em erreme mes
fotierpese
Ww
+
NVLLVHNVW YHMOT HO SONIGTINd YHTIVL TIHLS GNV TIVL 4HL
PCSEcecc
Crecelic i Bis i
reeereor bee 6 ee ae ee geenet®
PK
HOR 0 amas
I = —
COMMISSION ON BUILDING
DISTRICTS AND RESTRICTIONS
FINAL REPORT
JUNE 2, 1916
NEW YORK
BOTANICAL
GARDEN
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
COMMITTEE ON THE CITY PLAN
1916
COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS AND RESTRICTIONS
Epwarp M. Bassett, Chairman
Lawson Purpy, Vice-Chairman
Epwarp C. BLuM ALFRED E. MARLING
James E. CLonin GrEoRGE T. MorTIMER
Orto M. Erpuirz J. F. Smita
Burt L. FENNER WALTER STABLER
Epwarp R. Harpy FRANKLIN S. TOMLIN
RicHarp W. LAWRENCE GEORGE C. WHIPPLE
Atrick H. Man WILLIAM G. WILLCOX
Rozert H. Wuirtten, Secretary
COMMITTEES
BoroucH oF MANHATTAN—WALTER STABLER, Chairman; Otto M. Er1i7z,
ALFRED E. MARLING, GEORGE T, MORTIMER.
BoroucH oF THE Bronx—RricHarD W. LAWRENCE, Chairman; Epwarp R.
Harpy, ALFrep FE. Martine.
BorouGH OF BRooKLYN—FRANKLIN S. TomMLin, Chairman; Epwarp C.
Bium, Lawson Purpy.
BoroucH oF QueENS—Atrick H. Man, Chairman; James E. CLonin,
Burt L. FENNER.
BoroucH oF RICHMOND—WILLIAM G. WILLCcox, Chairman; J. F. Situ,
GEORGE C, WHIPPLE.
STAFF
Rosert H. WuitTtTen, Secretary
GEORGE B. Forp, Consultant
Joun P. Fox, Transit Expert
Hersert S. Swan, Investigator
GeEorGE W. Tutte, Assistant Engineer
Epwarp M. Law, Assistant Engineer
© MERTZ LIBRARY
R KEW YORK
f BOTANICAL
GARDEN
CONTENTS
CHAPTER JESHIN ATI RXONDNOKCANIOUN ae eco cep pod on See Cae aCe eI ee
CHAPTER II—NECESSITY FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF
(GLARE PSOE LAD IUNK Cy: Seeicncig Gini cra CUO OSCR oc SE eas
CHINE Reps) TW Sib DTS aeRMl CAS = pee yer coer savsocine sniereve ecvayare victsee
CHAPTER IV—APPROPRIATE INTENSITY OF THE USE OF
TS gANINFID ease ero Gree te ists Le EEE NCL eT I oe SU he Pee
CHAPTER WES ela Clelils IDUS ML SaUKCANS) hs Oa cae ddn d Gob tOni a acme OTE e
CHAPTER NA SeNRUevay. WB ITSKIDI SCARS Soeaandapocees yb REED OO eMeEE oOo noES
CHAPTER VII—FUTURE CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT OF DIS-
USOC INIEN (Cr 2] GENIN Meme aad cen oticc ta canoe nereno cade
APPENDIX I SCBUNRINGIR IPIROWUSIOINS: gcoasaccoscovsc0cggouenbG0000
APPENDIX II—ZONING SURVEY .<...........- ST EReE Geshamee Gen atts
APPENDIX III—DISTRICTING (REPRINT FROM HEIGHTS OF
IBUIUILIDIUNGS IRIGIAOIRIL)) sococenscacop000000d0000000
APPENDIX IV—RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN
RELATION TO NECESSITY FOR DISTRICT-
JUNG PIN og Sa cen Aol aotdic mod alana eRa Home
PAGE
dr@arns, WVereeAS sooooscaqcous Td IKkeloay, Clareaes Ilssconcodcantoue
Belli, Avmeell Jel; sosacccoccgo000 0) Isqalloin, Oa sossoccocscvcceccuce
Baral Niles Socaccocoocacoun Gil Kssielksos, Alkimeeal Io occooocancan0nce :
Bassett, Edward M........... 2 IS, IDR Ss Alon. 5 accccccd
Beymer, IL, Ioooo0qccc000500 Gi) Ilene, INGlsom IPsccagacoscncased0
Beragieim, Io cooonono0ccoo0n0s &} iLewmisolan, Sama Acsccasccocooc0ce
IBbialtcerm@l, IRE Soscdcccaccdc O3bilvordkesbranks cee tnel ce ecier eiocn te
Boehme, Dr. Gustave F., Jr... 94 McMillan, Dr. Marion B..........
