiles adopted, and running
upon grades determined by a man who had nothing to say
about the location, not only involve some serious and
needless difficulties and expense in the final development
of the sewerage and drainage system, but also fail to afford
locations for the extension of the traction system as
[17]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
good as might reasonably have been secured if that problem
also had been taken into account.
The Park Commission in this same city is fortunate in
having a dependable tax income not subject to erratic
variation by the City Council, a condition not uncommon
in the West, and has been pursuing an unusually systematic
course during the last few years in regard to planned
extensions of the park system, the plan having resulted
from a spasm initiated by a citizens' association through
employment of an outside expert to make a special report.
But again, any relation between the plans for park extension
and those for streets have been the result merely of personal
good sense and good will on the part of the men working
in or for the several bureaus and 'of the fact that some of
them have put themselves out of their way to bring about
a cooperation that is beyond the scope of their legal duties.
Since the normal attitude of the administrative official
is that of not looking for any trouble which is not plainly
part of his job, and equally of resenting the interference
of any one else who butts into his affairs without being
under official obligation to do so, it has long been apparent
that the progress of comprehensive city planning demands
the development of administrative machinery for facilitating
and enforcing cooperation between the various planning
bureaus as well as for stimulating some of them to more
far-sighted and better planning and for supplementing the
gaps where needful planning is not provided for by any
bureau.
Consider for an instant some of the conditions which you
saw today in the automobile trip : A splendid harbor with
a commercial waterfront now at last largely under the
control of a strong central authority, but absolutely
dependent upon the voluntary cooperation of the railroads
for its successful development. A park system which, in
spite of being laid out and administered by more than a
score of independent authorities, comes nearer being a
single, adequately connected system than any other in the
[18]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
country, but which is greatly impaired by the gaps in those
parts of the system which belong to the borderland between
parkways and highways, and which is utterly unsystematic
in respect to the distribution of local recreation grounds.
A number of first-rate radial thoroughfares, every one of
them the result of a separate spasm, and elsewhere thorough-
fares of even greater importance, like outer Washington
Street, allowed to remain absurdly narrow because by mere
chance no sufficiently strong spasm of improvement hap-
pened to come that way. Narrow picturesque local streets
charmingly adapted to suburban single family houses, set
back from the street; but permitted to be built up solidly
with tenement houses without a setback for the protection
of the street, without adequate open space for light and
ventilation on the lot, and with almost utter disregard of
fire risk through crowding of inflammable structures. The
evils of the old slums needlessly being reduplicated through-
out the suburbs, with rapid change and deterioration
of neighborhoods through the practically unlimited freedom
of choice of individuals in the use of their property regard-
less of the interests of their neighbors. I will not extend
the catalogue of evidences that we need here in the Boston
District a central, continuously acting, coordinating force
to make our city planning what it ought to be, and it is
a discouraging thing to contemplate the defeat of the Met-
ropolitan Plan Commission bill in the present legislature.
But elsewhere there are better signs of progress.
It is notable that within the last year or two a con-
siderable number of cities have established city plan com-
missions, either expressly permanent or created for an
indeterminate period. The conception of the duties of
such a commission and of its organization and methods
of work, as held by those who have created them and by the
commissions themselves, appears to be vague and various,
and they are not clearly distinguishable as yet from the
numerous temporary commissions which have preceded
them.
[19]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
The function of the temporary City Plan. Commission
has normally been to bring about the preparation and pub-
lication of a report with plans embodying a considerable
range of suggestions for the physical improvement of the
city : dealing always with improvements in the street system
both in respect to extension and alteration; generally with
improvements and extensions in the park system, and in
the public buildings, by grouping and otherwise ; not infre-
quently with improvements in the systems of street and
other railways, of waterways and wharves, and miscel-
laneous public facilities ; and to some extent with questions
of housing and the regulation of private building generally.
Each of these reports has been of value in two ways: first
and mainly, as an educational effort for the development
of a more intelligent understanding among the general
public and among city officials of the value and the need
both of far-sighted planning in all lines of city work and
of the intimate correlation of all such plans; second, as
direct contributions to the aggregation, more or less
thoroughly digested and correlated, of plans and projects
for physical changes in the city which are actually recog-
nized as probabilities or possibilities, the thought of which
does actually influence decisions, and which taken all
together form the real city plan such as it is. The interest-
ing and instructive essays in city planning produced by
these spasms of city planning, have varied from a brief and
sketchy brochure dashed off by some sympathetic and well-
trained observer after spending a day or two in perambu-
lating some small town, to such an elaborate and ambitious
work as those produced for the Commercial Club of Chicago
in 1909 and for the Municipal Plans Commission of Seattle
in 1911.
Without in the least questioning the value — the actual
necessity — of spasms of city planning such as are repre-
sented by these temporary commissions and these reports,
in several of which I have had a part, without belittling
the painstaking, thorough and constructive work which is
[20]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
often shown in the plans and reports, I feel that it marks
a great step in advance that a number of cities, and the
State of Pennsylvania and New Jersey by general law,
have recognized the city-planning function to be a continu-
ous permanent function and not a thing to be done in a
spasm once for all, or even once for a generation.
I feel this to be true, despite the regrettable fact that
I have not heard of a single one of these permanent plan
commissions that has yet begun to show notable results,
to show any such vigorous signs of life as the excellent
reports of many of the temporary commissions. To some
extent they may feel staggered by the bigness of their job
and hesitate where to begin, and for the most part they
are left hanging without funds or with very inadequate
funds. Moreover, some are still in the first throes of
organization.
Those which have begun to settle into a regular stride,
like the Hartford Commission, which is the oldest of the
lot, seem to be regularly performing as yet not a great deal
more than the functions of a street-planning bureau. In
many cases the main efforts of the Commission seem of
necessity directed for the present to further educational
work, to the building up of a sufficient public opinion to
back the Commission in the inevitably costly work of city
planning which shall be at once thorough and comprehen-
sive and unremitting. We have had thorough and far-
sighted planning of fragments of the city. We have had
some broad surveys of the field that have been of necessity
rather superficial and spasmodic. The drift is decidedly
toward the far more difficult task of combining these
qualities in a continuous operation, and it is yet too early
to speak of results except as they appear at close range
to those in the midst of them.
[21]
THE MEANING OF CITY PLANNING
MR. ARNOLD W. BRUNNER
Fellow American Institute of Architects, New York City.
THE desire for a better, more orderly, more livable city
is abroad in the land. There is much loose enthusiasm,
some curiosity, and a general desire to " do something."
Accordingly committees are formed, meetings are organ-
ized, resolutions are passed, and very often the matter
ends there. The most praiseworthy intentions are fruit-
less, without definite aim and purpose.
The movement for a city plan is generally started by a
few public-spirited citizens, a club or society, or a combina-
tion of societies. The local government seldom appoints
a city planning commission until the impetus has come
from private societies who have taken the initiative and
aroused interest in the subject.
At the very beginning the principles of city planning
should be explained by a competent authority, as the air
is full of misgivings, and in order to proceed intelligently
there are numerous misapprehensions that must be
corrected.
The public officials and all those exercising authority
over the city's expenditure have assumed serious responsi-
bilities by reason of their office, and it is due to them to
have the case presented in a sensible, serious, businesslike
manner.
The first impression which we must overcome is that the
city is to be turned over to a number of artists who intend
in some vague manner to make the city beautiful.
We know that city planning does not mean mere civic
[22]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
adornment or street decoration, and that it is a rational
treatment of a city to promote the convenience and health
of its citizens. Accordingly we should say so.
It is feared that a city plan will be ruinously expensive
and plunge the city into debt. We know that the contrary
is true and that it simply means the exercise of such pru-
dence and foresight as are necessary to secure the success
of any business enterprise. Accordingly we should say so.
It is generally feared that business will be interrupted
and commerce ruined. We know that the adoption of a
city plan is for the very purpose of encouraging commerce
and facilitating the transaction of business. Accordingly
we must say so.
It is generally supposed that a city plan must be put
in operation immediately and all its provisions executed
at once. We know that the plan is only a scheme for de-
velopment, a program of events to be followed one after
the other as the occasion permits. Accordingly let us
say so.
It is feared that old landmarks will be destroyed and the
city's expression and individuality will be entirely lost.
We know that good city planning is especially careful to
preserve local traditions, old buildings of historic value,
and everything that accentuates the individuality of a
city. Accordingly why not say so ?
It is feared that we shall have a series of weak repro-
ductions of London, Vienna, and Paris. We know that
our cities should be American — American at its best.
Accordingly let us say so.
These facts and many others must be stated in good,
plain terms. The public officials entrusted with the care
of a city, mindful of their responsibilities, must be con-
vinced that city planning, the movement that so much
interests us, is a sensible, serious proposition. Once assure
them of the underlying principles of this great movement
and we can secure their hearty support. The beauty that
results from the adoption of a good city plan will be wel-
[23]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
corned by them as it will by all citizens, but the beauty that
it is our motive to secure is, like the beauty of all architec-
ture, founded upon a clear, sensible solution of practical
problems.
City planning is not a fad today, it is a necessity; it
is not an extravagance, it is an economy; it is not an ar-
tist's dream, it is a scientific reality.
Our success depends largely upon how we state our case.
The " City Beautiful " failed — failed because it began at
the wrong end. We must state the case in the same se-
quence that we observe when we make our designs — the
plan first, the elevation follows.
Since utility and beauty go hand in hand, let us insist
upon utility. Since we have in mind a combination of sci-
ence and art, let us emphasize science.
There is no doubt that the unregulated growth of a city
is most wasteful and that improvidence and lack of fore-
sight are our pet forms of extravagance. An explanation
of this appeals strongly to the public, who will also be
interested to know how property values are increased by
good planning, and, generally, that civic art is a real
asset, not an imaginary one. We are all familiar with these
arguments, and we know that their soundness has been
demonstrated again and again, but to the general public
this is a new subject, and we must take nothing for granted.
When we quote European examples, let us present both
aspects of the case. Take the Place de la Concorde, for
instance; it is our duty to explain that it is wonderfully
planned, that the provisions for traffic are perfect, and
that it is logically designed for its purpose, and then our
raptures about its beauty will meet with hearty approval.
When we point out the beauty of that splendid boule-
vard on the banks of the Danube in Budapest, one of the
most attractive in Europe, let us not forget to mention
the admirable provision made for shipping and its attend-
ant necessities, which makes this work an almost ideal
combination of the useful and the beautiful.
[24]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Of course we must design beautiful cities, and we must
dream great dreams of the future, otherwise there is no
reason or excuse for our profession. A constructive im-
agination, a fine sense of form, color, and composition are
absolutely necessary, besides a knowledge of the compli-
cated practical problems that present themselves. Ac-
cordingly I believe that the preparation of a city plan
should be the work of several men or of a commission.
While we do not design new cities today, it is more diffi-
cult to rearrange and develop existing ones, and the skill
of the architect, the landscapist, the traffic expert, various
kinds of engineers, and others who are specializing on civic
problems, are all necessary. These experts, working to-
gether, having the advantage of consultations and debates,
can produce a design combining the best of science and
art, which no single individual could hope to equal.
I have found, to my surprise, that many cities are en-
tirely neglectful of their historic possessions and that in-
teresting landmarks are ruthlessly destroyed. A profes-
sional adviser, who is not a resident, can do much to pre-
serve the individuality of a city, and his advice often checks
the destruction of fine old colonial buildings, for instance,
and other priceless possessions that could not be replaced.
Lectures, illustrated by lantern slides, are of course the
most effective method of bringing the principles and scope
of city improvements to the attention of the public, and
they are especially useful before any designs are presented
or changes proposed. A real campaign of education is
necessary, and it cannot be begun too soon nor can it be
too vigorously prosecuted.
The first visible sign of a genuine demand for the re-
arrangement and improvement of a city is a report. It is
generally illustrated, and this is most advisable. Only a
few people read reports, everybody looks at the pictures.
While much care is bestowed on the illustrations, there is
some divergence of opinion as to what kind will best fulfill
their purpose.
[25]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
It must be remembered that the object of the report is
not only to record the opinions of the experts, or the com-
mission, but also to arouse public interest; accordingly
every suggestion of importance should be presented so that
it can be easily understood.
We may indulge in plans, elevations, and sections, ren-
dered in our best style, but it is well to supplement them by
sketches that will appeal to the layman.
Photographs of existing conditions placed at the side of
drawings of proposed changes are very convincing, and
show the contrast of what is and what may be in the sim-
plest way.
Maps and plans are inevitable, but if we take the trouble
they too can be drawn so as to clearly interpret their
meaning. An excellent method of presenting a new plan,
or portion of a plan, is to have it printed on strong, thin
tissue paper and place it over the old plan, so that a com-
parison between the two may be easily made and the differ-
ence noted at a glance.
The effect of this method may be seen by referring to
that delightful book " Paris a travers les Ages," in which
the transformation of the various quarters of Paris are
shown in this manner.
It has been a common practice to include reproductions
of civic centers, and similar work projected by other cities,
all of which is most encouraging, together with photo-
graphs of European cities showing their success in city
planning.
While the Place Vendome and the Avenue des Champs
Elysees have been slightly overworked of late years, the
masterpieces of the Old World are always an inspiration
to us. It is, however, only fair to point out that the con-
ditions under which these great works were produced do
not obtain in the United States. We can and must study
the works of the great masters, always realizing that their
methods are not our methods and cannot be so under our
form of government.
[26]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
A broad far-reaching plan for the city, providing for its
future growth in all its activities, is desirable, and in fact
necessary, but as there are nearly always conditions that
require immediate relief and which must be treated first
without undue loss of time, it is often well to prepare a
study or preliminary report which, bearing in mind the
ultimate, larger design, will specialize on problems of press-
ing importance.
Good designs demand adequate presentation, and our
drawings should be interesting and convincing, but at the
risk of being disagreeable I must say that many of the
drawings that we now make to accompany city reports
have far overshot the mark.
What would we say of the architect who made drawings
for a building, or group of buildings, however beautiful,
but which could not be built? We deal, not in drawings,
not in pictures, but in results. The drawings are the tools
of our trade. We would say very harsh things indeed of the
man who made designs that could not be realized, who
planned buildings that he knew could not be erected; but
the scope of city planning has grown so great, its oppor-
tunities are now so large, that we have been led astray by
the immensity of the subject, and with our new vast hori-
zon we have made huge pictures, wonderful pieces of scene
painting, in which facts have been ignored, grades forgot-
ten, whole railroad systems eliminated, and the city's
activities ignored. I have seen a larger part of a prosper-
ous commercial district wiped out and replaced by a series
of Italian gardens — on paper — impossible civic centers,
boulevards leading nowhere, and similar absurdities. De-
signs have been made, submitted, and published, that not
only could not be executed but which should not be executed.
To me this is most reprehensible. The city, as our client,
deserves the same fair treatment as an individual. We
may deceive ourselves, but the deception is certainly dis-
covered sooner or later, and the whole cause of city plan-
ning set back for years.
[27]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
City planning is not for amateurs, it requires the trained,
experienced practitioner, and if we are perfectly honest
with our work we shall receive the support and enthusiasm
of the public.
The scope of city planning is much wider than is gener-
ally supposed. The Town Planning Conference, held in
London in 1910, which was so successful, covered an enor-
mous field, and papers were read and serious discussions
followed on nearly every branch of the question.
The planning of Hellenistic Cities, Rome, the Roman
world, the Cities of the Renaissance, French and English
Gothic towns in the South of France, were described.
Papers were read detailing the progress made in Ger-
many, France, England, Italy, and Sweden, and special
articles were devoted to what is being done in London,
Paris, Glasgow, Brussels, Khartoum, and the Federal Capi-
tal of Australia.
The Development of Cities, Considerations of the Hous-
ing Question, Extension of Suburbs and Garden Cities,
formed an important part of the Conference.
The City of the Future was considered from the Ameri-
can, English, and French point of view. No less an author-
ity than Monsieur Henard contributed an essay on " Les
Villes de 1'Avenir."
The Preservation of Ancient Features, the Transi-
tion Period of Urban Development, and the Evolution of
Cities, Parks, and Public Gardens, Open Spaces and
Running Waters, Recreation Grounds, Congested Areas,
the Restraint of Advertising, are among the titles of
addresses.
The Growth of Control over Town Development, Land
Tenure, the Town Planning Act, and other legislation were
discussed, and there were many others, general in their
character, on City Improvements, The Architect and
Civic Ornamentation, Cause and Effect of the Modern
City, etc.
This incomplete summary of the work of the Convention
[28]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
conveys a faint idea of the immense field covered by the
words " city planning."
It is difficult to imagine an individual to whom some of
these subjects do not intimately appeal, and he must be
a dull citizen indeed who is not vitally concerned in the
development, beauty, and honor of his city.
[29]
THE ATTITUDE OF THE ENGINEER TOWARD
CITY PLANNING
MR. GEORGE F. SWAIN
Professor of Civil Engineering, Harvard University; Member of the Boston
Transit Commission
I HAVE been asked to say a few words to you regarding
the attitude of the engineer toward city planning. I will
occupy but little of your time to say what occurs to me
upon this topic.
City planning seems to me to be a field in which, more
than in most fields of human activity, the different pro-
fessions should meet and cooperate, because of the multi-
plicity of objects to be attained, and the varying aspects
of the general problem. Dealing, as its name implies,
with the general problem of the laying out and planning
of cities in such manner as to best conduce to the comfort,
happiness and well-being of the population, its aspects
are manifold. It deals with questions of construction,
questions of health, questions of beauty, questions of social
and moral welfare. It treats of the causes and prevention
of congestion of population, and in its broadest sense, as
Mr. Olmsted well said at the opening of the last conference,
of congestion of all kinds — of people in buildings, of
buildings or land, of transportation facilities, of recreation
facilities, of means of supplying light, air, water or any-
thing else. It deals, indeed, with all problems involved
in making our cities — in their physical arrangement and
equipment — healthier, pleasanter and more desirable to
live in, to come to and to move about in. It involves
legal problems of no small difficulty, especially in this
country, with our diverse national, state and municipal
[30]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
authority, relating to methods of taxation, of condemning
land for public improvements, the framing of building laws
and the regulation of public utilities. Upon this common
ground, then, the engineer, the architect, the landscape
architect, the sanitarian, the lawyer and the sociologist meet
to aid each other in solving the questions which have reached
their present great importance mainly because of the most
remarkable sociological phenomena of the past century,
namely, the increasing tendency of our population to crowd
together in cities. It is probably not generally realized
that while in 1790 only 3.3 per cent of the population of
this country lived in cities of 8000 population or over,
today the percentage is over 33. No wonder, then, that
within recent years the problem of the city plan has more
and more forced itself upon the public attention, until
it has culminated in this active and energetic association,
whose deliberations have done so much to render definite
the problems with which we are face to face.
Of the various problems involved, those of an engineering
character are by no means the least important, and may
well be the most important, as well as the most difficult
of solution. They include the great problem of urban
transportation, by lines on the surface, overhead and
underground, the relation of terminals of steam roads and
of wharves and docks to the city plan, with questions of
the proper width and arrangement of streets, the proper
form of pavement, and the proper disposition of water,
gas and sewer pipes, as well as of electric conduits for
power, light and other purposes.
And yet, notwithstanding the prominence of engineering
problems among those which you have to solve, the engineer
has not as yet become sufficiently identified with this move-
ment or with this organization. Whether this is due to
any lack of initiative on his part, or to a lack of apprecia-
tion of the importance of the engineering point of view
on the part of those who have so efficiently promoted the
movement, I will not attempt to say. That it may be in
[31]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
some measure due to the latter, however, would seem to be
indicated by- the fact that the organizing committee
formed at the first meeting, in 1909, was specified to consist
of representatives of the Committee on Congestion of Popu-
lation in New York, the American Institute of Architects,
the League of American Municipalities, the American
Society of Landscape Architects, the American Civic Asso-
ciation, the National Conference of Charities and Correc-
tions, with no official recognition of such organizations as
the American Society of Civil Engineers, the American
Public Health Association, or, indeed, of any engineering
organization whatever. The problem seems to have been
considered, in its inception, primarily as an architectural
and sociological one. I venture to predict, however, that
as its problems become more and more concretely defined,
it will be found to be fundamentally more and more an
engineering problem.
However, all things must have a beginning, and I, for
one, am disposed to award all praise to those who originated
the movement, to whatever profession they may belong,
and I am sure that engineers will not be lacking in enthusi-
astic cooperation in the future. Indeed, as I have perused
the volumes containing the records of the previous meetings,
I have noted with satisfaction the presence of papers by
engineers of eminence and of experience in the particular
civic problems with which we are most intimately concerned.
I wish to emphasize the fact, however — though it is
probably so well recognized that it does not even need
mention — that no civic plans of any magnitude will at
the present time be adequate without the cooperation of
a transportation engineer of experience in the working
out of the traction problems. That this is the case is
evidenced by the recent elaborate study for the city of
Seattle, a work carried out under the supervision of an
eminent transportation engineer, under the direction of the
equally eminent city engineer, and also by the recent studies
for Pittsburgh, Hartford and other cities.
[32]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
It is perhaps worthy of note that the urgency of the
transportation problem in cities has been precipitated by
three inventions or developments in applied science, for
which the engineer is responsible, namely, the steel frame
building, the elevator and the telephone. Without the
first two, the modern high building — almost a small city
in itself — would be impossible, and the consequent street
congestion would not be so acute. The influence of the
telephone is not so well recognized. Some years ago, an
official of the American Telephone Company told me that
his engineers had made a study of the relation of the tele-
phone to one of the New York sky-scrapers, which resulted
in the surprising conclusion that if all the telephone
messages sent from and delivered to this building had to
be carried by messenger, the entire building would be
required for the elevators. The telephone, then, has made
practicable the high building.
Of the various engineering problems involved in city plan-
ning, the most important is unquestionably that of transpor-
tation. Here, again, the solution is made possible by the
development of the electric car, without which modern
urban transportation, whether on the surface or above or
below, would be impracticable. In the study of this problem,
the point which strikes me most forcibly is the fact that,
as in everything else, the only thing that is permanent is
change. Our cities cannot be planned as a new problem,
to be solved once and for all. They are always in the
making. The character of a district, and its transporta-
tion needs, very radically change in a comparatively few
years. Means now sufficient may in a few years become
inadequate or, possibly, more than adequate. It is always
a condition and not a theory that confronts us, and fore-
sight, founded on experience, must be exercised in a
remarkable degree. Only fifteen years ago the first subway
in this country — that known as the Tremont Street Sub-
way in this city — was opened for traffic. Since that time
three new subways have been opened in Boston; three new
[83]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
ones or extensions of old ones are under construction;
and the original one will have to be materially modified
in some of its parts. With the rapid substitution of high
buildings for the old low ones, it seems scarcely possible
to keep pace with the demands for more rapid transit.
Each new line is congested almost as soon as it is put into
use, and engineering ability of a high order, combined with
long experience, is requisite in order to plan intelligently
and adequately for the future. As a result, the scene of
congestion is becoming in many cases shifted from our
lines of track to our street surfaces, which are proving
inadequate for the foot passengers and teams which must
use them. Some restriction of the height of buildings, or
some regulations similar to the foreign zone system, by
which certain sections of the city are set aside for certain
uses, seem to be increasingly necessary; and, in addition to
subways and elevated structures for carrying trains of cars,
similar structures will soon become necessary for the ordinary
team and foot traffic, or else street widenings, always
difficult and very costly to carry out, will be imperative.
Those of you who are familiar with Boston, which was
planned, it is said, not by engineers or landscape architects,
but by the cows, will no doubt be painfully impressed with
the woful inadequacy of many of our streets. On a busy
day you will find it sometimes difficult to distinguish the
sidewalk from the roadway, for there are almost as many
foot passengers on one as on the other. You may, therefore,
be interested in the most recent development in the subway
plans for Boston, which, though a small thing in itself,
is perhaps unique.
DISCUSSION
The Work of a Planning Commission
THE CHAIRMAN, MR. OLMSTED:
The subjects are now open for discussion. I think that
experiences, suggestions and questions in regard to the work
[34]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
of city planning commissions will be most profitably
discussed.
If no one else has experiences to offer at this time I
shall have to give some of my own. I had the tables
turned on me rather recently by being appointed on a
committee by the town of Brookline, not quite a city plan-
ning commission but an ordinary board of municipal im-
provements. It is a permanent committee, serving like
most town committees without pay, the duty of which is
to consider, pass upon and advise the selectmen concerning
municipal improvements which are proposed from time to
time. The committee, not being burdened with the routine
administrative duties which the selectmen have pressing
upon them all the time, is supposed to have the leisure to
look ahead and take the large view, to hunt for trouble,
which the selectmen, like the city councils in most cities,
have not time to do.
We have not done very much beside reporting on specific
improvements that were referred to us by the selectmen,
but we have asked the town engineer to prepare a topo-
graphical map of the town in one sheet, showing all the
streets, with contours and with figures of elevation on
the streets, so that we can study the town as a whole. The
town engineer has had most of this topographical data,
but not assembled in convenient form for such general
studies.
The situation of this committee of ours is, I think,
perhaps the situation of many of the permanent city plan-
ning commissions recently appointed. We have no appro-
priation, and any engineering work, plan work or paid
investigations, must come out of the general appropriation
of the town engineer. The town engineer is very much
interested and his assistants are working on the thing,
but they have a great many troubles of their own already.
The advancing of this sort of work at all rapidly is largely
a question of getting separate appropriations, because the
demands made on general appropriations by pressing and
[35]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
immediate municipal problems will otherwise drive this
remoter planning to the wall. I hope that members of
city planning commissions, city engineers and others who
are trying to get results, will give something more definite
as to their difficulties and the devices or steps which they
find it profitable to take. That is what we all want to
know — what are you doing, and what do you need in
order to do more?
MR. C. W. KILLAM, Cambridge, Mass. :
I would like to ask what a town of the size of Cambridge,
100,000 inhabitants, can do in reference to public improve-
ments coming into the town, improvements of all kinds —
bridges, subways, stations, everything from a lamp post
up; how it can get those things done right, what sort of
a body in a city of that kind ought to control? I have
had during the last year some experience with the Building
Commission in that town, which is supposed to advise the
city government on any building proposition that comes
up. But building propositions are only a part of the
things in which a city is interested. When a subway comes
in, as one has lately come into the Cambridge, there is no-
body to report to the city of Cambridge as to whether the
thing is well arranged, to see that the stations are properly
placed and designed, so that they fit the surroundings.
There is nobody but the City Engineer, who is very busy
doing something else, who is paid perhaps only $2000 a
year, and probably knows nothing about architecture and
other things entering into the various questions that may
arise. Such things are therefore left with a powerful cor-
poration which fortunately in this case has good advice.
But in general a city such as Cambridge is utterly at a
disadvantage in coping with such questions. Why should
not a city of 100,000 people be as well represented by
experts as the Boston Elevated? Some of you here may
know that the Boston Elevated Road, entirely of its own
volition, spends thousands of dollars a year for expert
[36]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
help to make things good looking and well arranged. Cities
have not reached that high standard yet. Now, can any
of you people here tell me what sort of a body we should
have, whether an unpaid force or a paid expert who can
see that the city gets a square deal in all those things
which go to make or mar a city?
CHAIRMAN OLMSTED:
I think perhaps Mr. Brunner can answer your question.
Perhaps he can speak from his experience while a member
of the Art Commission of the city of New York, which
probably has larger powers and more work to do than any
similar body, of the sort you have spoken of, in the country.
MR. ARNOLD W. BRUNNER:
I am not sure whether what I can say will answer the
gentleman's question. The Art Commission of the City of
New York is an unpaid body of ten members, composed of
seven laymen, one painter, one sculptor, and one architect.
According to the city's charter no work of art shall become
the property of the city unless it has been submitted to and
approved by the Art Commission, and the Charter further
defines the term " work of art " so that it includes not only
paintings, mural decorations, sculpture, and monuments,
but buildings, bridges, and even lamp-posts and fences.
The value of the works passed upon by the New York
Art Commission has in some years gone as high as
$50,000,000 or $60,000,000, so you see that its responsi-
bilities are very serious.
Much of its most important work is not realized by the
general public, as the rejection of faulty designs is simply
published in the City Record with the statement that Sub-
mission No. is rejected. The details of the rejection
are not emphasized out of consideration for the feelings of
the donors or designers. In many cases suggestions are
made so that faulty designs may be improved and re-
submitted and accepted.
[37]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
The work of the Art Commission has proved that abso-
lute control may be exercised over municipal art without
producing irritation and without impairing the activity
of the various departments of the city government, and
the steady improvement that has resulted from its labors
is most encouraging.
I suppose the real answer to the question that has been
raised here is that if the city really wishes an Art Com-
mission it can have one. When its functions are well known
and its good results have been proved, the majority of citi-
zens will demand some commission of this kind,- and when
the majority of the citizens demand it they can undoubt-
edly have it.
MR. J. R. MORSE, Tacoma, Washington:
We have in the city of Tacoma, a city of 90,000 people,
a municipal advisory board. It was authorized by the
City Council on the first of February this year. It is
composed of twenty-one of the principal citizens of the
city, taking in the three best civil engineers of the city,
the three best architects and practically the three best of
the various professional men about the city. They are
divided up so that each man appears once upon a committee.
There are committees on city planning and beautification,
transportation, harbor development, extensions and high-
ways, public utilities, legislation, city engineering, and so on.
These committees and subcommittees meet and decide on
everything upon which the City Council desires advice, and
in that way the City Council has intelligent advice on
various city problems as they come up.
The Board has not the absolute veto power of the New
York Art Commission, but its influence is great because
of the character of men that serve on its committees. The
Committee on Docks, for instance, has as one of its members
the First Vice-President of the Milwaukee Railroad who
gives an afternoon of each week to the Committee work.
[38]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
A Housing Code
MRS. ROKLIN NOERIS, Ardmore, Pa.:
I should like to ask the members of the Conference the best
method of securing a desirable building code. We have been
interested sufficiently to write to the governor to appoint
a commission to study the provisions of such a code, but
now we are beginning to wonder j ust what recommendations
to make to the commission if it is appointed. The time
has come, I believe, when as Americans we should stand for
more stringent sanitary regulations and further restric-
tions as to the number of houses that should be put on a
piece of land. I think a national organization like the
City Planning Conference or an association interested in
housing could help us a great deal in Pennsylvania. I
would request that the City Planning Conference take up
as a part of its duty the consideration of a building code
which should contain, among other things, provisions
governing the height of buildings and the percentage of
lot which a building should occupy.
CHAIRMAN OLMSTED :
The subject of which Mrs. Norris has spoken is, as we
all recognize, of tremendous importance and difficulty, and
we are all looking for that model building code which will
cover all these subjects. The regular process in framing
a code is to take the New York Tenement House Law and
use its provisions to patch up the local building code.
It is a process which gives lamentable results. It seems
to me that nobody has made an attempt to find out what
is the logical and reasonable thing to do as a norm from
which different localities may proceed. I am sure we would
like to hear from Mr. Veiller on the whole building code
proposition.
[39]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
MR. LAWRENCE VEILLER, New York City:
I am very sorry that I cannot comply with the Chairman's
request, for it would take at least twelve or twenty more
hours to discuss the whole building code proposition.
I will touch upon the subject very briefly. Some of the
questions involved in building codes may perhaps be illumi-
nating, as showing the experience of New York, and that
experience may be very helpful to other communities. We
are now going through our fifth attempted revision of
the very bad building code passed thirteen years ago.
It is estimated that those five revisions may cost the city
of New York $350,000 for fees of the men who have revised
the code, and we have n't had a code yet. None of them
has ever been adopted. We have one pending before us
now that has a distinguished parentage. It comes from a
group of really disinterested citizens, architects of the
highest reputation, engineers, men of a similar type, the
building material interests and others being represented,
and it is one of the poorest codes we have had presented
in those five revisions.
I wonder whether city planners are really interested in
a building code? I doubt very much whether we are.
We are all interested, I take it, in housing codes, but I
think the time has come when we should make a strong
distinction between the two. I am willing to put it to a
vote of this gathering whether any of us care much, unless
we be engineers, about stresses, strains and factors of
safety, details as to the kind of beams, concrete against
terra cotta, sand, cement, things of that kind. Those are
the things that a building code deals with, primarily. What
we are interested in, I take it, is a housing code, a code
which regulates the height of buildings, a code which regu-
lates open spaces for light and ventilation, a code which
has some relation to city planning and provides for ventila-
tion in the interiors of our blocks, a scheme which divides
the city into building lots with relation to the number
[40]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
of streets that we must have for practical use, making
such an arrangement that our lots will not be too small.
It seems to me that those and a number of cognate questions
are the questions that we are interested in and that it
would not advance the city planning movement one iota
were we really to get that model building code that our
President has so much at heart.
I am amazed, as I go through the length and breadth
of the United States from time to time, to find what the
attitude of the people is when, for instance, it is proposed
to take what is really a first step in city planning — namely,
to provide for adequate backyards • — you will see the
entire citizenship rise en masse ready to slay the poor
individual who suggests such a thing. I wish you would,
when you go back to your own city, look into that question
of backyards, and see what your laws are on the subject.
You will find that you have practically no laws in most
cities of the United States, except where they have a copy
of the inadequate New York law of some years ago; and
if you will propose to the authorities a law which would
result in generous backyards, as a matter of compulsory
regulation, you will see what happens to you. This build-
ing code now pending in New York, which was referred
to a few moments ago in complimentary terms, has among
its other meritorious provisions the first attempt that has
been made in New York City, aside from the tenement house
law, to provide for backyards, and it sets the standard
as an irreducible minimum at the large figure of five feet
for a building 200 feet high ! That is the progress we have
made in the great city of New York in our attempt
to deal with the building code in the year of grace
MR. A. N. PIERSON, West field, N. «/.:
The English tenement house laws lay down very well
defined specifications as to light shafts and areas between
the rear line of lots and the rear line of buildings. I think
[41]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
there is a provision that 30 per cent of the lot shall be left
for air spaces in the rear of the building.
CHAIRMAN OLMSTED:
That provision applies only to tenement houses. I think
that Mr. Veiller, in speaking of a housing code, meant not
merely to distinguish it from a building code dealing with
structural details, but also from tenement house laws which
cover only one class of buildings, the good provisions of
which may be largely negatived by the unregulated building
of other classes of structures immediately adjacent to the
tenement houses.
MR. W. F. BURDETT, St. John, N. B.:
From what I know and have read on the subject, I think
it is practically impossible to establish a code of laws
governing housing or building property. In England the
Jaw is that there must be a given area to a given number
of inhabitants for every house. The result has been that
building speculators have been able to build forty houses
on an acre of ground and still comply with the building
laws. I think the experience indicates that no code of
laws will adequately govern that question, but I believe
that the plan which has been incorporated in the English
Town Planning Act is the best solution of the question
of housing of the working classes. By that plan those
working on a scheme for a town plan can regulate the
size of houses and the number to the acre. The whole
scheme is then submitted to the Local Government Board
and becomes official on its approval. Thus the housing
of the whole community is laid out in advance and the
conditions of each locality are taken into consideration.
By this means attractive cottages are provided for working
men, grouped in such a way that there is ample space
about each house
[42]
PAYING THE BILLS FOR CITY PLANNING
MR. NELSON P. LEWIS
Chief Engineer of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, New York City
IN discussing city planning there is frequently a disposi-
tion to ignore such practical questions as that which is the
subject of this paper. The writer recalls one occasion at a
public dinner when a gentleman of distinguished reputation
in the world of art expressed his sense of humiliation that
one of the speakers, who was the chief financial officer of the
city, should have introduced such sordid considerations as
those of cost when the discussion up to that time had been
confined to things of beauty. He assured his hearers that
when, a few centuries ago, the men of Siena or Florence
wanted to do something to adorn their cities, they did not
stop to consider the cost but went ahead and did it and
thought about the expense afterward. In contrast with this
a prominent officer of a real estate holding company re-
cently expressed his strong disapproval of any widening
of streets or readjustment of street lines which were calcu-
lated to facilitate traffic whether vehicular or pedestrian.
He admitted that such changes might be advantageous to
the city at large and would stimulate the development of
outlying sections, but as his company owned a large amount
of business property in the older part of the city, he be-
lieved that the rental value of that particular property for
retail shops would be greater if the movement of the people
were so obstructed that they would be compelled to loiter,
to look into the shop windows and go in and buy. We may
have less patience with the latter than with the former
point of view, yet both are inimical to real progress in city
planning. He who scorns any consideration of cost may by
his enthusiasm succeed in committing the city to projects
which will seriously cripple its finances for years to come
[43]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and render the public suspicious of any improvement, while
he who openly avows his supreme selfishness may possibly
arouse a feeling of indignation which will result in bringing
about the very things he would like to prevent.
The question of how the bills are to be paid is not only
a pertinent but a necessary one and cannot be avoided. To
provide for a city of one hundred thousand, with no appar-
ent reason for exceptional growth, an ambitious scheme
suited to a metropolis of several millions is to invite disas-
ter ; while to limit the plan of a large and rapidly growing
city occupying a strategic position to one suited to its
present size will seriously retard its future orderly develop-
ment and may prevent it from realizing the growth and
importance of which its natural advantages appear to give
promise.
The feeling is common and not unnatural that if we are
planning more for the future than the present, coming
generations which will reap the benefit should bear the
greater part of the burden. It seems easy to pay with bor-
rowed money, particularly when the money can be borrowed
for fifty years, or the span of two generations. The habit
of paying in this way is easily acquired and is broken with
difficulty. When anything is paid for with money borrowed
for a period longer than the possible or even probable life
of the article purchased, the city's credit is improperly
used. A corporation which pays for its betterments from
earnings is on a sound basis. When large earnings are
used to pay excessive dividends, and betterments and re-
newals are paid from borrowed money representing addi-
tional obligations, there is danger. When interest on exist-
ing debt is paid from funds raised by incurring more debt,
disaster is imminent. The only source of revenue of the
American city is its power to tax. Its credit is due to this
same power plus the value of its own property. The larger
the city's debt which has been incurred for projects which
are not self-sustaining, the greater will be the demands upon
its taxing power to meet interest and sinking fund charges
[44]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
due to such debt, and the less will be its ability to undertake
new improvements and at the same time meet the enormous
running expense of the modern city. It might not be a
forced comparison to say that the ordinary services which
the city renders to the public through its administrative
departments, the expenses of which are met by the regular
tax levy, are the dividends which it pays to its stockholders,
while for its betterments it must issue bonds or levy special
assessments. Every bond issue requires an increase in the
tax levy for a term of years in order to meet interest and
amortization charges, curtailing by just so much the amount
which can be expended upon municipal housekeeping ex-
penses. In order to keep the tax rate within reasonable
limits, expenses which should properly be met from the tax
levy are often paid with borrowed money. Is not the city
which adopts this policy actually doing the same thing as
the business corporation which incurs additional debt in
order to pay dividends?