IBbicely Io. Jelgoooqodosonoeneds Co} Marsa, IRemiEvri Csccscoccsac0000
Calder, Hon. Wm. M......... C7 Moshi, Islemny sooccoao0enc0d
Case, MiG Iscsocccosnsdsoo8 C8 Mpa, Jol Woocoonocovesu00e0e
Cormier, lhemese IX coocacacces OOS Mi ryt Vee AG ene acta ccy sine
Cisinion, JOM IB.csoccoscccc 100 Reeratheaneden CbEmeener ener ac
IDyyyarsoye, Ieyabsatbbal Gooaccconcnce Il leyexee, Iie, George Wlsscccsovcbace
iktisseElonseAtbrarni lene ener 102 IPawrahy, WEWSOM socooccccopsccsauen
macrsom, ID, IBIS ooccooune 105 ikopmdkes, IMlawtiin Soocoscocescbcocce
Emerson Valliam ieee neni 10S) Sclaerier, AGROS o6o caccsssvced0an
Ralleomer, IirbeS Wlososcoccacce 110° Schieffelin, Wm. Jay.............
Hetherstonsa Ohne heeeeeen ete ZO: Seurag, ILOWIS sesccospsoccabcncns
(Gebtiardeohne Gaeeeereeeeeee Zi Suewerin, Wailbern ooccsasccesocuc
Goodrich tehineste > eeeeeeee 123 Swan, Herbert S., and Tuttle, Geo.
Gireyme, IMIEGhIXOIN 5osnaccccoocas 127 NGS og Suan iCc OnlRRCRT RE RE REET art
Inlaralee, Jreihiig cosancosomodecc iz” Sywam, Islernst? Socacccccascoocese
Isleyechy, IWalyerl IR, ooccocscose 123 Wormer, Del Wssscoscuscoccccss
dlexames, IRowleiaGl j.ccccsc0ccs 132 Whipple, George C......:........
loyal, JOSAH oonscoscesneo 14) Wyllie, Theale 1Boncocsccccnobee
Ingersoll, Raymond V......... 135
APPENDIX V—SOME RESULTS OF HAPHAZARD DEVELOP-
MENT AS RECORDED BY THE CAMERA.......
APPENDIX VI—REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
OF THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPOR-
TIONMENT, JULY 18, 1916
211
HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
PAGE
APPENDIX VII—BUILDING ZONE RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY
THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTION-
MENT JULY 125; 1916 Aicicn snics cieiee oisiceielentteem aces 232
APPENDIX VIII—MAP DESIGNATIONS AND MAP DESIGNATION
RULES ACCOMPANYING BUILDING ZONE
RESOLUDION ADOPTED ULY) 25 19loneeeeeeee 245
APPENDIX IX—DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS...... 255
ILLUSTRATIONS
Fig. 1 The Tall and Still Taller Buildings of Lower Manhattan.. FEA SRG C opp. p. 1
fe 2 Use of Artificial Light in Offices on Exchange Place, from Broad
Street to Broadiways fiz o.s © «sje loaisiss eleivielesnisininiole a eS follow p. 9
s 3 Use of Artificial Light in Offices—On New Street, looking south
sees Wall Street; On Exchange Place, from Broad Street
sich oveye (oro. ufhs kl tn a soa us seve so tosses ipeeaceedotel atone lav co a’o) ote eee follow p.9
: 4 aces Building Cutting Off Light and Air from Tenements..... follow p. 12
v 5 Unimproved Property in Brooklyn, 1913........................ follow p. 14
2 6 Docks and Terminals in New York City and Vicinity............ follow p. 16
+4 7 Map Showing Place of Work of Factory Employees, 1913....... follow p. 16
£ 8) Bactories am Residence ‘Streets icc cie elector ebateielalobeticieletsiclars lela ene follow p. 18
c QO) Bitthr Atventie: eat «cleo etotetotedererelesetetorer-toreleielevevatejsfectovercinsioye tate kertienes follow p. 18
“10 Congested Side Streets with Combined Traffic of Business and
igh: Wott wil dimes srereleemtelctereratelelelefeteeiniceicelereteteiaciate er ieee follow p. 18
©) ie “ihe: Binvironments om the rome crete yepitererleteiotelteeietteieierer aaa follow p. 20
«! 12. Noise and ‘the Homes..22sssccce cceisaeene ae e eee Gennes follow p. 20
“13 Part of Map Showing Locations of Fatal Accidents Caused by
Automobiles, Surface Cars and Horse-Drawn Vehicles in the
Borough! of Manhattans 190 Gneeer caesar see eeter follow p. 20
« 14° ‘Dhe Streetasa Playoround ey yaacteccctesicitersiicteieele sioiste yore eee follow p. 22
“15. junk Shops anyG@ongested’ Menements cee eect ieee ree follow p. 24
16 Horseshoeing in Congested Tenement Streets...............-... follow p. 24
«17 Stores) Invading; Residence |Streetsin -- cee ciel seein follow p. 24
“ 18 Sidewalk Obstructions Incident to Business Use................- follow p. 24
« “19. Windows: on’ Lot (hinesy. «acc. citccciosiem a cir essistota sicteete renee follow p. 26
“ 20 Part of Population Spot Map—U. S. Census 1910............... follow p. 30
Zit all Biildings Ovenrtaxe Street. Capacithyeen see nacre eee eres follow p. 38
“22 The Apartment House Invading Detached House Sections....... follow p. 42
“23 Part of Map Showing Contours and Street Grades, 1916.......... follow p. 46
“24 Part of Use District Map for the Area shown on Opposite Page. . follow p. 46
“25 Existing and Future Rapid Transit Lines and Stations, Lower Man-
hattan; 1915: Bieta ate con ee eee eerie follow p. 46
“ 26 ‘Time ZoneiMapiot New, MorklGityoe neem eee eens citer follow p. 48
“27 ~Part of Map Showing Main Trucking and Automobile Routes with
TraftietGounts: 91S. ew aee aicine ccc: cciee co ene eee follow p. 48
“28 Map of City of New York Showing Population Centers Based on