The class of improvements which are commonly con-
sidered city planning projects are not self-sustaining.
They consist for the most part in the correction of defects
due to lack of proper planning. The property affected by
them has presumably been already assessed for the acquisi-
tion and improvement of streets which were at the time
considered adequate for its local needs. The widening and
rearrangement of streets in built-up sections will, however,
improve conditions and increase values, and a part of the
expense should, therefore, be placed upon the property
benefited. In the more fundamental work of city planning,
where unoccupied territory is being developed, the property
will not have been assessed for improvements, and conse-
quently the cost of the acquisition and construction of new
streets can properly be assessed upon the adjoining prop-
erty according to benefit, such benefit representing the
entire cost in the case of local streets and a portion of the
cost in the case of thoroughfares of metropolitan impor-
tance. One principle should be invariably recognized,
[45]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
namely, where there is local benefit there should be local
assessment. There can be no improvement which has been
intelligently planned and executed which will not result in
some local benefit, and it follows that there should always
be some local assessment. No improvement, however small
or however large, will be of equal benefit to the entire city,
and to distribute the burden of paying for it over the whole
city according to taxable values is unfair in that it is not
placed according to benefit. The owners of property in the
immediate vicinity are frequently enriched at the expense
of those whose holdings are entirely outside the district
directly affected.
Perhaps this statement should be so qualified as to ex-
clude certain great improvements such as public buildings,
bridges, docks, and rapid transit lines, and yet there is
doubtless a local benefit resulting from these. It may be
urged that such things are not included in what is com-
monly called city planning. If so, the definition of city
planning needs revision, for they are certainly most essential
parts of any city plan. The City Club of New York several
years ago showed that as a result of the building of the first
Rapid Transit Subway in New York the actual land values
in those portions of upper Manhattan and The Bronx which
were most directly affected were within seven years increased
$80,500,000 above the normal increase for that period.
The cost of that part of the subway passing through the
districts where this rise in values took place was about
$13,000,000, while the cost of the entire subway from the
Battery north was $43,000,000. It is quite evident that
if the $13,000,000 which was spent upon that part of the
subway traversing the district so notably benefited had
been assessed directly upon the property, its owners would
still have netted a neat profit of some $67,500,000, while
had the cost of the entire subway been assessed upon the
same limited district, the net profit to the land owners
would have been $37,500,000. Was it quite fair that prop-
erty in distant parts of the city, entirely unaffected by
[46]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
this great project, should bear the same proportion of the
burden as that which was so conspicuously advantaged?
It is true that this improvement is entirely self-supporting,
interest and amortization charges being provided from the
rental paid by the operating company ; but the local benefit
was so clearly established that the Rapid Transit Law was
so amended as to permit the assessment of any part of the
cost of future subways. Many new subways are now being
planned, and some are being built, but it is doubtful if any
of them will be self-supporting for years, the route furnish-
ing the most intensive traffic having been followed by the
line first built. The property owners along the present
operating line having secured their benefit without direct
tax, those along the proposed lines are not enthusiastic
about being assessed for theirs, and there seems little pros-
pect that the right to assess will be availed of.
To take another illustration from New York, — two new
court houses are about to be built, one in New York County,
the other in Kings County. In the former case a site has
been selected to include a large area which will provide sites
for still other public buildings and result in the creation of
a real civic center. What will be the effect upon the neigh-
boring property of the expenditure of the millions required
for this site and buildings? There is abundant evidence to
justify the prediction that its value will be doubled, if not
trebled, by the time the first building has been completed.
Is it fair or just that the owners of this contiguous property
should be enriched through no action of their own, and that
they should bear only the same proportion of the expense,
according to their taxable values, as will those owning
property ten miles distant?
It needs no extended argument to prove the equity and
wisdom of local assessment wherever there is local benefit.
That it has been done to such a limited extent in the past
is no reason why it should not be more generally done in
the future. That certain property owners have heretofore
been treated with such prodigal liberality is no good reason
[47]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
why others should fatten through a continuation of an
irrational and essentially unfair policy. To the degree that
the assessment plan is adopted, to that same degree will the
city place itself upon a cash rather than upon a credit basis.
It may be urged that the adoption of such a policy would
discourage the agitation for and execution of many desir-
able city planning projects, that American cities have been
slow to appreciate the advantages of intelligent city plan-
ning, and now that there has been a marked awakening it
would be unwise to suggest the adoption of a policy which
might dampen this new-born enthusiasm. A desire for
something which involves no direct cost is not a sign of
intelligent interest. We are learning that the improvement
of our cities pays. That is a hopeful sign. If we have
simply reached the stage where we want better conditions
only if someone else is to pay the bills, the hope has not a
very substantial basis. If we want them badly enough to
pay for them ourselves in proportion to the benefit we feel
sure will follow, we are making real progress.
Assuming that a case has been made in favor of assessing
the cost of all improvements in accordance with prospective
benefit, we are still confronted with a very difficult problem.
The direct and indirect benefit must be estimated in advance.
We cannot first carry out our city planning schemes and
afterwards determine how the cost is to be met. Further-
more, we must determine to what extent the benefit will be
strictly local, in what degree it will extend to a larger trib-
utary area, and, again, how much it will mean to the entire
city or metropolitan district. In the case of residential
streets, the purpose of which is to give light, air and access
to the dwellings located upon them, the benefit will be en-
tirely local, and the entire cost can properly be imposed
upon the abutting property. When a highway is given a
more generous width in the expectation that it will be called
upon to accommodate a certain amount of through traffic,
the benefit is more general, and the assessment area in
such a case may be extended to a line midway between it
[48]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and the next street of more than residential width. The
major part of the cost should, however, be confined to the
abutting property, so that the cost to it shall be somewhat
more than that of the narrower street. In the case of
arterial thoroughfares, or in that of the first street to be
opened through an undeveloped territory, the effect of which
will be to give access to and stimulate the development of a
large area, the district of benefit will be correspondingly
enlarged. Again, in the case of thoroughfares of excep-
tional width which it is proposed to treat as boulevards,
the entire city or metropolitan district will be substantially
benefited and should bear a portion of the expense ; in fact,
the state itself may derive an advantage which would justify
its assumption of a portion of the cost ; but the disposition
to recognize such an obligation on the part of the common-
wealth is exceedingly rare, even though a great city within
its limits may, through its large taxable values, contribute
the larger part of the state's revenues by which its rural
highway system is maintained.
In the case of parks this same principle might be applied.
Some small parks are of strictly local benefit, and their cost
could properly be placed upon the district in which they are
located. Every park, whether small or large, is of some
local benefit, even if such benefit were deemed to consist
solely in unobstructed light and air to the property on the
surrounding streets.
In the case of street widening or the cutting through of
new streets, the local advantage is less marked, though it
will always follow. The mere fact that a widening or exten-
sion is required to accommodate traffic is conclusive evidence
that the street has assumed more than local importance.
The width of the roadway as widened is not an index of its
local or general importance. There may be cases where the
opening up of a new street of a width commonly given to
local streets and extending for a very short distance would
on account of its strategic position be of very great general
and of little local benefit.
[49]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
It is quite apparent that the relative local, district, or
general benefit of any street or other improvement can be
determined neither by its dimensions nor its cost. An im-
provement involving an expenditure of $1,000,000 in one
part of the city may be more distinctly local in its beneficial
effect than one costing $50,000 in another section. No fixed
rule can be established to govern the distribution of expense.
It must be determined in each case after a painstaking in-
vestigation. Such investigation should not be entrusted to
a different individual, board or commission in each case.
There should be a permanent body which should act in all
cases. This body should not be large, and it should be
so constituted that its entire personnel could not be changed
at once, thus insuring continuity and consistency of policy.
They should be broad men whose training should have fitted
them for their difficult and delicate duties. The misleading
evidence commonly called expert testimony as to existing
and prospective values will be of little assistance to them.
They should be capable by experience and intelligence of
forming their own conclusions.
While no definite rule can be adopted to govern the distri-
bution of assessments representing the district and general
benefit, it should be possible to prescribe a method of deter-
mining the amount and extent of local benefit, particularly
in the case of new streets, boulevards and parks. Let us
assume that sixty feet is the normal and maximum width
required for a local street ; then the entire cost of acquiring
and improving all streets sixty feet or less in width may
properly be placed upon the property within a half block
on either side of the street. In the case of wider streets
that proportion of the cost represented by the ratio which
sixty feet plus twenty-five per cent of the excess over sixty
feet bears to the width of the street would probably be an
equitable proportion to assess upon the local district.
Inasmuch as property fronting a wide street is more valu-
able, it would be manifestly unfair to adopt a rule which
would result in making the cost of a seventy or eighty foot
[50]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
street less to the abutting owner than would have been the
cost of a street sixty feet wide. On the other hand, after a
street reaches certain proportions, additional width will not
involve additional benefit. It may be assumed that a share
of the expense wrhich would be equivalent to paying for a
street eighty feet wide should represent the limit of local
assessment. This limit would be reached under the rule
proposed when the street becomes one hundred and forty
feet wide. The percentage of cost which would be locally
assessed would, therefore, be as follows for various street
widths: 60 feet, 100%; 70 feet, 89.3%; 80 feet, 81.25%;
90 feet, 75%; 100 feet, 70%; 120 feet, 62.5%; 140 feet,
57.1%; 150 feet, 53.3% ; 200 feet, 40%.
In the case of parks the problem is more difficult, the
amount of local assessment and the extent of the area of
local benefit being determined by the size and shape of the
park and facility of access to it from other parts of the
city. In any case, no rule should be adopted until it has
been carefully tested and it has been demonstrated that
the assessments levied in accordance with it will constantly
decrease with the distance from the improvement. This
decrease should not be directly in proportion to the dis-
tance, but in a geometrical ratio. A curve to determine
the distribution of the assessment after the limits of the
district have been decided has been proposed by Mr. Arthur
S. Tuttle, Assistant Chief Engineer of the Board of Esti-
mate and Apportionment of New York City, in accordance
with which about 32.5% of the assessment would be placed
upon the first 10% of the distance to the outer limit of the
area of benefit, 55% upon the first 25%, and 80% upon the
district extending half way to the boundary of the assess-
ment area.
In the case of street widening involving the destruction
of buildings, it is suggested that the same general principles
be adopted as in the case of new streets, but that they be
applied to the land values only. If the street were less than
sixty feet wide, the proportion of the expense for additional
[51]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
land in order to make it sixty feet would be assessed upon
the half block on each side, while for all excess over sixty
feet the same rule already proposed could be adopted.
For instance, if a street fifty feet wide were to be widened
to eighty feet, involving the acquisition of thirty feet of
additional property, the first ten feet required to make it
sixty feet and 25% of the twenty feet over sixty feet, — a
total of fifteen feet, or one-half of the cost of the additional
land to be taken, — might be assessed locally, the expense
involved in damage to buildings being included in the dis-
trict assessment, or in the general assessment if the improve-
ment were of sufficient importance to involve general benefit.
If the same street were to be widened to one hundred feet,
the local assessment under the same rule would be for
twenty of the fifty feet to be acquired, or 40% of the total
land damage, the damage to buildings, as before, being
included in the district or general assessment.
Special cases will undoubtedly arise which would require
special treatment, but it is probable that in the great ma-
jority of improvements the method proposed would result
in an equitable distribution of the burden. Those who are
to pay the bills have a right to know in advance how the
costs are to be apportioned, and the formulation of a policy
which can be consistently followed is not only desirable
but necessary.
The problem of determining whether or not there is
general benefit and the proportion of the cost representing
such benefit will be difficult. A typical case is that of a
new boulevard recently laid out in the City of New York
and now being acquired. It has been given a width of 200
feet and extends from one of the great bridges over the
East River directly across the Borough of Queens to
Jamaica, and it is expected that it will ultimately be carried
to the ocean front. It will afford ready access not only to
the highway system of the Borough of Queens, but to all of
Long Island. It includes within its lines an existing high-
way about eighty feet in width. Owing to its strategic posi-
[52]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
tion, this boulevard will be of more than local benefit. It
was thought proper in this case to assess upon an area
extending eight hundred feet on each side that proportion
of the cost of acquiring title represented by increasing the
existing highway from eighty feet to one hundred feet.
Of the remaining one hundred feet it was decided to impose
three-eighths upon the Borough of Queens and five-eighths
upon the city at large. This division would have placed
upon the local area, the borough and the city, 16.7%,
31.2%, and 52.1%, respectively, but these were rounded off
to 20%, 30%, and 50%. In the improvement of this high-
way it is proposed to construct one central driveway forty-
four feet wide, with parking spaces thirty feet wide on each
side, and outside of these side roadways twenty-eight feet and
sidewalks twenty feet in width, the side roadways and walks
to be treated strictly as local improvements and the cost of
their construction to be assessed directly upon the abutting
property, the central driveway and parking spaces to be
treated as a part of the park system and to be built at the
expense of the entire city. It is believed that such a distri-
bution of the expense is just, but there has been a disposi-
tion to consider it a precedent for similar treatment in the
case of other streets where the general public benefit would
be far less, while in some instances there would be none.
Demands for the apportionment of the expense of local
streets as though they were thoroughfares of metropolitan
importance must be consistently denied, however powerful
may be the influences exerted to induce special treatment
in certain cases. A policy which is manifestly just will
ultimately win popular favor. To hastily adopt a plan for
the distribution of costs which afterwards proves unwork-
able, and which must, therefore, be modified, will involve
some injustice as between those who may have been assessed
by one plan and those whose burdens may be determined
by a revised plan. The policy should, therefore, be carefully
studied and thoroughly tested before its adoption, after
which it should be consistently adhered to. It follows that
[53]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
such a policy should be confined to principles, rather than
be expressed in percentages, for special cases will inevit-
ably occur where a principle can be applied, while a
rigid rule involving fixed percentages would entail serious
hardship.
There is one other method by which the expense of city
planning projects could be met, at least in part, namely,
through recoupment by the exercise of the right of excess
condemnation where this right exists, but this subject is
to be treated in another paper, and is simply referred to
in this connection.
Where the financial condition of the city will permit,
the burdens of the property owner can be considerably
lightened by the recognition of deferred benefit and a cor-
respondingly deferred assessment. In this case the city
would carry the account until the benefit resulting from
the improvement should have been fully realized, or, in
other words, should have been reflected in actual increase
in values. Similar relief could be given by permitting the
payment of assessments in installments carrying a moderate
rate of interest. Either plan would require larger capital
to finance such improvements, and would to that extent
impair the city's borrowing capacity for other purposes.
These, however, are matters of detail and have to do with
the manner of collection of the assessments rather than
the distribution of the expense. The general principles
which should, in the writer's opinion, govern the distribution
of the cost of city improvements may be briefly summarized
as follows:
1. Where there is local benefit, there should always be
local assessment.
2. The entire city or the metropolitan district should
bear no part of the expense unless the improvement is in
some degree of metropolitan importance and benefit.
3. Assessments should not be confined to the cost of
acquiring and improving streets, but should extend to any
improvement which will increase the value of the neighbor-
[54]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
ing property, and should be apportioned as nearly as
possible according to the probable benefit.
4. A workable policy once adopted should be consist-
ently adhered to.
5. The determination of a policy and its application to
each case should be entrusted to a board composed of men
especially qualified, whose terms of office should so overlap
as to insure continuity of policy and purpose.
APPENDIX
WHILE a few cities may now have statutory authority
to carry out the policy which is outlined in the above
paper, most of them lack such power. The following is
suggested as an act which, with such modification as local
conditions and existing laws may require, would accomplish
the purpose.
In all cases where an administrative board is authorized to
determine that an improvement is to be made, the said board
shall also determine what proportion of the cost and expense
of the said improvement shall be assessed upon the property
which shall be deemed to be benefited thereby and what pro-
portion of the cost and expense thereof shall l>e borne and paid
by the city.
The said board may also determine in each case how much
of the cost and expense of an improvement shall be assessed
upon a restricted area of peculiar benefit and how much, if any,
shall be assessed upon a larger area of indirect benefit. The
said board may also determine whether the entire assessment
shall become due upon confirmation of the same, or whether it
may be paid in annual installments, and it shall also determine
the number of such annual installments in which such assess-
ments may be paid and the rate of interest which shall be
charged upon all such installments from the date of the con-
firmation of the assessment until each installment shall be
paid; provided, however, that the number of installments shall
not exceed and the rate of interest to be charged upon
the same shall be not less than nor more than per cent
per annum.
[55]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
The word " improvement " as used in this section (or act)
shall be deemed to include the acquisition of title in fee or
easement to any land required for streets, parks, bridges, tun-
nels, waterways, drains, sewers or buildings required for any
public purpose, or the construction of streets, parks, bridges,
tunnels, waterways, drains, sewers or buildings, or any other
improvement, the carrying out of which in whole or in part
will increase the value of the property in the immediate vicinity
of such improvement or within a district including the same,
or will promote public utility, comfort, health or adornment for
the entire city or part thereof.
[56]
PAYING THE BILLS FOR CITY PLANNING FROM
A BOSTON VIEWPOINT
HON. JAMES A. GALLIVAN
Street Commissioner, Boston
A FEW days ago a Boston newspaper briefly referring
to the approaching visit to our city of gentlemen who
compose this association, advised the city's representatives
at these gatherings not to concede too much to the delegates
who are here from beyond our borders who may feel
prompted to criticise Boston because it is not " laid out "
on the checkerboard pattern. The writer of the paragraph
was apparently anxious that we should let you folks know
that we are conscious of the structural shortcomings which
were imposed upon us by earlier centuries, and which many
a city has been able to avoid by reason of the fact that it
was built the other day. And while we were advised to
acknowledge cheerfully that our streets are narrow, that
our waterfront is not all that it should be, that we still
accommodate a few slum districts, and cannot hope to hide
certain waste areas that should have been developed years
ago, we were not to forget to let you know that we are now
widening some of our streets, that we are building up the
waste areas, and have already started the great work for
the improvement of the port of Boston.
Boston is indeed honored in the presence of this Con-
ference in its city, and fortunate in the opportunity afforded
of acquiring at first hand a knowledge of the proper and
scientific solution of those varied problems that have grown
to be such serious defects in the civic and social life of our
American municipalities. The modern city planning move-
[57]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
ment, conceived largely in this country in the desire to
cure the evil of congestion of population, has now become
an all-embracing study. The great broad field of human
endeavor, all the complex forces of social and industrial
life, private and public interests, individual and collective
cooperation all bear important relation to the science of
city planning, but underlying all, as a practical matter
of compelling interest, is the question of the city streets,
those great arteries through which flows its life blood and
the basis of its prosperity and proper healthy growth.
I regret to state that Boston with respect to the science
of city planning offers little of an instructive nature,
unless it be to teach the lesson of the futility of not looking
beyond one's generation in the planning of the streets of
the city, and the dangers of inadequate laws constituting
almost insuperable obstacles in the way of systematic im-
provement.
There is a growing tendency, of late years, to recognize
the charm of the irregular and informal plans evolved
out of the necessities of the times. Old Boston with its
crooked and twisting ways is rich in historic associations;
it appeals to the patriot, the romanticist and the esthete;
some of the old streets are hallowed spots where stirring
scenes of our country's history were enacted, and are
still fragrant with the memory of our Revolutionary heroes ;
but there is also the practical aspect which must be con-
sidered if the city's industrial needs are to be served, if the
commercial life is to be given free and convenient means
of circulation and the population afforded adequate facilities
for transportation and communication.
Unfortunately here in Boston we are forced to recognize
deplorable street conditions in the business section of the
city which, uncorrected, are bound to hamper its growth,
and, worse still, we are forced supinely to contemplate
the evil because ill-advised legislation prevents the remedy-
ing of the defects on a proper financial basis. The streets
of business Boston today are choked with foot and vehicle
[58]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
traffic, not a sudden culmination by any means, nor the
result of unforeseen development, but rather because the
population and trade of the city have increased in a natural
way with no effort made from year to year for devising
a well-formulated scheme of relief. Like many of our
large American cities we have progressed beyond that stage
where a comprehensive plan, starting with an imposing
civic center and embracing radical and circumferential high-
ways could be realized, but eventually American ingenuity
will bring cosmos out of the chaos of the immature and
impulsive planning of past years, so that what Voltaire
said of his own Paris, " We see every day what is wanting
in our city and content ourselves with murmuring," may
not forever be said of us.
At the third national conference in Philadelphia it was
decided that, in the scheme of city planning or replanning,
the cost of local improvements should be paid for by special
assessments upon the benefited districts. In our theory
of law this form of tax represents an enhancement of private
values. Boston's special assessment law was enacted in
1891 and was designed to return to the city practically
the entire cost of such work, but ten years after its passage,
during which time millions had been expended for improve-
ments, litigation and the importunate demands of realty
owners for a change in the law led to the enactment of
legislation which compelled the city to assume at least
one-half of the cost of every street improvement it effected,
and to limit its assessable districts to within one hundred
twenty-five feet of the street opened or improved; it is
under such unwise restrictions that this city today is
laboring. Forty millions of Boston's outstanding funded
debt has been issued for street and sewer improvements
from which tremendous private profits have resulted.
I believe it is fundamentally wrong for a state legislature
to compel a city to assume a fixed proportion of the cost
of its street improvements. This should be determined
by the municipal body or officers charged with the duty
[59]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
of making the assessment. The Federal Supreme Court
has laid down the rule that these charges must be limited
by the measure of the benefit conferred, but this principle
was enunciated, I submit, no more to afford protection to
the owner of land against the imposition of oppressive
charges than to indicate to what extent cities might justly
demand reimbursement for those expenditures of public
funds which result in private gain. If the right of the
city to assess for local improvements is to be qualified
in the authorizing statute the classes of street improve-
ments should be differentiated for assessment purposes
according to functional needs. The cost of constructing
a forty-foot residential street should be borne entirely by
abutting land owners. In some cities the entire expense
of streets, openings and widenings up to sixty feet in
width are assessed on contiguous land. The streets ex-
ceeding forty feet in width are usually built in response to
general public demands, not alone to furnish ordinary street
facilities to abutting land; and as the width increases,
so the direct benefit to abutting land becomes a propor-
tionately smaller part of the whole cost and the benefited
district expands. It is only fair to expect the city to
assume a part of the cost of the more pretentious improve-
ments, such as boulevards, main highways and traffic
thoroughfares, but the point I wish to emphasize is, that
the practical determination of special assessments should
be delegated to the municipality whose officials are of
necessity familiar with the nature and scope of the work
for which the charges are levied as well as the character
and value of properties within the assessable districts.
These restrictions are usually imposed by legislative bodies
at the behest of real estate interests, and the lack of wisdom
shown by such laws is well evidenced by that provision in
our Massachusetts statute which compels a limitation of
assessable districts to a distance of 125 feet from the
improvement in entire disregard of the actual distances
and area of the benefit conferred. The inadequacy of a
[60]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
law delimiting assessable districts is well shown by the
assessment levied on account of the Bennington Street
boulevard constructed in this city a few years ago at a cost
of $700,000. An assessment was made of $56,000, about
8 per cent, and the legislature, at the request of persons
assessed, has recently passed an act recommending the
abatement of even this meagre sum. The fact that the
legislative enactment, according to our Federal Supreme
Court, as far as assessable districts are concerned, is not
open to review by the court, does not justify such a law.
The truth of the matter, in regard to this method of
financing local improvements, is that the ordinary tax-
payer looks with particular resentment upon special assess-
ments of any kind. General taxation is regarded and
anticipated as an incident to the ownership of real estate,
a pure civic responsibility, but it is an extremely different
matter to convince owners that the construction of local
improvements enhances the value of their holdings, and
the frankest professions and assurance of willingness to
pay assessments made at the time these improvements are
sought, very frequently are transferred, after completion
of the work, into feelings of antagonism which often culmi-
nate in long-drawn-out litigations. In many instances,
I will admit, this antagonism is justified. The restriction
of assessments to a radius of 125 feet necessitates the
limitation of the amount assessed to 50 per cent of the cost,
because it seldom happens (and then only in 40-foot
residential street openings) that the benefit of the improve-*
ment within the limited radius exceeds or even equals this
percentage. This is particularly true in those parts of
Boston where the benefit, as measured by the rise of valua-
tions in the immediate vicinity, proves disappointing. So
that, after all, there is a perverse consistency in the yoking
together of these two limitations, each of which in itself
is unjust to the city as a whole.
The logical result of the inability of the city to get
back even a reasonable percentage of its outlay from the
[61]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
property owners has been a reduction of activity in this
direction. In other cities, as, for example, in New York,
where the property owners over a wide area pay the larger
part of the cost, the authorities may go ahead boldly and
satisfy the demands of traffic by laying out new thorough-
fares at will; but in Boston every such venture means a
considerable addition to the debt of the city.
At the same time our needs are perhaps greater than
those of the newer cities, because of our complicated high-
way plan, narrow streets and congested business district.
The pressure of absolute necessity has led to the examina-
tion of new methods of assessment for street construction,
culminating in the partial adoption, by means of a consti-
tutional amendment, of what is known as the excess
condemnation method. This system has been favored else-
where because it enables the city to take over the remnants
or odds and ends of estates which in some of our thorough-
fares, as well as in those of New York, have led to a motley
and irregular frontage, offensive to lovers of symmetry
in construction and actually detrimental to the growth
of business in the streets affected. Its advocates, moreover,
argued, from the experience of foreign cities, that it would
enable Boston to pay the whole cost of its street improve-
ments and even reap a profit, where now the only question
is the extent of the loss. This seemed to a good many
of us at the time a rather roseate view to take, for if the
full benefit to the estates within a radius of 125 feet is
seldom equal to one-half the cost it would seem difficult for
the city to recover the whole cost by taking over the title
to the same property, holding it for a term of years, and
then reselling it.
However, at our state election last year the people
adopted this constitutional amendment. Briefly stated, it
permits the legislature to pass acts for street improvements
wherein more land than is required for the street may
be taken, the same to be sold after the completion of the
improvement. This amendment had been agitated for many
[62]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
years by people who honestly believed it would cause a
revolution in the methods of making highway improvements.
The advocates of this measure also believed that it would
help to solve the question of a city beautiful, because, as
I have explained, the city could control the use of the
excess land taken by placing upon it restrictions as to
the character of buildings to be erected, their height, use
and anything else which would satisfy the esthetic tastes
of the community. In this respect they are undoubtedly
right, but, if our study of the problem amounts to any-
thing, they will fall far short of their expectations on the
financial side.
Before entering more fully into a discussion of the possi-
bilities of excess takings, it may not be amiss to say a
brief word of an ambitious attempt to apply the principle
of excess condemnation in the cities and towns of this
Commonwealth. In the statutes of 1904 may be found
a comprehensive act which had some of the purposes in
view for which you gentlemen of the city planning con-
ference are striving. This act is known as chapter 443
of that year. It was adopted after a careful study of
the problem, including personal studies abroad by members
of a commission which had been appointed for the purpose,
and which actually drew the bill. This act intended to
provide that cities and towns, or even the Commonwealth
itself, might acquire all of a piece of property, any part
of which was to be taken for a highway improvement, and
sell the excess of land after the completion of the im-
provement. A study of the act would be worth the while of
any person interested, if for no other purpose than to
observe the extreme care exercised in making it, and the
safeguards thrown about the property involved.
Though this act has been on the statute books for eight
years, I know of no instance of its being invoked. The
constitutionality of the act was questioned from the
beginning, which probably accounts for its not being used.
The existence of the act shows, however, that here in
[63]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Boston the subject of correct city planning has long been
given serious attention.
Undoubtedly there are opportunities to invoke the excess
condemnation provision of our laws in the improvement
of highways without great cost to the city. The business
centers of large and growing cities undergo changes every
few years, due largely to expansion of trade. If this
expansion could be gauged with some degree of accuracy,
a few years in advance, the street improvements necessary
to bring about the best results could probably be made
so as to give the city the fullest returns on the expenditure
required.
Soon after the adoption of the constitutional amendment
about which I am speaking, the Board, of which I am a
member, made an exhaustive study of this method of city
highway development, with results which, I think, will
interest you. I will take but two examples of the study,
and I select them because they are widely different in the
manner in which they work out.
Nothing is more needed in this city than a broad high-
way connecting the two terminal stations. Such a highway
is particularly needed for teaming traffic and for the
transportation of passengers. A plan for such a highway
has been prepared. It proposes not only the widening
of existing thoroughfares but also the making of an entirely
new way through property which has a high market value.
The proposition is for a way 100 feet wide. It would be
without doubt of tremendous value to a very large section
of the city. The assessed value of the property which
would be taken for the way itself is $8,118,811. If only
remnants of estates which would be affected by the improve-
ment were taken $3,804,899 would have to be added.
It is thought that, if the fullest use of the excess
condemnation principle is to be applied, takings for a
distance of 125 feet from the line of the improvement
ought to be made. To make such a taking would involve
property having an assessed value of $7,875,700, making
[64]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
a total assessed value of all the property involved
$19,799,000.
This is a pretty large sum for a city whose borrowing
capacity is less than one-quarter of this sum. Bear in
mind that this is only the assessed value. When property
is taken for public purposes it is rarely obtained for the
assessed value. Perhaps in a case such as I am discussing,
where the property has a large and sure rental value, the
city might be required to pay as high as 50 per cent over
the assessed value for such as would be taken. This would
add $9,899,500 additional to the foregoing figures, making
the total about $28,698,500 for land and buildings.
To get this vast sum back into the city treasury it has
been estimated that the excess land would have to sell at
153 per cent over its present assessed value. Can you
conceive of such a tremendous enhancement of values merely
because the city has laid out a broad highway which would
be devoted largely to transportation purposes? For myself
I confess I cannot see such a great increase in values im-
mediately following such an improvement.
If such an improvement should be made, under the
conditions I have described, ought the city to hold the
excess property taken until such time as it could be sold
at the advance named? What would the city do with the
property while awaiting a favorable market ? Ought the city
to put it in order for occupancy and rent it during the time
it has it on its hands? It seems to me that our constitu-
tional amendment does not contemplate anything of the
kind. I doubt that the city could even put new fronts
into buildings that had been partially destroyed, and if
it cannot do this, imagine what an unsightly condition a
street would be in, with the interiors of buildings exposed
with hideous effect.
Unless the city could improve such buildings and rent
them while awaiting a favorable market the disadvantages
of such a method of street improvements would be far
greater than any possible benefits. There would, in
[65]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
addition, be the loss of taxes, no inconsiderable item, and
the interest on the money borrowed for the undertaking.
As showing that there is some merit in the principle of
excess condemnation, I have in mind a street in this city
which it is proposed to improve, and which, judging by
the estimates, it seems can be done under excess condemna-
tion proceedings to the great advantage of the city. This
street is in line of the development of the Park Square
lands, so-called, the abandoned site of a railroad station.
It is proposed to widen this street, taking property which,
it is estimated, will be damaged to the extent of about
$900,000. It so happens that a large portion of the
property to be taken is either owned or controlled by the
New Haven Railroad, whose representatives show a dis-
position to treat with the city on an extremely liberal basis.
The total cost of this improvement, including excess
takings, is estimated at $950,000. It is further estimated
that the net cost to the city would be but $100,000, because
it is believed a ready market at a good price would be
found for the excess land which would be sold by the city.
A betterment assessment is involved in the foregoing,
which is an important factor in bringing the net cost of
this improvement down to the low sum of $100,000. For
this improvement it is proposed to allow the city authorities
to assess wherever they may find a benefit, and to assess
the full benefit, which in my judgment is the right way.
Now, in addition, this would be an improvement which
would aid in bringing into the market a large tract of land
which has lain dormant for many years, and perhaps,
the creation of a new retail center, carrying its benefits
far beyond the street itself, thus adding greatly to the
taxable value of the city and in a short time wiping out
every expenditure which the city has made.
If a broad highway, such as is proposed between the north
and south terminals, is to be laid out, I believe it can
be done without great cost to the city and without invoking
the aid of the excess condemnation law, by extending the
[66]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
assessable area and by assessing the benefit rather than
50 per cent of the cost. I would create a zone for assessing
purposes. This zone could be made wide enough to recover
back practically all that the improvement would cost. If
a tunnel is to be constructed under the street for the rail-
road, as has been proposed, I would have the railroad
pay a fair portion of the cost of the construction of the
highway.
The zone system of assessments could be justly applied
to an improvement of this character because it would be
an improvement which would be of benefit to almost the
entire business district of the city by giving the whole-
sale and retail houses better and more rapid facilities for
carrying on their business.
On the whole, however, I do not see any great benefit
in excess condemnation methods except in isolated cases.
The advocates of this method, from what I have been able
to glean, have had the impression that it was a great success
abroad. The principle has been well tried in London,
and it is not a success there, viewed from the standpoint
of cost. As showing its failure in this respect, I will
quote a paragraph from the report of the London Traffic
Branch of the Board of Trade, made in 1904, as follows:
" It is difficult to make any direct comparison of the
relative advantages of widening old, and making new streets.
Both operations are necessarily costly. It is often supposed
to be more economical to make a new street if enough land
is taken, but the expectation that the disposal of valuable
sites fronting an improvement repays, or nearly repays,
the original outlay is seldom borne out by experience.
The most striking example of success attending an operation
of this kind is Northumberland Avenue, where the amount
realized by the disposal of surplus land exceeded the cost
of the improvement by 119,000 pounds ($595,000). This
amount was, however, arrived at without taking the charges
for interest on the outlay into account, and these charges
could not have been small, since some six years elapsed
[67]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
after the completion of the improvement before any of
the surplus land was let. The satisfactory result in this
case was due mainly to the fact that the operation did
not involve the acquisition of valuable trade interests,
and that land in such a central situation was much in
request. The street, moreover, is short. A new street of
considerable length is apt to fill up slowly, and as years
may elapse before all the building sites are disposed of,
a large addition to the net cost may have to be made by
way of interest."
From the studies of the Board of which I am a member,
I am convinced that here in Boston we would get similar
results.
Answering then the query, who shall pay the cost of
city planning, I believe there is no good reason, moral,
legal or economic, why the millions expended by our
American municipalities for streets, sewers, parks, side-
walks, water-front improvements and subways should not
be returned to them in generous proportion by land owners
who reap such tremendous resultant profits.
DISCUSSION
THE CHAIRMAN, HON. LAWSON PURDY, New York City:
Before the floor is open for discussion, on behalf of
those of my associates in the city of New York who have
sought from the legislature and the people further powers
of condemnation, I want to say that we are often much
impressed by the notion expressed that the reason why
we want excess condemnation in the city of New York
is because we want to make money. No idea could be
more mistaken. We do not care if it costs us more to
accomplish a city plan, the widening of a street or the
opening of a new street, when we take more land than is
necessary for the street. It may cost us more money to
do it, but we will have building land that can be put to
suitable economic uses; and we will not have any more
[68]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
streets, of which we have too many already, where improve-
ments cannot be made on account of obstructive parcels
of land of inadequate size and unusable shape. To many
of us it has not seemed a question of getting back the
money that the improvement costs, but of having a suitable
street when it is finished, that will be of value to the
community and to the property owners, and of saving
those persons who own land on the street from assessments
for local improvements which are a great burden, when
they cannot use the land. If incidentally we ever make
any profit, well and good. I do not see how a profit can
be made, however, out of a situation which involves the
payment for the improvement by the people who own the
abutting land, if you take the land away from them and
keep it yourself. That land has got to pay the expense,
whether the city owns it or the people own it; and I
hope in the discussion a little more weight will be given
to that aspect of the case.
MR. L. L. TRIBUS, Borough of Richmond, New York:
There is one thing that occurs to my mind in considering
the very admirable paper of Mr. Lewis. I think we all
agree with the principle of direct assessment. There is, how-
ever, in all our cities another thing to be considered. If
every city had as its head the same efficient sort of executive
as our chairman of this morning's session, whom the city
of New York has at the head of its Tax Department,
there would not be so much money lost by neglect of the
principle of assessment for betterments. Mr. Lewis called
attention to the fact that often from these large improve-
ments not directly assessed there is large direct benefit to the
owner, and the inference is that the owner pays nothing
for that direct benefit. But I think we all realize that
the owner does pay. When Mr. Purdy's department, for
instance, learns of the sale of a certain piece of property
within such a benefited district, although there may not
have been a direct betterment tax that would cover it,
[69]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
his assessors jack up the assessment a little higher, and
the owner pays on that enhanced value, and pays not for the
ten years perhaps over which the benefit might be assessed,
but for all time. Perhaps he finds the next year that the
value of that property has enhanced a little more. Up
goes the assessment. We will assume that the value of
that property is doubled, due to that improvement. The
Tax Department does not necessarily double the assessed
valuation, but it will probably saddle fifty per cent of
that increase on the property and that tax goes on for
all time.
ANDREW WRIGHT CRAWFORD, Esa., Philadelphia:
In the discussion this morning there has been some intima-
tion that the methods of excess condemnation and of assess-
ments for betterments are to be considered as alternatives.
There are really four methods of paying for the execution
of city planning schemes, each of which is supplementary
to the others. None is the alternative of any other. The
four methods are: excess condemnation, assessment for
benefits, increase in taxable values outside of the assessment
and excess condemnation areas, and increase in the taxable
values of the land either specially assessed or taken by the
method of excess condemnation and resold. There is indeed
a fifth source from which the cost will be recouped which I
will refer to hereafter.
In Philadelphia we benefited by taking advantage of the
principle of excess condemnation in the case of Fairmount
Park under the original Act; where a part of a tract was
required for the park, the whole could be taken and the
excess sold. Three or four remnants have been sold at a
considerable increase over the cost of acquiring them some
thirty or forty years ago.
The process of excess condemnation, of course, may be
successful in one instance and may not be successful in
another. It may bring back ten per cent more than the
cost in one case and 110 per cent in another. Obviously
[70]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
we are not to decide as to the absolute value of excess con-
demnation from the results of one, two or three operations.
But European cities which have used it continue to do so, and
this fact furnishes satisfactory evidence of its practical value.
The second method of paying for improvements, by local
assessments for betterments, has been emphasized by Mr.
Lewis.