Police’ \Gensus:. JOUS a rece ree ote oo en nas eee follow p. 48
“30 Typical Block from Atlas Showing Existing Building Development.follow p. 48
“31 Part of Map Showing Building and Transit Development, Manhat-
tan, 1914 0.2 cca cicmienleterketn gerne srsioionn iciore oo saci Eee ae follow p. 48
“32 Part of Map Showing Building and Transit Development, Manhat-
tan, 1885. ook casahacn cava naternenisienSicnien pierre: ihooanies Ge eee follow p. 48
“33 Part of Map Showing Heights of Existing Buildings, 1915........ follow p. 50
“34 Height District Map for Section Shown on Opposite Folder...... follow p. 50
“35 Part of Map Showing Percentage of Lot Covered by Existing Build-
ings, TOUS ©. ic abisrifec ere raeietinoe mtclee ie eieicic eee ae follow p. 50
“36 Area District Map for the Section of the City Shown on Opposite
Bolder vi.nsstiss nos says ee ee eet hoe aleceion eee eee follow p. 50
ve 3/7) Map’ Showing Land!) Valuesi 19) 5 semen ee ae eee eee eens follow p. 50
<~ 47 Districting: in Boston)... s0se nie ene re ee eee follow p. 60
+ (48, Districting: in Washington’ reassert eee eee follow p. 62
=. S49 Districting in, Minneapolis..:..ctoors onder ee eee eee follow p. 64
CONTENTS : V
PAGE
IDreimaciongs wa INIT RAUECS. ocoolsnoconcvsdo000dccodbaacbassnnoosne follow p. 66
IDistrictinewink ZosmAne eles peeEereE PEE rete re errcit caer arr follow p. 68
DIStrictine wil hnanktonlene eee eee ee erk erect renner acre follow p. 72
Lunch Hour Crowds of Factory Workers..............++00++eeeeeees 117
Congested Side Streets in Fifth Avenue District...................... 119
Part of Map Showing the Number and Location of Fires in the Bor-
ough of Manhattan During the Years 1910, 1911 and 1912......... 130
Volume of Sunshine Admitted by Window...........-.......00.00005 180
Cross-section of Bundle of Sun Rays Entering WYitaG@lOnooaccaccca0e0n 180
Sunshine Admittediby wWindowaneeaeenceren cee ceereennneceeneaaceees 181
Hourly Percent of Maximum Possible Sunshine in New York........ 183
Daylight Illumination on Street Surface and on Building Facade...... 183
Flux of Direct Daylight Entering Given Window..................... 187
Mae oniromimemn’ Or We IBIOWMEs cccocccsscccncd0uccecunDGDOuDNDND follow p. 214
The Impnirommene Or Wae IIOWME., .occocosssacacenn500cau0000G000 follow p. 214
INoisexandithemelomemtep cn acta ave retmire acre eee rane aeiace follow p. 214
INoisenandisthemblomesenyaa scree noo ol ete eeaeian ae follow p. 214
Stabless in Gongestedlenement Streetss-s4. sees aces follow p. 214
Sizlnles im Comeegued! Wemememe SWC. oocccncnscae0n0cc000000 follow p. 214
GaracespAmonemerivateMomesee eran aerate follow p. 214
Carages Amnon lire lalomneS, oacagncocbancososd00d0000000006 follow p. 214
Garages in Congested Tenement Streets....................-0-- follow p. 214
Garasespine Apartment sElouses Streets-peme nee ieee neice follow p. 214
Roadway Obstruction Incident to Stable and Garage Use....... follow p. 214
Swipe amal Gamage IWiloGkS.coccocosapcancsccacnocdcnss0GnGde0DD follow p. 214
Homes Exposed to Increased Fire Dangers.................... follow p. 214
Junk Shops in Congested Tenement Streets.................... follow p. 214
Junk Shops in Congested Tenement Districts.................. follow p. 214
Horseshoeing in Congested Tenement Streets.................. follow p. 214
Swomes Ihnpevhines Iesilenee SisrSStSooo0cccccceaccococdououounce follow p. 214