The effect of the improvement will not be confined to
the area specially assessed or to the land acquired by excess
condemnation. It will gradually spread and be felt over a
considerably learger area, resulting in the third method of
paying for improvements — a general increase in taxable
values that will be very real though difficult to analyze with
accuracy.
The fourth source of meeting the expense is much more
easily defined. When land is acquired by the process of
excess condemnation and resold, the city will not only gain
the increment in value between the purchase and the selling
price, but, in addition the property will thereafter be
assessed at or about the reselling price, thus increasing
the annual income of the city. For example, let us suppose
the excess land acquired costs $1,000,000, and is sold at
$1,500,000. The city will gain directly, by the increment,
a half million dollars. Assuming that the assessment for
taxation purposes is at 80% of the value, the city was
receiving, before the improvement, income from that prop-
erty on the basis of $800,000. After the improvement, and
after the resale, with the assessment on the same basis, it
will receive income from that property on an assessment of
$1,200,000 — an addition to the income that will take care
of a considerable portion of the interest and sinking fund
charges of any bond issue that may have been made in
order to undertake the improvement.
Similarly, after property has been locally assessed for
benefits, its annual assessment for taxation purposes will be
higher, with a corresponding increase in the city's annual
income.
[71]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
It seems to me that as a Conference we have not justly
emphasized what a wholesale reconstruction may mean to
a community in creating or enhancing another source of
revenue. I refer to the city's waterfront. We know that
European cities have secured large returns from the re-
construction of their waterfronts. We know that London
spent $11,000,000 in constructing the four miles of the
Thames Embankment during the years 1855-1875. The
City secured a new thoroughfare, got land for parks, sites
for the Hotel Cecil, the Hotel Savoy and other structures of
high value, and, at the same time, one of its greatest attrac-
tions. London is but one of a hundred cities where similar
results have been obtained.
In America we are continually suffering economic loss
because of our neglect of the waterfronts. In Philadelphia,
property near the Schuylkill is assessed for $3,000 or
$4,000 a lot, where it ought to be assessed for $125,000 a
lot. Why is that so? Merely because Philadelphia has
turned its back on the river and has left it to the railroads.
The railroads ought to be there, but they ought to be
there under proper conditions as they are in London, as
they are in Paris. Four-track railroads run under the
Thames Embankment in London and transcontinental rail-
roads under the Seine Embankment in Paris. The electri-
fication of railroads will make it easier to operate them in
tunnels under embankments. The time cannot be distant
when the regeneration of our waterfronts will be undertaken.
When it is done, our American cities will realize not only
how much they have heretofore lost in the beauty of their
cities, but also how much in the way of income. The water-
front should be the highest taxed area of the city, not the
lowest.
When we have constructed such improvements, a fifth
method of paying the bills of city planning will be apparent.
How much of the bills for the replanning of Vienna, of
Budapest, and of Paris, have been paid by the money of
tourists? The beautification of large cities brings people
[72]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
there, and visitors are spenders. They say that Baron
Haussmann spent two hundred million dollars on public im-
provements in Paris, but they say also that visitors leave
from fifty to sixty million dollars a year in Paris. Berlin
has learned the lesson. It is making itself beautiful; so is
Vienna, so is Budapest.
The power of beauty is j ust as strong on this side of the
Atlantic as on the other side. Our cities can be made beau-
tiful, and it can be made to pay and will pay in dollars and
cents.
MR. R. A. POPE, New York City:
The Conference may have the impression that excess
condemnation has not been as financially successful as I
think the results show in England. The most notable
example is that of the improvement which Mr. Joseph
Chamberlain of Birmingham instituted in Birmingham.
They put a very broad and fine street right through the
heart of the city, where the worst slums were, thereby
connecting with a fine thoroughfare the two sides of an
important city. It is estimated that the returns will be
at least fifty million dollars per year. Of course, as has
been said, there is no rule by which you can figure the
profit from excess condemnation. As a general thing,
however, it has worked out very well indeed. In connection
with the reference Mr. Crawford made to the improvement
on the banks of the Thames, he ought to have said, I think,
that the Duke of Northumberland is reputed to have made
sixty million dollars through the extension of his profits.
If private capital is to have its profits by investment
and improvement of land, public capital should also get
a part of the return which may come from investment
in the land.
HON. FREDERIC C. HOWE, New York City:
I have no desire to speak to the text of the papers, but
I do want to emphasize my own point of view as to the
[73]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
extreme importance of the subject matter. It seems to
me that, while listening to Mr. Lewis' paper, I got a clearer
vision of the way to pay the bills of city planning than
I ever had before. It seems to me that that is a classic
paper and that this morning's work means the establishment
of a kind of norm line, that we are getting to the point
where our minds are clear as to the things that should be
paid for out of the general purse and the things that
should be paid for by those who enjoy special advantages
from the improvements which a city makes.
We have no appreciation, I fancy, of the many cities
which are precluded from taking any forward step at
all, by reason of the fact that real estate interests have
so controlled the legislature that it is necessary to pay
for every improvement out of the general tax levy. The
result is that every suggestion looking to improvement
is doomed to defeat, because of the jealousies of various
sections of the city and the fear of increased taxation.
We should crystallize the idea as a norm of this Con-
ference that certain enumerated things should be paid for
by special assessments on abutting property, and on the
property of a larger district. I think Mr. Lewis, more
nearly scientifically than I have ever seen it done before,
has laid down the principle to be followed in such special
assessment work. Most of our cities have assessed at
least part or all of the expense of street and sidewalk
construction and the installation of a sewer system, and
that is as far as they have gone. Yet we find Kansas
City, precluded by law from raising money for park pur-
poses, laying out a ten million dollar park and boulevard
system by the assessment plan. They compelled the specu-
lators who benefited to pay for it. Denver will pay for its
civic center in the same way by assessment of its cost
on land included in one of the park districts.
It is interesting to note the psychological effect, the
psychological reaction on the part of the community,
whether it approves or disapproves of planning. We find
[74]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
in Kansas City, so I am informed, that the consciousness
on the part of all the people that they cannot grab out
of the public purse for local improvements, that they
cannot log-roll as is done in other cities, has led the
public not only to be willing to pay for their benefits but
to studiously consider the benefit that flows to them; and
I understand that real estate speculators, promoters,
developers, have come to appreciate, as in few cities
in this country, the benefits flowing from boulevards and
park improvements ; that now there is a steady demand
on the Park Commissioners for improvements there, while
in most of the cities with which I am familiar there is a
steady pressure against such improvements. I think the
psychology of special assessments will make for city plan-
ning projects much more than throwing the burden on
the general taxpayer.
I hope the papers this morning will be printed in such
form that they can be widely distributed, and I hope the
executive committee may possibly utilize this crystalliza-
tion which has taken place to pursue a series of investiga-
tions which will result, first, in an enumeration of the things
that should be governed by special assessment ; second,
in a determination of the period through which the payment
of special assessments should be carried. I think from
ifchese subjects we can get one of the most valuable contribu-
tions possible to the program upon which cities are entering.
MR. F. L. OLMSTED :
One of the points in Mr. ^Lewis's paper which particularly
interested me, and which was touched on by Mr. Howe
at the close of his remarks, was that relating to the period
over which the payment of the special assessments should
be distributed.
There is also another suggestion as to the carrying by
the city of the burden of the special assessment until the
improvement in value, the betterment, is clearly apparent,
instead of calling for the payment of the assessment when
[75]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
that benefit is still speculative. There can be no doubt
that the great difficulty in trying to get payment for im-
provements by the special assessment method is the feeling
of some doubt on the part of the jury, in case the assess-
ment is contested, whether the assumed improvement in
value will really take place. Where that doubt exists a
jury is very apt to upset or reduce the assessment.
Therefore, in view of that difficulty, it has seemed to
me that, in spite of the objection which Mr. Lewis pointed
out, the net return from special assessments might be
greater if that method were generally followed, — that
juries would sustain special assessments if it were under-
stood to be the rule that they* were not to be collected
until the betterment actually appeared in the assessed
value of the property. It would mean that every year in
addition to the regular taxes on the value of the property
any increase in its value would be collected as an installment
of the betterment assessment until the whole of the latter
was paid, or it was demonstrated that the expected increase
in value had failed to materialize. I should like particularly
to know whether Mr. Lewis knows about the application
of that method in any American city, and how it seems
to work.
MR. LEWIS:
I am afraid I cannot answer Mr. Olmsted's question
very specifically. New York City, while it labors under
some disabilities and has some pretty poor methods, has
blazed a pretty safe trail in the matter of assessments for
improvements. It assesses all the benefits almost always,
and there is no escape. Once in a while, through some
technical defect, an assessment is declared invalid. That
rarely happens, however, and it does not happen as often
as it formerly did. There is but one provision in our char-
ter affecting the levying of assessments for the full value
of the improvements, and that is that no assessment for
any one improvement shall be levied which amounts to more
[76]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
than one half of the fair value of the property. That fair
value is construed to be its assessed value. It is manifest
that, notwithstanding the admirable work of our Tax
Department, there are certain districts where the property
is not available for development — undeveloped meadow
lands, for instance, occupying perhaps a strategic position,
which we know will one day be of very great value and
which we know that the owners today would not sell, except
for a substantial consideration. Yet they cannot be assessed
at the value at which the owners hold them, because they
are unavailable for development. When we make an im-
provement, put a new street through that property, we
can only collect one half the assessed value, and the full
benefit therefore cannot be assessed.
I know of no attempt in this country to exercise the
principle of deferred assessments. It is done in Europe
quite frequently. We approximate that, however, when we
allow the payment of assessments in installments, and in
my judgment we come pretty near adjusting any inequality
if the installments are extended, say, for a term of ten years,
with the right to adjust in connection with the last of those
installments, by a reduction in case the actual benefit
anticipated has not arrived.
You may say, " That is easy in your case, because you
determine the benefit through your own Tax Department
by levying assessments. You establish them by taxation,
prove your case, and the property owner is helpless." The
Tax Department is not going to take chances, deliberately
raising the assessed value for the sake of collecting an
assessment, if that value has not been clearly indicated
through sales.
I am sorry that Commissioner Gallivan has left the
room, because he raised a question as to the success of
the excess condemnation policy as it has been carried out
in England, especially in London. I can say that there
is no question whatever of its success. I have not the
figures here, but if I remember rightly it was first exercised
[77]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
in the sixties in the opening of Garrick Street to Covent
Garden. In that case, seventy per cent of the cost of the
acquisition of the land and the physical improvement of the
street was recouped by the sale of the surplusage. Was n't
that a success? Of course, they do not all run as high as
that. In the case of the widening of a street the name of
which I do not recall, on the south side of the Thames, the
extension of a new street, including the widening of Tooley
Street, only eighteen per cent was recouped. But there
was a reason, as they say in Battle Creek. The Housing
of the Working Classes Act compels the London County
Council when it goes through a new street or disturbs
and destroys houses or tenements occupied by working
people, to provide accommodations much more satisfactory
and wholesome, for the number of people whose dwellings
are replaced. That is charged up to this account. And
yet that eighteen per cent was recouped. Was n't that a
success? The Kingsway, as you all know, in Aldwych,
opened in 1900 after agitation in Parliament since 1836,
has already returned in the sale of surplusage, I am told
reliably, ninety per cent of the cost of the improvement,
and that amounts to thirty million dollars nearly. Is n't
that a success?
I wish I had made more clear in my paper that I do not
regard assessments for local benefits and the exercise of
the right of excess condemnation as alternatives. I en-
deavored to point out that it was wrong to make any
improvement that would enrich certain property owners
without a corresponding assessment. If we use the right
of excess condemnation and levy no assessments, we are
still enhancing property enormously, and are not asking
for a return. The two work together perfectly. The
area of assessment should be laid out the same way, whether
excess condemnation is exercised or not. The only differ-
ence is this, that the city, purchasing more than is required
on one or both sides of the street, becomes the abutting
owner and is liable to assessment. The city itself, by
[78]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
exercise of the process of excess condemnation, can recoup
a portion of the money, can lighten the burden, can harvest
a part of the increase. But under no circumstances, in
my judgment, should the principle of assessment for
benefit be departed from in the slightest degree, even though
we exercise the right of excess condemnation.
MR. J. P. HYNES, Toronto, Canada:
Mr. Lewis has read to us a splendid paper, and I would
like to ask a question in regard to it, so as to bring the
thing out clearly. I would like to know how much is purely
academic theory, and how much has been applied to actual
practice in New York, and, if it has been applied in practice,
whether the theory has been sustained by any courts of
law.
MR. LEWIS:
The statements I have made are almost exclusively a
record from actual experience.
THE CHAIRMAN:
For five years and somewhat over, I have sat officially
upon the Board of Revision of Assessments of the city of
New York. That is the court of appeal from the board
of assessors, who make the assessments for local improve-
ments within streets. I do not think that one assessment
in a thousand has got into the courts during that five
and one half years. I do not think that any invalidity
or any occasion to reduce because the assessment was
more than half the value of the property assessed, has lost to
the city of New York one quarter of one per cent of the
assessments levied during that period. It is simple, quick,
direct, get your money! The way we get our money is
of some little interest, because it is a very humanitarian
and effective method. It is comparatively recent in the
city of New York, since 1908. When an assessment for
a local improvement is made, when any tax becomes a
[79]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
lien, the owner of the property can wait three years before
he pays it, paying in the meantime seven per cent interest.
If he allows an assessment for a local improvement, a tax
or other charge, to get in arrears more than three years,
the city's lien for all the charges against that particular
property down to the present is sold at auction for its
face value to the person who bids the lowest rate of interest
for which he will pay the face value and carry the lien for
three years more. We get our money for those liens
immediately, in full. We are not bothered with the process
of collection. So far it has been an absolute and entire
success. There was, for instance, a gentleman in Brooklyn
who was terribly frightened for fear he was going to lose
his property. They always think of property being sold
right away. It is very hard to get into their heads this
idea of selling the lien. He came to the collector of assess-
ments and arrears with tears in his eyes, said that his
property had cost him a number of thousands of dollars
and that he was going to lose it next Tuesday, if something
was not done to prevent. He was told not to worry, to
attend the sale and see what would happen. The lien
on the property was put up for sale. The bidding was
active. It was sold for three-fourths of one per cent. Con-
sequently that man had three years more in which to pay his
$2800, in the meantime paying three-fourths of one per
cent per annum! That was all that happened to him.
MR. W. TEMPLETON JOHNSON, San Diego, CaL:
There has been mention made of opposition to a city's
recouping the cost of an improvement by selling surplus
land at the increased value. It does not seem to be fair
that such a bugaboo as that should be raised, because
the German cities practically all go into the buying, selling
and keeping of land, just for their own benefit, and so
that they may give a little more benefit, to their own people.
The discussion has also called to my mind the fact that
there is a weapon in New Zealand called a boomerang which
[80]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
is a very useful weapon in administration of the tax depart-
ment. In connection with the condemnation of land, the
law of New Zealand is that land may be acquired by munici-
palities for 10 per cent above the assessed valuation. The
person who thinks he is assessed too high on his property
goes to the city hall and says, " I am assessed too much
for my property." The city authorities may immediately
take him seriously and say, " Very well, we will buy it from
you for 10 per cent more." Then, if he has been taking
a foolish position, in regard to the valuation of his property,
he either withdraws his complaint or sells his property to
the city and pockets a loss.
The summary of a paper by Mr. George C. Warren, of Boston, in discus-
sion of Mr. Lewis's paper, not presented at the time of the Conference, but
reprinted here by vote of the Executive Committee.
There may be something of value in a comparison of various methods of
meeting the cost of construction and maintenance of street improvements.
In Boston 50% of the cost of the first improvement may be assessed on the
abutting property, and all subsequent repairs and renewals are paid for from
the general budget. In New York the entire first cost is assessed on abutting
property, but in other respects the law is much the same as in Boston. In
both cities the almost universal result is that the initial pavement adopted is
the cheapest type of construction, either gravel or stone macadam. Either
many miles of roadway remain out of repair because of insufficient revenue
from taxes or from bonds, or, as in New York, pavements are reconstructed by
the issue of bonds for long terms of years, very much longer than the reasonable
life of pavements. It is stated that New York has many miles of streets that
have been reconstructed two or three times out of the proceeds of long term
bond issues, the first of which successive bond issues is not yet paid for.
In St. Louis the entire cost of all street improvements and of renewals is
assessed on the abutter, and the contractor is given tax bills against each
abutter with interest at 7%. Despite the higher rate of interest and the fact
that the tax is a lien which takes precedence over mortgages and all other
such liabilities, except city taxes, the tax bills are not popular with investors
and are salable only at a heavy discount.
Contrast these methods with the sane and equitable system which Utica
has enjoyed for twenty-five years. First, the city pays one-third the cost of
all original pavements and all renewals thereof and provides for this out of a
tax of about $1 per capita of population.
Second, the remaining two-thirds of the cost of the original pavement and
all renewals is assessed on the abutting frontage. Assessments may be paid in
full or by six annual instalments at 6% interest. To cover the deferred assess-
ments the city issues six paving bonds, each for one-sixth of the whole amount
of such deferred assessments, and payable in one, two, three, four, five or six
years with 5% interest, the due dates of the bonds and assessments being
coincident. The city loses nothing on account of the credit it gives to the
taxpayers, and the premium the city gets for the bonds and the 1% extra in-
[81]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
terest charged the taxpayers fully pays all clerical or other expense of the city
in the transaction.
Third, the city at large pays for minor repairs required between the time
of laying the original pavement and the necessity of reconstruction or re-
surfacing.
The practical working out of the system can be illustrated by the typical
result on Oneida Street. In 1892 the street was newly paved at an annual cost
of about $200 per lot of 50 feet frontage, the assessment being payable in cash
or at the option of each taxpayer in six annual installments of about $33, with
interest, say $35 per year for six years, including interest. The last installment
of the assessment was paid in 1898. Then came thirteen years' respite, and in
1911 the street was resurfaced at a cost of about $90 for each lot of 50 feet
frontage, or if any desired to pay in six annual installments at a cost including
interest of less than $16 per annum. It should be here noted that all this —
a thoroughly well paved city — has been accomplished by a general tax of
less than one dollar per capita per annum.
[82]
ROUND TABLE TALKS
Introductory Remarks by the Presiding Officer, John Nolen, Fellow American
Society of Landscape Architects, Cambridge
I WANT to tell one short story that I heard last Wednes-
day in Erie, Pennsylvania, from a Dr. MacDonald, whom
you probably know as the editor of the Toronto Globe.
He had been around seeing Erie in the afternoon, in
preparation for the Board of Trade meeting in the evening,
and at that meeting he said he was struck by the combina-
tion that the city afforded. On one side he found growth,
expansion of the great industries, especially at the big
plant of the General Electric Company, which has recently
settled in Erie; and, on the other hand, he was struck
by the attractiveness of Erie as a city, the provision of
things for recreation, joy and satisfaction. He said it
was important that these two things should be kept in
some happy relationship and combination, and that it
reminded him of a Scotchman at home — he is himself a
Scotchman — who had a way of mixing his drinks. He
used to take half whiskey and half beer. They asked him
why he mixed those drinks. He said he had found that if
he took whiskey alone he got drunk before he was full, and
that if he took beer alone he got full before he was drunk.
I think perhaps this luncheon will give us an opportunity
to strike a happy balance in our program. It will
perhaps afford us an opportunity to touch upon different
points in a way in which they would not be touched upon
in the formal series of prepared discussions, bringing out
points of especial value, incidental, spontaneous, vital things
which each individual has learned from his own experience.
In that sense they will be prepared, because they will be
[83]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
things deep in our hearts, as the result of experience,
and already to go off when the opportunity is given. This
is the opportunity that we want to afford. The meeting
is thrown open, and we would be glad to hear from any one,
especially any one who has some definite achievement to
report, some definite good way of doing things to suggest,
or some definite bad way of doing things to avoid.
City Planning in Smaller Cities
A SUGGESTED CITY PLANNING PROGRAM
MR. E. C. HILL, City Plan Commission, Trenton, N. J.:
I have been very much interested in what has been told
us about Cleveland, New York and Chicago, but I think
that some of the speakers forget that we have a thousand
cities in these United States and that most of them are
comparatively small. I think if out of this planning con-
ference we could evolve some sort of plan that we could
submit to the various municipalities, embodying recommen-
dations, so that instead of having each city compelled to
work out entirely its own plans a little basis might be
furnished on which each one could work, whether it be a
small municipality or a big one, it would be a great help
to those cities that have timid Common Councils and Com-
missions. For instance, it seems to me that we could
recommend that every city should appoint a city planning
commission, somewhat like the German commissions, of
which at least one half should represent the engineering
activities of the city and the other half should be made
up of taxpayers, preferably those who are wealthy, so
that we might have both sides of the problems represented
by individual members of the commission. Those boards
on which the private citizenship is not represented do not
always recognize the point of view of the ordinary private
citizen, and those that are made up of private citizens do
not have the knowledge that they should. We might also
[84]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
be able to recommend as fundamental that city planning
commissions should endeavor to obtain the waterfronts;
that they should endeavor to secure control of the streams
that run through the city; that they should endeavor to
provide ample park spaces of a certain given proportion
to the area of the city ; that they should endeavor to connect
those park spaces with a boulevard surrounding the city.
Those are four fundamental recommendations that we might
make, that would furnish a basis for almost all city planning
commissions and would not frighten them. There are many
small cities that are just as anxious as large cities to
be pointed to with pride, but they cannot spend the money
that New York, Cleveland or Chicago can, and I think a
recommendation of this conference outlining ;somethingi
that could be done without great expense would be hailed
with a great deal of pleasure by them.
THE SITUATION IN BRIDGEPORT, CONN.
MR. C. D. DAVIS, Business Men's Association, Bridgeport,
Conn. :
One thought that impressed me as I attended this morn-
ing's meeting of the Conference and heard the talk before,
at and after the formal session was that if this city planning
movement keeps on there will be only three or four cities —
New York, Philadelphia, Boston and Chicago — fit to
live in, unless some of the small towns and cities wake up.
How are we to start city planning in the smaller cities?
We in Bridgeport number 100,000 and we have not got a
plan of any sort. We have a common council that now and
then raises the salaries of the firemen, or something of
that sort, that costs us $23,000 a year and profits us
nothing. We have grown so fast that we have not a school-
house big enough to house the high school children and are
obliged to hold a double session, afternoon as well as
morning. Talk about condemnation! They tried to take
a plot of ground next to one already bought, and the
[85]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
owner said, " You cannot get that for a schoolhouse in
five years ; I can keep you out of it." What can you do in
a case like that? We have to go to the State of Connecticut
for every thing we want to do. We have no freedom what-
ever. That may be the fault of the city charter, but the
present generation is not altogether responsible for that.
The city of Bridgeport, as far as the business men are
concerned, would like to see something done; but we have
an impression that the city administrators are largely a
sort of grafters. I don't know that you can put your
hand on any one man and say that he is engaged in real
graft ; but they waste the money. We went to Hartford
to get a commission appointed, and they laughed at us.
We went up there to get some amendments to our charter,
and they laughed at us. The politicians were against us.
We must have more freedom in the city to go ahead and
try experiments; and if there are any towns of 100,000
population represented here, towns with intelligent plans,
personally I should like to hear from them.
CITY PLANNING IN CALGARY, ALBEETA
MR. G. W. LEMON, Secretary City Planning Commission:
Calgary is one of those cities with less than 100,000
population where city planning has been started. Five
months ago we formed a planning commission of thirty-five
members, appointed by the mayor. On this commission
were both commissioners — we have a commission form of
government — the city engineer, the city clerk and other
city officials, besides a number of citizens. We made an
attempt at the very first to work in harmony with the
city officials. The work of the commission was divided
into several parts, which describe themselves, — such as
sanitation and housing, streets and improvements, sewers,
buildings, parks and boulevards, drafting legislation, traffic
and transportation, and education.
I will briefly sum up the efforts of five months. We
[86]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
have pending before the legislature an amendment whereby
we will have the power to go in and clean up vacant lots
of absentee owners, on the same principle that a city goes
in and clears the snow away and charges it up against
general taxation. Then we had a notion, which I suppose
is rather a peculiar one, that bill boards are rather in-
artistic, and we started after the bill boards. Of course,
we met with opposition; of course, we were told that our
plan was unconstitutional, and that the whole power of
the United States and Europe would be brought to bear
on our little city if we should undertake to put such an
ordinance into effect.
We expect to have the building code amended soon,
for the reason that we have succeeded in getting a fire
chief who is immensely popular, a new medical inspector,
a health officer, together with one of the city physicians,
to help make proposed amendments covering the regulation
of the height of buildings, distance from the street, restric-
tions as to residential property, and so forth.
We found that there was some need for an ornamental
lighting system, and the commission, through its secretary,
wrote to various cities all over the continent and got sug-
gestions. From all those suggestions we have worked out
a plan for the ornamental lighting of Calgary, and that
plan has been adopted.
The educational committee secured the services of Mr.
Mawson, the English landscape architect, from Liverpool
University. He came and delivered a lecture, and we have
arranged to have 500 copies sent through Alberta free,
just doing a little missionary work among the smaller
places in Alberta in the way of town planning.
Our parks and boulevards committee has been consider-
ing the turning of vacant lots into playgrounds. We now
have a committee making a survey of the whole city,
section by section, and this with a view to securing from
the owners of vacant lots permission to use them as
temporary playgrounds. We find so far, although the thing
[87]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
has not been fully developed, that the owners are not
reluctant to give the use of their vacant lots, provided
they can be built upon if necessary. Of course, they are
only temporary playgrounds, but it may be two or three
years before they will be built upon in certain sections
of the city.
The sanitation committee is asking for an amendment
to the tenement house law which will allow us to go in and
correct certain abuses in housing which our present laws
will not allow.
Last, but not least, Calgary is to have a civic center.
You may raise your eyes and think that is a little ambitious
for a city of 55,000 people; although the population is
55,000 today, in five years from now we expect 100,000,
and in ten years a good many more than that. We really
do not know our population until after the last train
arrives. The announcement that the Dominion govern-
ment intends to spend within the next three years
in Calgary $2,000,000 in the erection of an immigration
hall and a custom house, brought us to the point where
we thought the psychological moment had arrived for a
civic center. We invited all citizens who had any interest
in the matter to come to a public meeting. Then we
wrote to twenty experts with a view to securing a plan, and
the replies will be read at a second public meeting soon to
be held. We do not expect to have all these buildings go
up in a night, but we plan to have in the next five or six
years the nucleus of a civic center.
THE CHAIRMAN:
It is quite evident that we shall have to change the map
or Calgary will change it for us, because they are evidently
making city planning history there with these constructive,
creative plans. I think such work shows the importance
of the adoption of better planning methods for small
cities. While the cities are still small, there is an
opportunity to do something, because of the flexibility
[88]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and elasticity of conditions and the low value of real
estate.
Stanley Hall, the president of Clark University, has said
that when he was a boy there was a theory among the boys
that young turtles contained all sorts of meat, that there
was one kind of meat in the body, other kinds in the different
parts, but that an old turtle was simply turtle. With
cities that is true. Potentially there are all sorts of possi-
bilities in a small city that can be easily drawn out, but
it seems that the old cities are mostly turtle.
MR. RICHARD B. WATROUS, Secretary American Civic
Association, Washington, D. C.:
We are fortunate in having present with us in this
Conference the energetic secretary from Calgary, so that
he can tell us about the planning of the new city. Most of
us in the East are not planners but re-planners, but in
that great country to the northwest they are taking up
with more zeal than any of us can the general subject
of making cities from the foundation up. It has been my
good fortune to be in more or less personal communication
with Mr. Lemon. I believe when I first got in touch with
him, about a couple of months ago, the city had 40,000.
It has 55,000 now. There is another city in Alberta,
Edmonton by name, that is working out a plan which has
some most enthusiastic and intelligent advocates, one of
whom, an architect, has spent the entire winter in Europe
studying the situation there.
What is true of Alberta is also true of other new sections
— if they may still be called new — of our own country.
I refer particularly to that great state of Texas, which
is setting up some splendid examples for the making of
a new city. Dallas, which is not very new, has within the
last three years had a commission. *It has printed within
the last three months a most elaborate planning report;
and, best of all, the recommendation of the expert has been
taken up and is being pushed through with vigor. That
[89]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
is not a report that is going into a pigeon hole. And so
the story comes to us from time to time of new, small
cities in new, virgin country that have got from the East
the experience that is being disseminated by these con-
ferences.
What can be said of the great western country is also
true of the South, which is very much interested. We
are going to have a chance to show to our own people
and to the people from abroad cities that have been made
by people who have given thought in advance to their
making.
City Planning in Brooklyn, N. Y.
MR. WOODRUFF LEMMING, President of the Brooklyn
Chapter of American Institute Architects:
A committee of Brooklyn citizens started the idea of
getting up a city plan commission and putting the borough
president on it, but before the commission was entirely
formed the word went out that the borough president had
joined with the four other borough presidents of Greater
New York in a city planning committee of their own. Such
is the rapid rate of city planning progress in Greater New
York.
We have a unique plan in old Brooklyn, because there
used to be a horse ferry there. I can remember my grand-
mother telling me how she sat on the banks of the East
River and waited for the horse ferry to come over, because
she would n't trust herself to the steam ferry. The roads
radiated from the point where the horse ferry landed to
the other parts of the city. When Brooklyn Bridge was
erected it came over almost to the same point where the
old horse ferry landed. Therefore we have in Brooklyn
today practically a radial plan, and other parts of Long
Island which had a horse ferry like Brooklyn's have to
a certain extent the same radial plan.
At the very beginning of our work we found that if
we wished to form a plan for Brooklyn that plan must
[90]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
take into consideration the whole of Long Island, so rapidly
is Brooklyn growing and overlapping neighboring towns,
and bring the various Long Island communities into cor-
relation. Of course the great trouble in Brooklyn is to
raise the money. Our committee has for some time been
considering how best to present the matter to the city from
the financial point of view, and this morning's session has
given me some thunderbolts for my own use.
City Planning in Philadelphia
MR. W. F. GLEASON, Secretary of the Philadelphia Com-
prehensive Plan Committee:
Since your last session, in Philadelphia, in June of last
year, an ordinance was passed creating a Committee on
Comprehensive Planning. That committee was composed
entirely of citizens, with little representation on the engi-
neering side. After its appointment and before it was
actually able to begin the work, the campaign for the
election of another mayor arrived, and during the political
discussion city planning was lost sight of. With the inaugu-
ration of the new mayor the work that Mayor Reyburn had
so well started was again taken up, and we now have a
commission composed of ten citizens — large taxpayers —
and seven members ex officio, including the mayor, president
of the common council, president of the select council
and the chairman of the finance committee. The engineering
staff is represented by the chief of the Bureau of Surveys,
the Director of the Department of Public Works and, in
addition, one of the ten appointed members is the Director
of the Board of Docks and Wharves, in charge of the
improvement of the river front, and he has an engineering
staff working under him. We have, therefore, a system
that guarantees the cooperation of engineers and citizens.
The citizens on the committee include two architects of
recognized standing, a doctor, a lawyer, two large manu-
facturers, and one of the largest and most important
[91]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
financiers in the city connected with the street transporta-
tion interests, our vital problem at present. Their first
meeting was held in April and they have had two meetings
since organization, one in April and one in May. Since
that time they have appointed sub-committees on rapid
transit, on the limitation of the height, character and use
of buildings, on publicity and lectures, on river and harbor
improvements, on housing and sanitation, and so on. The
committees are actively at work, and although we have not
published any report I have no doubt before the next
national conference is held, Philadelphia will give a full
account of herself and show decidedly important results,
One of our first achievements was to get $50,000 appro-
priated by the Council for the appointment of a corps of
engineers and experts and assistants, to work out a com-
prehensive study. That money is available now. The
appointments will shortly be made, and Philadelphia is
going to study the problem in a careful manner.
Metropolitan Planning in Philadelphia
MRS. ROLLIN NOERIS, Representing Main Line Housing
Association, Philadelphia:
We are planning to have in Philadelphia next fall a com-
prehensive planning conference of all the townships within
a radius of twenty-five miles of Philadelphia. We felt that
the townships ought to have an opportunity to show their
interest in comprehensive town planning, and we asked our
township commissioners to cooperate with our main line
housing association in sending out a letter asking the
townships near us to confer in regard to the need of
comprehensive township planning. The result was that
we brought together the township officials from several
of the townships and boroughs near us on the main line
of the Pennsylvania Railroad, and delegates from the civic
organizations. At that meeting a resolution was adopted
to the effect that our main line housing association should
[92]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
send out an invitation to all townships and civic associations
for a conference next fall. Since I have come to Boston
I have realized more and more the importance of what we
are doing, and hope that our movement will be a means of
carrying out what some of the towns outside of Boston
have done.
THE CHAIRMAN:
The general question of planning for a development
metropolitan in character and under metropolitan auspices,
representing a number of independent towns and cities, is
and will continue to be of increasing importance. So far
as I know, the action of townships outside of Philadelphia
is the first action of the kind taken, unless you consider
the county action in Essex County, New Jersey, of that
character. In that case they organized simply for park
and playground development.
MR. B. A. HALDEMAN, Philadelphia:
In the several years we have been actively engaged in
Philadelphia in preparing plans for things that should
be done in the future, we have all felt the work should
extend far beyond the confines of the city proper, and we
have been fortunate in awaking a spirit of cooperation
on the part of sections adjacent to the city. We have
found a particular interest along the main line, among
suburban towns near Philadelphia. Housing conditions
of the population in these suburban towns have provoked
a great deal of discussion. It has been generally supposed
that unfortunate conditions of living, such as are known
in some of our large cities, were confined to the cities, but
they have also grown up in the suburbs. The situation has
been very thoroughly gone into, and it has been decided
that the only way in which those unfortunate conditions
can be successfully eliminated is by the different communities
cooperating with each other, in order that they may not
only cure the conditions that exist today, but establish such
[93]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
regulations that it will be impossible for such conditions to
be created in the future anywhere within the suburban areas
of Philadelphia. To that end it will be necessary to enact
certain laws that will give the suburbs the right to control
the use and occupancy of land, to some extent at least.
I think that that really is one of the most important
things that this conference has to consider, to determine
just what kind of laws we want in order to carry out this
work.
City Planning in Ottawa, Canada
HON. CHARLES HOPEWELL, Mayor of Ottawa:
The people of the capital of the Dominion of Canada
are keenly alive to anything that bears on the improvement
and development of their city.
With regard, for instance, to charging the whole cost
of local improvements against the property benefited we
are free to do that in the city of Ottawa. We deal with
every street opening, every local improvement, upon its own
merits. In some cases the total cost of the improvement
is paid out of the general fund, in some cases fifty per cent
and in some cases seventy-five per cent is so paid, and in.
other cases the total cost is paid by the property benefited,
without a cent being taken out of the general fund.
We go on the principle that some local improvements benefit
the city as a whole to a greater extent than others, and
also that the opening of any street through a congested
district is a benefit to a city as a whole in that it gives
more fresh air and sunlight to the inhabitants. I venture
to suggest that the question of raising money for improve-
ments is largely a question of education. I notice that
human nature as I see it exhibited at this Conference is
about the same as it is across the line. In any municipality
you will find a certain class of people anxious to have
certain improvements made if someone else will pay for
them, but if they are asked to pay for them all sorts of
objections will be raised.
[94]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
I have been preaching a city planning doctrine for some
years in our country, that local municipalities should be
given by the state or province an unlimited amount, almost,
of home rule; that is to say, that a local municipality,
with proper safeguards in the way of taxation, should be
given the power to do its own business and to solve its
own problems in its own way. I am one of those who
believe in trusting the people, who know the conditions,
to solve the local problems.
On behalf of myself and on behalf of the other Canadians
present at this Conference, I thank you, our American
cousins, for the cordial reception we have had here. We
shall carry back to our homes not only suggestions that
we hope to put into practice, which we think will bear fruit
abundantly, but we shall carry back this thought impressed
upon our hearts, that we are all of one blood, that we are
one people, after all.
Procedure in Condemning Land for Public Use
FRANK B. WILLIAMS, ESQ., New York City:
One of the great troubles in carrying on city planning
arises from the waste incident to our expensive methods of
taking property for public use. The procedure for con-
demnation, for instance, is made needlessly complicated and
expensive. The rights of property owners would be
adequately safeguarded by simplifying the present cumber-
some machinery. If a simpler method were adopted I
think a great part of the difficulty in acquiring and would
be obviated. We should consider the necessity of a reform
in procedure, and aim at uniformity in all the states of
the Union.
FLAVEL SHURTLEFF, ESQ., Secretary of the Conference:
So long as the difficulty that Mr. Williams has just
presented exists, there will be a permanent obstacle to the
execution of city planning. Land ownership in the munici-
[95]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
pality is essential, and the acquisition of land in the great
majority of cases means the starting of condemnation
proceedings. It does not seem necessary to protect indi-
vidual rights to the extent of keeping the city out of
desired land from two to five years, and yet this delay is
not exceptional in cases where condemnation procedure
has to be invoked.
Let me cite as one cause, and the chief cause, of the
delay and expense in condemnation procedure the right
of appeal to a common law jury. It is a rule to which
I am glad to say there are some notable exceptions, that
a jury in condemnation cases will find a verdict against
the city, and both materially increase the award of damages
to property owners and materially decrease the betterment
assessment, if it allows any betterment assessment at all.
The result is that cities do not take chances with juries
but make settlements with owners on a basis outrageously
in excess of the fair market value of the land. The effect-
iveness of the condemnation procedure which eliminates
the jury is evidenced in several commonwealths. I am think-
ing particularly of Indiana. I am told by the Indianapolis
Park Commissioners that in acquiring land for a park
system, work which has been going on for about three years,
there have been only three appeals from the awards of the
park commissioners. It would be difficult to convince the
Boston Street Commissioners of the truth of this statement,
and I feel sure that had there been a right of appeal to
a jury in Indianapolis, the park commissioners' awards
would not have been so generally assented to.
But you say " there is a constitutional provision that
makes a jury necessary." You will be surprised to know,
perhaps, that many commonwealths have a jury in condem-
nation cases only because other commonwealths have a
jury. Under the common law, a jury hearing in land
damage cases was not a right of the private owner, and the
common law still obtains, except where it is modified by
constitution or statute. Some states that have let the
[96]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
common law alone are enjoying condemnation procedure
without the intervention of a jury; other states have given
land owners the right of appeal to jury by statute, and in
still others the right is a constitutional one. It will be
an extremely difficult matter because of the opposition of
landed interests, either to overturn statutes or amend
constitutions, but if the city is to acquire land in a reason-
able time at reasonable cost, we must secure a more
competent tribunal to determine awards of damages and
assessments for benefit.