Stores Invading, Residence Streets......:.....3------+s------: follow p. 214
Stores lnvacdimossiesidencemotheetseerenemee tomate secon a follow p. 214
Stores Iknyaching; Iesclemee SwRreaiSoosccocccscccccoasnoagngn00s follow p. 214
Partial Conversion of Dwelling to Business Use................ follow p. 214
Residential Blocks Invaded Beyond Recovery.................. follow p. 214
Sidewalk Obstructions Incident to Business Use.........-.....- follow p. 214
Sidewalk Obstructions Incident to Business Use...............- follow p. 214
Sidewalk Obstructions Incident to Business Use................ follow p. 214
Sidewalk Obstructions Incident to Business Use................ follow p. 214
Sidewalk Obstructions Incident to Business Use................ follow p. 214
Sidewalk Obstructions Incident to Business Use...............- follow p. 214
Storage Warehouse in Residence Street....................... follow p. 214
INES Ge IResicemes Sere occccsouccopecv0bsnoadovubocdgauone follow p. 214
HORUS MOMMIES a tedey shiney jurist Se Am Lena ete follow p. 214
Tne hivirommear OF ae SEn@Olcascoscnv0gcaccs00doaccc00sGG06 follow p. 214
Mine Wayiromment oi tne San@COl, scooocoosceneoscqsouuasvonsdss follow p. 214
Tine Emyiromment OF ine SOHO. .occocooscososscaoavcoconcsceee follow p. 214
Hnvironmentsons Ciunchand sl ospitalaenmeseerceaaeeaere recs follow p. 214
IP esailS) Gir, Wevd” Sualeyyalken. oo lseoaaaoedosos pepbe cbuaeos bon coaseaoE follow p. 214
eri swoupolteeSidewallemmee mrp ere cee tere caesar tite follow p. 214
RerilspotuthnesSidewalle escape tees cio eee ody ee ae ee follow p. 214
Tyorcall IkaGhnowrey! IDIGUACIS.ocaccooapcccpscoc ng gs0000D0D ee DNDK follow p. 214
Typical Iackassrell IDIGEICHS>occ000cnbccoudcgcpac0dgncdcc000RbE follow p. 214
Pasian Cars aime Giseeer ComgessOm. ooocccc9c0couacoas9nuc0ccnsaes follow p. 214
RusheCaxtsyands Street. Congestionese asset eda eee aaa follow p. 214
Pag Carcis aimel Sireet COMGEHTON. s5000ccn000n4500ncas0ueseGnOr follow p. 214
Wiiindowsmonwalvotwlein emery rir cicrcricer exer titecie ine Os aor follow p. 214
MWindowsmongivotmlineren sserce nmin casera trates rss follow p. 214
Factory Buildings Cutting Off Light and Air from Tenements. . follow p. 214
Rear Yards of Tenements Used for Industries................. follow p. 214
Use District Map of the Borough of Manhattan................. follow p. 244
Use District Map of the Borough of The Bronx................. follow p. 244
Use District Map of the Borough of Brooklyn.................. follow p. 244
Use District Map of the Borough of Queens..................... follow p. 244
Use District Map of the Borough Ox ING oMO MG oscogqcc0asancacoe follow p. 244
Height District Map of the Borough of Manhattan............. follow p. 244
vi
Fig.
129
130
131
132
133
HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
PAGE
Height District Map of the Borough of The Bronx............. follow p. 244
Height District Map of the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. . follow p. 244
Height District Map of the Borough of Richmond.............. follow p. 244
Area District Map of the Borough of Manhattan................ follow p. 244
Area District Map of the Borough of The Bronx.............. follow p. 244
Area District Map of the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens....follow p. 244
Area District Map of the Borough of Richmond follow p. 244
Heighthof a Ballding .cmecctmerinccenerchti: aone noes * svevelseststetete 256