The Coordination of Municipal Effort
THE CHAIRMAN:
One of the most encouraging things in city planning
is the increasing recognition of the need for coordination
of the work. It has been heretofore going on more or less
piecemeal, and it should be brought together for the greatest
effectiveness. In considering the problem, for instance,
of meeting the cost of city planning, we should not lose
sight of the direct and indirect effects that assessments
may have upon the different features of city planning.
To my mind one of the strongest arguments that can be
made in support of assessments for benefit is that it fur-
nishes, on the one hand, a stimulus to the city to plan
ahead properly, and, on the other hand, it furnishes a
check and restraint upon planning because there is aroused
the interest of adjacent property owners, who must pay
the bills. Indirectly by a better system of finance we have
one of the most powerful influences for a better system
of planning.
MR. L. L. TRIBUS, Consulting Engineer of the Borough of
Richmond, New York:
It will be a matter of interest to those present, following
the topic of cooperation between city officials and city
departments, to know that at a recent meeting of New
[97]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
York's central ruling body, the Board of Estimate and
Apportionment, a resolution was passed prohibiting the
acquisition of property or the erection of a public building
on property already owned by the city until the President
of the Borough in which the property belonged had full
opportunity to report upon the matter and advise the
Board of Estimate and Apportionment as to whether there
would be interference with any existing or contemplated
plan for general civic betterment. The resolution also
forbade department heads from presenting their requests
to the Board of Estimate and Apportionment until they
had first held a conference with the respective Borough
Presidents as to the possibility or probability of such
interference, the whole being aimed at securing proper
cooperation between otherwise independent authorities, so
that the appearance, at least, of portions of the city in in-
terest could be developed along intelligent and harmonious
lines. New York has grown so rapidly in population that its
energies have been largely devoted to trying to provide
transportation, with but comparatively little effort towards
the artistic or beautiful or even convenient city. Recently,
however, public sentiment is demanding intelligent thought
and careful planning, so that the city of the future shall
not only be habitable, but impressive and artistic.
City Planning and Housing
MR. ELMER S. FORBES, Boston:
My interest has been more especially in the direction
of providing better housing for people in some of the
unplanned cities, but this subject has a very vital connection
with city planning. A large part of the trouble comes
from improperly laid out towns. With streets properly
planned and with building lots of suitable depth most of
the housing problem would disappear. The difficulty may
perhaps be taken care of with comparative ease in newly
laid out towns or in extensions of older towns which may
[98]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
be laid out at the present time and in the future. Our
difficulty with the housing problem is in trying to get
proper housing in the old town. I don't know that that
concerns this gathering so much as some other questions.
I have been greatly interested in what has been said
with reference to the ability of towns and cities to develop
in their own way. At present we here in Massachusetts
have been compelled to go to the legislature, as has been
the case in other states, for everything that we wanted
to do. We have recently passed in the General Court a
bill, which has been signed by the Governor, permitting
towns and cities to pass by-laws and ordinances respecting
fire protection, public health and public morals, and we
believe that through the agency of this law it is going to
be possible for towns and cities, if they choose, gradually
to improve conditions.
There is also a tenement house bill which has passed both
houses of the General Court and is now in the hands of
the Governor. It is not a mandatory bill at all, but an
enabling act which will permit towns, if the Governor sees
fit to sign it, to provide themselves with a housing law
which will shut out bad housing in the future absolutely,
and we are waiting with bated breath to see what his
Excellency will do in the matter. With these two bills
we shall be in a position to do something as we wish to
do it; and then, of course, must come that campaign of
education, because without education it will be impossible
to secure the benefits of these bills. The trouble in the
past has been that too many people have thought, as was
recently expressed in a town meeting, that a man ought
to be allowed to build anything he likes, at any time and
anywhere. That disposition must be overcome, and it
can only be overcome by education.
[99]
THE PROBLEM OF THE BLIGHTED DISTRICT
MR. J. RANDOLPH COOLIDGE, JR.
Fettow American Institute of Architects, Boston
SINCE you are to have a disappointment in my address,
you had better have the measure of it now. I am not
going to point out any blighted districts in Boston or in
New York, though they exist, nor in Philadelphia, nor
anywhere else. I am not going to show you any lantern
slides to illustrate what a blighted district is. I am going to
address you as people who know what my definition of a
blighted district applies to, each of you in your own city
or town.
My discussion of the subject will be entirely theoretical.
I am not aiming at any district anywhere. Nevertheless,
if apology is needed for presenting this subject in a some-
what technical way, I will justify myself by saying that
the Metropolitan Plan Commission appointed last June
by the Governor of Massachusetts, that labored and died
early in January, asked certain questions of the people
to whom it looked for help here in Boston. We had three
sets of questions, — one addressed to our friends abroad;
the second intended for Americans outside of Boston; the
third set just for ourselves. Among those questions was
this : " Think of any region in the metropolitan district
in which values are stationary or falling. Is there any
action that you can suggest to rehabilitate this district
and put it on the up-grade?" The answers to that ques-
tion — which, I repeat, was advanced only to persons in
Boston — indicated that, in their minds, at least, there
were some districts to which the question applied; -but
[100]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
the remedies suggested were few and far between. It is
to direct your attention as city planners to this problem
of the blighted districts that I will ask you to suffer for a
few minutes this evening, while I consider the problem
of the blighted district.
What is a blighted district and what has it to do with
the subject of city planning? A blighted district is one
in which land values after a period of increase are station-
ary or falling. (I am not talking of any social blight
whatever; this is an economic question, as I view it.) Its
relation to city planning is that it represents the absence
or the failure of planning and cries out for meliorative
treatment under penalty of discrediting city planning for
any but undeveloped areas.
Now city planning has few functions more important
than the conservation and restoration of impaired land
values. When a district goes through the successive trans-
formations from rural to suburban and urban, residential,
small retail business, wholesale business, storage, industrial
uses, offices and large retail, there is an alteration or
renewal of the buildings at each stage of the movement
and a partial sacrifice of values that is more than made
up (in most cases) by the increase in the value of the
sites. Thus, in Metropolitan Boston today,
Land in the open country may be worth .... $5.00-$500.00 per acre.
Suburban residential .02- 2.00 per sq. ft.
Urban residential 1.00- 10.00 per sq. ft.
Small retail business 5.00- 25.00 per sq. ft.
Wholesale business (& storage) 10.00- 50.00 per sq. ft.
Industrial uses .05- 5.00 per sq. ft.
Offices and large retail business 20.00- 250.00 per sq. ft.
New buildings (permanent) may range in cost . . 2.50- 100.00 per sq. ft.
It is plain that wherever the increase in value of the
land more than offsets the depreciation on the buildings,
there is no economic loss. In Metropolitan areas by far
the greater part of the land is rising in value, and valuation
tends to increase faster than population, for, owing to the
fall in the value of gold and other causes, prices tend
[101]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
upward. Moreover, the upward movement of prices keeps
real estate improvements from showing the whole of the
shrinkage in value that is inseparable from increasing
age. If a building that cost $100,000 thirty years ago
could not be replaced today for less than $130,000, it
may have an earning capacity greater than belongs to
its theoretical value obtained by charging off thirty years'
depreciation from its first cost. It is somewhat fortunate
that a part of the value of old buildings is thus conserved,
for when a particular piece of land attains its fullest
earning capacity, that capacity gradually tends downward,
because of the waning advantages of the buildings as they
grow older.
Here then is a frequent cause of economic blight. A
district once rural has become suburban through extension
of a street railway with horse cars (curious old-fashioned
word), the horse cars have been replaced by electrics,
the running time shortened one-half and the service doubled.
The suburban detached houses, each in its own garden,
give place to continuous blocks of dwellings, or detached
apartment houses. The street frontage is practically
built up and the back of the lots, although open, is
decidedly unattractive. If this district is transformed from
suburban to urban within a few years, the later buildings
are not likely to be more attractive or valuable (per square
foot) than the earlier invaders. This means that the
development attains definite proportions within a compara-
tively short time and then stops. The land is fully covered
with buildings, and the buildings are in competition with
still newer buildings on cheaper land a little further out
of town. If now a subway or an elevated railway affords
rapid transit to outlying unimproved sections and brings
them within twenty to forty-five minutes' run from the
down town centers, the competition of attractive low-priced
building sites not more remote from the center than the
older sections were when they were first built up is liable
to bring the growth of these older sections to a standstill,
[102]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and their buildings showing signs of age, perhaps of neglect,
enter upon a stage of declining value that may be called
blight. The more hastily and cheaply a district has been
built up, the sooner its symptoms of structural decay be-
come acute. One single neglected wooden building among
scores gives an impression of decline that repels possible
tenants of adjoining property. A decline in rents, together
with persistent overvaluation of properties, most of which
are virtually for sale, intensifies the difficulties of the owners
who begin to neglect the upkeep (especially the painting
and plumbing) of their buildings or require the tenants
to make the repairs which then invariably are insufficient
for proper maintenance. In such a district business can-
not thrive, good new housing cannot be provided except
by destruction of buildings less good, but not without value ;
these older buildings become ever more forlorn and a per-
manent blighting is established until some new impulse from
outside transforms and recreates the district.
In cases that will readily come to mind the discontinuance
of some large industry may leave a district with empty
factory buildings, and a supply of cheap dwellings far
beyond the immediate demand.
In still other cases a residential section once attractive
is blighted by the permanent disfigurement of its main
thoroughfares through the construction of an elevated rail-
way, or as a result of the depreciation of some section
intervening between it and the center of the city through
bad pavements, unkempt or disorderly streets (and houses),
an increase in the number of saloons, a development of
slum conditions. There is unfortunately no legal compensa-
tion for the damage done to a quiet self-respecting neighbor-
hood through the depreciation of the main traffic streets
that connect it with the down town center. Even the
owners of property abutting upon a line of elevated railway
are fortunate compared with those whose premises border
upon side streets in the same region. The latter have no
claim to compensation from the uproarious intruder whose
[103]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
coming has beset them with turmoil whenever they leave
or draw near to their homes; too often with the added
injury of reduced service on the surface car lines.
Now the remedies for a blighted district are more easily
suggested than applied. So long as a district is not really
but only apparently blighted, its present buildings un-
remunerative but its land values maintained or rising by
reason of good prospects, no remedy is needed and the
initiative of property owners can be safely counted upon;
but when the general mass of real estate transactions in
a district shows an unmistakable decline in values, the fact
should be recognized by assessors and revaluations made
accordingly. It is worse than useless to try to maintain
a fictitious appearance by valuations which the earning
capacity of property does not warrant. Inadequate re-
turns on capital are not helped by high taxes. The taxes
should be lowered even though the city's general rate of
taxation has to be raised and the loss upon the blighted
district must be made good by more favored sections. Not
only must the city expect to receive less, but also to expend
more in a district that has seen better days.
There is no such thing as a hopeless district, and the less
of decline there may be even in the worst spots, the easier it
will be to give values a general upward tendency by the right
expedients of city planning. Suppose that a main thorough-
fare that formerly served the traffic needs of a residential
district has become overcrowded in course of time with
traffic unrelated to that district, or suppose such a
thoroughfare to be given over to street railways, including
an elevated structure, some new means of access exempt from
the drawbacks of the older highway is greatly to be desired,
a new parallel street for instance with asphalt pavement
free from car tracks. Failing this — which is a costly expe-
dient, to be sure — the existing main thoroughfare may be
widened or repaved or designated as a one-way street,
but the effect upon the district is neither so beneficial nor
so lasting. Independently of any improvement in ap-
[ 104]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
preaches a blighted area can be redeemed by judicious
improvements at public expense, as by planting of trees
and shrubbery in certain streets, re-surfacing others,
erecting well-designed public buildings on well-chosen sites,
schoolhouses, police and fire stations, public baths, gym-
nasia and markets, by creating or improving open spaces,
squares, playgrounds and small parks, — and by establish-
ing civic centers with popular lectures and concerts. All
that public authority can lawfully do to make life more
agreeable in such districts should be done, rather than
in those that pay a larger share of the taxes or attract
an increasing population, for the mere increase in popu-
lation is a sign usually of industrial prosperity and good
demand for labor. Indeed the evil of congestion, which is
the very opposite of the depletion we are now dealing with,
is caused by the rush of new industries to a well-assured
labor market and by the tide of new population (largely
foreign) attracted by the new industries. Since there is
so marked a tendency in certain manufactures, like that
of clothing or confectionery, to pre-empt high-priced land
in sections of the city already built up with tenements and
shops, it is likely that the introduction of such industries
into sections hitherto free from them will be accompanied
by an increase in population and of land values, and the
housing will tend to change in character from separate
dwellings to crowded tenements. How far a sound public
policy will justify the introducing of new industries under
exemption from taxation for a certain number of years is a
debatable question, but it is easier to justify such exemption
when applied to the conserving of existing values threatened
with depletion than to advocate it as a means of creating
non-existing value. Self-preservation is Nature's law.
This plea may also commend the practice of municipal
housing which, however successful in England and Germany,
is looked on askance in this country as an unwarranted
invasion of the field of private enterprise. There is no
criticism of the municipality that establishes schools, hospi-
[105]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
tals and asylums in competition with private institutions,
nor are we averse to municipal water supply and lighting
and power plants. As yet, however, we hesitate as to muni-
cipal traction systems and denounce municipal housing as
paternalism. Nevertheless the one remedy approved by
actual experience in dealing with intolerable conges tipn_pf
population Is municipal expropriation and model housing ;
anoTthis is a remedy that can be advised on economic and
social grounds to apply to a district in decline.1
No city is well administered unless the whole of it is
well administered. Where private capital halts and dreads
the risk and feels no responsibility for future conditions,
public credit must be applied, and declining values social
and economic, must be supported until they can stand alone,
for a city, unlike a business enterprise, cannot liquidate,
it cannot discard its unprofitable lines, it must grow, it
must change, but it must not depreciate.
DISCUSSION
MR. F. L. OLMSTED, Brookline, Mass.:
As Mr. Coolidge has been delivering his paper I have been
wondering at the probable reaction of various members
of this conference on that paper, and wondering somewhat
as to my own reaction.
I think there are probably a good many members of the
conference who will, without defining it very clearly in
their own minds, rather start back from the idea expressed
by Mr. Coolidge that it is the business of the community,
the business of the city, to support land values. I want
to point out the connection between that idea and what
1 " If American cities have nothing to learn from other countries in regard
to bad housing, they have nothing to teach in the way of reform. They are
following Europe slowly and a long distance behind. There is no serious
attempt to deal with insanitary areas, as they have been dealt with in Eng-
land, or to prevent the creation of new ones by regulation and planning of
extensions as in Germany or to promote the provision of superior houses by
organized public effort as in several countries." — ARTHUB SHADWELL in
Encyc. Brit., Housing.
[106]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
might be regarded as the reverse statement of it, which
was discussed this morning. It might be said that if, as
we all seemed to agree this morning, the city has a right
to collect and should collect the value which the action of
the city in making and carrying out its city plans gives to
private property, the reverse of that, as suggested by Mr.
Coolidge, is perhaps in fairness also true, — that when the
action of the city has depreciated property, through im-
proper or unwise planning or through the mere accidents
of planning which on the whole is good, the city should
stand behind that loss in some way, not by paying damages,
but by striving to make good the depreciation which has
come about from the action or non-action, the fault of the
city, as regards that district. Are not those two ideas,
in fairness, more or less complementary, one to the other?
I simply inject that idea into the discussion.
HON. LAWSON PURDY, New York City:
I have very seldom heard so philosophical and comprehen-
sive a paper as that of Mr. Coolidge. Being in an assessing
department, it holds me with very great force, because
when values decline or are stationary the owners of such
property make life especially miserable to the assessors. They
ought to do it. It is the function of an assessing depart-
ment to keep pace with vanishing and declining values so
that those so unfortunate as to own declining or stationary
property shall not bear an undue burden. But an assessing
department must always, from the nature of things, follow
the evidence. Consequently they are always somewhat
under the rising values and they are somewhat above the
falling values. All the more need, then, for great industry
on the part of an assessing department.
But I did not rise to speak of assessing depart-
ments. I have seen and you have seen certain sections
of a city remain stationary or decline, and Mr. Coolidge
has made certain philosophical generalizations as to certain
things, as far as the responsibility of the city is concerned.
[107]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
It comes home to me, thinking of my own city of New York,
how certain territory has remained stationary or has de-
clined which was once on the up-grade, and that that fact
is evidenced there and evidenced everywhere that the city
has been at fault. The advance of land value measures
the economic utility of the site that advances, and if a
city advances in value in a normal way, along lines of
main thoroughfares, advances radially from the center,
it ought never to go back, for the land nearest the center
ought always to be put to a higher economic use than the
land farther from the center. If that is not the case, it
is the fault of the city authorities. We have been confronted
in the city of New York for some years with declining
values along our best known street, Broadway. From
Broadway west to the Hudson River, there is a large terri-
tory, part of which was once occupied by people of moderate
means living in their own and hired houses, one family to
a house, part of which was inhabited by people who owned
their own dwellings of larger size or who hired at large
rentals. Those dwelling houses remain to this day in
large numbers, but instead of housing a single family they
house three, four or more families. Their glory has passed
and the aggregate rental is less. They are not suited for
the uses to which that part of the land in the city of
New York should be put.
I do not know entirely why that condition exists. I
think I know one reason, and the main reason, and it is that
that development of the land west of Broadway on Manhat-
tan Island was unplanned. There were no thoroughfares
running to and from the financial section of Manhattan,
and there are not to this day. There is one good street,
Hudson Street, and a certain line of commercial activity
has been pushing northward along Hudson Street to
the enhancement of values on that street. But all the
way between Hudson Street and Broadway there has
been stagnation, and on Broadway there has been a decline.
The decline on Broadway, I think, has been partly due
[108]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
to the character of the ownership, the lack of ability and
foresight of the owners. Buildings on Broadway today are
very largely what they were thirty, forty and fifty years
ago — good buildings in one sense, that will last fifty years
yet and maybe one hundred, if cared for, but lacking the
modern advantages. North of that, where the land was
not owned by estates which did not spend the money to
improve, but owned by persons capable of improving, prop-
erty has been improved in accordance with modern condi-
tions, and tenants from the old section have been taken in-
to modern buildings, fire proof, with a sprinkler system,
elevators, up to date in every way.
I have only hinted at the causes. I do not know them all.
I can see certain things that happen. But I think it is
clear at least that the city has not done its part by means
of through streets of adequate size to develop that territory
in a way that would have been best for the economic advan-
tage of the city of New York. Again, I want to come
back to the point that impressed me so much in Mr.
Coolidge's paper. The value of land is the test of economic
advantage to the city of every square foot of soil, and
when land farther away from the center rises to a higher
point in value, while land near the center remains station-
ary or goes backward, there is something wrong. That
something wrong must be due to some lack of foresight or
lack of ability on the part of the city government.
DR. DANA W. BARTLETT, Los Angeles:
The speaker who said that no city was well adminis-
tered that was not well administered in every part, it seems
to me, struck the keynote. No city can be half good and
half bad. The first thing to do in connection with city
planning, in dealing with the question of blighted areas,
is to find out the cause. If it is through deterioration in
the character of the region, as has perhaps been suggested,
the coming in of bad life in any respect, that is, of course,
a matter for social study and for scientific examination,
[109]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
to see if we cannot find a way in which the moral life of
that neighborhood may be elevated, and in that way elevate
the values of the land.
I have in mind in our town an effort that is being made
to put the civic center and the new Union Station in what
is called the blighted neighborhood. It seems to most of
us that that would be a thing well done, because it happens
also to be the historic center of the city. Then in our town
we have a movement for a garden city. Mr. Olmsted is
at work upon plans looking to a great industrial city
that will be free from all the evils of the old life of the city.
When the people move to Mr. Olmsted's new village from
that region where the factories now exist, shall that region
simply be left, or may it not become a study on the part
of those who are planning the city how that particular
region can be improved? Shall it fill up with shacks? Shall
the poorer class of people be allowed there, or shall every-
thing possible be done to elevate the people, elevate their
ideals, possibly by putting in a playground or a small
park, or running a boulevard through that region, some-
thing that will add to the value of the whole city? The
point that the speaker has made, it seems to me, is good,
that the whole city is the thing that we are working on.
We cannot beautify a city simply with a beautiful string
of boulevards and parks, or even our garden city, but
we must work until every part is up to the ideal.
FRANK B. WILLIAMS, ESQ., New York City:
In listening with interest and pleasure to Mr. Coolidge's
paper I was also thinking of the reason which the city
could have for trying to keep up land values in blighted
districts, and an additional reason occurred to me — that
a blighted district tends to become an unsanitary district,
and where the blight goes far enough in time it may even
tend to become a slum district. Here we have another
reason, and a strong reason, why something should be done
for such a district, whether it is blighted simply in the
[110]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
way of land values or whether it has become blighted
through becoming a slum district. In city planning in this
country we have two great problems always before us. In
the first place, what we should do ? — and we all know
that is a serious enough problem; and in the second
place, whether under our legal system we can do it? As
soon as health considerations can be urged in connection
with this problem the courts allow us a free hand. The
English Unsanitary Areas Act is an excellent example for
us to follow, and we have precedents in this country, notably
one here in Boston. The area here, it is true, was not a
blighted one. It was an unsanitary one simply by reason
of bad drainage and the Back Bay. It was condemned as
a whole, and in the reclaimed district a new street system
was laid out with great advantage to the city in every way,
financial, economic and otherwise. So far as I can see
there is every reason why unsanitary districts or districts
blighted in any way should be condemned as a whole, re-
planned, and the land sold off so that the city can get all
the economic and hygienic advantages. It is not a new
field legally, it is not a new field practically. It is something
we can do with freedom and success.
MR. E. K. MORSE, Pittsburgh, Pa. :
I am more than interested in the discussion this evening
because of its relation to the question of housing, a subject
which is giving us more anxiety in Pittsburgh, I think,
than any other. There is every reason why it should do
so, because there is no distress in the city of Pittsburgh
equal to that which comes from the lack of good housing.
I have been in the Whitechapel district of London when
I felt very much like backing out, and I have been inside
a year in places in Pittsburgh where I have felt like backing
out — not for the same reason, not because it was especially
dangerous as regards menace to life or limb, but because
it was unwholesome, unhealthy and nerve-racking. We have
there a population that is varying and changing continually.
[in]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
The recent strike in our coal mines meant an almost en-
tirely new population. It is so in the mill districts. Every
time there is a change of rates you have a partial or entire
shut-down, and the whole population changes.
This is but one of our city planning difficulties. The
other is caused by Pittsburgh's peculiar topography. Why,
we are just now spending $800,000 in the laying out of
squares and are asking the city government to condemn
property in order that we may get some vacant lots. Most
of our vacant ground is on edge. All the business of Pitts-
burgh is done on 210 acres — I am speaking of the financial
district — between hills 700 feet high on one side and 400
feet high on the other. Such humps very effectually prevent
growth. The residential part of the population is separated
in just the same way. When you compare this condition to
Boston and her level fields you see the enormous disadvan-
tage that Pittsburgh has in .solving the problem of city
planning.
MR. WALTER B. STEVENS, St. Louis, Mo.:
Blighted districts in our city are the concern of the city
planning commission but recently appointed. Our first city
planner was the founder of the city. He laid out a plaza
on the river front and built back of it. He called it the
"Place Publique," and he told the men about him when
he laid out that plan that he was going to have one of
the finest cities in America. That plaza remained there
through three generations. Then came the Bostons, the
American invasion, and when the city was organized, not
quite 100 years ago, they were able to out-vote the French
and elect a Boston mayor. One of the earliest things that
that administration did was to sell this Place Publique that
had been intended by the founder for the use of the people
for all time. It was built over with commission houses
and warehouses because it lay near the river landing. In
those days river transportation was everything, and now
our city plan commission has as its first problem to get
[112]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
back the Place Publique. The growth around there has
been arrested by the railroad. It is a blighted district
all about, blighted because the river transportation has
gone down. I presume that the total cost of the property
will be at least a million dollars, which is nothing like its
former value. Our commission has started with the idea
of clearing away a string of blocks nearly three-quarters
of a mile long on that river front, to get back what the
founder intended to see there and what we lost through
the "Bostons."
But there is another blighted district, which comes about
through economic, not through social causes, that is giving
us trouble. With rapid transit, through the electrification
of the street railway systems, the people who lived in the
best houses were, you might say, left stranded between the
business center and Grand Avenue, a strip of two miles.
Stone-front houses, some of them as fine as the best people
in St. Louis could build, went down rapidly to about one
fourth or perhaps one third of their original value. How
to save this district from becoming a slum has been engag-
ing the attention of our commission. We propose to con-
demn a strip from Boylston Street to Grand Avenue about
260 feet wide and lay this strip out in two border roadways
of 60 feet and divide the remaining 140-foot center strip
into sidewalks, trafficways, parkways and street car reserva-
tion. It will cost fifty per cent at least more than the
assessed value, or about $6,000,000, but only in this way
can we save the great heart of St. Louis.
The city plan commission of St. Louis has come into
existence not as a voluntary movement but by force of public
demand. Our people have realized that something must
be done to steady values, to restore the river front, a tract
four blocks wide and ten or fifteen blocks long, and try to
save the area which I have just described, which is now
degenerating into a slum district. The commission is
organized on what seem to be practical lines authorized
by ordinance and provided with an appropriation which
[113]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
for the coming year is as much as the commission asked for.
The membership of the commission comprises among others,
ex officio, the president of the council and the speaker
of the House of Delegates. In that way we get immediate
connection with the legislative branches of the government.
Then there is the head of our tax department, the president
of our board of public improvements, corresponding, with
enlarged powers, to your city engineer and street com-
missioners, the park commissioner and the building com-
missioner, and there are nine citizens representing all
elements in the community as nearly as possible and all
parts of the city. These men are working as heartily
and as earnestly as men having high ideals in the way of
city planning might be expected to work. Out of such
an organization we hope to get rapid and good results.
We have all the papers in the city with us and following
up the matter so closely that they are insisting that we
shall have something beside plazas on paper. The situation
looks hopeful; and yet when it comes to assessing six
million dollars of benefits on people with property lying
along both sides of this great park and trafficway in the
heart of the city, the tug of war will come.
We hope to meet the cost of the great improvements
which are contemplated by assessing it on the districts
which are peculiarly benefited and by spreading the assess-
ments over a series of years. This is the method that
has worked perfectly in Kansas City. After recommenda-
tion from the park board, the city council decides whether
the assessment shall be distributed over five, ten, fifteen
or twenty years, its decision depending on the size and
the extent of the improvement. In the ten years that this
method has been in practical operation, the experience has
been that from forty to sixty per cent of the property
owners will take advantage of the installment plan. The
rate of interest is six per cent on the deferred payments or
installments, and when they come in default it becomes
eight per cent. Then, when action is taken to enforce the
[114]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
lien, as you would a tax, it becomes ten per cent ; and then
the owner has a year to pay up all delinquencies and have
the thing cleared up before his property goes at a tax
sale.
The Kansas City method has been thoroughly tested, and
decisions of the supreme court have sustained the pro-
visions of the charter which incorporate the assessment
principle. Though we are in the same State of the Union,
Kansas City has ten years' start of us in city planning
achievement by its foresightedness in securing this advan-
tageous legislation, which, being incorporated in its charter,
applies only to that municipality.
MR. COOLIDGE, closing the discussion in answer to a question
by MR. KELLAWAY:
I would say that we have the kind of congestion that I
referred to in my paper, due to the increase in factories
which require near at hand a supply of unskilled labor.
The very increase of those factories reduced the available
area for housing and increased the demand for labor and
attracted more labor. We have moved in a vicious circle,
and the only remedy that has been suggested which has
promised any effectiveness is the very drastic one that has
been used in London and other foreign cities, of expropriat-
ing a part of that densely populated area and colonizing
the inhabitants in some other part of the city, then rebuild-
ing with good houses for a smaller population under better
conditions. That is so serious a problem that nobody has
proposed it for Boston. I know of no other remedy, and
the condition is increasingly bad.
[115]
THE PUBLIC STREET SYSTEMS OF THE CITIES
AND TOWNS ABOUT BOSTON IN RELATION
TO PRIVATE STREET SCHEMES
MR. ARTHUR A. SHURTLEFF
Fellow American Society of Landscape Architects, Boston
HAD you the power to rebuild your cities of the West
and the East, taking counsel of the past to make your
future plans perfect, whom would you trust to rearrange
your streets? Would you consult with the philanthrop-
ists and draughtsmen who devised the rigid gridirons of
Philadelphia, Chicago, and San Francisco, or would you
turn for counsel to the farmers, traders, and shipbuilders
who fashioned the meandering street system of the district
about Boston? In other words, would you seek the ad-
vice of men lacking topographical sense, but industrious
with the T square, dividers, and theodolite, or would you
confer with men acute in perceptions of gradient and site,
but lacking the most rudimentary knowledge of mapping
and composition? Doubtless you would feel little inclined
toward either of these groups of men, and yet the district
about Boston owes to farmers, traders, and shipbuilders the
best system of radial thoroughfares in America, and for
the want of the coordinating faculty of the dullest philan-
thropist and the stupidest draughtsman, this district stands
a strong chance of possessing the worst system of circum-
ferential highways in the world. A brief review of the
parts which have been played and which remain to be
played near Boston by these two groups of apparently
incompetent men may be of interest to students of city
design.
[116]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Boston was founded by men whose life-long contact
with shipping, lumbering, farming, and trade had taught
them the strategies of town placing. These pioneers
scanned the coast for weeks and finally settled here in
Boston under the conviction, which we also hold, that a
more perfect spot for human habitation and industry was
not to be found. They saw the value of this protected in-
curved shore, and the three navigable streams which
watered a gravelly country of moderate contour backed
by an amphitheater of high rock hills. At the focus of
this natural composition where the harbor shore was
deepest, they built their houses and wharves. A brisk
inland trade springing up from this young community
quickly brought about the formation of a system of radi-
ating trails leading to Plymouth, Hartford, Northampton,
Ticonderoga, Haverhill, and Quebec. These primitive
thoroughfares were laid out as direct as possible, but with
careful, even sensitive, regard for the contour of the hills
and river valleys to secure gradients moderate enough for
heavy pack trains and clumsy vehicles. The endurance of
man and beast covering a period of many generations
tested and fixed the line and grade of these primordial
radials in a manner which we cannot but admire today.
Our own knowledge of highway location has nothing to
offer to improve the work of these early toilers, except in
so far as our use of machinery enables us to overcome
obstacles which they avoided. The principles which they
practised are the principles which we have learned to use.
Those were ideal times for the growth of convenient
through roads when men had only to struggle against
natural difficulties, and before the more serious barriers
of land title and building obstruction had come into exis-
tence. Man-made obstacles have become more compelling
in our own time, until difficulties of topography are reck-
oned as of little consequence compared with conflicts with
land and buildings.
The system of roads which were derived in this scientific
[117]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
though rustic manner, and which were extended and im-
proved during the last two centuries by the various way
EXISTING
RADIAL THOROUGHFARES
BOSTON
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
} ^ *^org^*
FIGURE 1.
This map shows upon a small scale the existing radial through roads of the district.
The distribution of the roads forming this system of main highways is astonishingly uniform,
although each road, with hardly an exception, was built without regard to a general scheme.
cities and towns, is shown in Fig. 1. That so admirable a
system of thoroughfares was secured automatically
through the agency of systematically placed river valleys,
shore lines, and general ground contours, coupled with the
[118]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
well-distributed trading interests of the interior, is both
fortunate and astonishing. Conscious planning, except of
EXISTING
CIRCUMFERENTIAL THOROUGHFARES
BOSTON
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
FIGURE 2.
This map shows upon a small scale the existing streets. These roads, taken as a whole,
form the present cross-district system of highways. Their symmetrical distribution is notable,
especially in view of their failure to make through connections, and illustrates the remarkable
opportunity which the district possesses to create, by their coordination, an orderly and
efficient system of circumferential thoroughfares.
the line and gradient of each separate radial, was never
applied to this system. No general scheme for the placing
of these roads was ever worked out, and no cooperation re-
[119]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
garding them on the part of the cities and towns through
which they pass has ever been accomplished, with the one
exception that a Metropolitan commission has carefully
described them and reported the need of taking them sys-
tematically in hand.
It will be seen at once that the polar forces which pro-
duced this system of radials could not exert as great an
influence upon the development of thoroughfares tending
to unite the district by circumferential ties. Fig. 2 shows
to what degree coordination has occurred on these cross-
roads. The concentric position of these fragments, which
all but unite to form a complete system, is wholly the re-
sult of natural forces working for and against town-to-
town communication, and is not a consequence of deliber-
ate planning, except in the instance of parkways built
within the last twenty years. Our forbears had no knowl-
edge of these tendencies of their roads to group themselves,
and they had no conception of the advantages of a system
which would permit vehicles to pass conveniently not only
from one town to its adjoining neighbor, but to continue
without detour through town after town to more distant
centers.
Fig. 3 indicates how completely the orientation of the
scattered cities and towns about the parent Boston are
determined by the direction of the main radials upon which
the towns were founded. The common origin of these
settlements, their common dependence upon the city of
Boston, and the similarity of their daily life express them-
selves in a singular uniformity of plan. These street sys-
tems had the same naive origin as the streets of the Metro-
politan District. These centers were laid out upon approx-
imate checker-board systems modified to avoid irregulari-
ties of the ground and to lend themselves to arbitrary
property lines and to other local difficulties. Without ex-
ception the main street of this checker-board leads directly
towards Boston. Streets leading to adjoining communities
on the opposite side of this main road rarely, if ever, connect
[120]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
directly with the first lateral. This characteristic jog at
the crossing of the main street is of no great hindrance to
the business of the town, but it constitutes a very serious
obstacle in cross-district communication. The character-
A TYPICAL TOWN
OF THE
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
BOSTON
FIGURE 3.
istic plans of the majority of the cities and towns about
Boston, including Lexington, Maiden, Melrose, Everett,
Waltham, Watertown, Weymouth, Brookline, and many
others, is illustrated by the accompanying diagram. This
plan also typifies the heart of old Boston in which the
main street is represented by State Street and the lateral
[121]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
streets by Devonshire Street, Merchants Row, and Broad
Street, all of which cross State Street with annoying jogs.
The serious handicap to business and to traffic which has
been occasioned by this street arrangement in Boston is
sufficient evidence of the evils which are to be expected from
its repetition throughout all the older towns of the district.
Singularly enough, at this day, when the need of trunk
communication throughout the district is greatest, and
at a time when the methods of securing coordination are
best understood, we are least able to take advantage of the
good thoroughfare work which has already been done so
miraculously and to head off the bad work which is creep-
ing in. Our present problem is not so much to secure roads
to fill the gaps between the cities and towns while correct-
ing some of their imperfections, but it is rather to prevent
individual land owners from clogging vacant lands with
crooked roads, which by offsets, dead ends, and bad gradi-
ents tend effectually to block future thoroughfare devel-
opment altogether. Blockades of this kind cannot be over-
come like topographical barriers by the steam shovel and
the rock drill, because they are fixed by legal entangle-
ments and solidified by custom and investment until they
become adamantine. Road building in the district about
Boston was never so active as at present, and yet, measured
by its service to main transportation, this activity was
never so futile. Private individuals are building streets in
many of the cities and towns faster than the authorities
can provide sewers, water, sidewalks, and light. Town and
city engineers are often obliged to devote their entire time
to problems connected with these mushroom developments
which might have been solved in a moment's time had the
streets been properly located and connected. Private
individuals have the right to take the initiative, and the
towns follow as best they may. Many of the communities
about Boston have given up all hope of controlling the line
and gradient of private land subdivisions, so weak are the
powers delegated to the public to protect its own interests,
[122]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and so expensive are the costs of correcting ill-adjusted
streets when finally built. Few promoters of land sub-
SCHEMATIC
DIAGRAM OF THOROUGHFARES
BOSTON
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
FIGURE 4.
Having indicated the general characteristics of the existing radial thoroughfares, and of
the incipient circumferential thoroughfares, it remains to be shown that a combination of
these two types of main roads when perfected would afford an efficient system of inter-
communication for the district. The diagram shown above indicates in a purely schematic
way the combination of a series of radial and circumferential lines comparable with the ulti-
mate development of the existing and proposed thoroughfares of the district, with all local
streets omitted. The absence of the more intimate connections which are actually afforded
by these local streets places the diagram at a disadvantage, but it suffices to indicate the
readiness with which a vehicle at any point, such as X, may proceed to any other points,
such as A, B, C, D, E, by a variety of alternative routes. In fact, this combined scheme of
radials and circumferentials which the district has been slowly approximating in a wholly
unconscious manner during the last two centuries offers a system of intercommunication
more direct than that which could be afforded by a rectangular gridiron similiar to those
which characterize the plans of most American cities. It should be frankly admitted, how-
ever, that — in a decidedly minor aspect — a rigid gridiron scheme, like that of San Francisco,
Chicago and Philadelphia, has at least one point of superiority over all city plans containing
many diagonal lines, like the plan of Washington and Boston, all containing many curving
lines, like Paris and Boston. This superiority lies in the fact that strangers may
readily find their way in such uniform gridirons. To such strangers the streets of
Boston and the Metropolitan District promise forever to be a puzzle, but on the other hand,
these thoroughfares also promise to become more convenient for everyday use, more individual
and more free from monotony than any other street system in America,
divisions are interested in the future of the towns in which
they operate, and they cater to a market of small pur-
chasers to whom readiness of access to the nearest car line,
[123]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
railway station, or provision store is the only requisite of
highway service. To such purchasers the extension of im-
portant thoroughfares is of no interest, and to the land
speculator these main connections too often stand for an
interference with personal rights. It is unfortunate that
a prompt return from the sale of land cheaply subdivided
and cheaply described is often a better policy for the land
operator than a carefully planned subdivision of better
site and gradient, which eventually may bring greater
returns but at heavier initial cost for plans, construction,
and transfers, and fraught with the risk of delays. There
is no effective legal process now existing by which this
community can secure for itself without prohibitive cost a
control of street layouts essential to the convenient develop-
ment of a whole district.
We do not need a Hausmann or a L'Enfante to solve
the riddle or to start anew with a clean sheet of paper.
The scheme of our road system is already fixed and promises,
when completed, to be one of the most logical and con-
venient in the world. (See schematic diagram with foot
notes.) When the gaps are filled and the more evident
connections established, we may expect the plans of Paris
and Washington to seem by comparison wanting in con-
venience and variety. It will be too early for us to boast,
however, until the hundreds of miles of private roads which
are being built here each decade are made to conform to
this scheme. No brilliant intellect or ingenious wit is re-
quired to draw the plan; the most ordinary draughtsman
can fill in blanks so obvious. Real ability is needed, however,
to defend the public against the petty right of individuals
to interpolate in a great plan of thoroughfares whatever
hindrances in the form of irrelevant private streets fancy
or means may suggest.
[124]
STREET PLANNING IN NEWTON
MR. EDWIN H. ROGERS
City Engineer
THE street system of Newton, Mass., is similar to that
of most New England cities insomuch that it is not laid
out on any predetermined plan, being mainly the outgrowth
of and additions to a few ways of travel when its territory
was but sparsely settled, and it also shares their good for-
tune in not being laid out on the checkerboard plan so
common in other parts of the United States.
The subject of planning a street system for the future
first received attention in Newton in the year 1869, but
the favorable report of the committee which was ap-
pointed to consider the subject was not officially acted
upon. The matter of supervision of the city plan of
Newton was allowed to lapse until 1899, when it was sug-
gested that the city would be benefited by a so-called board
of survey act similar to that provided for the city of
Boston in the year 1891. The authorities finally decided
to let the matter drop, as was subsequently done in 1909,
when the same recommendation was made.
The form that the board of survey act usually takes
under the Massachusetts laws is to provide for a commis-
sion to pass upon the location, widths, grades, etc., of pro-
posed new streets, and to require that streets built without
the approval of such commission shall not be laid out nor
have the benefit of sewerage, water, or other public utili-
ties controlled by the city. Provision is also customarily
made for the planning in advance for streets in undeveloped
territory.
[125]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
At the present time there are two cities and five towns
in Massachusetts having boards of survey created by
special legislative act. There is also a general law which
any town can accept by vote and thereby vest in its select-
men the powers of a board of survey.
The problem of reconciling private land owners' inter-
ests and the convenience of the general public is a difficult
one for the members of any board of survey and requires
careful policy in all features of the work involved. Most
owners naturally desire to get the most they possibly can
out of their land, and in a city where the land is cut up
into irregular-shaped parcels it is difficult for such a com-
mission to do justice to both the private owner and the
public and to harmonize the interests of the different
owners, particularly where the topography admits of
various forms of development and the streets to be built
will never become thoroughfares.
The difficulties of planning lateral streets for the not
immediate future is well recognized, particularly in Bos-
ton, where a large proportion of the original layouts
filed by the board of survey in that city and the com-
mission succeeding to its powers have been revised and
annulled, in some instances because of too great waste of
land, in others because the resulting lots on the streets as
designed were of unsuitable size for the uses to which it was
evident they would be put, and in yet others for the
reason that it became apparent that the layout planned
did not adequately meet public convenience.
The tendency in many instances in the planning of a
wholesale system of streets by public authority is to pro-
vide streets of excessive width, particularly as regards
widths of the traveled ways, thereby putting the munici-
palities to an undue burden in cost of maintenance to say
nothing of the money uselessly expended in construction.
The minimum width of residence streets in this section of
the country is usually from 40 to 50 feet, but in many
places it is obvious that while it would generally be inad-
[126]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
visable to make the layout lines less than 40 feet apart,
yet in streets of greater width the width of the portion
graded for travel could be reduced from the general prac-
tice without detriment to the use of the street by the pub-
lic until such time as the volume of travel demanded more
width, thereby effecting economy in both investment and
maintenance.
A building line restriction results in the same effect as
that of a wide street, but puts the burden and responsibil-
ity of maintenance on the abutters instead of on the
municipality.
In developing their property, many property owners
find it convenient to locate a street along one of the division
lines between their own and their neighbor's property. In
such cases it often happens that the owner reserves a nar-
row strip, say one foot in width, between the street and
the adjacent property line, unless the adjoining owner
will contribute land or money for the new street. This re-
served strip is desirable from the owner's standpoint, as
he may rightly claim that his neighbor is not entitled to
have the benefit of the new street for the use or develop-
ment of his land without any cost to him, and it also tends
to retard the building up of the neighboring land with
houses that might be claimed to be undesirable to the first-
mentioned property. The neighboring owner may be
obliged to cut up his land with a street so close to the
property line in question that the backs of the lots he may
lay out will abut on the reserved strip, thereby resulting
in two streets perhaps within a hundred feet of each other,
usually an undesirable result.
Reserved strips of this nature have been the cause of
considerable unpleasantness in many places, and in recent
years it has not been the policy in Newton to lay out as
public streets any private ways having reserved strips
located beside them unless such strips are included as a
part of the street. The reasons for this policy are, briefly,
that the public streets are for the benefit of all the public
[127]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
to give them access to the adjacent land and to give an
owner an outlet from his property; also that it is unfair
for an owner to be cut off from a public street and its
numerous benefits, including sewerage, drainage, water,
lighting, etc., by a piece of property that he may only be
able to purchase at an exorbitant price if at all, and con-
sequently be prevented from realizing the full value of his
land; to say nothing of the loss of revenue by the munici-
pality from the potential value of increased taxable prop-
erty and the disadvantages of the less desirable street sys-
tem likely to result therefrom.
It appears to be a fact that the courts will not sustain
any laws prohibiting a man from laying out his land into
such streets as he sees fit, and the only way that the prac-
tice can be regulated is by refusing such an owner public
utilities. Definite information from more than sixty of
the largest cities of the United States and Canada shows
that some two thirds of that number attempt to regulate
the location of new streets, but in most instances with only
indifferent success, and it is apparent that ultimate success
in city planning along good lines can best be aided and
encouraged by educating the people to make the most
of their opportunities for the encouragement of civic
betterment.
[128]
STREET PLANNING IN WATERTOWN
ME. WILBUR F. LEARNED
Town Engineer
THE legislature of Massachusetts, by Chapter 272 of the
Acts of 1900, passed an Act to establish a Board of Sur-
vey for the Town of Watertown, the purpose of which was
to authorize the selectmen as a board of survey to obtain
the laying out of private lands with reference to adjoining
streets, and to obtain such locations of streets as would
conform to an economical drainage or sewerage system.
It was therefore made mandatory on all parties desiring to
lay out, locate, or construct any street or way in said town
before beginning such construction to submit to the Board
of Survey suitable plans of such streets or ways, to be
prepared in accordance with such rules and regulations as
the board might prescribe. Upon the receipt of such
plans, with a petition for their approval, the Board of
Survey were required by the act to give a public hearing
thereon after giving due notice in public print, and after
such hearing the board was given the right to alter such
plans and determine " where such streets or ways may be
located, and the widths and grades thereof and shall so
designate on said plans." The plans were then to be ap-
proved and signed by the board and filed in the office of the
town clerk.
Following the text of the act, " If any person or corpo-
ration shall hereafter open for public travel any private
way the location, direction, widths, and grades of which
have not previously been approved in writing by the Board
of Survey in the manner provided in this Act, then the
[129]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
town or any other public authority shall not place any
public sewer, drain, water pipes, or lamp in, or do any
public work of any kind on, such private way so opened
to public travel contrary to the provisions of this Act;
provided, however, that these provisions shall not prevent
the laying of a trunk sewer, water or gas main, if it be
required by engineering necessities."
It would appear, from the synopsis of the Board of Sur-
vey Act for Watertown, that the town was well provided
with authority to have all new streets systematically laid
out with proper gradients to obtain sewerage and drain-
age without undue expense.
Let us see how the Board of Survey Act worked in
Watertown with reference to a tract of land known locally
as the Bemis Estate. This tract of about thirty acres is
centrally located on a main thoroughfare extending from
Boston through Watertown and Waltham, Weston and
Sudbury, and also on a cross country street extending to
Arlington and Lexington. It is elevated land with southern
exposure overlooking the center of the town. It is easy
of access by streets with favorable gradients and possesses
all the requirements for first-class development.
The Bemis Estate was acquired by a company of land
speculators who laid out the streets without reference to
the adjoining street system of the town, and without ref-
erence to drainage or sewerage, with house lots of twenty-
five feet frontage and as nearly alike in all cases as was
possible.
No plan of streets was presented to the Board of Sur-
vey before construction nor was a petition for approval
made, and only by an official notification demanding a hear-
ing was the Board of Survey able to act in the matter.
At this hearing the Town Engineer showed the advisa-
bility of changing the location of the streets extending
east and west by making them continuous with other ad-
joining streets of the town for the purpose of coordination,
and as a matter of economy to the town when a system of
[130]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
drainage and of sewerage should be laid out. The pretext
given by the company for not adopting the street locations
as shown by the board was on account of expense.
The hearing was closed without the approval of the com-
pany's plan.
The company continued the construction of the streets
without regard to the hearing, knowing all the facts and
conditions that would follow. The streets have been partly
constructed by the removal of loam and the forming of
walks with sub-soil. In a few instances the streets are cut
through knolls to flatten what would otherwise make a very
steep gradient; but in all cases they follow the topog-
raphy of the land without regard to systematic grading,
and even an inexperienced person would look on them as
unfinished.
A few lots have been sold and buildings erected with no
facilities for sewerage, water, or lighting except in those
cases where the buildings have been erected within the
Bemis Estate and abutting on public streets.
It may now be asked what benefit was the Board of Sur-
vey Act to the town of Watertown, or why was not the
company compelled to lay out the streets in accordance
with the suggestion of the board? My answer is, The
power to regulate the use of private property depends
upon what is called the police power, and can be exercised
only when it is required for the protection of health or life,
or for protection against fire. Except as the exercise of
this police power may be necessary for the protection of
the public in respect to health, life, and fire risks, every
man has the right to unrestricted use of his own property,
so far as he does not injure others. For this reason the
owners of this tract of land could not be enjoined from
laying out the streets as they proposed, nor could they be
compelled to lay out streets in such manner as might be
approved by the Board of Survey.
[131]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
DISCUSSION
THE CHAIRMAN, MR. NELSON P. LEWIS:
Mr. Shurtleff showed a number of instances where thor-
oughfares passing through centers of population were con-
structed at an entirely inadequate width for the demands
of traffic upon them, and where up to the present time no
parallel street which would with its added capacity give
an adequate width has yet been provided. A number of
you have doubtless seen the report for 1911 of the London
Traffic Branch of the Board of Trade and will have noticed
that, conservative as the English have heretofore been in
their street widths, there is now a movement, a demand, for
fa* more generous street capacity. They recommend as
standards for main highways nothing less than one hundred
feet in width. The trouble in constructing these radial
highways out of London has been encountered in attempt-
ing to go through suburban towns. The towns resist vigor-
ously any attempt to widen their streets. They are satisfied
with existing conditions. A wide street with extensive traffic
means to them perhaps passing automobiles with a whirl of
dust, and their local tradesmen do not get any additional
business.
It has been suggested that in dealing with this problem
the thoroughfare should pass around the town entirely, if
streets cannot be widened at reasonable expense. A num-
ber of such by-passes have been indicated in this report
through towns in the metropolitan district of London.
It seems to me that there is there perhaps a suggestion
of value and possibly a solution of some of our troubles.
I recall a number of cases within the limits of the city of
New York where old highways coming through from old
settlements have a width at present of sixty feet. Some of
you may be acquainted with Flushing, on Long Island,
where old Broadway, leading out to the north shore of the
island, goes up to and partly through the town of Flush-
ing at a width of one hundred feet. A portion of it for a
[132]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
certain distance is then contracted to 60 feet. It is true
that it has been laid down on the map as a street of one
hundred feet in width all the way through. The widening
of the sixty-foot part to one hundred feet has been agi-
tated, but there is a very vigorous protest against it and
one that I suspect will be effective. Now, if the sixty-foot
street is to remain, it seems to me most essential that a
wide pass shall be provided through the less developed part
of this old settlement, in order that people may travel
properly through these towns on Long Island — Great
Neck, Little Neck, Manhassett, Fort Washington, and so
on. It is very important that the possible future develop-
ment of that part of Long Island shall be recognized and
that the thoroughfare shall be given this continuous width
of one hundred feet, even though there must be something
of a detour around the well-built portions of Flushing.
A good deal has been said about the expense of acquiring
property for streets. I cannot see, for the life of me, why
property which is taken for a street, which will convert the
abutting property into city lots, should be paid for on a
city lot basis when the property is not city lots, but noth-
ing but farms. The property is good for nothing else;
it is acreage property. And yet when we lay out a normal
street of sixty feet in width through that property and
thereby convert it from farm property into lots, the owners
expect and demand compensation for the land taken just
as though it comprised city lots.
Liverpool was the first city in England to have extraor-
dinary powers given to it in connection with this matter.
The year before the enactment of the English Town Plan-
ning Act, Parliament authorized the city of Liverpool to
take without any compensation whatever land which was
free from improvements up to a width of thirty-six feet,
which was the normal minor street width. But the act also
provided that if the local legislative authorities of the city
of Liverpool were to determine that in a particular loca-
tion more than thirty-six feet were required, that a width
[133]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
up to eighty feet was required, then eighty feet could be
taken without any compensation whatever. It seems to me
there is an inherent justice and equity in such a provision,
provided of course that a man will have left a normal lot
depth on either side of the street. Of course, if his prop-
erty is mutilated, if you take all he has or leave him prop-
erty that is not valuable for development, he must in fair-
ness be paid for it, but not on a city lot basis.
MAJOR JOSEPH W. SHIRLEY, Baltimore, Md.:
I should like to refer to some little legislation that we
thought was simple when it was passed, which has proved
to be very effective in taking care of the troublesome situ-
ation when a property owner insists on doing as he pleases
with his land. A few years ago Baltimore annexed a con-
siderable area for which a topographical map was pre-
pared and on that map a street plan was laid out. Our
trouble was to keep the owners from developments for
speculative purposes not in conformity with the plan. For
four or five years we have had very little success in bring-
ing many of them to terms. Then the act to which I have
referred prohibited the city from accepting the deed or
dedication of any street that did not conform to the plan
that had been adopted, or that plan as amended. An
amendment of that plan can only be made by the joint
action of the commission that has it in charge and the
mayor and the city council. If the city does not own a
street it has no authority to spend any money on it, and
we have been able for the last few years, by making the
matter as public as we could, to show that a man who has
a street which is a private street, and which by law will
have to remain a private street for all time, has a great
deal more trouble in disposing of his property than if it is
a street which the city will maintain. The speculator
in Baltimore, probably as everywhere else, after he sells
out his lots, moves away to other fields, and leaves the
condition of affairs he has created behind him. But the
[134]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
people have now got to a point where they appreciate the
situation, and when they buy a house they will look to see
that the street is on the city plan.
I have in mind the case of one man who disregarded the
plan and did with his property as he pleased. Now by his
own statement he has lost a good deal of money and still
has the houses on his hands.
We have another perplexing problem regarding private
streets in the territory which has been annexed. When this
land became part of Baltimore in 1888, it was taken in
under a contract that until 1900 the tax rate on the prop-
erty annexed would be exactly the same as it was in Balti-
more county at the time, or sixty cents on $100, and that
after 1900 it would remain at that same rate until the
streets were opened and graded around a block and six
houses were built. Now, we want to assess the property
that has been built on these private streets a higher rate
of tax, but we don't want to take the streets in many cases,
because they do not conform to the plan. This situation is
a real drawback to the proper development of our city
plan. I think in the course of a little time, however, we
will work it out in some suitable shape.
MR. E. P. GOODRICH, New York City:
I will indulge in a little prophecy. Some of my work has
been along what you might call legal engineering lines. In
Manhattan we are beginning to take very energetic steps
to remove encroachments where people have crept out onto
the street line. On the other side of the continent Los
Angeles has been having some trouble with the tide land
suits. In looking up the law and in having experience with
this sort of thing I find the courts have decided in several
cases — and I have in mind one or two instances of the
appraisal of public corporation assets — that where the
public interest runs counter to private development it
should be superseded, the individual being enabled in the
last instance to carry out a scheme which would run
[135]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
counter to the paramount interests of the general public.
I believe, however, that within a few years — even though
some decisions of late have ruled that it would take a con-
stitutional amendment, in view of what the Constitution
of the United States says as to individual property rights
— the courts will have swung in the other direction and
said that the paramount interest of the general public will
supersede that of the individual in such things as the open-
ing of streets or building lines in connection with special
development.
In the general discussion which 'followed emphasis was
laid on the necessity of subdividing for streets and lots
with the human viewpoint more in mind. Only brief sum-
maries of the discussion are given.
MR. H. J. KEI/LAWAY:
City planning will fail in a most important essential if
it does not provide for the payer of small rent a home of
his own with room enough around it to insure healthful
conditions and an expression of individuality. We have
been speaking too exclusively of land values; we must
think more of the social and human side of the problem.
MR. A. W. CRAWFORD:
I am glad that the last speaker has emphasized the health
feature of city planning and the importance of making it
possible for each man to own his own house. Great changes
in our social status are bound to come as a result of the
spread of the democratic doctrines of England and Ger-
many in this monarchical country of ours. When these
changes come they will be met more conservatively and
considerately, with due regard for the rights of others if
each man is his own landlord.
[136]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
THE CHAIRMAN:
While I think everybody must be in entire sympathy
with Mr. Crawford and Mr. Kellaway, in their advocacy
of the independently owned home for the working man, we
must provide him also with more adequate protection
against the real estate operator who fraudulently gets
every dollar of his money for the purchase of a home by
representing that so much down and so much a month will
pay for his house. It turns out that mortgages and
assessments for all kinds of improvements are later charged
against the property, and the owner is unable to meet the
payments. In cases of this kind I think he would be better
off if he did not own his house.
MRS. ROLLIN NORRIS:
It seems to me that if there should be some propaganda to
meet the American attitude that has been expressed here
tonight, that every man has a right to do as he wishes, it
would do a great deal of good. A man who takes the
ground that every one has a right to do as he wishes should
add the proviso that he does n't interfere with the rights
of others. There is too prevalent a fear that any progres-
sive action may interfere with the rights of individual
property owners. That attitude, I think, is not the atti-
tude of people generally, but of a great many conservatives
whose influence is far-reaching.
[137]
THE LEGISLATION NECESSARY FOR INTELLI-
GENT CITY PLANNING
Street Planning and the Law of Massachusetts
MR. WILLIAM F. WILLIAMS
City Engineer, New Bedford, Mass.
IN twenty years' experience in the engineering depart-
ment of the city in Massachusetts which has the record of
having made the largest growth in the last ten years of
any city in the Commonwealth, I have necessarily been
brought a great deal in contact with the law in its rela-
tion particularly to the layout of streets. I realize
that we are and must be a government by law, and that if
we ever expect to realize our dreams in regard to city
planning it must be done in conformity with law.
Cities and towns of this Commonwealth derive their sole
authority to lay out streets or ways from the General
Court. Existing laws on the subject were drafted many
years ago and have not been revised to meet the require-
ments of the present-day purpose and use of streets in
their relation to the material and esthetic necessities of a
growing city.
The present law relating to the creation of a street is
included in Chapter 48 of the Revised Laws, and while a
few cities have special laws on the subject they do not add
anything material to the powers granted in the general
law. The theory on which the law of today is founded is,
NOTE. — This subject and the four following were chosen for discussion out
of a list of fifteen submitted to the members of the conference. The discus-
sions were, for the most part, extemporaneous.
[138]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
first, that there is an immediate necessity for a highway
for public travel; second, that there is also to be an imme-
diate adjustment of the damages created by the taking
of private property. That there must be an immediate
necessity is shown by the opening words of the law, " If
common convenience and necessity require a new highway."
Certain sections of the law refer to the petition of those citi-
zens who actually want the highway, Which was originally
the first step to be taken in the creation of a way. Then
again, in the matter of damages, if the award of the author-
ities is not satisfactory, the appeal for a jury must be
made within one year " from the day when the highway
is entered upon and possession taken for the purpose of
constructing the same." Furthermore, possession must
be taken within two years or the layout is void. All of
which shows that in the minds of the framers of the law
a highway was a thing of necessity in the immediate pres-
ent, and not a question of the future.
Under these laws no city can adequately plan for the
future without incurring obligations that are prohibitory.
The law makes no provision for the projection of a street
on paper in advance of its requirement for public use. A
city might attempt such planning by local ordinance, but
it would have no standing as against the plans or wishes of
the owners of the land over which the street is to be located.
As the law stands today, a city must lay out and accept
a public street or way, pay the damages, enter upon and
construct it within two years, and thereafter maintain it
in a condition that the law will construe as reasonably
safe for public use. On the other hand, an owner of land
may lay out streets through his property to suit his pleas-
ure or convenience, sell lots on the same, and without any
public control define what will ultimately become a public
street. Practically an individual has usurped a function
fixed by law in certain officials. It is true, the municipal
authorities can say when it shall become a public street,
but suppose they refuse, the loser is not the real offender,
[139]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
because he has sold out, but the innocent purchaser who
has improved his property and wants those public utilities
which he cannot have except in a public street.
The creation of a public street should be a public func-
tion from its inception to its completion. The various uses
of public streets have long been a matter of public control.
Why should not the same authorities control all the steps
leading to the creation of a public street?
A law recognizing this principle might seem to be a
serious invasion of the rights of property, but only so in
the statement, because cities must always grow in the
direction in which land is for sale and public authorities
would have to plan to meet all such contingencies.
Greater power in the matter of the projection of streets
is of vital importance to the cities of this Commonwealth.
The very life of a city is controlled through its streets.
The words " common convenience and necessity " have
grown to cover a meaning which the early framers of our
highway laws could never have even dreamed of. Water,
sewers, gas, surface and elevated railroads, electric wires,
conduits, subways, and the future care of utilities of which
we now know nothing, are all in addition to the simple pro-
viding of a way for vehicles and pedestrians, which is about
all that the early framers of the law knew about. And be-
yond all these utilities of life comes the question of making
a city more attractive and more beautiful so that it may
become something more than a place to which one goes to
make money.
To sum up, I believe our public authorities should have
the power to project streets in advance of their acceptance,
No damages should be allowed on the projection of a
street, but upon its acceptance as a public street damages
should be determined as at present. Owners of land should
not be allowed to define streets not in conformity with those
projected by the city.
[140]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Sufficiency of City Planning Legislation in New York
City
MR. G. W. TILLSON, Consulting Engineer to the Borough
of Brooklyn, New York:
As this question has been presented here for discussion
this morning, it means, of course, that there are certain
cities which do not have the requisite authority for proper
city planning. I thought, therefore, it might be interest-
ing to tell the conditions in New York City, where no fur-
ther legislation is necessary for city planning of any kind.
The basis of all our work is the city map. Upon the city
map must be laid out by the Board of Estimate and Ap-
portionment, which is the governing legislative body there,
the location of every street, parkway, and public park,
before anything can be done towards its acquisition. The
law there is practically the same as that recommended by
the city engineer of New Bedford, who has just spoken.
No property owner can lay out any street or have any
legal authority in connection with the matter, without its
first having been put upon the city map and afterwards
adopted by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment.
In the borough of Brooklyn, which comprises about sixty-
seven square miles, the entire area has been mapped by the
city authorities, and when it becomes necessary to acquire
title to any of those streets, authority is given by the
Board of Estimate and Apportionment, and appraisers, or
commissioners as they are called there, are appointed by
the Supreme Court. After those commissioners have filed
their report, the Board of Estimate and Apportionment
can take title in the street or parkway at once, provided
there are no buildings on the street. If there are any
buildings on the street, the title cannot vest until six
months after the filing of the report. Then the property
owner receives interest, when the final adjudication has
been made for damages, from the time the title was vested.
[141]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
The Board of Estimate and Apportionment, when it
passes a resolution to vest title, determines and states in
this resolution just how the cost of acquiring the title shall
be raised, how much shall be paid by the city, how much by
the property owners, and also determines the area upon
which the assessment shall be laid, provided any is laid.
A recent law passed by the legislature in the session of
1911 makes possible a different rule of assessment. New
York is divided into five large boroughs, and an improve-
ment might be made which would be a benefit both to the
borough and to the entire city. Legislation of 1911 will
allow, in the case of the creation of a park in Staten Island,
for instance, an assessment of fifty per cent on the city at
large, twenty-five per cent on the borough, and twenty-five
per cent on private property especially benefited. What
I wish to make clear is that any legal requirement that is
necessary for city planning is already vested in the Board
of Estimate and Apportionment.
The City Planning Powers of Toronto
MR. J. C. FORM AN, Assessment Commissioner:
I have the honor to appear before you as a member of the
Toronto Board of Trade. Our board of 2600 members,
similar, I presume, in its functions to the Chamber of Com-
merce in your cities, is representative of the commercial
interests . and of all that pertains to the general better-
ment of the city of Toronto. Town planning is now in
part occupying its attention. We believe that this subject
is of the utmost importance in the future development both
of the city and of contiguous and new suburban properties.
It may be interesting to know just what city planning
statutory powers the city of Toronto possesses. Just
this year the Ontario legislature passed an act which gives
the Ontario Railway and Municipal Board power to pass
on all plans which assume to lay out vacant blocks of land
situate within our present municipal limits. It goes even
[142]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
further and provides that the plans of all outlying lands
shall conform to a general plan to be prepared by the city
which may cover the territory five miles in any direction
outside the city limits. No plan may be registered nor any
lots sold therefrom until the plan has been approved by the
said Board. This act came into force on the 4th of May
last.
We have had the power for several years to extend, widen,
or open any street under what is termed our local im-
provement system, which, briefly speaking, means that the
cost of such work may in part be levied against the lands
directly benefited, whether fronting on or off the line of
improvement, the city assuming the balance of the cost.
Such work may be done in three ways :
First, under a petition signed by the owners whose lands
will be assessed for a share of the cost. To be valid two
thirds of the property owners representing at least one
half the total value of the property assessed must sign the
petition.
Second, under the " initiative system," by which the
property owners have the right to petition against the
proposed improvement.
Third, under a forced recommendation adopted by two
thirds of the members of council, and which may not be
petitioned against, and this includes pavements, sidewalks,
and boulevards. In all cases a joint report of the City
Engineer and Assessment Commissioner is necessary, and
must be adopted by council, which report gives the frontage
liable to assessment and cost of work, the city's share of
the cost, the number of years (generally ten years) over
which the assessment is to be levied. Property owners
have the right to appeal from any such assessment to the
Court of Revision, a separate court appointed by the
Ontario government. The appellant is allowed the right
to appeal to the Railway and Municipal Board from the
decision of the Court of Revision where the improvement
is estimated to cost $50,000 or over. Under the Local
[143]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Improvement Act, which has accomplished a great deal in
the way of street extensions, we are at present widening
several of our principal town line streets from sixty-six to
eighty-six and one hundred feet, at an estimated cost of
about $1,000,000, the city in this case, by vote of council,
paying seventy-five per cent of the total cost. In widen-
ing these thoroughfares the owner of the land taken is
compensated for the value of the land and for the dis-
turbance to his business. If amicable settlements cannot
be arrived at, the question of compensation is referred to
the Official Arbitrator, who is appointed by the local
government.
Toronto has also the power of excess condemnation by
its right to condemn two hundred feet of land more than
is necessary for the widening or extension on either side
of the proposed street and the whole of the lot where the
same is entered upon in part, when such lot extends beyond
two hundred feet. The municipality in such case is re-
quired to sell such surplus land within seven years of its
acquirement. The object, of course, is to allow the mu-
nicipality to share in the profits of such improvement
by the sale of such land, thus reducing the cost to the
ratepayers.
Congestion of the central parts of our cities appears to
be as great as it is in the larger American cities, and the
people will be called upon soon to vote on such improve-
ments as diagonal streets and tube lines. Much of the
congestion is owing to the fact that Toronto has only one
important north and south retail business thoroughfare,
Yonge Street, a town line about sixty-six feet wide and
two and a half miles long in the present city limits. To
relieve congestion in the central portion by the establish-
ment of parallel streets or diagonals will mean the con-
demning of land the value of which is from $2500 to
$10,000 a front foot. Naturally the ratepayers hesitate
before accepting a proposition which means increased tax-
ation, but it is thought by a well-considered plan, including
[144]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
the taking of additional land over and above that neces-
sary for the widening made, the improvement will eventu-
ally be voted.
In closing, let me refer briefly to other city planning
powers given our municipality. In residential districts we
may pass by-laws prohibiting the erection of houses within
any reasonable distance of the street line.
The erection of apartment houses may be prohibited in
any residential district, or in any street to be named in
the council's decision.
We have power to extend and construct street railway
lines in any part of the city not now occupied by the pres-
ent street railway system, if sanctioned by vote of people
and approved by the Ontario Railway and Municipal
Board.
We have also power to construct and maintain industrial
steam railway sidings.
Under the Public Health Act the Medical Health Officer
may close any dwelling deemed by him unfit for occupation.
DISCUSSION
MR. OLMSTED:
Mr. Williams, of New Bedford, stated the difficulties
under which New Bedford, in common with other cities in
this state, has labored in dealing with the subject of city
planning, particularly street planning. Those difficulties
are pretty general. The point is this: There are no in-
herent obstacles anywhere to interfere with a city's plan-
ning its streets as thoroughly and as far in advance as the
appropriating bodies of the city will provide money for.
There is no trouble about that, except to get the money
to pay for the planning. The difficulty is to control pri-
vate development in accordance with the plan after you
have got it. There are two alternatives. The first method
is to make the plan binding upon land owners, so that
land designated on the plan for streets, for example, cannot
[145]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
be used for buildings or for other purposes obstructive to
the execution of the plan. This amounts to the acquire-
ment of certain public rights in the land, and the land
owner must be paid for those rights. There is no dodging
that payment. If such rights are not taken, then some
indirect means must be used to induce owners to develop in
accordance with the plan. That is the second method.
Various devices have been used in different cities to make
it more convenient for the owner to follow the plan than
to disregard it. By the exercise of sufficient ingenuity con-
ditions can be made pretty uncomfortable for the owner
who disregards the plan; but you cannot compel him to
avoid other uses of the land, cannot compel him to keep
vacant the land you want for future streets, without pay-
ing him when you put that encumbrance on his property.
The devices used in different localities for making it
uncomfortable for him when he disregards the paper plan
of the city are various. The principal one, of course, is
refusal to accept streets laid out at variance with the
plan, and refusal to construct sewers and water mains in
those streets. That is a threat, and is in some cities ex-
tremely effective. In others it is very ineffective, because
it is a bluff, and it soon becomes known as a bluff. Where,
as so often happens, the original layer-out of the streets,
an irresponsible person, sells the property and goes away,
leaving the innocent purchaser, as Mr. Williams has
pointed out, to deal with the difficulties arising from dis-
regard of the city plan, the city finds it extremely hard
to live up to its threat.
But this method of control is used pretty systematically
in certain cities, and in those cities people have learited that
it does not pay to buy lots on streets which are not in accor-
dance with the city plan. In some cities it is practically
impossible to obtain a mortgage on such lots from the large
mortgage houses.
There are many other devices essentially of the same
kind which make it uncomfortable for people who do not
[146]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
adhere to the plan, even though it remains nothing but a
paper plan, without any legal force until its several parts
are successively put into execution. I think Pennsylvania
is the only state in which the streets as laid out on a plan
are really legally binding upon the property, and in which
damages are not paid at the time of the imposition of that
encumbrance on the land.
ANDREW WRIGHT CRAWFORD, ESQ., Philadelphia:
In speaking of Pennsylvania, Mr. Olmsted stated that in
that state alone there appears to be an effective town plan-
ning system, and intimated that possibly the same system
could not be adopted in other states. I am of opinion
that the same system can be adopted in other states in
effect.
We make it uncomfortable for property owners not to
comply with an official plan as laid out by our constituted
authorities, generally called bureaus of survey, by provid-
ing that if an owner does interfere with that plan by build-
ing within the limits of a plotted street, for instance, then
when the street is legally opened he shall not get damages
for his building. That hits his pocket, and works well.
When we plot on the city plan a street across a man's
property, the plotting prevents him from using his prop-
erty as he chooses and is to that extent a deprivation of
his rights.
I believe other states can adopt the principle in this way,
by providing that after plotting a street — — and of course
the same principle applies to parks and other areas — no
one shall erect a building within the lines of the street
unless he is willing to waive all damages for the building
when the property is taken; providing that if the street
after plotting is changed he shall then get damages for the
loss of the full use of the property meanwhile, between the
date of plotting and that of the change of location of the
street; and further providing that if the street is not
changed, but is later legally and physically opened, then
[147]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and then only he shall get damages, which shall include the
rights taken from him at the time the street was plotted
plus the damages for the delay in giving damages, from
the date of original plotting to the date of actual opening.
That gives him a right of recovery for every bit of loss he
has sustained.
I know of no decision which holds that you cannot defer
the award of damages for the opening of a street, providing
the individual who owns property through which it will
run is sure to get damages some time. That is to say,
you must enable him by due process of law to get the dam-
ages for the right he loses, but you do not have to give them
to him within one month or one year.
I pass to another point that was brought to my atten-
tion very strongly last year, the matter of home rule for
cities. In Pennsylvania there is absolutely no demand for
home rule, because we have it, and we have it as a result of
a paragraph, a sentence, in the state constitution. I do
not remember the exact words, but the constitution pro-
vides that the General Assembly shall pass no local or
special law affecting the affairs of cities. The result is
that every act of the legislature must be general in charac-
ter. The legislature cannot pick out one or another city.
If this provision had been construed strictly, Philadelphia,
with a population of 1,600,000, would have been under
exactly the same laws as Harrisburg, for instance, with a
population of 50,000 or 75,000. But the Supreme Court,
by a decision which was at least practically wise, whether
legally accurate or not, has permitted us to classify cities.
Philadelphia is in the first class, Pittsburgh and Scranton
in the second class, and all other cities in the third class.
But even with that interpretation local legislation for
Philadelphia is not direct. All acts to affect Philadelphia
must be for cities of the first class. Philadelphia cannot
be mentioned. The terminology must be general. This
has resulted in the total absence of a demand for local
home rule to which I referred. A provision of this kind,
[148]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
permitting classification of cities into three, possibly four,
classes, put into other state constitutions, would, I believe,
work in exactly the same way, and effectively secure home
rule through the generality of the law. Then, instead of
one city asking for a special charter, and another demand-
ing a somewhat different charter, you will have the several
cities coming together, and you can determine what is
good for all, and a concurrent and consistent demand will
get more attention than several diverse ones. It seems to
me that this provision is as important as any that can be
suggested for state constitutions generally, as far as muni-
cipal affairs are concerned.
MR. JOHN IHLDER, New York City:
It is a painful thing to follow such a beautiful picture
as Mr. Crawford has given us with any criticism, but I
understand that in Ohio there is a similar provision of
law calling for general legislation. I understand that the
legislature there gets around it by passing a law, not ap-
parently applying to any particular city, but to cities, we
will say, having two streets, such as Washington and Main
streets, intersecting each other. The city for which the
legislation is desired meets that particular requirement and
is the only one which does. In Michigan, when they came
to adopt a constitution, they studied the Pennsylvania
system and decided that it was so difficult for cities like
Pittsburgh and Scranton, two second-class cities, to get
together when one of them needed something, that classifi-
cation of cities would not do for Michigan.
MR. CRAWFORD:
One word in reply to Mr. Ihlder. If there were any act
passed referring to a city with intersecting streets by the
name of Broad and Chestnut streets, the Supreme Court
would knock it out, as it has knocked out act after act,
simply on the ground that it was attempting an improper
classification. If you get a Supreme Court that regards
[149]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
the will of the people, I am sure there will not be any
difficulty about it.
ME. A. L. SCHAEFFER, Borough of the Bronx, N. Y.:
A large portion of the island of Manhattan was mapped
under a law of 1807, which provided that no buildings
should be erected within street lines after they had been
shown on the map. So far as I know, this law was in ex-
istence until the enactment of the Greater New York
charter in 1897. Some years previous to that there was
an unimportant lawsuit on this question, which was de-
cided against the constitutionality of the law.
What I would like to know is, if the law which is now
in existence in the state of Pennsylvania, which applies, I
understand, to the three classes of cities in a little differ-
ent form, has been thoroughly tested in the courts. The
reason for declaring the law in the state of New York
unconstitutional, I understand, is due to the provision in
the constitution that no private property shall be taken
for public uses without due process of law and without
compensation. I understand the courts have held that
the laying aside of property within street lines and
preventing the erection of buildings on it, is an improper
taking of private property. I should like to know if the
Pennsylvania law has been thoroughly tested in the courts.
MR. CRAWFORD:
It was upheld at common law and later the Act of 1871,
embodying the same principle, which act expressly applied
only to Philadelphia, was declared constitutional by the
Supreme Court. This act has since been made to apply
to all the cities of Pennsylvania by the Act of 1891.
•
MR. R. N. CLARK, Hartford, Conn.:
In Hartford we discourage professional building pro-
moters who come into a town and endeavor to exploit large
areas of land for their own pecuniary advantage and to
[ISO]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
the decided disadvantage of the citizens at large and of the
persons who attempt to buy those lots in this way. The
City Plan Department, which is now in its fifth year, is
required by the law to put its acceptance or its disap-
proval upon the proposition to lay out any street before
the street can become accepted by the city. In that way
the citizens of Hartford or people coming there to buy lots
on comparatively new streets or on proposed streets are
very careful not to buy on a street where there is any
question of its final acceptance by the city. A promoter
coming into the town must file his map also with the town
clerk, and the clerk will not accept it for filing unless it has
the approval of the commission for the city plan.
The general discussion was participated in by Mrs.
Rollin Norris, Mr. F. L. Olmsted, Mr. A. W. Crawford,
Hon. Charles Hopewell, and Mr. G. W. Lemon. The dis-
cussion brought out the necessity of effective control by
the municipality, not only of subdivisions within the city
limits, but for at least five miles beyond, in order to insure
a harmonious system of thoroughfares and local streets.
[151]
THE REGULATION OF THE HEIGHT
OF FIREPROOF COMMERCIAL
BUILDINGS
MR. ARTHUR C. COMEY
American Society of Landscape Architects, Cambridge
THE principles involved in building height regulation are
so obscured by many complex factors, when all classes of
structures are considered, that I desire to confine the
present discussion to one class only, the strictly fireproof
commercial buildings, in which three underlying factors
alone are of controlling importance to the public — con-
gestion, light and air, and architectural effect. Though
these three factors are dependent directly on width of
street, limitations in many American cities ignore it and
but very imperfectly meet any of the conditions.