Goutt and Yard ‘Definitions: <... 2a: wcie sense coeiee ee ee eee 256
Heightjot a Yard lor a. Court... ...,5: onesie one ee eee 257
Chart Showing Height Limits at the Street Line for all Street
Wadths: infall Height) Districts: /-).ncescer <leesieienie ee ieee 258
Setback Principle—Typical Example in a One and One-Half Times
DASEPIGt: cos, S ayes bys satel ave crete stacey SENSI eee eee ee 259
Height Limits—One and One-Half Times Districts.................. 260
Corner Buildings—One and One-Half Times District............... 261
Typical Example Showing Influence of Wider Street at Intersections. 261
Limiting, Planes; for, Single Dormertysssceee- ee ee eee eee eee 262
Dormers—Typical, Maxima) 2% useyucicteteictoces « celacice meee ee earns 263
TROWELS: os se'e:n,0:5'ete saielaneinle ormteiceote et eee Me OR Ele eI ae One eee 264
Influenceof Existing) Eich) Buildingsses mecca ence eee 265
Influence of Existiney ich) Biildinesesscemeccieceeeicnen cen tne 265
Cornices and Parapets in a Two Times District....................-- 265
Height Limit Exception on Frontage Not Over 50 Feet............. 266
Area “iB” Districts—Interior! WLotsi..q.ceseee~ eee eee lee Cee 267
Inner Courts .iccieieiads o1e,accb Sree votes avsiaee ous eevee ele Sele eltl ss Se 268
Area “iG” Districts—Intertor Lotsw yes ac one seen eateries eee 269
Area “D2 Districts—Interion Wotsessas. ee eeeeneeee eee eee 270
Area “EE” . Districts —Side “YardSzcae..s soueateeun oo eke eee eee 271
Rear Wards: 24 cctxcfice's,is aieweiels crews avtlcioe thee eather eis heehee 272
Eots Running Dhrough) BromStreet to) Street.. oe eee eee 274
Influence of (Existing? Wards ja). ari<lsterasie craves eloteretevoreieteteteieteteiet tet eee 275
Area “B” District—Least Horizontal Dimensions of Yards and Courts. 275
Area “C” District—Lots Over 30 Feet Wide—Least Horizontal Di-
mensions of VardssandelCourts:epecmiecce cence once neers 276
Area “C” District—Lots Not Over 30 Feet Wide—Least Horizontal
Dimensions of Wards and (Courtse.-msemeiles cece ee aie 276
Area “D” District—Lots not over 30 Feet Wide—Least Horizontal
Dimensions) of, Yards) and! (Gourtsteeeia eee: see beeen eee eee 276
Area “D” District—Lots not over 30 Feet Wide. Least Horizontal
Dimensions of Yards and Courts. -ee.- 224 --ee ocie ls oie 276
Area “E” District—Lots over 50 Feet Wide—Least Horizontal Di-
mensions of svardssandmGourtse-eemeceeeene eer tee teers 277
Area “E” District—Lots not over 50 Feet Wide—Least Horizontal
Dimensions of Wards, andiiGouttsec- oo. seen: os eee scree eee 277
Area “B,” “C” and “D” Districts—Lots not more than 30 Feet wide
—Least Horizontal Dimensions of Outer Courts...............-- 277
Area “D” District—Least Horizontal Dimensions of Outer Courts.. 277
Area “E” District—Least Horizontal Dimensions of Outer Courts.. 277
Area “B,” “C” and “D” Districts (Non-Residence District)—Least
Horizontal Dimensions Oh sacs: cers rcteteretetctetot=telelel=|ateleieteletet ett site 278
Area “D” District—Residence District—Least Horizontal Dimensions
Of Wards: 2. sackcccc i cttcinwiaieiss a sdloe SIRE PRIEIOIe -e otohe Oe ee tee ere ketene 278
Area “E” District—Non-Residence District—Least Horizontal Di-
MENSiONS OL WALGS cele cies eatin ierlaleatoh eteiens Pee re 278
Area “E” District—Residence District—Least Horizontal Dimensions
OL “Wards occ h.c pe. cicle ape ares apotseterenere aver eit as ei sle «le e/ete)syenetakel alo Larateraereaae 278
CHAPTER I—INTRODUCTION
June 2, 19106.