Regulations in force, and proposed, may be classified in
six main groups:
1. The flat limit, if low, gives relatively uniform archi-
tectural effect, but does not permit the tower building,
which has both architectural and practical value, and does
not consider the width of street, though it bears an imper-
fect relation to congestion over large areas.
2. Limit to height proportioned to width of street covers
the factor of light and air precisely, but does not permit
tower buildings, though it does encourage architectural
uniformity.
3. Height controlled by a sloping line from opposite
side of the street takes into account light and air only, and
is not adapted to effective architectural treatment.
4. Height controlled by area of cross-sections or ele-
vations may meet congestion in part, but is apt to be con-
fusing and is seldom adapted to architectural effect.
[152]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
5. Limit by cubage, that is, total volume, covers the
factor of congestion over large areas only, and does not
meet the requirements of light and air, for the entire build-
ing may be built as a great wall on the street line.
6. Limit by cubage proportioned to width of street
covers the factor of congestion precisely, and permits effec-
tive architectural treatment, but is open to the same objec-
tion as the simple cubage method in the matter of light and
air.
A combination of the second and last of these methods
will evidently be most effective. Cubage (and therefore the
factor of congestion) and the average height of the front
elevation (and therefore the factor of light and air) will
vary directly as the width of the street, and the tower
building will be encouraged without the abuse of its unre-
stricted adoption. Furthermore, the regulation should be
simple in its provisions and clear in its application. Leav-
ing out all accessory factors, the following regulation has
been worked out for the concrete case of Houston, Tex.,
a city of intermediate size, with rather uniformly broad
streets representing quite ideal conditions. With narrower
streets or greater population, the actual proportions might
need to be changed, but the principle would remain the
same.
A building may occupy its entire lot to a "height not
exceeding the width of the principal street upon which it
faces, and not exceeding in any case one hundred feet.
Move this height the cubage of the building shall not ex-
ceed one fourth of such height multiplied by the area of
the lot.
DISCUSSION
M». GEORGE DUDLEY SEYMOUR, New Haven, Conn.:
I was very much interested three years ago in an effort
to limit the height of buildings facing New Haven Green.
I tried very hard to interest the Chamber of Commerce and
the community in the passing of an ordinance, but did not
[153]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
succeed. Within the last four years we have had four
buildings projected on the Green to the height of one hun-
dred and forty feet, and it has been a great source of
distress to me and, now that some of the buildings are
erected, a great dissatisfaction to the people of New Haven.
I am assured from a great many quarters that lately the
tendency in American cities has not been to attempt to
limit the height of buildings to any great extent. I should
like to ask what the trend of opinion and practice on the
subject is.
MR. W. T. JOHNSON, San Diego, Col.:
I am very sorry to have to present to the conference a
very gloomy report on the question of the regulation of
heights of buildings in this country. Within three months
I have had statistics of practically all the large cities in
the United States which have sought to regulate the height
of buildings, and apparently Boston, with a height limit of
one hundred and twenty-five feet, is in the best position. A
great many other cities either have set no limits whatever
or have put a limit such as that of Chicago, of two hundred
feet, which I think we all believe will make decidedly for
congestion. The city of San Diego happened several
months ago, by some chance, to pass an act limiting the
height of buildings to one hundred feet, which was a very
progressive measure, more so than any measure passed
anywhere in this country. But San Diego is in entire con-
trol of people who are interested in the real estate business,
which consists of about twelve elevenths of all the popula-
tion, and for that reason they were very soon able to amend
that statute so that now they will either have to have build-
ings to a height of one hundred and fifty feet or no limit
whatever.
I think what we must finally do, perhaps, will be to look
to Germany or to Europe, as we always have been looking,
to get some ideas about regulation of the height of build-
ings, and either adopt a uniform height above which build-
[154]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
ings may not go, and have it a very low height, or else
adopt the scheme which I think Mr. Comey spoke of, of
having each succeeding story stepped back, so that its
cornice line will meet the cornice line of the story above it
at an angle of forty-five degrees, which would not cut off
sunlight.
The general discussion was participated in by Mr. John-
son, Mr. Seymour, Mr. C. F. Puff, Jr., Hon. F. C. Howe,
and Mr. Veiller, at the close of which the following resolu-
tion was passed by the Conference:
Voted, that the desirability of collecting the ordinances,
and practices of American and European cities bearing on
the height of buildings be referred to the Executive Com-
mittee for consideration, with Mr. Johnson's cooperation
and assistance.
[155]
HOW A WORCESTER, MASS., BANK DISCOUR-
AGES THE "THREE-DECKER" HOUSE
MR. ALFRED L. AIKEN
President of the Worcester County Institution for Savings
WHEN your Secretary was good enough to ask me to use
five minutes of your time in explaining some of the meas-
ures that we have taken in Worcester (to discourage the
so-called " three-decker " house), I hesitated about doing
it because our attempt was so mild in form and the results
as yet have hardly been definite enough to be worth re-
cording, but having assurance from him that whatever we
had done might be of some interest, I am glad to have an
opportunity to present it.
Perhaps it might be well to define more definitely the
type of house that we call a " three-decker." It is rec-
tangular in shape, with a frontage of twenty-five or thirty
feet and a depth of forty-five to sixty feet, built of wood,
of the most bare and plain style, with either a tar and
gravel roof, or a very low, pitched roof slated or shingled,
and containing three similar tenements, one above the
other. These houses, as the price of lumber and labor has
gone up, have been built of cheaper and cheaper material
and are built as close to one another as the law permits.
It is this type against which we have been waging a very
mild warfare.
I am not sure as to the origin of the " three-decker," but
from its prevalence in Worcester I suspect that we are the
responsible parents; at any rate, I think that our city
has suffered more than any other from its construction.
[156]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
No one with an observing eye can fail to notice the tier
upon tier of these monotonous, unattractive houses that
rise on the hillsides, on either side of the railroad tracks, as
one passes through the city.
The Worcester County Institution for Savings, with
which I am connected, is interested in Worcester real estate
to the extent of $12,000,000 or more of mortgages, and it
has seemed to us that we were confronted with a real prob-
lem in the poor development of local housing conditions
through the local preference for this type of house.
Of course we recognized the fact that if these houses were
not available as a basis for loans, their construction would
stop, but from numerous conferences with those who had
money to loan on real estate mortgages, it became apparent
that plenty of money could be found to finance these
undertakings, and that it would be useless for any one
lender of money on mortgages to try to stem the general
tide, because nothing in the way of restraint would be ac-
complished and he would lose one of his most profitable
sources of investment, a fact that we have to consider as
much as the altruistic side of the matter.
We finally decided that if something could be done to
call the attention of the public to a better and more attrac-
tive type of construction this might act as a sort of
counter-irritant, and while encouraging the building of
the cottage house might discourage the building of the
" three-decker."
Worcester seems to be a particularly hopeful place for
such an undertaking because of the fact that we have a
very large permanent population of mechanics of the
highest class who are the very type that enjoy the feeling
of proprietorship and family privacy of a detached house
of their own.
With this in mind, we published the following adver-
tisement which I may perhaps be permitted to read, as
it expresses our purpose as briefly as I have been able to
do it.
[157]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
NOTICE TO HOME BUILDERS
For the benefit of those interested in owning their homes,
the Worcester County Institution for Savings has made an ex-
tensive collection of elevations and plans of inexpensive, de-
tached houses that should cost from $1500 to $3000 to build.
Persons interested in building attractive, detached houses for
homes for themselves and their families are invited to avail
themselves of these plans at any time.
While the Worcester County Institution for Savings is pre-
pared to make mortgage loans at any time upon houses of the
above description, it should be understood that the use of these
plans implies no obligation whatever toward the institution.
These plans have been collected and offered to the public for
the sole purpose of encouraging better housing conditions, by
which it is believed the whole community will benefit.
Worcester County Institution for Savings,
ALFRED L. AIKEN, President.
Before publishing this advertisement, we obtained, through
the advertising columns of such papers as Country Life in
America, a large number of books of plans, principally from
architects in the Middle West, and from books so obtained we
selected those in which the elevations and plans and general
type of construction seemed best suited to our local condi-
tions; we then consulted with one or two reliable carpen-
ters and small builders in regard to the costs of construc-
tion, for the costs that were attached to the plans were
absurdly low in most cases, and got an approximate
figure for the construction of a number of typical houses.
We were very much surprised after our advertisement
appeared, and it appeared only once in each of our three
papers, to find the general interest that it aroused, and for
months afterward there was hardly a day that from two or
three to fifteen or twenty people did not come in to look
over our elevations and plans.
Perhaps twenty houses have been built practically from
plans found in our files. We are sure of about this num-
ber, how many more have been suggested of course we are
[158]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
unable to tell, but a much more important result, to our
minds, has been the fact that a very general interest has
been aroused in cottage houses as against the tenement
houses in our community.
The newspapers, both in Worcester and outside, took a
considerate interest in the scheme and did everything that
they could to further it, and a Home Building Company
somewhat on the lines of Boston's most admirable Boston
Dwelling House Company is now under consideration in
Worcester.
It would hardly be fair to close this statement without
admitting that we put another advertisement in the papers
this spring, thinking that it would be well to continue the
work, and the result so far as people calling upon us for
information has been disappointing. Of course the element
of novelty has disappeared, and while we have calls every
week from a number of people, undoubtedly those who were
promoted by curiosity have had that satisfied and do not
now come in.
We recognize the fact that the greater the center of
population, the greater the necessity of contracted housing
space, but we feel in a city like Worcester, where land on
the outskirts is comparatively cheap, that the tenement
house should be discouraged so far as practicable. The
three-tenement house may be a necessity in some places,
but we do not believe it is for Worcester, because there is
plenty of land, plenty of air, and plenty of light which can
be obtained at a small cost, and we are doing what we can
to make these three available for the detached house.
We look with somewhat envious eyes on the admirable
work that is being undertaken in Boston by your Boston
Dwelling House Company, and along similar lines in
various other cities, but of course this is out of our prov-
ince. All that we have done has been to use our influence
where opportunity arose in the actual course of our busi-
ness to encourage better housing conditions in our own
local community.
[159]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
It seems to us that the cottage house, where real estate
conditions are akin to those existing in Worcester, is the
ideal one for the man of moderate means, for we believe
that the establishment of the house for himself and his
family, because of its more attractive surroundings and
because of its decent privacy, makes him a better citizen and
makes for better physical as well as social development of
the city as a whole.
DISCUSSION
MR. JOHN P. Fox, Utica, N. Y.:
The greatest problem in our city today, I think, is the
problem of getting the tenement house population in some
way to find more comfortable housing conditions, both for
the poor people and the people who are well to do. The
difficulty with that problem is the financial one, — how on
the same amount of land to accommodate people in single
houses? Philadelphia, of course, is a model city today in
the matter of single houses, and there the number of single
houses to the acre is very high indeed. But it is possible
to get even more on the land than they get in Philadelphia,
and it can be done by having interior lots, that is to say,
by having lots reached by passageways from street to
street, instead of having each house facing on the street
itself. That is done, as you know, in Europe in a number of
cities. In Berlin interior lots are very large, and some
large streets reach interior lots.
I would suggest that the study of this question is a very
interesting one in connection with remedying the evil of
the tenement houses and the three-flat houses. Taking the
situation in Boston, I think it possible to take land on
which you now find these three-family houses, and to put
as many single houses on that land as will accommodate
the same number of people, with more space than you get
under present conditions. In the city of Utica I made some
practical studies to see what could be done, and found that
[160]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
you can take the worst slums in Utica, buy them at the
market value, tear down the houses and put up single
houses, have as much accommodation on that slum area,
with single houses, as you have today, and at the same time
bring the houses in that area down to the level of practi-
cally the poorest people in that district. In a new section
of Utica I found that you could go far beyond that and
rent single houses for $6.50 per month, built of brick, under
local conditions, housing as many people on that land as
with the three- or four-family houses which they have in
Utica. So I would like to have the Conference consider the
matter further, studying out the possibilities, and see if
something cannot be done to check the construction of the
three-family houses of the worst kind.
MR. R. A. POPE, New York City:
I believe that on the question of depth of lots for houses
we have gone on the wrong principle. We have taken the
lot and then put a house on it. I believe we should take
the house unit and then determine the size of the lot. We
can talk about the maximum limit being one hundred feet
in depth and the minimum sixty-five feet, but in Boston we
find dwelling-houses with only twenty feet in the rear of the
house. In the front of the house we have perhaps fifteen
or twenty feet more, which is for the garden of the house.
The purpose of a deep lot, of course, is to keep the rear
of the houses far apart. I think there could be some sav-
ing by having a common playground in the rear.
MR. H. J. KELLAWAY, Newton Centre, Mass.:
I think the paper read by the gentleman from Worcester
is one of the best I have heard for a long while, because it
interests the people most vitally. If you give people plenty
of light, air, and room on their own lots, they will agree
with you, but if you talk about streets, red lines on paper,
and different schemes, you will not interest them. If you
speak about giving a man a home, he will be ready to talk
[161]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
to you every time and put his hand in his pocket for streets
to get to his lot, and he doesn't want a little lot, just a few
feet at his front or back door, either. He wants room to
plant something and he wants room for his children to move
around, and he wants room in front to have respectable
surroundings. This crowding of houses on lots with
interior and exterior arrangements, with alleys and
that sort of thing, is all right perhaps for England,
but it is not necessary in this country. We have plenty
of land here, and we don't have to resort to that sort of
thing. The trouble is that we are figuring on foot prices
for land, seeing how much money we can get in return for
a piece of land, instead of figuring how much benefit a man
can get out of his surroundings. I think we shall get a
great deal farther if, instead of figuring entirely in dollars
and cents, we figure on humanity and health.
MR. W. F. BURDETT, St. John, N. B.:
I would not take the liberty of addressing you had it not
been for the remark made by Mr. Fox, of Utica, who has
just sat down. I am speaking from experience when I say
that I wish a body of this kind would condemn the old,
worn-out system which has prevailed in England in the
way of housing the poor, that is, the court system. That
is what I would term the system proposed or suggested by
Mr. Fox, where you would have an interior passage. I had
experience with it when I lived in Liverpool a good many
years ago, as a boy, and I have had a horror ever since of
that system of housing poor people. We have plenty of
land. If a city cannot accommodate its citizens with com-
fortable places to live in, whatever their positions in life,
then it is better that those people should build elsewhere.
We are not living here altogether for dollars; we are liv-
ing here to be comfortable. Without proper houses for
the working people you will not have comfort, content-
ment, or progress in your community. I would simply say
to persons who may think it well for the interest of the
[162]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
community from an economic point of view to adopt the
court system, that I hope they will carefully consider it
before doing so.
MR. G. S. WEBSTER, Philadelphia, Pa.:
In the city of Philadelphia we have had some experience
with this sort of thing, as far as passage-ways are con-
cerned. Prior to 1855 it was the custom to construct in-
terior courts — that is, to develop the interior of the block
in that way, having a passage-way leading from the main
street, a narrow passage-way. The result of that
class of development was that slums grew up, breeding
places for vice, and created very dangerous conditions in
time of serious conflagrations. Our experience compelled
us by law to restrict that sort of thing, and today such con-
struction is positively prohibited.
[163]
PRACTICAL VERSUS IDEAL CITY PLANNING
MR. AMOS L. SCHAEFFEE
Consulting Engineer to the Borough of the Bronx, N. Y.
THE laws and other restrictions of the communities from
which the members of the Conference come must necessarily
differ in a great many respects, and if the theories ad-
vanced are not based on the laws of the community they
can scarcely help being influenced, at least to some extent,
by them, or else they are based on ideal laws such as should
exist to bring about the best results in city planning. For
instance, The Housing and Town Planning Act, passed in
England in 1909, possibly enables English city planners
to work on broader and more effective lines than those of
any other country. Any theories or plans proposed, there-
fore, by Englishmen are naturally based on The Housing
and Town Planning Act. American cities are not so for-
tunate as to have a statute which gives as broad powers as
the Housing and Town Planning Act, and therefore they
cannot plan on the same broad lines. This criticism is not
made with the belief that conferences like the present should
not advocate city planning under ideal conditions. It is one
of its first duties to wage a campaign of education with the
idea that proper legislation will finally be obtained to bring
about the desired authority. Until such legislation is ob-
tained, however, the best use must be made of existing laws
and conditions.
The problems which the city planner is required to solve,
as a rule, are not the laying out of a new town site, but the
readjusting of an old one, which grew up with little or
no thought of what its future size, influence, or importance
[164]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
in the community might be. The rapidity with which some
cities grow requires the frequent extension of their limits,
thereby bringing under the central city control suburban
villages which grew up in a more or less haphazard way
without any thought of eventually becoming a part of
the greater adjoining city. It can readily be seen, there-
fore, that the street system of the newly incorporated vil-
lage will not coincide with the extension of the city streets ;
if it does, it is only by chance. In order to lay out a
proper street system, the arterial highways, at least, must
be extended through these suburban villages, even if the
location of the subsidiary streets remains unchanged.
These arterial highways need not be extended in a straight
line, only a general direction needs to be maintained, and
whenever possible they should be located so as to include
within their lines the bed of existing streets. In nearly
every case, however, it is necessary to widen the existing
streets and to change their grades. This is true not only
of the arterial highways, but of the entire street system.
In some cities where the development tends towards pri-
vate residences and where these are set well back from the
street lines, the widening of the street is not so urgent and
not so difficult when it does become necessary. But it will
be but a comparatively short time when the construction
of apartment houses will predominate in all boroughs of
New York City. The time is so near at hand as to make
it necessary to lay out streets for residential purposes at
a width sufficient to give proper light, air, and access for
apartment houses. The lower grade of apartment house
is usually six stories in height. The minimum width of
street for six-story buildings should be sixty feet; the
average width of streets in suburban villages is from forty
to fifty feet. In order to provide for the kind of building
development which may be expected, all subsidiary streets
should be widened to sixty feet and arterial streets to such
greater widths as may be required to accommodate traffic.
Each individual house is usually provided with a cesspool
[165]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
to take care of its drainage, which has to be abandoned as
soon as these villages become subject to the more severe
sanitary regulations of the city. A change of street
grades therefore frequently becomes necessary in order
to include the new territory in the general drainage sys-
tem. In order to derive the greatest ultimate economy
these changes in street lines and grades should be made
before any further building development takes place, so
that the amount of damage to the buildings due to these
changes will not be unnecessarily increased.
The laws governing the acquisition of land for public
purposes in the city of New York provide that there shall
be assessed against each piece of property not more than
one half of its fair value, and by this is meant the fair
value of the property prior to its enhancement due to the
improvement the cost of which it is proposed to assess.
The valuation of property in these sections is frequently so
low that it is impossible to levy sufficient assessment to
carry out any improvements whatsoever. There are other
cases where the property has just sufficient value to bear
the assessment. In these cases it frequently happens that
the acquiring of title, the grading and the construction of
sewers and pavements, follow each other so closely that the
last improvement is completed before the assessment for
the first has been paid. In such cases the amount of the
assessments levied against the property practically
amounts to confiscation. It should be stated here that the
statutory limitation to levy an assessment of only one half
the fair value of property applies to a single improvement,
and may be repeated as many times as there are different
improvements.
It is seen, therefore, that even though proper city plan-
ning has been done, it is impossible to carry out these plans,
either because of insufficient value of the property benefited
to pay for the improvement, or because the carrying out
of the plan will confiscate the property where it has just
sufficient value to bear the assessment.
[166]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Some of the conditions which exist, therefore, in the
suburbs of our large cities are due not so much to the in-
difference of the city planner as to his inability to carry
out his plans. It becomes necessary, therefore, to permit
the further development of some sections on manifestly im-
proper lines until such time as a proper development may
be undertaken even at greater cost.
An attempt has been made in the short time allotted to
show that some of the poor features of our cities are due
not so much to bad city planning as to the inability of the
city planner to carry out a correct plan because of legal
and other restrictions.
DISCUSSION
ME. VINCENT S. STEVENS, Akron, Ohio:
A long step from ideal plans to the accomplishing of
practical results will be taken if the technical experts, the
idealists, and the dreamers of dreams would only ally them-
selves with the practical business men, farmers, and boards
of trade throughout the country. This is the kind of
alliance we are trying to bring about in Akron. The
Chamber of Commerce, with a membership of twelve hun-
dred, is the city planning agency and is accomplishing
results. It is cooperating with the City Government in
the consideration of plans for the construction of a
$3,000,000 water works plant, and with the City Council
is working out a civic group plan to include a city hall,
armory, court house, and other city buildings. I want
simply to leave this practical suggestion with you.
[167]
POPULARIZING THE CITY PLANNING
PRINCIPLE
THE discussion of this topic was participated in by sev-
eral members of the Conference.
MR. GEORGE B. FORD, New York City:
It is one thing to study the various technical essentials
of plan making; it is another thing to consider the neces-
sary legislation under which city planning will be put into
effect, and it is a quite different thing, a thing of great im-
portance, to decide how particular plans, or, in fact, the
whole subject matter of city planning, shall be submitted
to the people for their support. In the four Conferences
on City Planning the methods of getting plans before the
people or conducting a campaign for city planning have
not been sufficiently considered. I believe that one of the most
effective things that the City Planning Conference can do is
to study and suggest the best methods of getting public
support which will insure the execution of the plan. I see
a number of people present who have had experience in
attempting to arouse interest in the people and others who
are here anxious to start city planning campaigns. Each
ought to learn from the other. It seems to me the Con-
ference might well devote a large amount of time to this
question of education and that subsequent conferences
might do so. It might be desirable to work out a program
for work along the line of publicity, showing how to extend
the usefulness of the Conference between the annual meet-
ings by bringing this matter before the people interested
in city planning.
[168]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
MRS. ROLLIN NORRIS, Ardmore, Pa.:
That is right in line with what we want very much down
in the suburbs of Philadelphia. Last year there was a
conference for a whole month in Philadelphia on township
planning. We sent copies of the program to town offi-
cials, and one of our town officials was telephoned to, ask-
ing if he would not like to attend the meeting. He said he
was not interested. Since then we have said to town offi-
cials, " We are especially interested in housing and plan-
ning. We know that you are busy men. We think the
officials of the towns and the people should be partners in
the business. Those of us who are interested in the sub-
ject and who have the time are willing to devote ourselves
to it and would be very glad indeed to do the work, and
then have the privilege of your cooperation with us."
Under these circumstances officials of towns within twenty-
five miles of Philadelphia have been very willing to co-
operate with us.
There is a certain fear among the towns about Pennsyl-
vania that we must dissipate. They are interested in com-
bining for more effective town planning, but they have
been afraid of Philadelphia swamping them. Their edu-
cation is necessary, and for their education we need tre-
mendously campaign literature.
Two or three township officials who have been asked to
introduce resolutions later in regard to building regula-
tions have said to me, " That is all right for you people
who are specially interested in housing and town planning.
You know just what you want. But we are just beginning
to consider the plan. We want to do what we can, but we
do not want to commit ourselves by introducing resolutions
and agreeing to resolutions unless we know a little more
about where it is going to lead."
We could use particularly a pamphlet showing what is
being done throughout the country in the way of regu-
lating the number of houses per acre according to the dis-
[169]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
tance from the center of population, and this pamphlet
would be only one of many that are needed.
MR. W. F. GLEASON, Philadelphia, Pa.:
I merely wanted to state what our experience had been
in Philadelphia in the matter of publicity. About four or
five years ago, when the movement was begun in Philadel-
phia along comprehensive lines, the newspapers looked
upon it askance. The very men who were possessed of the
greatest amount of intelligence and who would be supposed
to grasp the situation and see visions of what a future
Philadelphia might be, did not realize it. That can be best
shown by a story that was related to me by a newspaper
reporter in Philadelphia. He said when the plans were
first prepared he took them up to the city editor of his
paper, and the city editor said, " Bah ! They are dreams !
We don't want them; we can't print anything like that."
Then he went to the managing editor. Well, the managing
editor said there might be something in it, that it might
be all right for the Sunday supplement. So the story was
written telling what the plans were and what the great
Philadelphia of the future might be. But they would n't
publish the plans. The reporter argued with the editor
of the paper for nearly a month or six weeks to get the
plans in the paper. Finally they were published, and the
paper today is proud of the fact that it was the first
journal in Philadelphia to announce the comprehensive
plans. Our committee is now planning to send lecturers
out to the different organizations giving illustrations of
all phases of municipal activities and of departmental
problems. Interspersed among the lectures will be refer-
ences to city planning and what it means in the administra-
tion of all the departments.
MR. JOHN NOLEN, Cambridge, Mass. :
This subject of publicity is, of course, a very important
one, and I suppose we should decide whether the Conference
[170]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
is really in a position to promote publicity. Assuming for
a moment that the Conference is in sympathy with the
idea, we then come to the fact that the making of public
opinion for city planning is like making public opinion
for pretty much anything else. It is done by agitation,
by the newspapers, by public meetings, and particularly
in this field by exhibitions. An important thing to discuss
in the different communities is the financial end — that
city planning in a big sense pays. That might be the
first appeal. Such arguments as were set forth in yesterday
morning's discussion, in relation to the execution of city
plans, might be stated. The second appeal is an opposite
appeal, the appeal to sentiment. It is surprising, when
you get before boards of trade, chambers of commerce,
and practical business bodies, to find the response you get
simply on the ground that city planning promotes the
city's welfare. The third appeal is to the imagination
through prepared plans which will visualize the kind of
thing that may be done in transforming conditions from
what they are to what they may be. The fourth appeal
is by the doing of a little bit of concrete city planning as
an illustration of what city planning definitely means.
MR. G. D. GALLUP, Boston, Mass.:
There are two things in connection with publicity that
have not been mentioned. Those connected with this move-
ment in the cities of New England have found it desirable
to show manufacturers the advantages to them of a city
plan. Then there is the social standpoint to be considered.
I have not heard very much in this Conference about the
social phase of city planning. I expected to hear a great
deal. There are, I believe, about thirty thousand men, in
Boston, connected with church organizations, men's clubs,
and the like, interested in doing something practical along
the social side, and city planning seems to present a means
of effective work for those organizations. There are also
the women's clubs, very powerful in this section, many
[171]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
of which would be glad to do work along the line of social
service and also proper publicity methods, if the social
value of city planning were emphasized. I should be very
glad to see this organization bring about the creation of
a Committee on Publicity that would take up that whole
subject, just as chambers of commerce and other organiza-
tions today are establishing publicity committees to take
up the question of securing certain advantages for certain
communities. What we are driving at is the advantage
of the whole community. If we could get in the city of
Boston thirty thousand or fifty thousand people interested
in this question from the public standpoint, we would
have an influential body of opinion for the support of
necessary legislation or for the execution of desirable
public improvements.
The general discussion was participated in by Mr. G. W.
Lemon of Calgary, Mr. W. W. Emmett of Baltimore,
Hon. F. C. Howe, Mr. John Nolen, Mr. W. B. Stevens of
St. Louis, and Mr. G. D. Seymour of New Haven, at the
close of which the following resolutions were passed by
the Conference:
Voted, that the thanks of the Conference be expressed
to the members contributing to the fund to be used for
the purpose of popularizing city planning and particularly
to Mrs. Norris and ex-Mayor Reyburn for their generous
contributions.
Voted, that the Executive Committee be requested to
consider the advisability of the creation of a special com-
mittee to finance the popularizing of city planning.
[172]
THE CONTROL OF MUNICIPAL DEVELOP-
MENT BY THE "ZONE SYSTEM" AND ITS
APPLICATION IN THE UNITED STATES
MR. B. ANTRIM HALDEMAN
Assistant Engineer, Bureau of Surveys, Phila.
THERE appears to be much reluctance on the part of
municipal authorities in the United States to actively under-
take the solution of some of the civic and social problems
that have assumed large proportions and great importance
in the swift evolution of our cities. These problems involve,
to some extent, the regulation of the privileges of the
individual and of industrial and commercial enterprises
in their relations with the general public. To such an
extent has the American citizen exercised his freedom to
do as he pleases, and particularly to do as he pleases with
his own property, regardless of public rights, that some
form of public control of that freedom seems inevitable if
the larger rights of the people are to be preserved. The
discussion of such problems, the arousing of public interest
in them, and whatever tangible progress toward their
solution has been made are almost entirely due to the in-
itiative and persistent energy of citizen organizations. It
must be apparent to the most obtuse and unwilling observer,
however, judging from the drift of large events in recent
years, that the regulation of the use of property, and of
private and corporate enterprises that closely affect the
well-being of all the people, is coming to be an issue of
vital importance to modern progress.
The necessity for limiting the right of the individual to
do as he pleases has arisen from the exploitation of the
[173]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
property and rights of the public by private interests,
and from the exigencies attending the intensive growth of
great cities. Modern methods of big business are forcing
a gradually widening control and regulation of trade, and
man's inhumanity to man is forcing the police and health
authorities to take measures to prevent man's destruction
of man.
From the points of vantage that have already been
gained by those who believe in some form of public control
and regulation of those individual and corporate activities
which have a direct bearing upon the welfare of the com-
munity at large, it may seem but a comparatively short
step to the public control and regulation of land and the
uses to which it may be put. We have already seen the
exercise of such authority to a limited extent in the decla-
ration that certain industries are nuisances and may not
be engaged in in certain localities; also in the limiting of
the height of buildings and the requirement of open spaces
attached to dwellings.
Some of the nations of Europe, out of a wealth of un-
fortunate experiences in the rapid growth of industrial
cities and the crowding together of the people in them,
have evolved what is known as the " zone system " for
controlling the use and occupation of land. The members
of this Conference, and all persons actively interested in
town planning and housing, are no doubt familiar with
this system, but for the benefit of the layman who may be
reached through the Conference or its published Proceed-
ings and whose interest and support we wish to enlist, a
brief description of its origin, purpose, and accomplish-
ment may not be out of place.
The system had its origin through the deplorable living
conditions which were forced upon the working people and
poorer classes of Germany during the period of industrial
progress that has absorbed the energy of the German
people since the Franco-Prussian war, and during which
old feudal towns have been transformed into metropolitan
[174]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
cities and the countryside into a forest of factory stacks.
The administrative machinery of the towns, confronted
with new and perplexing problems due to the rapid increase
of population, was for many years unable to cope success-
fully with the new conditions by reason of the manner in
which land was held, its sudden rise in value, and the lack
of any authority to interfere in any effective manner with
the owner's disposition and use of it.
The swift progress of industrialism throughout the
German states encouraged the rapid growth of industrial
towns at a time when the social conditions and the manner
of living of the common people were not conducive to either
the morals or the health of crowded communities. The work-
shop and factory drew upon the farm and rural hamlet
for their labor, and the working people, unable to obtain
proper dwelling places, herded in caves, cellars, and un-
sanitary buildings, like rabbits in a warren. The rapid
increase of urban population offered a fertile field for
exploitation by the great land owners who erected barrack
dwellings of many stories and rooms which were an improve-
ment over the caves and cellars and into which the working
people crowded. Although these dwellings marked much
improvement in living conditions, they still bred many evils
from the too intensive occupation, and to correct these
and provide greater assurance of the public health and
safety a multiplicity of building regulations were enacted
by the municipal authorities.
Ministerial decrees were issued tending to enlarge the
authority of local councils in matters relating to the erec-
tion and occupancy of dwellings. Gradually the fact dawned
upon the law-makers that the power and prestige of the
empire among the nations of the earth depended as vitally
upon the health and efficiency of its working people as upon
the courage and loyalty of its fighting men. By slow
degrees, slow because opposed by the great land owners
who dominated many of the legislative bodies, the minis-
terial decrees were enacted into laws granting broad
[175]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
autonomy to municipalities and enabling them to strike
at the root of the evil of their housing system by checking
the increase of the speculative value of land, such specu-
lative increase in some cities having risen four hundred
per cent in a single year. Municipalities were also author-
ized to purchase ground, to erect dwellings, and to loan
public funds to societies for the erection of workmen's
homes. Much encouragement has been given to the erection
of one-family houses, and home-owning has been made
possible among the working people.
The story of the industrial and social evolution of
Germany is an intensely absorbing one, but we can con-
sider here, and that but briefly, only the manner in which
the municipal authorities exercise the powers vested in
them to regulate the development of private property.
This is accomplished mainly through the employment of
the " zone system," under which the municipal department
having charge of the city planning, in establishing and
extending the street system, also establishes the building
lines, determines what percentage of the property may be
built over, and the arrangement of the buildings themselves,
whether they shall be erected in solid rows, in pairs, or
singly, and the distance between the buildings when built
singly or in pairs, and the number of floors or stories. No
appeal from the established regulations can be taken after
the plans have been completed, examined, and finally ap-
proved by the several independent committees having
jurisdiction. The plans frequently show three fixed lines
in a block — the line to which the street is to be opened
and improved, a line of restriction a certain distance from
the street line beyond which no building is allowed to extend,
and an interior line fixing the boundary of the courtyard
or garden within which no structure is permitted.
The term " zone " as applied to the system is somewhat
of a misnomer and misleading. Although the general theory
under which it is applied is that the buildings should be
lower and farther apart the greater their distance is from
[176]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
the center of the city, the arrangement is not one of con-
centric girdles, as might be supposed, but a division into
districts, irregular as to area and boundary and regulated
in accordance with some local characteristic or special
adaptability for certain classes of buildings; in fact, it
sometimes occurs that a " zone " consists of a single city
block, or even part of a block. True zones girdling the
city would result in alternating rings of high and low
buildings or a single indeterminate outer zone, regardless
of topography or local conditions, and are considered un-
wise, if not impractical; so also are very large zones, or
districts, since the application of absolute restrictions
would prevent the establishment of local business and trade
centers for the convenience of the people.
The system has undergone considerable modification
since its introduction; keen judgment and great care are
essential in determining boundaries and in imposing regu-
lations which will permit property to be used for the
purpose for which it is best adapted. Although there was,
and still is, considerable opposition to it in some instances,
it is gradually producing the desired results, checking land
speculation and inflation of values, discouraging the erec-
tion of barrack dwellings, encouraging the erection of
one-family houses, and making it possible for people of
modest means to own their own homes.
Thus we find that within the span of about a quarter of
a century the industrial classes of Germany have been
translated from hovels and dens reeking with disease,
degeneracy, and vice, to pleasant homes, surrounded with
all the comforts, conveniences, and privileges that make for
health, happiness, and good citizenship; and this has been
accomplished mainly by breaching the one-time sacred wall
of vested rights and establishing the principle that the
economic progress of the nation and the integrity of its
social fabric transcend the prerogative of the individual.
Since the system has been productive of beneficent results
abroad, let us endeavor to determine whether conditions
[177]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
in the United States are such as to justify an effort to
apply it here. At first thought it seems full of promise,
but many of our cities have been founded and are becoming
great with such a broad and enlightened conception of the
advantages and amenities of the distinctive home life of
America that the advisability of urging such control of
land development will depend upon the necessity for the
protection it insures, upon the influence of healthy public
sentiment to curb familiar evils and abuses, and the extent
to which those who are responsible for the development
of property, as owners or promoters, are amenable to less
arbitrary forms of regulation.
The natural ambition of the American citizen is to be
the owner of his home, whereas home-owning is a com-
paratively new and strange experience to the European.
This ambition, properly encouraged and aided by civic
organization and the municipal authorities, should be of
great assistance in curbing the tendency apparent in many
cities to drift toward apartments and tenements.
Just as the industrialism and commercialism of Europe
have created congestion and bad housing conditions, so
are the same evils following in the wake of the tremendous
activity along industrial lines in this country. The central-
ization of trade and the lack of adequate transportation
facilities are, perhaps, the most powerful factors in pro-
ducing a too intensive occupation and use of land. The
desire to make property produce the largest possible in-
come is a characteristic of landlords the world over, and
tenement houses under lax regulations are splendid revenue
producers.
The conservation of the health of the people is one of the
most vital purposes of modern, progressive town planning,
and in no place can health be better or more easily con-
served than in the home. The influence of the home, its
amenities, associations, and surroundings, inevitably mould
the character of the citizen for good or ill. The ownership
of his home gives to the citizen the pride of partnership
[178]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
in the prosperity of the community and its institutions,
and any measure of proven efficiency for multiplying the
number of home owners should command the public support,
even though it may reduce the flow of speculative dollars
into the pockets of the landlords.
Although the zone system as employed in Europe is the
outgrowth of a long and persistently fought battle for the
improvement of housing conditions, it has resulted in other
economic and administrative reforms, and it is along these
lines that its application in the United States might also
produce important results and be of great benefit. It
would enable the municipal authorities to predetermine the
character of improvement in any given area and, as the
permanence of the improvement would be assured, very
large economies in the planning of streets, the construction
of public works, and the conducting of the general public
service could be effected.
One serious defect in American methods is the lack of
stability and permanence in improvements of all kinds.
Temporary and makeshift structures are erected to serve
until such time as the character of the improvement in a
neighborhood may be determined or until such improvement
shall greatly enhance the value of property. Sometimes
a district will undergo such a transformation as to neces-
sitate radical and costly changes in buildings, streets, and
public works which would otherwise be permanent.
Under the zone system the permanent population of
any given area may be determined with a reasonable degree
of accuracy before a single building is erected upon it.
With this factor known it is possible to intelligently fore-
cast the needs of the district for every class of public works
and public service and to plan accordingly, with the confi-
dence that whatever is done will be done properly, per-
manently, and economically.
Transportation is the great, controlling factor in the
growth and development of the modern city, and the most
difficult problem municipalities are called upon to solve.
[179]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Its difficulties would be greatly lessened if the density of
population could be kept within reasonably certain limits.
This is understood in the German system of town planning
and the locations of the trams, or street railway lines, are
determined as the street system is extended, and are based
upon the volume of traffic likely to be created by the
known population and the predetermined character of the
territory they will serve. The same is true of main, or trunk,
lines of every kind of underground service — sewers, water
pipe, electrical lines, pneumatic tubes ; and subways, pipes,
and tubes for every purpose of subterranean transporta-
tion. The number and capacity of public service structures
under, upon, or above the surface depends upon the density
of the population and the local needs of the community;
these elements being known, the original construction of
public works can be of the most permanent character and
the liability for repairs, reconstruction, and enlargement
can be reduced to a minimum.
Wide streets, planned with the almost certain knowledge
the zone system would give of the traffic requirements for
long years of service, would permit of a far more economical
system of secondary and residential streets than we now
find in most of our cities. In almost every city we find
large areas laid out with streets of uniform width and
uniform improvement, but they seldom carry an equal
amount of traffic or are of equal public use except in con-
gested localities. Certain ones, by reason of easier grades,
better connections with important points, greater business
activity, or other favorable local conditions, attract the
greater volume of travel, leaving perhaps half a dozen
adjacent ones unused and unlovely expanses of costly
pavement.