To the Board of Estimate and Apportionment:
On May 22, 1914, the Board of Estimate and Apportionment adopted
the following resolution: 5
“ Whereas, Chapter 470 of the Laws of 1914, approved by the
Governor April 20, 1914, authorizes the Board of Estimate and
Apportionment to divide the City into districts and to regulate the
height of buildings, the area of courts and open spaces, the location of
trades and industries and the erection of buildings designed for
specified uses; and
“Whereas, The statute provides that before establishing such
districts and adopting such regulations the said Board shall appoint a
commission ‘to recommend the boundaries of districts and appropri-
ate regulations to be enforced therein’ ; therefore be it
“Resolved, That the Board of Estimate and Apportionment ap-
point a Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions of not less
than nine, nor more than nineteen members, serving without pay, if
not already in the employment of the City, to recommend the boun-
daries of districts and appropriate regulations to be enforced therein ;
and
“Resolved, That the Committee on the City Plan of the Board
of Estimate and Apportionment, the chief engineer of the Board, the
presidents of the various boroughs and the various city departments
be requested to advise with the Commission, and to co-operate
actively with it in the preparation and study of the necessary data;
and
“Resolved, That the secretary of the Committee on the City
Plan shall serve also as secretary of the Commission ; and
“ Resolved, That before reporting its recommendations the Com-
mission shall hold public hearings thereon.”
On June 26, 1914, the present Commission on Building Districts and
Restrictions was appointed pursuant to the above resolution.
The work of the Districting Commission was preceded by the investi-
gations and report of the Heights of Buildings Commission. On February
27, 1913, the Board of Estimate adopted the following resolution:
“ Whereas, There is a growing sentiment in the community to
the effect that the time has come when effort should be made to
regulate the height, size and arrangement of buildings erected within
the limits of the City of New York; in order to arrest the seriously
increasing evil of the shutting off of light and air from other build-
COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
ings and from the public streets, to prevent unwholesome and danger-
ous congestion both in living conditions and in street and transit
traffic and to reduce the hazards of fire and peril to life; and
“Whereas, Under the provisions of Section 407 of the Charter,
the height and size of buildings may be regulated by city ordinance,
but such ordinance must first have the approval of the Board of
Estimate and Apportionment; therefore be it ;
“Resolved, That the chairman be authorized to appoint a com-
mittee of three members of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment
to take this general subject under consideration, to inquire into and
investigate conditions actually existing, and to ascertain and report
whether, in their judgment, it is desirable to regulate the height, size
and arrangement of buildings hereafter to be erected or altered within
the city limits, with due regard to their location, character or uses,
to examine into the practice and the comparative experience of other
cities either here or abroad, and to consider and report upon the
question of the legal right of the City of New York to regulate build-
ing construction in the manner proposed; and be it further -
“Resolved, That such Committee may also investigate and report
whether, in their judgment, it would be lawful and desirable for the
purposes of such regulation to divide the City into districts or into
zones, and to prescribe the regulation of the height, size and arrange-
ment of buildings upon different bases in such different districts
or zones; and be it further
“ Resolved, That the Committee, when appointed, may in turn
appoint an advisory commission to aid in its work, such commission to
consist of as many members as the Committee may determine, sery-
ing without pay, if not already in the employment of the City, but
including representatives of each of the several boroughs, and that
either the Committee or its advisory commission may hold public hear-
ings in each of the boroughs and may use all appropriate means to
bring the subject to the attention of the taxpayers and to other
persons who may be interested ; and be it further
“Resolved, That the Committee be empowered to employ a sec-
retary, who shall also be the secretary of the advisory commission,
to secure such expert or technical advice as it may require for its
proper guidance, and to incur such other incidental expenses as it
may from time to time find necessary, such disbursements to be made
from the contingent fund of this Board, but not to exceed in the
aggregate the sum of $15,000; and be it further
“Resolved, That the said Committee be instructed to submit, if
practicable, in advance of any general report that it may make, sug-
gestions and recommendations with relation to the proposed limitation
of the height of buildings upon Fifth avenue, between One Hundred
and Tenth street and Washington Square, in the Borough of Man-
INTRODUCTION 3
hattan, and within certain prescribed areas on either side of the said
avenue, as proposed in the resolution presented to this Board on May
9, 1912, and now pending; and be it further
“ Resolved, That such Committee shall submit its final report and
recommendations to the Board not later than six months from the
date of its appointment, and shall thereupon cease to exist.”