The zone system would permit property to be restricted
to the use for which it is best adapted by natural
conditions. If hilly and picturesque districts were reserved
for high-class residences, or for residences requiring lawns
or gardens, the cost of improvement, both as to property
[180]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and streets, would be greatly reduced by removing the
necessity for the usual formal street system and the great
amount of grading required for the building of solid rows
of houses on small lots. Instances have occurred in Phila-
delphia where the street system had been established with
due regard for topographical conditions and with a view
of encouraging open development, but had to be changed
r.nd the rectangular system substituted in order to permit
owners to build solid rows of small houses, the cost of
grading the sites being, of course, added to the price of
the houses and paid by the home buyers. Moderate priced
single or double houses might have been built, if such
regulations could have been enforced, without detriment
to any interest except, possibly, that of the real estate
speculator or the operative builder.
It also frequently occurs that a quiet and attractive
neighborhood that has been occupied for many years by
the better class of residences, surrounded by well-kept
grounds, is invaded by rows of cheap houses, the character
of the neighborhood enabling the builder to realize large
profits. Since these profits are generally the sole object of
the builder, the operation seldom fits harmoniously into the
surroundings, and almost invariably the result is that the
character of the neighborhood changes and property loses
some of its desirability and value, except for the erection
of more rows of houses. Operation houses are usually
built for sale rather than for stability, and if their erection
was confined to certain districts there would be a competi-
tion among builders that would result in a higher class of
workmanship, more attractive arrangement and surround-
ings, and better value for the purchaser of a home.
In many of the towns of the Middle West and West,
where the one-family house, set back from the street and
surrounded by ample open space, has been the almost
invariable type of dwelling, the rapid growth of recent
years has encouraged the introduction of large apartment
and tenement houses. These have been set down in residential
[181]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
neighborhoods, close to the street line, rearing their many
stories high above all surroundings, obtruding themselves
into fine vistas, cutting off the view from adj acent residences,
and destroying the dignity and charm of handsome, tree-
lined streets. Proper restrictions, confining such structures
within designated areas, would result in greater beauty and
symmetry in the growth of the city and would prevent the
incongruous mingling of totally different types of buildings.
The sky-scraper, as an institution of the business life
of America, is a costly luxury for which the public pays,
and will continue to pay in ratio increasing with its growth,
a heavy price in both cash and health. It increases enor-
mously the difficult problem of transportation, and with
its brother evils, the subway and the tenement house, for
both of which it is partly responsible, it is moving steadily
toward the creation of an abnormal condition of urban life
under which the city dweller will arise in the morning, enter
the subway through a subterranean passage, be hurled
to his office through an underground tube, toil all day under
artificial light, and return to his apartment at night with-
out having known the caress of the sunshine, the smile
of the blue sky, the breath of the fresh air of heaven, or
anything of nature's wide beneficence — a condition having
a tendency to lower the human race to the level of the mole,
the woodchuck, and the angle worm. The sky-scraper,
eminently respectable as it now seems to be, may ultimately
be a greater menace to the health of mankind than the
slum, for it will strike at the vitality of every class, from
the highest to the lowest. This menace of the sky-scraper,
the subway, and the tenement can only be removed by the
enactment and enforcement of regulations limiting the
height of buildings, defining the areas within which those
of maximum height may be erected, and prescribing the
percentage of surface area they may cover and the amount
of light and air space around them.
In no department of city building is there a larger
opportunity for the advantageous application of the zone
[182]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
system than in the defining of the areas within which indus-
trial establishments may be erected. Mills, factories, and
workshops of almost any kind may now be set down in any
locality which seems favorable to the promoter of the
enterprise. Such establishments must invariably have facil-
ities for transportation by rail or water, or both, especially
'f they are conducted upon a large scale, as most modern
establishments are. Their random placing may work to
the disadvantage of an entire neighborhood. There is a
large economy for any concern in having transportation
companies deliver and receive freights directly at its doors,
and the problem of supplying such service is a difficult and
complicated one where industrial plants are distributed
widely throughout a community. In Philadelphia, which is
distinctively a manufacturing city, there are constant
requests for permission to lay sidings at grade along or
across important streets to effect connections with rail-
roads. To refuse such permission is to lay the municipal
authorities open to the charge of discouraging the business
of the city, and to grant it means the blocking of general
traffic by cars crossing the streets or standing upon them
while being loaded or unloaded.
The confinement of industrial establishments within
certain prescribed areas would protect residential districts
from invasion by incongruous or otherwise objectional
institutions and would immeasurably simplify the problem
of industrial transportation, both local and foreign. The
creation of factory zones in locations conveniently reached
by rail or water would permit the development of terminals
of maximum efficiency at minimum cost. Drayage between
the mill and the shipping station is a large item of expense
to the manufacturer, and the collection, classification, and
distribution of freights from or for scattered and isolated
yards are distracting problems for the traffic manager and
the yard master. The short haul, the reduction or concen-
tration of trackage, and the saving of time and energy
where freights originate or are distributed within certain
[183]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
prescribed areas, all count for economy in trade and trans-
portation. Main traffic streets for through travel could
be kept clear from obstruction by railroad crossings and
sidings, and to a considerable extent from costly bridges,
if freight yards and freight- carry ing lines were kept within
the industrial zones.
So apparent do the advantages of the industrial zone
seem, and so complex and costly are the problems of in-
dustrial transportation under present methods, that it is
strange the manufacturers and transportation companies,
in their efforts toward scientific and economic management,
have not used their influence to establish such a system.
Indeed, some of the large industrial concerns have found
such an arrangement so desirable that they have established
their own industrial colonies in which their factories and
freight service are entirely separated from the residential
sections. Only the most extensive ones, however, have been
able to do this successfully, the smaller ones having found
the problem of obtaining and keeping skilled labor a diffi-
cult one in colonies a considerable distance from large
towns.
Many large industrial establishments are removing from
the cities on account of the high price of land and the
consequent difficulty and cost of expanding and taking
care of increasing business. This exodus is a serious menace
to the progress and prosperity of manufacturing commun-
ities, and might be effectually halted if the municipal
authorities could set aside certain areas for manufactur-
ing and establish such other regulations as would tend to
keep land values within reasonable limits for such purposes.
If this Conference, or any other civic organization, or
any considerable number of our people, should agree that
large benefits would accrue from the adoption of the zone
system in the development of our cities, there would still
remain a difficult task and a long campaign to overcome
the opposition of powerful property interests and to obtain
the necessary legislation to establish it as one of the funda-
[184]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
mental elements of modern city planning, and in this
connection several important questions immediately suggest
themselves.
First. Is it necessary, or even advisable, that such a
system be established or advocated at the present time?
The claim that it is necessary cannot hold if the objects
it is intended to accomplish can be achieved in an easier
and less disturbing manner. That its accomplishments
in German practice have been generally beneficial cannot
be denied, and the very fact that we are considering it
seriously is convincing evidence that we believe it possesses
some merit. It will not do to say that we do not need it
at present; that is a half-hearted way of approaching the
problem. Although present conditions are largely responsi-
ble for the organization of this Conference and our energies
are being directed toward the improvement of civic pro-
cesses and the removal of obstacles to civic progress as
they now exist, our largest field of usefulness will lie in the
keenness of our prophetic vision and the skill and wisdom
with which we may direct the course of civic progress
toward higher and nobler ends in the future. Therefore, if,
through the vista of the coming years we see that public
control of the occupancy and use of land in the interest
of the people is inevitable, now is the time to inculcate the
principle rather than to postpone action until the difficul-
ties the zone system is intended to overcome have become
too great to be readily uprooted. Let the lesson of the
sky-scraper teach us to anticipate and prevent the growth
of its brother evils.
Second. Would not the attempt to establish the system
in this country be regarded as an unwarranted invasion
of vested property rights incompatible with the American
idea of freedom?
Any attempt to engraft the system into our schemes
of municipal development would probably meet with great
opposition from land owners, real estate operators, and
operative builders, and from large interests not directly
[185]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
concerned in the development of land. The objections of
the first would doubtless be based upon the abridgment of
their right to do as they please with their own property;
of the second, upon the cutting off of prospective profits;
and of the third, upon the general proposition of the invasion
of vested rights. All of these arguments were advanced
against the establishment of the system in Germany, and
all had to give way at the behest of the people.
In this country, or in some of the states at least, land
owners place perpetual restrictions upon property, pro-
hibiting all succeeding grantees from improving it except
in a certain prescribed manner. They establish a permanent
building line beyond which no building may extend, fix the
minimum cost of the house to be erected, and prohibit
certain buildings and the carrying on of certain kinds of
business. If it is within the power of an individual, during
his brief enjoyment of ownership, to place a restriction
upon land which shall be binding upon unborn generations,
it should be placed within the province of the public author-
ities, representing the whole people and acting for their
common good, to impose similar restrictions.
The curtailment of the prospective profits of the real
estate speculator and the operative builder, whose interest
in land seldom amounts to bona fide ownership, may not
seem a serious obstacle, but instances are not wanting in
which it has been used with telling effect.
The plea for the protection of the vested right has not
the force it had a few years ago. The great unrest we
find throughout the country today may readily be traced
to the exploitation of nearly every line of activity under
so-called vested rights; the days of perpetual franchises
and special privileges are passing away, and, while every
reasonable safeguard must be maintained around the rights
of property and invested capital, their leveling down to the
service of the people who have given property its value and
capital its reward is proceeding steadily.
Third. Is the organism of our municipal governments
[186]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
sufficiently stable to administer such a trust with exact
justice and continuing firmness?
A long process of reasoning might be necessary to con-
vince the people that our municipal officers may be trusted
with such large powers as are involved in the practical
application of the system, for there are too well-founded
suspicions that public service does not always mean serving
the public. But the administrative machinery of our cities
is passing from the control of political machines and cor-
poration influences to the control of enlightened public
sentiment. The people have been thinking and inquiring into
public affairs, and they are learning that the city, with all
its vast resources and wealth, is theirs, created by their
energy and labor. They are learning what a tremendous
organization the modern city is and, in the pride of their own
work as its creators, are beginning to assert their right
to rule it. Municipal government in the United States is
undergoing an evolution that points toward material im-
provement, and the time may not be far distant when our
cities will be governed as wisely and honestly as those of
Germany, where the power of the local officials is so great,
and so unrestrained by constitutional or statute laws, that
only the most capable and trustworthy men dare be placed
in the public service, and where election to a public office is
a real honor, the greatest that can be conferred upon a
citizen.
Fourth. Cannot the undeniable benefits the system has
conferred upon foreign cities be obtained by other means
and under our present laws?
It may be entirely possible to obtain many of the benefits
claimed for the system by other methods and with the
legal instruments we now have at hand, but it will require
wise, forceful, and courageous officials whose tenure of
office is not subject to the vagaries of party politics or the
influence of selfish interests and who shall enjoy the confi-
dence and support of the people. Accomplishment will be
by slow degrees, and some enabling legislation will be
[187]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
required in any event. The many associations of a national
or local character that have been organized to carry on
the work of social and civic improvement can exercise a
large influence in encouraging progressive thought and
action among municipal authorities and the people, and
in bringing about harmony and cooperation in matters
affecting the public welfare as well as in the large construc-
tive measures essential to the substantial and permanent
development of the modern city.
DISCUSSION
HON. JOHN E. REYBURN, Philadelphia, Pa.:
In listening to the thoughtful paper of Mr. Haldeman,
I am struck again with the advantage that Philadelphia
has in the matter of city planning. As mayor, I was sur-
rounded by a class of men who were deeply interested in
their work. Success in city planning was made possible
because we started it after much consideration and removed
from it all thought of partisanship. Our first meeting was
composed of citizens of all classes representing the leading
industries and thought in the city. In that way we removed
from the undertaking all charge of partisanship and
politics. In all the four years that city planning was con-
sidered there was never a charge that it was originated
for partisan purposes. The entire city and all classes of
citizens were considered. It was truly a comprehensive
undertaking.
One other thought occurs to me. If the idea contained
in Mr. Haldeman's paper or, in fact, if any of the funda-
mental city planning ideas are to be carried out, it will
have to be done by downright energy and no halting at
imaginary or real obstacles. If the plans we now have at
Philadelphia could have been halted by raising financial
considerations as an insurmountable obstacle, they would
have been stopped, but we paid no attention to all the
things that were said about the lack of money. We
[188]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
believed that it was capable of demonstration that the
money expended would bring back a tenfold return. I
personally believe that if a company were organized in the
city of Philadelphia to develop some of the avenues for
\,hich we have plans, it would return a very handsome
profit to its stockholders, if it were allowed to take its
pay in a certain percentage of the taxes based on the
increased value due to the improvement.
From the viewpoint of both city and private interest
I believe in the commercial advantages of city planning.
Its esthetic advantages need no re-statement.
MR. C. F. PUFF, JR., Newark, N. J.:
Mr. Haldeman has brought out two valuable points in
his paper which I think will bear emphasizing, namely,
reluctance of municipal authorities to adopt new ideas
and the query " How best can we obtain results ? " The
first point, to my mind, is probably the most important.
It is here that ideas are either crystallized or crushed, and
therefore it is necessary to study this point and find a
remedy. No official cares to make radical departures from
his set policies, and these policies are built on the theory of
" don't trouble trouble until trouble troubles you." It is
just this indecision and hesitancy which give rise to doubts
in the minds of the people, and instead of moulding opinion
officials are subservient to opinions founded perhaps
through ignorance of the true purpose. To feel the pulse
of the public is indeed diplomatic, but to stimulate that
pulse is what inspires confidence and insures success. This
is what we need and this is what we have in some of our
progressive cities. All depends on the presentation of a
new idea and who favor it, and I urge our officials to be-
come not only acquainted but close allies with measures
which have demonstrated their practicability.
The query as to how best we can obtain results suggests
Mr. Haldeman's hint of some indirect means, some
means other than the zoning system. Zoning legisla-
[189] '
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
tion will no doubt be fought strenuously and perhaps
defeated. The street plan, special taxation and assess-
ments, building codes and health regulations, all offer in-
direct means, but to apply even these intelligently we must
zone the city. Fire zones, police zones, postal zones, etc.,
have been established; the tenement sections or zones have
certain limited heights of buildings and certain areas of
lots to be left unbuilt up ; residential sections or zones have
restrictions as to amount of lot to be left unoccupied and
distance back from the street line to be preserved. Now,
in view of these existing indirect zoning laws, why not add
some of the building laws in force in Frankfort-on-the-
Main? These laws regulate the ratio of height of build-
ing to width of street, also the ratio of house area to
lot area, etc. Then they impose stringent rules for plac-
ing a factory in a residential section and just as stringent
rules for placing a dwelling in a factory section. In just
such manner we could arrange our building code so as to
make it unprofitable to establish either a factory in a
residential section or vice versa, and we could thereby give
protection to both, accomplish natural zones, and pre-
serve the integrity of them.
These regulations, however, sometimes become a boom-
erang and drive industries out of the city unless that city
can offer them a more advantageous site than the one
made unprofitable by the building code. This is the
trouble with all kinds of regulation. If we could offer
factories and dwellings better opportunities than those
they have at present, we would get natural zones without
injury to private property. It is the indirect means of
accomplishing our purpose that I wish to emphasize. Mu-
nicipal authorities, instead of imposing regulations and
restrictions, should establish industrial zones, made attrac-
tive by conditions under which the transfer of raw material
and the finished product would be provided at the lowest
cost. Acting on this idea, Newark, N. J., hopes to estab-
lish one of the greatest industrial zones in the world on
[190]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
what is now waste land. The same municipal forethought
and ingenuity which go into the establishment of zones
calculated to attract industries can be employed with as
great advantage to make attractive certain portions of
the city for residence.
MR. W. T. JOHNSON:
The map which Mr. Haldeman showed of the city of
Cologne suggested two thoughts which might be supple-
mentary to his paper. The city of Cologne, so far as its
city plan is concerned, is in charge of an architect who has
a twelve-year term, and he is not a Cologne man, but is
imported from another part of Germany, for the simple
reason that he was the best man they could get. That is
the system that they use in Germany. If a town wants a
mayor, for instance, it advertises in the newspapers for
one. This eminent architect has in charge the development
of the plan of Cologne, and at the same time, at the end
of his twelve-year term, the city of Cologne, if it wants to
get rid of him, has to pay him a large forfeit, for the
simple reason that it does not seem fair, if he has spent
all of his twelve years in the development of Cologne, that
he should be just turned down.
There is another point which is very interesting about
the city of Cologne, and that is that in the building law
certain limits are placed, as Mr. Haldeman explained, to
buildings in certain zones, but if, for instance, in a zone
where there are five-story buildings a man deliberately
puts up a four-story building, he is allowed to have a
certain rebate in his taxes, just for the reason that he has
gone below the limit.
[191]
REMARKS AT THE DINNER GIVEN BY THE
BOSTON CITY CLUB
Presiding, MR. JAMES P. MUNROE, Vice-President of the City Club,
Toastmaster, MR. J. RANDOLPH COOLIDGE, JR., Vice-President of the
Chamber of Commerce.
HON. JOHN F. FITZGERALD, Mayor of Boston:
WHILE I have not been able to attend as many of the
sessions of the City Planning Conference this year as I
could have wished, yet I have kept in touch with the dis-
cussions and have in this way been enabled to follow the
general trend. I think it is fair to say that while the spirit
of the movement and the conceptions of its exponents have
lost nothing in breadth and in fineness, there has been a
tendency toward practical methods and the achievement
of concrete results which is extremely gratifying.
The general theme of the Conference this year, with its
emphasis on the financial and administrative sides, indi-
cates that this group of idealists have come to the point
when they realize the necessity of embodying their visions
in definite achievements. I have been pleased, for example,
to note the recognition given to the engineering profession.
There is a notion, all too prevalent still, that city plan-
ning is purely a question of landscape architecture, but
those of us who have had to do with the actual work of the
government of cities realize that dependence must be placed
upon the engineer for the laying out of subways, streets,
sewers, and water systems, which are in a sense the skeleton
over which this great organism is developed. The city gov-
ernments themselves have recognized this, and while we may
not have reached the position of Paris, which is said to
have in its municipal departments the finest engineering
[192]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
corps in the world, it is a fact that the cities of the United
States perforce give recognition to some of the ablest
members of this profession.
The tendency, moreover, to include in the conferences
heads of city departments is encouraging to those of us
who realize how practical and human this entire question
is. From its very nature city planning must assume a
somewhat critical attitude. It expresses a noble discon-
tent; but it will defeat its own purpose if this criticism
goes so far as to attach blame indiscriminately to the men
who, hampered by difficulties of every sort, by legislative
restrictions, and popular apathy, are seeking a way out
and endeavoring to accomplish to the best of their ability
the tasks that are assigned to them. There should be no
attitude of superiority on the one side or of hostility on
the other, but both sets of workers should labor side by
side for a common end.
The presence of city officials as speakers and interested
listeners at all of your sessions holds out a rainbow of
hope for the future, since it is only through the absorption
by the community of the ideas which the leaders of this
movement have to communicate that there can ever be
brought about even a partial realization of their dreams.
Not only the city officials but the people themselves need
education. This movement should be popularized by vigor-
ous campaigning so that a higher conception of city life
may be spread among the citizens. The press is another
agency which can be a means of assistance in widening the
basis of popular support which every such movement re-
quires in a democratic country like ours. Only a month
or so ago our attention was called to the remarkable devel-
opment of the park system in Rochester, where I believe
the first session of your conference was held, and we
learned that this was due to the enthusiasm awakened
among the people of that city largely through the efforts
of the daily papers. There is no reason why the press of
Boston, for example, should not display the same pride in
[193]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
the achievements of our metropolitan and local park boards
and guide the people to points of interest and beauty in
the wonderful system which has been created here.
The idea which I wish to extricate from the multitude
of suggestions which have been offered in the last three
days, is simply this, — that we are working not for the
purpose of ventilating our personal opinions or of sketch-
ing vaporous visions of a city beautiful, which is to be
brought into being somewhere, somehow, at some future
stage of the world's progress, but for the purpose of better-
ing conditions of life in Boston, New York, Chicago, San
Francisco, and wherever tens of thousands and hundreds
of thousands of men are living under conditions that are
admittedly far from ideal. Results are what we want and
we are willing to accept suggestions from any quarter that
promises improvement.
From the European cities, for example, we can learn
not only their searching methods of taxation, their liberal
treatment of the workmen by means of old age pensions
and accident and disability insurance; their expert admin-
istrative processes; their scientific statistics; their stress
upon technical education and industrial development; and
their magnificent application of engineering skill to the
creation of harbors, but such comparatively minor lessons
as the importance of tree planting and tree preservation,
the control of public advertising when it becomes offensive
to the esthetic sense; the employment of sculpture in pub-
lic places on a wider scale; the supervision of the height
and style of buildings, and many other similar instances of
regulation and control.
I think it is fair to say that Boston, as well as the other
American cities, is moving forward in the direction pointed
out by these gentlemen at the Conference. Our subways
and street system have received a major share of attention,
because the whole life of the community flows through these
avenues. Recently we have come to realize that we, after
all, are primarily a seaport, and have taken thought for the
[194]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
utilization of our magnificent waterfront and the estab-
lishment of proper rail connections with other parts of
the country.
On the recreative side the most notable extension of
activities in the last few years is the dotting of the en-
tire residential portion of the city with new playgrounds,
which, under the consolidated park and recreation depart-
ment, which is soon to be created, will be administered under
the guidance of the best experts that can be found.
Esthetically there is no local problem more fascinating
than the rearrangement of Copley Square. I believe the
members of the Conference have had an opportunity to see
the drawings of the architect employed to suggest a better
plan. The great Parkman bequest, which places at our
disposal the income on five million dollars annually for
park improvement, has been carefully expended, and the
city will have as a result of the liberality of this worthy
Bostonian an aquarium and a zoological garden, a marble
memorial bandstand, and many other features of interest,
while almost the entire soil of Boston Common has been
made over to a depth of two feet, under the careful super-
vision of Mr. Olmsted.
Most of these improvements go to make life pleasanter
for the people who must live in the cities themselves, but
I think your movement might go further than this and aid
and encourage city dwellers to move out of the congested
sections into the outlying suburbs. At the last session in
Philadelphia several of the papers dealt with the English
movement for garden suburbs, and Mr. Raymond Unwin,
the leader of that movement, was there in person to ex-
pound his ideas. Within a year a group of Boston gentle-
men have purchased a large tract of land just south of
Forest Hills in the least settled portion of Boston Proper,
for the purpose of developing a garden suburb for Boston.
The fact is that Boston is entirely surrounded with such
suburbs. Its greatest beauty in some respects consists in
the variety of the landscape and the wholesome living con-
[195]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
ditions that are to be found within a radius of ten or fifteen
miles. Nowadays the trolley has penetrated the country
in every direction and nowhere are these connecting lines
more abundant than throughout New England. One may
ride eighteen or nineteen miles through Greater Boston for
a single fare. In New York, on the Interborough, one can
ride twenty-four miles for five cents. To ride such dis-
tances in London, Paris, or Berlin would cost at least fif-
teen or sixteen cents. As any movement to reduce the
tenement population and disperse them among the out-
lying districts depends absolutely upon cheap transporta-
tion, it would seem that the first condition for success has
already been attained.
I do not need to emphasize the advantages of suburban
life. It seems to me that people who are brought up in the
outskirts of a great city under the open air and yet free
from the narrowness of the hill towns and the back woods
settlements, having reasonable access to the educational
influences of the city itself, are peculiarly fortunate.
We all know that the tendency everywhere, in both
Europe and America, is for the people to congregate in
cities, and the very evils and problems that have grown
up are due to this circumstance, which is not altogether
a healthy sign. I could not help noticing, for example, on
my recent return from Washington, how few cattle were
to be seen pasturing in the meadows. In Europe one meets
them everywhere, and they are not only an agreeable
feature of the landscape with their rich markings and sug-
gestion of life against the vegetation, but they are evi-
dence, it seems to me, that the people are holding to their
old simple tastes and that country life is not neglected.
I might say that I have been so impressed with the impor-
tance of this and the advantage of bringing up my own
children with a taste for nature that I have recently pur-
chased a farm of my own and intend to cultivate it as a
practical investment. I have also suggested to the park
department of Boston that it set aside a space in one of
[196]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
the city parks for the growing of cereals such as corn,
wheat, oats, rye, and buckwheat, as well as garden vege-
tables, and have conferred with the chairman of the school
board on the question of having a class in agriculture.
One of the difficulties that settlement workers in New
York have found is to get people who have never known any
other life than that of the city to care for life in the open
country. In a greater or less degree this holds true of
thousands of tenement dwellers even in a city so well
parked as Boston and provided with such facilities for get-
ting out into the country. I would go so far as to suggest
that this general idea be given a prominent place in your
Conference a year from now. Of what avails it to cry out
against crowded tenements, impure air, and congested
streets when the whole tendency and spirit of the times
leads to an exaggeration of these conditions. It is like
flourishing Mrs. Partington's broom in the face of the
Atlantic City surf. The more you develop steel construc-
tion and urge your sky-scrapers upward so that they liter-
ally touch the clouds, the more you congest your down-
town streets and residential sections adjacent to the busi-
ness district.
Moreover, there is this difficulty in dealing with large
cities, that they are practically built up on unchangeable
lines, while the open country in the suburbs presents op-
portunities for new beginnings which should avoid the mis-
takes of our predecessors. While I think there is danger
of artificiality in the towns that spring completely out of
the head of a landscape designer (a natural shrub always
pleases me more than the trimmed bushes of the Japanese
garden), I do not think this consideration outweighs the
importance of distributing a population which is suffering
in health, efficiency, and morals from the evils of over-
crowding. I hope this may be taken up seriously, as it
seems to me as important as any subject which has been
considered.
In conclusion, I want to congratulate the members of the
[197]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
conference upon the high standard which they have main-
tained. They are educators in the best sense of the word,
and their lessons apply not to school children or college
youths but to the entire community. We are all proud
to have had them with us and our only regret is that they
cannot come every year to stimulate and inspire us by their
words and their example.
DR. NEWELL D WIGHT HILLIS, Minister of Plymouth
Churcht Brooklyn :
Gentlemen of the Conference, many, many years ago I
made a proposition to my family physician that if he
would keep me out of heaven I would do my best to keep
him out of hell, but that I thought I had the hardest part
of the job. So when my friend Mr. Bennett came down to
Brooklyn to give us a plan for the city beautiful, for a
beautiful Brooklyn, I told him immediately that if he would
only pray and work with me for a plan for the divine
city of God that I wished to have set up on earth, I would
be almost glad to exchange jobs with him and try to find
a plan for the city of Brooklyn.
Over the threshold of an old palace in the city of Flor-
ence I once read these words : " Erected to the glory of
God and the adornment of my beloved city," and Brown-
ing tells us the story of the old merchant who erected the
palace, tells us that his ambition was not merely to be self-
supporting, but that he wanted to do something to adorn
his beloved Florence; that he wished to have an excess
over what was required for purposes of utility to devote
to a cultivation of the beautiful ; and he quoted the saying
from Plato's Republic, that if any man would fain set his
house in order on earth he will find that he is working
towards an ideal of the divine city of God, the city beauti-
ful of heaven.
And so in these strange ways we seem to have brought
down to us in these modern times the notion that every
man, every architect, every artist, every landscape gar-
[198]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
deuer, is really trying to find an ideal, divine, beautiful,
celestial plan, that is to be set up here on earth; and I
take it, gentlemen, that that is really the reason why
everything is changing in modern society. When our
grandfathers and grandmothers were here it was enough
for them that the house kept out the rain and snow. Now
the house must be beautiful, even if it is the workman's
little cottage of few rooms. It must have its library and
books, its pictures and decorations, its dining room, its
room for social companionship. One hundred, or even
fifty years ago, the Book of Truth was bound in plain
sheepskin and printed in ugly black type; now the ten-
cent magazine has its beautifully printed and illustrated
text and ornamental cover. We have given up the ox cart
and are riding in Pullman palace cars.
I take it, gentlemen, that the greatest change that has
taken place between the old days and our time is this, that
while the expression of the beautiful was then centered in
castles, palaces, and cathedrals, it is now centered in the
life of the common people. The development of the people
was confined to the palaces, castles, and cathedrals for
five hundred years; it now finds its expression in the
clothes people wear, in the conveyances in which they ride,
in the houses in which they live, and it is spreading out
little by little into broader ideas for the general beautifica-
tion of our great cities.
I take it that the greatness of your plan is this: that
it means to give to things that have in themselves, apart
from the working out of the plan, very little value, very
great value indeed; that it represents the spirit that, tak-
ing a pile of bricks, makes them into a beautiful house,
that, taking a bundle of words, turns them into a Hamlet,
a King Lear, a David Copperfield, a Constitution of the
people, a Declaration of Independence.
Little by little the world has advanced, until we see that
we are entering upon an absolutely new epoch, that we
are improving our houses, establishing beautiful play-
[199]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
grounds and parks, having better factories, streets, shops,
banks, — all these things forming the background, so to
speak, of the huge, glorious canvas which is showing the
whole life of the people absolutely transformed.
I suppose we will all agree in this, that the measure of
an art lies in its flexibility. I believe it was Ruskin who
said that landscape gardening was the lowest of the arts,
because dirt was inflexible, and that, passing through the
range of the arts, music stood at the top, because it dealt
with the air, which was liquidity and flexibility itself. I
suppose if I should accept the proposition that landscape
gardening is at the bottom, because it is not flexible, that
architecture is above it, because it is more flexible, that
sculpture is higher because it is still more flexible, that lit-
erature stands higher among the fine arts because it
handles words and ideas, and that music stands at the
head because it deals with the most flexible thing known,
the air, I would immediately come in conflict with our
friend, Mr. Olmsted.
In touching on the relations of city planning to modern
life I wish to say a word about the physical constitution
of the American people, our health, our bodily building
up and our mental and spiritual life. I take it that the
most terrible document published in the last thirty years
is the new Blue Book published by the English Parliament,
which deals with the deterioration in physique of the Eng-
lish factory class. In that book England tells us she had
twelve million of her people who live in closely congested
towns, in the factory districts, where the bodily physique
of the people has gone all to pieces; that they not only
are no longer able to do good work, because they have
not the physique, but that they are unable to do fine
thinking. We all know that sound thinking stands with
one foot on fine brain fiber and one on sound physique.
Nineteen boys out of twenty in Manchester, Sheffield,
Leeds, are not able to obtain papers that would enable them
to join the English army in case of war, because they have
[200]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
gone to pieces, because their arms and legs are atrophied,
because their heart action is not right. Only a week ago last
Saturday a cablegram came over from London through the
Associated Press, saying that over 7500 Englishmen had
applied for enlistment in the navy, and that the English
government had refused 6500 of them. That is the coming
English problem, — a more terrible problem than the prob-
lem of the southern part of Ireland. One quarter of
England's people have gone to pieces physically. We have
no reason to think that that is peculiar to England, because
it is something that threatens everywhere where proper
attention is not paid to the housing and the hygiene of the
people. This report shows, in the first place, that these
people are crowded together without proper playgrounds,
without a chance to exercise in the fresh air, with poor
and insufficient food. You can build a good physique on
plain food, if there is enough of it, and if there is a chance
for people to get fresh air, but you cannot build a good
physique on the richest food if there is no chance for air
or for exercise.
And when you come to this country, don't you believe
that in our congested districts the American physique is
going to pieces? I go out around the country occasionally
to lecture and to find what people are thinking and talking
about. I have recently been in thirty-four states in the
South and in the great central West; and when you get
outside of cities like Boston, Washington, New York,
Philadelphia, Chicago, you find that the most typical build-
ing in the United States is an insane asylum, a hospital for
feeble-minded children, for epileptics, for the blind, deaf,
lame, and halt, and you begin to realize that there is a
breakdown going on in the American physique. When you
go to England and ask to see the typical building, you are
shown a castle or a university; in France a cathedral, in
Italy a palace or cathedral. But the typical building in
most of the cities in this country, the small cities, is a
lunatic asylum, an institution for feeble-minded children or
[201]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
something of the sort, showing that bodies have gone to
pieces.
When you come to examine the Indians, you discover
that 86 Indians out of every one hundred have tuberculosis
or one of the unnamable diseases; in San Antonio, 78
per cent of the Mexicans are diseased, 20,000 having either
the unnamable diseases or tuberculosis. When you go
to Central and South America, among twenty-five million
people, you find almost the same conditions.
And you will find similar conditions in the congested dis-
tricts of your own town. We as a people are breaking
down. In New York, our working classes, those in the
factory districts, are going to pieces right in front of our
eyes. I know of nothing more terrible than the injury to
the optic nerve of children, the injury to the ear and to
the digestion; and when we hear the reports from physi-
cians, those who examine the American physique, showing
the deterioration of the eye, the nerve, the brain, the wan-
ing force of the heart as a great engine to force blood, we
know that this country is on exactly the same road as other
countries.
When you build a boy you have to build him in accor-
dance with the fundamental laws of physical life. When
an elm grows it pushes out branches which are soft, but
they become hard. What makes them hard and tough?
The wind blowing them back and forth. That exercises
them, the sap runs up into them, they become strong,
tough, and able to resist. It is so with a boy's body.
When the boy stretches his arm by throwing a ball, or runs
about, the blood flows to the arm or leg, supplying
strength, nutrition, and you have a physical growth of the
arm or leg. It is a crime to the children to keep them con-
fined, as so many of them are, in the great cities today.
They should be out where they can have elbow room, room
to play, to exercise, to get fresh air.
Take my own city of Brooklyn ; a very small percentage
of the land is dedicated to parks. The little town of
[202]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Kissingen, in Germany, with 50,000 people, has a greater
acreage of parks and playgrounds, more walks for men,
women, and children, than the entire city of Brooklyn, with
two million people. You cannot build boys and girls with-
out fresh air, exercise, and good food.
Last summer, coming back in the month of August to
the city of Brooklyn, I went over to the Heights. I saw a
very pathetic sight at ten o'clock at night — a poor driver
with a little baby in his arms and a young woman of
twenty-five sobbing bitterly. They were sitting on the
stone steps in front of the residence of one of the wealthy
citizens of Brooklyn. I talked with the woman and found
that she lived in the congested part of the city, not within
two miles of a spot where the little child could have a
breath of fresh air. She was fighting a losing battle for
the life of the child, who was gasping for breath, and
there were two other children, three and five years of age.
She was so poor that she could not afford to pay the fares
to take them to the park.
We lost last year in Brooklyn 10,000 children.
The average locomotive costs $10,000. Suppose every
one lost was equal to a steam engine, and figure it out at
four and one-half per cent. That is, we will say that last
year there were destroyed, burned out, wasted in Brooklyn,
ten thousand steam engines, each costing $10,000. If the
New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad lost every
year ten thousand locomotives, it would go into the hands
of a receiver, for no railroad corporation in the United
States, and not even the Standard Oil Company, could
stand any such financial strain. How does American
society hold on in face of this enormous loss?
We have had our poets, our novelists, our merchants, our
inventors, but the next generation is going to apply to the
architects, the landscape gardeners, the builders of cities,
to work in the interests of the health and regeneration of
the people. Your ideals will be realized in another genera-
tion, because the people are coming to understand that, as
[203]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
they must have a different kind of house in this twentieth
century, they must have a different kind of people. We
are going to take great spaces in our cities and give them
up to the boys and girls for parks and playgrounds, within
walking distance of their homes — places where they can go
and build up their bodies, their arms and legs, send good
rich blood through their arteries. Unless we do this, our
boys and girls are going to break down, and that means
that we will break down in religion, in art, in science, in
finance, and become a degenerate nation. Wherever we find
people crowded together as we find them in some of our
congested districts, we find that they lose the power to
reproduce themselves in sound, healthy sons and daughters.
That is one side of city planning, with its relation to
the national physique. Every nation depends on the sound
health and physique of its people. There is always to be
considered the important effect that broad, intelligent plan-
ning is going to have on real estate values, as well as on
the comfort and happiness of the poor people. Of course,
in this country we know nothing about taxation. A man
who lives in London is taxed on his income and in other
ways. He now pays one-fifteenth of his income back again ;
he pays a school tax, a street tax, a throne tax; he pays
four and one-half times the tax pro rata that a man pays
in the United States. But the man who pays a tax abroad
understands that he is going to get something back. They
have planning commissions in Germany and in Paris who
go to work in an intelligent way with reference to real
estate values. Over here we widen a little street — such as
Livingston Street, Brooklyn. The city paid for only one-
third of the lots, the front 30 feet on that street, as much
as the lots were worth, and the owners then sold the re-
mainder for as much as the 100 feet were worth before.
If the city had condemned the entire 100 feet, used the 30
feet, and sold the remaining 70 feet, it would not only have
made enough so that that particular street improvement
would not have cost anything, but it would have made
[204]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
enough to build another street. I found a book on city
planning in Munich last summer, and noticed this state-
ment in the last chapter, that if the men in authority do
not make their city planning pay the bills that are in-
volved outside of the large park areas, it is because the
plan is not properly made and worked out or not ade-
quately carried through.
I was very much interested last summer in attending
one of the public sessions of the men who have charge of
the new movement over in Paris in connection with the plan
to expend $180,000,000 in the Latin Quarter, and my
host on that occasion called my attention to the fact
that they had been studying the great Chicago plan, and
that the plan had created a sensation in Paris. He stated
that they had gone into the plans they had in mind very
carefully and had discovered this, that the people of Russia,
of South America, of Asia, of New Orleans, of San Fran-
cisco, of New York, of Boston, Chicago, of all the cities
and countries of the world, who were making money, went
to Paris and spent their money. Taking the most careful
statistics they found that Paris had an enormous income
very largely from men who made money in almost all the
rest of the planet, and then came to Paris to spend it. So
they are going to spend $180,000,000 there in improve-
ments in the next ten years. That is an expenditure that
would stagger Boston or New York, and yet they expect
to get it back from the foreign visitors whom they will
entertain, who are spending in Paris, according to the best
figures they can obtain, $750,000,000 a year; so that in
the next ten years they will get from these visitors
$7,500,000,000. Therefore, although they are only going
to spend $180,000,000, they expect to clear in ten
years about $7,320,000,000. That is a pretty good
investment.
The trouble in the United States is this: We are allow-
ing the people of Texas to make the money, are allowing
the people of the South and West to make the money, but
[205]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
they do not come to Boston and New York to spend it.
They go to Paris, because Paris is the most beautiful city
in the world.
You put your investment into wood, and you get six per
cent ; you put it into iron and get a seven per cent return.
But a Frenchman, with a conception of the beautiful, buys
a piece of canvas for fifty cents and makes it into a beauti-
ful painting, for which you pay $107,000, the Frenchman
making a profit of $106,999.50. That is the way to make
money ! When a man comes along and buys a ton of raw pig
iron for $10, you do not ordinarily associate ideas of wealth
with a ton of raw pig iron ; but when the imagination and in-
tellect have play and that ton of raw pig iron is converted
into $10,000 worth of hair springs for watches, you see
where the intellect and imagination come in. The trouble
in this country is this, that we have been dealing too much
with raw material, overlooking the ideal, the imaginative,
the beautiful, and have been getting a very small return
for our money. If the city of Chicago carries out its plan,
don't you believe that many millions will be spent there by
people from the West and Southwest who now go to beauti-
ful Paris and spend their money there?
We have got to the art age. It is not enough that
things are useful, convenient, economical; they must be
beautiful in addition to being useful and convenient. The
next steps in American citizenship must be these: the
streets that are beautiful, the houses that are beautiful, the
life that is beautiful. The reason why we are making a
fight against corruptionists in politics is, that they are an
ugly blot on the body politic, and we want to make every-
thing beautiful. The old conception of the beautiful has
gone, and I take it that you gentlemen are more interested
in its going than anybody else. The old idea of decoration
and adornment, simply the frosting and veneer on the out-
side, has disappeared. Society had come to believe that
beauty consisted in the frosting on the outside, the silky
cheek. We now find out that beauty on the outside is but
[206]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
an exterior revelation of soundness and obedience to law on
the inside. We have discovered that whenever a man obeys
the law in the thing he is doing his work will blossom into
the beautiful; that unless he obeys the laws of his art he
has a canvas on the wall instead of a beautiful painting;
and that if the American architect lives up to his ideals
and obeys the laws of architecture in building a house, he
shows us the finest type of home in the world. And so it is
when a Wendell Phillips stirs us by his eloquence or when
we live up to the beautiful memory of a revered father or
mother. In other words, everything in modern life repre-
sents obedience to law, or if it represents disobedience to
law, we say that it represents ugliness and decay.
And so I take it, even from the economic point of view,
that we are going to give ourselves to the beautiful. It
will increase our real estate values, but that is not the real
end. We want to get at the facts, we want to get at the
real truth of things, and in doing so we find our work blos-
soming into literature, into the beautiful in art, into the
beautiful in city building.
There is one other phase of our life that I would like to
speak of for a minute, and that is this : This city and town
planning movement is sweeping over the country, becoming
almost a tidal wave. I was lecturing in Iowa the other
day and found a little town of 3500 people who had passed
under the influence of the Chicago plan. The business men
and the citizens had come together, had raised money, dug
three artesian wells, and were developing a lake of 320
acres. They had never dreamed of such a thing before.
They have now started in, laid out a series of parks and
playgrounds, have begun a little summer college, and have
arranged for lectures and entertainments this summer, all
in the interest of the farming people, and they are going
to make their town a beautiful town. I understand that
there are over 2000 towns and villages in the United States
that have organized for work connected with the building
of the town. It perhaps means as much for the life and the
[207]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
civilization of this country as anything that has taken
place.
I have seldom been so impressed by a document as by
the new volume of statistics published in London, by Mul-
hall, on the farm lands of the world. That may seem far
afield from city planning, and yet there is not a man here
who will not be influenced ultimately by the conditions set
forth in that book, showing the farm resources of the
world. Taking the great mass of statistics he calls atten-
tion in the second chapter to the fact that the world will
have to make up its mind to disappointment because of the
discovery that, instead of a great increase in farm land and
food products resulting from the opening up of Africa,
such hope will have to be abandoned, because two-thirds of
Africa and one-half of Southern Africa is desert and can
never be utilized; that the greatest extent of Central
Africa is at the equator, which crosses Africa at its broad-
est point; that statistics show that Europe, Asia, Africa,
Australia, and New Zealand contain but ten million square
miles of farming land, while this little continent of America
contains eleven million square miles of farming land, and
will ultimately have one-half the population of the world.
The important thing is this, that we are going to own
more than one-half the farm land of the globe, as citizens
of the United States. We now own Alaska, and own more
than half the resources of America. We have poured
$365,000,000 into one single American enterprise in the
little state of Panama. For twenty years we have been
buying coffee plantations in Brazil, mahogany lands in
British Guiana and Venezuela, rubber plantations in Cen-
tral America. We are going to control more than half the
farm lands of the globe, and the United States will be rich
beyond the dreams of any people of the world. The trick-
ling stream of gold will swell into a river which will give to
the people of the United States enough for their arts, for
their architecture, for their city building and parks.
England, with twelve billions of dollars spent in one hun-
[208]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
dred years, has bought India, South Africa, Canada, Aus-
tralia, New Zealand, and other possessions, and controls
a population of 750,000,000, more than half the human
race. We are 95,000,000 now. Last year we produced
sixteen and one-half billions of dollars ; this year the figure
will probably be eighteen or twenty billions of dollars. If
we should live as economically as our fathers did, in the
next twelve months, we would save as much money as Eng-
land spent for India, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand,
and Canada. Ultimately we will save it, and it will come
back to us in the various ways making for civilization and
advancement. We are destined to have an enormous popu-
lation, to develop untold resources.
Our great Southwest is making money. No man who
has not been in the Southwest recently can understand the
wonderful revival and growth of trade there; no one can
compute the amount of money that is coming into our
American cities, like New York and Boston. I was down
in Texas a while ago and saw men earning $85 an acre net
on their cotton lands, $50 an acre net on their rice lands —
men who have made a fortune, in the last three years. I
saw in a moment what the result would be. They are com-
ing into the eastern cities to spend their money. They are
going to be attracted by the architecture here, by the arts ;
they are going to pay out their money in millions. Men
need joke about Texas no longer. No state in which you
can travel in a straight line as far as the distance between
Boston and Muscatine, Iowa, need be smiled at. If Texas
had as many people to the square mile as Belgium you
could put there all the people of the United States, plus all
the people of Canada, plus all the people of Mexico, plus
all the people of the Hawaiian Islands, and then in the
single Texan houses have twenty million rooms to let for
the people of Europe. The figures give a man a little bit
of an idea of the future of industry in the United States.
In the long run what we spend in civilizing influences and
in the development of the arts is going to come back to us
[209]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
a hundredfold. We have money enough for food, clothes,
and for the ordinary things. The next great stage in
American citizenship is to be a renaissance of the beautiful
in the fine arts. I found by the Consul General's report
the other day that more than ten thousand Americans are
registered as students in one line or another over in Paris,
and the report shows that there are not as many students of
the beautiful there from all the nationalities of Europe put
together. These men and women are coming back to us,
because the people of the United States are spending money
on the fine arts.
When Balfour said the other day that the people of the
United States are going to buy the art treasures of Europe,
just as the English a while ago bought the art treasures of
Spain and Italy, some of the English seemed to think it
was a strange notion. But it will be so. The income of the
average family in the United States, instead of being $800
or $900, is going to be $2500; we are going to do away
with the tenement house region, to have better housing,
more and better parks. We are going to do away with the
ugly spots. Starting with the city economical, we are
going to have the city convenient, the city useful, which
will blossom into the city beautiful. We ought to have,
and we will have, in the men in charge of the movement in
this country, an earnestness, a civic pride and enthusiasm,
as great as that shown in the buildings of Athens, of Flor-
ence, of Venice.
I am riotously optimistic about the people of the United
States. I do not believe any man can paint in colors too
rich the future of this country and of the great cities of
the country, especially along the lines of this new move-
ment for city building and city planning.
HON. FEEDEEIC C. HOWE, Director People's Institute, New
York City:
I have been listening to an exhaustive discussion of the
subject of town planning from almost every point of view
[210]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
for three days, and it is because of that, rather than with
any reflection upon the speakers who have occupied the
platform during the last few days, that my mind turns to
the story of a Wisconsin Swede who took his young lady
" out to a buggy ride," as they say in the West. After
a long silence he proposed to her, and she very promptly
accepted him. The Swede was silent for some time, and
finally the young lady said, " Ole, why don't you say nod-
ings? " and Ole said, " Ay tank too much been said already."
I must plead guilty to the comments made by Mayor
Fitzgerald upon my conversation with him. I did spend
five delightful hours in an automobile traveling through
Boston's parks, playgrounds, and along her waterfront,
and when I landed at the hotel at half past seven in the
evening I did feel a wonder in my mind, and I say, without
reservation or any attempt to indulge in flattery or persi-
flage, that I think Boston has done the job — the building
of parks, the intelligent conservation of human life through
provisions for play, the wonderful bits of landscape gar-
dening that we meet at every turn — better than any city
in this country, yes, I think better than any city in the
world. I think that is a rather interesting psychological
fact, and I presume in this city, where Puritanism, Cal-
vinism, Unitarianism, Christian Science, were given such
hospitable welcome, that probably psychology is not a dead
science. But it is an interesting psychological fact that
Boston, which has dreamed, thought, and contributed to
the world so much from the inner life, should more than
any other city in this country, unless it be Washington,
have thought of the city in physical terms, for Boston has
contributed a great park of 17,000 acres which surpasses
any in the world.
I remember coming here some years ago representing a
magazine, when the business men among whom I circulated
said, " Yes, Mayor Quincy has gone in for all sorts of
socialistic ideas — for playgrounds, for public baths, for
offering that sort of thing to the people." And it was
[211]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
socialistic, then; but today all America has appropriated
that conception of Boston of the physical foundation of
city life. You were first, if I am not mistaken, to regulate
the height of buildings. Unfortunately your courts made
it rather costly, but you had that vision. You, too, devel-
oped a great metropolitan water works, a gigantic sewer-
age and water system. You have planned and have par-
tially promoted and ripened the idea of a Metropolitan
Planning Commission, of a system of docks for the con-
servation of your waterfront. You have controlled the
subway situation — not as I would control it, because I
believe in the municipal ownership of public things, but
better, I think, than any other city in this country. You,
I think, have developed the best library system; you have
developed schools that are among the best in this country.
This, I think, is psychologically strange, because it sprang
up among a people who are famed in America for the em-
phasis they have laid upon religious, ethical, and psycho-
logical things.
That is the impression that Boston makes upon me —
that you have had the realization that the city is a physi-
cal thing, that it is something like a World's Fair, like a
railroad system, like a private house ; that it has to be
built for all the people who use it, who live in it.
I have long felt about the American people — that, in-
stead of being, as Herbert Spencer says, the most tolerant
of people, we are really the most intolerant of people ; that
there are more people to every hundred in Boston, in New
York, in Chicago, in Cleveland, interested in civic matters,
fighting for better things, than there are in Germany, in
England, in any other country with which I am familiar.
Personally I think the American people are not only
more intolerant of bad things, but that they have a quicker
sense of morality and immorality than the Germans and
the English. My explanation of the failure of American
cities is not personal at all. It is not ethical at all. I
think the American people are all right. The trouble with
[212]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
our cities is economic, it is physical, it is social. We have
turned the city on its apex; we have done what Gulliver
found among his islands. We, almost alone, or more than
any people in the world, have assumed that the city was a
political thing, like a county, like a township; that it was
ethical, and that, along with some other contributions
which you have made in Boston to America is, I think, a
very false note. You have contributed to us that over-
emphasis on the personally ethical, so that we, all over
America, have neglected the economic. We have failed to
build because out of Puritanism there sprang that empha-
sis on the individual. It was that which led us so easily
and quickly to appropriate from England the Manchester
philosophy of " Every man for himself and the devil take
the hindmost," of competition, of that interpretation of
the Darwinian philosophy, which minimized to the utmost
the community and exalted to the heights the rights of
personal property. The wonderful thing about this town
planning Conference of the last three days, which psycho-
logically marks, I think, a high-water mark in all the mu-
nicipal conferences I have ever attended, is that for three
days, from business men, professional men, architects, and
engineers, there has been a protest against the ascendancy
of property.
I have been interested in things municipal for probably
twenty years, and as I go back over the conferences I have
attended, the organizations with which I have been identi-
fied, it seems to me that the municipal movement has gone
through a steady evolution. The first stage of our revolt
was, " Turn the rascals out." You remember that stage.
It was a partisan stage. The next stage was that of good
government, — merely good government. Then we moved
on to the idea of a business man's administration. " Let
us get the business men in office, and all things will be
well." We fussed about charters, about the spoils system,
about the immigrants, about the ignorant voter. We tried
a great variety of things, and if you will go back and
[213]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
enumerate in your minds all the things we have tried in the
last twenty years you will agree with me, I think, that they
have been personal, they have been ethical, they have been
political, but that not until the town planning movement
was born did we realize that the city was a physical thing.
And we are just beginning to appreciate, as does Germany,
as does France, and to an extent as does England, that the
city is physical and that our far most costly mistakes have
not been personal at all. They have been physical. The
ignoring of the physical foundations of the city explains
the poverty that Dr. Hillis spoke about. For we lure our
people into our cities. They create high land values. The
means of transportation are inadequate to the needs of the
city; and poverty is produced by high rents, by awful
housing conditions, which in turn are traceable to high
land values. Civilized nations have put the plumbing of
our cities in private hands ; we have turned over the street
railways, the gas, the electric lighting, the telephone, and
the water service, to private hands. Think of the owner
of an office building who should turn over his elevators, his
plumbing, to private hands, to exact the highest possible
return from that service, and to render the worst possible
service. But that is what we have done. We have failed
to control the land speculator, who lays out our streets;
we have failed to control the builder, who shoots us up in
the air perpendicularly instead of permitting us to live
upon the ground. We permit private interests to appro-
priate our waterfronts, to strangle trade and commerce,
and increase the cost of living. We have left the planning
of cities to private individuals with no appreciation of
community rights, of the rights of all of us, with a re-
sultant ugliness, to speak of only one part of it, which is
an offence that the community ought to protect itself
against.
And that, it seems to me, is the interpretation of the
American city. Our worst costs, your worse costs in
Boston here, are not the spoils system. I have been told
[214]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
that the lowest estimate of cost here, due to the opening
up of streets, to correct mistakes, is thirty or forty mil-
lion dollars. It is costing Chicago running into the hun-
dreds of millions of dollars to correct its streets, because
of mistakes of the past, to make provision for its traffic and
commerce.
Town planning is a protest against the indifference to
the economic foundations of life. Last week in New York
I listened to Woodrow Wilson at the Economic Club. He,
borrowing from a Scotchman who had visited him and who
had made a great impression upon him, said it was an in-
teresting fact, taking the centuries of history, that we
found one great note dominating each age: That in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries all thought was satu-
rated with the Newtonian hypothesis, that politics re-
flected it, that the thought of all people was saturated with
it; that when we came to adopt our Federal Constitution
we adopted the Newtonian theory carried over into politics
and provided the checks, balances, and distributions of
powers. In the next century, the nineteenth, Darwin came
forward with his evolutionary theory, and that the evolu-
tionary theory gradually drew to it as a sponge all other
thoughts, until we began to interpret life in evolutionary
terms, — not as a static thing, not as a crystallized thing,
as in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, under
the Newtonian hypothesis, but as a growing thing; that
under that Darwinian hypothesis we naturally adopted the
philosophy of the Manchester school of physical science,
which said that the progress of the world came through' in-
dividualism, through the sacrifices of the community to the
rights of each individual, that property was sacred, —
more sacred than anything else — and that life was advanced
by the freest possible play of the struggle for existence.
And now we are passing over into a new philosophy, a phil-
osophy of the twentieth century, which will draw to it as
a sponge, — just as did the evolutionary hypothesis, just as
did the Newtonian hypothesis, — a new set of ideas, which
[215]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
up to the present time have been expressed by Marx,
by our great Socialist, Lester F. Ward, by Prince Krapot-
kin, whose expression of it is that civilization advances in
a direct ratio as society protects itself from certain
predatory influences; that it is necessary for the city to
do certain things, like provision for water, parks, and play-
grounds, in order that society may be free to evolve, to
have its growth; that that is the philosophy of the twenti-
eth century, just as the struggle for existence was the
philosophy of the nineteenth century.
And this town planning movement, it seems to me, could
not have sprung up in any other age. Of necessity it was
a reflection of this idea of Krapotkin, who, taking animal
life, demonstrates that those species survive best, progress
most, where the group spirit prevails, where they work in
packs, where individualism is subordinated to the rights
of the community.
I think that is true. I think that is true in municipal
study, that no matter where you go, in what age of the
world you study it, you will find that civilization has
sprung from the city and that the advance of civilization
has been in direct ratio as the city did many things for
the protection of the weaker members of the community
from the strong. That is the meaning of the philosophy
of Athens, in which the rights of the individual were very
slight, in which the life of the community was in the open,
— in the temples, in the streets, in the porticoes, — in
which all life was centered on leisure. The expenditures
were for the purpose of giving the Athenian leisure to de-
velop the arts and sciences, the drama. He lived in his
leisure, and his leisure was the result of town planning.
In Rome the same was true. Culture came when the city
planned physically for leisure. In Florence, in Genoa, in
Venice, the rich merchants built cities as well as private
homes; they subordinated private rights to public rights;
they had a high community ideal. They thought not on
their own doorsteps, but as a community. And today in
[216]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
Germany the great cities of this age are being produced
by a state that thinks in community terms, that compels
the railroads to serve, the water ways to serve, the land
speculator to serve; that compels the builder to limit the
height of his house, that puts its heavy hand on slums and
tenements, that views the city as a whole and that subordi-
nates property to life.
And so it seems that all of these agencies, activities,
philosophies, are focusing into a philosophy of city build-
ing, not in a small way but in a big way. We should build
cities not for a single sense, the sense of touch, the means
of transit, but realizing that God gave us five senses, not
one, and that a community is negligent, terribly wasteful,
that builds its cities merely for the satisfaction of one sense
rather than of five senses.
We are also beginning to appreciate that leisure deter-
mines the whole civilization of a people. We are beginning
to appreciate that, almost alone among the nations of the
earth today, America divides life into two sessions, —
eight hours of work and eight hours of sleep. The eight
hours of leisure, when civilization comes, when the arts
develop, when life springs up in a community, are turned
over to commerce, to the saloon, to the dance hall, to the
commercialized amusements. And no civilization can grow
or flower when all of its opportunities for culture are in the
hands of commerce.
That is why this city planning movement holds such a
big appeal to me, — because it attacks, just as the Greeks
attacked, as the Romans attacked, as the Germans today
are attacking, the problems of civilization, of leisure time
in which to make provision not only for the recreation and
happiness of a people but for their education. It is open-
ing up streets into which it will be a j oy to go ; it is build-
ing playgrounds, opening schoolhouses, building parks.
It is a vision of life — not of twenty million warring units,
with " the devil take the hindmost " as the highest motive,
but a life in which the activities of man will be given an
[217]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
opportunity for their biggest, freest, most democratic
play, under proper physical surroundings.
HON. JOHN E. REYBURN, Ex-Mayor of Philadelphia:
I have been in a sort of trance here this evening listen-
ing to the two speakers who have preceded me, because
what has been said has made me think perhaps more deeply
than I ever did before, and I thought I had given some
time and some thought to this city planning question
during the last four or five years. I have often dreamed
or thought I could see for the future of the cities and for
the future of this movement something that was greater,
something that was better in its conception for man, than
anything that had been evolved, certainly within my
experience.
The more I observe the more I am impressed by the
conditions that surround not only this country but all
the countries of the world. A sort of upheaval is coming,
and the people not only of our country but of the world,
the future men and women, must be taught and made to
believe that their fathers fought for that change. We as
a community must satisfy this great longing that is coming
into people's minds, and the lines along which we are
working represent the only way to satisfy it. They must
be taught not only their advantages in a money sense, but
in all that goes to make men better, to lead them to have
nobler and better thoughts. This is the secret of the
success of city planning, that down deep in the public
mind there is this great thought for the welfare of all
the people; and the thing we must do is to bring that
thought out, to develop it, and we will have the support
and the backing of all the public.
It has been so in our community. The fact that more
progress has not been made in the past is only because
the people have not been aroused, because they have been
led to think that dollars meant everything, that taxes
must not be raised, that money must not be spent for
[218]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
anything except the most practical and most utilitarian
purposes. Now I can see that they look at it in a different
way, and that any public movement in the city of Phila-
delphia to buy land for parks, to give cleaner and better
streets, to improve the water supply, and to make all
civic conditions better, will have the support of the public
unanimously. No man or men will dare to raise their hand
for one instant against any great movement of this kind,
free from partisanship, free from locality, embracing both
the city and the region roundabout.
The city of Boston ought to join with the communities
surrounding it in preserving certain natural things that
it is yet possible to preserve in a great deal of their original
and natural beauty. So it is around the city of New
York; so it is around the city of Philadelphia. Take
our Schuylkill River, for instance. It passes through a
most beautiful region, lined with cities and communities.
Soon it will be destroyed, if something is not done. All
the trees, all the grass, all that goes to show our children
and those who are to come after us, what the world was
when we were young, will pass away. Nothing made or
created by man can take its place. And what better or
greater movement could be inaugurated than to take in
that river along its entire banks and preserve those natural
beauties? It is not useful today, it is not necessary for
commerce. The banks of the river are mountain ridges,
which, bought and taken care of by the different com-
munities, would be a heritage such as nothing in the world,
no money value, could ever replace in time to come, if once
destroyed. So it is, gentlemen, with all our cities; and
so it is well that this planning convention should come
together and discuss these subjects, joining together as
one body of men, thinking alone of the great public
good.
It has been so with us in Philadelphia. Men of all
classes — engineers, architects, ministers, business men,
men interested in all the various walks of life — have come
[219]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
together and said, "We can join in this great movement
for the planning of a great city and for the improvement
of our community." And so in every community we can
make this movement one of the greatest benefits to man-
kind that has arisen within our lifetime, or, I might say,
within the history of man; because there can be no nobler
conception, no nobler work, than to take men and put
them in better fields, to make them see a better world
around them, and to believe that there is something in
the world besides grubbing for money all the time and
never seeing anything but the dollars. Why, sometimes I
am almost disgusted when I hear the talk there is about
the cost of city planning. The cost of preserving some
beautiful, natural thing does not amount to anything, and
no man can say that it is not money well spent to preserve
it and to hand it down to those who come after us.
[220]
PROCEEDINGS AT THE BUSINESS SESSION
THE Business Session was held in the Aldermanic Cham-
ber of Boston City Hall at four o'clock in the afternoon
of May 29, 1912, the Chairman of the Executive Com-
mittee, Frederick Law Olmsted, presiding.
RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE CONFERENCE
Approval of the principle of assessment for benefit as laid
down in Mr. Nelson P. Lewis's paper:
Whereas, It is the sense of the Conference that, however
admirable may be the plans prepared for the improvement of
cities, progress must depend in large degree upon the equitable
distribution of the expense involved in the execution of the
plans and in the soundness of the methods employed in finan-
cing them.
Resolved, That the Conference hereby approves of the
five general principles laid down in the paper presented to the
Conference upon this subject by Nelson P. Lewis and com-
mends them to the cities here represented, namely —
1. "Where there is local benefit, there should always be
local assessment on the land benefited."
2. " The entire city, or the metropolitan district, should
bear no part of the expense unless the improvement is in some
degree of metropolitan importance and benefit."
S. " Assessments should not be confined to the cost of ac-
quiring and improving streets, but should extend to any im-
provement which will increase the value of the neighboring
property, and should be apportioned as nearly as possible ac-
cording to the probable benefit."
4. " A workable policy once adopted should be consistently
adhered to."
5. " The determination of a policy and its application to
each case should be entrusted to a board composed of men
[221]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
especially qualified, whose terms of office should so overlap as
to insure continuity of policy and purpose."
Adoption of the report of the Committee on a Proposed
Study in City Planning:
Resolved, That the report of the Committee on a Proposed
Study in City Planning be adopted by the Conference and a
committee of five be appointed by the Executive Committee to
carry it into effect.
. REPORT or THE COMMITTEE ON THE PROPOSED STUDY
IN CITY PLANNING
The committee appointed by the Executive Committee of
the Conference to prepare for the consideration of the Con-
ference a program for a cooperative or competitive study
in the planning of a tract in the outskirts of a growing city
based upon the general outline printed in the Preliminary
Circular of the Conference, begs to submit the following
report :
After careful consideration of the advantages and limi-
tations of a hypothetical case and of a real tract of land
or a number of selected tracts, the committee is of the
opinion that a hypothetical case based upon an assumed
topography will prove, on the whole, more interesting and
profitable, and permit of a more ready and accurate com-
parison of the -results and ideas contained in the various
plans. The committee believes that a well-organized hypo-
thetical city plan, dealing even in a skeletonized manner
with all of the more important elements that should be
included in a city plan, would do more than any other
one thing now open to the Conference toward clearing the
minds of their own members and of the general public as
to what city planning comprises. It would also tend to
set a standard for those actually engaged with the con-
crete problems in this field.
Therefore, the committee presents as a basis for the pro-
[222]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
posed study and investigation a topographic map (subject
to change), covering about 500 acres. With regard to the
property, the following conditions are to be assumed:
1. The tract is located on the outskirts of a growing
city, but entirely within its corporate limits. This city
at present has a population of 500,000 inhabitants.
2. The tract is so situated that it will be reasonable to
apply to it the following assumptions upon which the
recommendations and predictions of the several plans are
to be based:
a. The rate and direction of growth of the city is
assumed to be such that the tract when fully developed
with streets, etc., will be absorbed by the demand for build-
ing lots within a reasonably short period and at prices
sufficient to repay the investment in the land of $3,000
an acre, together with the cost of development, interest,
taxes (15 mills of assessed valuation at full value), selling
cost and a fair profit, and that within ten years it will
be built up almost to the full extent contemplated by the
plan. It is assumed that the streets would be dedicated
without cost to the city, and that such street improvements
as are usually charged against the property, with the ex-
ception of grading and sewers, should be charged against
the abutting property at the actual cost of the work in
front of each property (for half the width of the street) ;
the cost of work in the roadway at intersections to be dis-
tributed pro rata throughout the adjacent blocks; the
cost of grading to be distributed pro rata throughout all
the street frontage, and the cost of sewers, both main and
branch, in each drainage area to be distributed pro rata
throughout all the frontage within that area.
b. The demand is assumed to be mainly for the erection
of dwellings and for such other purposes as are normally
incidental to such a development — retail stores, local
places of amusement, schools, churches, etc. Approximately
half of the population is assumed to be engaged in or
dependent upon work in nearby factories. The majority
[223]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
of families, it is assumed, will occupy dwellings commer-
cially rentable at from $15 to $30 per month, while there
must also be provision for some families who cannot afford
to pay $15 a month and for a considerable minority who
will demand residences rentable at from $30 to $100 a
month, or occasionally even higher.
c. In order to avoid confusing discrepancies in the legal
conditions which the various plans are devised to meet, it
is proposed to assume, unless otherwise stated, that develop-
ments on private property in each tract are to be governed
by the requirements defined in the Building Code approved
by the National Board of Fire Underwriters and in the
New York State Tenement House Act.
It is proposed to confine the plans to a general plan
drawn at a scale of 200 feet to the inch, and street cross-
sections at 16 feet to the inch. Plans are not to bear the
name or mark of the designer. The general plan is to be
presented as a blue-print or a black-line print. If it takes
the form of a black-line print, it may be rendered in flat
wash in color. The general plan should include :
a. The layout of streets and proposed public properties.
6. Such desirable control over the developments on the
private lands as could properly be exercised by ordinance
or statute under the most favorable existing constitutional
limits in the United States. Differentiated building regu-
lations are assumed to be constitutional.
c. Such control as might reasonably be expected to be
exercised by enlightened and public-spirited land companies
through restrictions in the deeds of lots with a view to
increasing the saleable value of the tract as a whole.
It is proposed that the plans and accompanying reports,
herewith suggested, be presented at the next meeting of
the National Conference on City Planning and that the
present Conference appoint a committee to make the further
arrangements necessary and to appraise and report upon
the merits of the various plans submitted. The committee
does not recommend an award of prizes, nor does it wish
[224]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
to emphasize the study as a competition in the ordinary
sense. It is of the opinion that the interest in city plan-
ning is just now of such a character that better results
will follow from studies which are undertaken more in the
spirit of cooperation than of competition. In other words,
it wishes mainly to focus attention more definitely upon the
scope and nature of some of the more important problems
of modern American city planning and through the studies
proposed to afford a convenient and useful clearing-house
for the best ideas and methods.
Respectfully submitted,
(signed) JOHN NOLEN,
B. A. HALDEMAN,
GEORGE B. FORD.
An exhibit of municipal activities at the Panama-Pacific
Exposition:
Resolved, That the City Planning Conference, recognizing
the increasing importance of the problems confronting our
municipalities, does hereby urge upon the Panama-Pacific Ex-
position Company the desirability of featuring an exhibit illus-
trating, in a convincing and comprehensive manner, all the
manifold municipal activities.
Resolved further, That a committee of five members, includ-
ing the Chairman of the Boston Conference and the incoming
Chairman be appointed by the Chairman to take steps to
secure if possible the cooperation of the Federal, State and
Municipal governments and of national and local civic and
sociological organizations to assure the realization and success
of the proposal.
In explanation of this resolution, Dr. Frank A. Wolff, of
the Bureau of Standards, Washington, D. C., communicated
the following remarks:
Some few months ago, in connection with the preparation
ef a report on another subject, it occurred to me that the
time was ripe for a great cooperative effort for municipal
betterment. An unusual opportunity for the development
of such cooperation seemed to be offered through the
[225]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
medium of the Panama-Pacific International Exposition to
be held in San Francisco in 1915.
The exhibit I had in mind was one which would illustrate,
by models, apparatus and appliances, maps, charts, graphs,
diagrams, tabulations, reports, and by such outdoor ex-
hibits as might be deemed necessary, all the activities of a
modern municipality.
Appreciating the assistance that the Federal Government
has given to the maintenance of Agricultural Experiment
Stations, I undertook to develop the attitude of govern-
ment officials toward the idea of a municipal exhibit, and
I am happy to state that the suggestion for Federal co-
operation in the solution of municipal problems has met
with a most hearty response.
This further encouraged me to take up the matter with
the Panama-Pacific Exposition Company. I am also happy
to state that the Exposition is greatly interested in the
proposal, and I am led to believe that the only thing
which stands in the way of its realization is the question
of working out a feasible method for carrying it out. The
final decision will rest mainly in the hands of Dr. F. J. V.
Skiff, Director General of Foreign and Domestic Partici-
pation, who is now abroad.
My particular object in bringing this matter to the
attention of the Committee on Resolutions was to secure
the active assistance of this body and its individual mem-
bers in convincing the Exposition Company of the time-
liness and importance of featuring a comprehensive munici-
pal exhibit.
With regard to the cooperation to be expected from the
Federal Government, this would consist only in small part
in providing funds for especially prepared exhibits along
many lines, but, more important by far, Congress should
be urged to provide funds for the publication of reports
on the principal topics illustrated.
These reports should be of two kinds: One aimed to
present in the form of technical treatises, summarizing
[226]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
all the information of value collected from every source,
which taken together would constitute what might be termed
a municipal encyclopedia, and the second set, intended for
general distribution, prepared along non-technical lines, but
aimed to present in a logical and convincing manner the
lessons of the exhibit. To my mind such reports would
be almost invaluable and would alone be worth more than
the entire cost of the Exposition.
In conclusion, I might say that since the object of the
proposal is to lay the foundation of the application in so
far as it may be justifiable of the principles of standardiza-
tion, to municipal activities and thus make it possible for
municipalities to perform their functions better and in
most cases more economically, the savings effected could
be devoted to the broader undertakings for which our organ-
ization stands.
Prmt'mg of papers for distribution:
Whereas, Frequent requests have been made in open meet-
ing that copies of some of the individual papers be printed in
quantity for prompt and inexpensive distribution;
Be it resolved, That the Conference commends such action
to the consideration of the Executive Committee.
Resolution of thanks:
Resolved, That the thanks of this, the Fourth National Con-
ference on City Planning be and are hereby tendered to —
First: The City of Boston and to his Honor Mayor Fitz-
gerald, for the hearty welcome extended to this Conference and
the complimentary luncheon which opened it; to the Boston
Chamber of Commerce; the Boston City Club; the Boston
Public Library and especially to Mr. O. H. Fleischner; Har-
vard University; the Woman's Municipal League; the Boston
Dwelling House Company; the Local Committee and all
cooperating organizations, for their hospitality.
Second: To the Press for its interesting, sympathetic and
adequate reports of this Conference, and
Third: To the officers of the retiring Executive Committee
[227]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
and particularly to the esteemed and efficient secretary, Mr.
Flavel Shurtleff.
Fourth: To the contributors of the formal papers to whose
expenditure of time and thought the success of the Conference
is so largely due, and
Fifth: To the Russell Sage Foundation for the support of
its continued and substantial sympathy.
Cooperation of other organizations:
Whereas, It is desirable to increase general interest in
City Planning and broaden the knowledge of the public regard-
ing competent methods of undertaking this work.
Resolved, That the Executive Committee of the National Con-
ference on City Planning should consider the advisability of
inviting all organizations of a social or civic nature, including
women's clubs, men's church clubs and brotherhoods, and also
neighborhood improvement societies, to cooperate with the Na-
tional Conference on City Planning by introducing this subject
in their educational and lecture courses.
[ 228 ]
THE ORGANIZATION OF THE FIFTH
NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CITY
PLANNING
CONSTITUTION
The report of the Committee on Nominations and Consti-
tution, made up of Messrs. Charles Moore, of Detroit;
J. Randolph Coolidge, Jr., of Boston; John Ihlder and
George B. Ford, of New York City, that the forms of pro-
posed constitutions be referred to the Executive Committee
of the Fifth Conference, with instructions to consult the
general committee and report to the Fifth Conference its
recommendations, was unanimously adopted by the Con-
ference.
NOMINATIONS
The nominations of the Committee for General and Ex-
ecutive Committee with the addition of several nomina-
tions from the floor, were unanimously adopted.
Voted, on motion of Mr. Veiller, that the Executive Com-
mittee be empowered to add to the membership of the
General Committee.
Voted, on motion of Mr. Ihlder, that for meetings of the
Executive Committee, five members should constitute a
quorum.
Voted, on motion of Mr. Crawford, that the Executive
Committee should have the power to add one member to
its number from the city where the Conference of 1913 is
held.
[229]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Fifth National Conference on City Planning
FREDERICK LAW OLMSTED, Brookline, Mass.
NELSON P. LEWIS, 277 Broadway, N. Y. City.
GEORGE E. HOOKER, City Club, Chicago.
LAWRENCE VEILLER, 105 East 22d St., N. Y. City.
ANDREW WRIGHT CRAWFORD, Stephen Girard Bldg., Phila-
delphia.
HON. FREDERIC C. HOWE, People's Institute, N. Y. City.
E. P. GOODRICH, 17 Park Row, N. Y. City.
E. H. BENNETT, Railway Exchange, Chicago.
GEORGE A. Ross, Montreal, Can.
JOHN C. DANA, Free Public Library, Newark, N. J.
HENRY C. WRIGHT, 105 East 22d St., N. Y. City.
HON. LAWSON PURDY, Hall of Records, N. Y. City.
RICHARD B. WATROUS, Union Trust Bldg., Washington.
GEORGE B. FORD, 347 Fifth Av., N. Y. City.
J. P. HYNES, 199 Yonge St., Toronto, Can.
GEORGE S. WEBSTER, City Hall, Philadelphia.
GENERAL COMMITTEE
ARCHITECTS
A. W. BRUNNER New York
J. G. HOWARD Berkeley, Cal.
GEO. A. Ross .Montreal, Can.
J. P. HYNES Toronto, Can.
G. ATTERBURY New York City
E. H. BENNETT Chicago
ALLEN B. POND Chicago
ALFRED CLAS Milwaukee
GLENN BROWN Washington
RALPH A. CRAM Boston
ENGINEERS
COL. W. L. JUDSON Washington
E. P. GOODRICH New York City
MAJ. Jos. W. SHIRLEY Baltimore
MILO R. MALTBIE New York City
[230]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
FRED A. BARCROFT Detroit
R. H. THOMPSON Seattle
NELSON P. LEWIS New York
FREDERICK L. FORD New Haven
Louis K. ROURKE Boston
GEORGE S. WEBSTER Philadelphia
PUBLIC OFFICIALS, LAWYERS, ETC.
JAMES PHELAN San Francisco
HON. WALTER L. FISHER Washington
F. B. WILLIAMS New York
CHARLES H. MCCARTHY Madison
REV. DANA W. BARTLETT Los Angeles
J. R. WEATHERBEE Portland, Ore.
WILL S. CLARK Oklahoma
HENRY A. BARKER Providence
WM. P. DECKER Minneapolis
ANDREW W. CRAWFORD Philadelphia
HON. LAWSON PURDY . . New York
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
JOHN NOLEN Cambridge
GEORGE E. KESSLER St. Louis
ROBERT A. POPE New York
F. L. OLMSTED . Boston
SOCIOLOGISTS, ECONOMISTS, AND PUBLICISTS
HON. GEO. L. PERLEY Ottawa
HENRY C. WRIGHT New York
E. DRUMMOND LIBBY Toledo
MUNSON HAVENS Cleveland
GEO. E. HOOKER Chicago
W. L. MOODY Chicago
ALLEN T. BURNS Pittsburgh
BENJ. C. MARSH New York
JOHN COTTON DANA Newark
GEO. B. DEALEY Dallas
DANTE BARTON Kansas City
VINCENT STEVENS Akron, O.
LAWRENCE VEILLER New York
[231]
CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE
FREDERIC C. HOWE New York
RICHARD B. WATROUS Washington
RICHARD HURD New York
CHAS. MULFORD ROBINSON Rochester
JOHN E. REYBURN Philadelphia
B. A. HALDEMAN Philadelphia
B. E. LYON Troy
J. R. COOLIDGE, JR Boston
JOHN IHLDER New York
CHAS. MOORE Detroit
GEO. B. FORD New York
J. H. DAVIDSON Calgary, Can.
[232]
University of To
Library
DO NOT
REMOVE
THE
CARD
FROM
THIS
POCKET
It
Acme Library Card P<
LOWE-MARTIN CO. L
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11