In accordance with this resolution the Mayor appointed a Heights
of Buildings Committee with George McAneny, President of the Borough
of Manhattan, as Chairman. This Committee appointed an Advisory Com-
mission consisting of the following members: Edward M. Bassett, Chair-
man; Edward C. Blum, Edward W. Brown, William H. Chesebrough,
William A. Cokeley, Otto M. Eidlitz, Abram I. Elkus, Burt L. Fenner,
J. Monroe Hewlett, Robert W. Higbie, C. Grant La Farge, Nelson P. Lewis,
George T. Mortimer, Lawson Purdy, Allan Robinson, August F. Schwarzler,
Franklin S. Tomlin, Lawrence Veiller and Gaylord S. White.
On December 23, 1913, this Advisory Commission submitted its report.
The Commission, through its technical staff, made extensive investigations,
both of existing conditions in New York City and of the practice and experi-
ence of other cities, both domestic and foreign, including an intensive study
of the zone regulations of German cities. The Commission held an extended
series of hearings and of conferences with leading experts and others rep-
resenting the civic, social, professional, business and real estate interests
of the entire city. The Commission’s report of 295 pages contains a thor-
oughgoing and authoritative discussion of the problem of regulating the
height, area and use of buildings. The Commission states that it finds
conclusive evidence of the need of greater control over building develop-
ment. “The present almost unrestricted power to build to any height,
over any proportion of the lot, for any desired use and in any part of the
city, has resulted in injury to real estate and business interests, and to the
health, safety and general welfare of the city.” The Commission found
that any complete system of building control necessitated the application of
different regulations to different parts of the city and accordingly recom-
mended that the city be divided into districts and that the restrictions for
each district be worked out with reference to the peculiar needs and require-
ments of that particular district.
The resolution under which the Heights of Buildings Commission was
appointed directed it to investigate and report on whether in its judgment
a districting plan would be lawful. The Commission gave much attention
to this problem and considered carefully the various laws and decisions
bearing on the subject. As a result of such consideration the Commission
gave as its mature opinion that reasonable and appropriate regulations for
the districting of the city are constitutional under the general police powers
of the State. The Commission submitted a draft charter amendment per-
mitting the Board of Estimate and Apportionment to divide the city into
districts for the purpose of regulating the heights of buildings, the area of
4 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
courts and open spaces, the location of trades and industries and the loca-
tion of buildings designed for specified uses. This draft amendment was
passed by the Legislature, approved by the Governor and became a law
April 20, 1914. (See Appendix I.) Pursuant thereto the present District-
ing Commission was appointed.
Taking up the work where the former Heights of Buildings Com-
mission left it and using its data, investigations and report, the Commission
has during the past two years made an exhaustive study of the entire sub-
ject. The Committee on the City Plan of the Board of Estimate placed
at the disposal of the Commission its expert staff. The Commission has
made an extensive study of the present distribution of population and of
the present and proposed transit facilities, including a detailed transit time
zone map showing the estimated time from 14th Street, Manhattan, to every
section of the city, under the new dual subway system. Maps have also been
prepared showing the distribution of factory employees in the places in
which they work throughout the city; also maps showing graphically and
in detail the assessed land values per front foot throughout the city. With
the aid of insurance and real estate atlases, maps have been prepared for
each borough showing at various periods in their history the transit lines
and the building development and its use for residential, business and indus-
trial purposes. The present building development has been most carefully
studied and maps have been prepared to show graphically and in detail
the height of each building and the percentage of the lot covered by it.
Maps were also prepared showing existing grades, contours and other topo-
graphical features. The entire area has also been studied in detail and on
the ground by members of the Commission and its staff of experts.
The Charter amendment under which the Commission is acting directs
it before submitting a final report to the Board of Estimate to make a
tentative report and hold public hearings thereon at such times and places
as the Board shall require. Accordingly on March 10, 1916, the Commis-
sion submitted to the Board a tentative report and the Board fixed as dates
for public hearings March 27th, 28th, 29th and 30th, and April 3d, 4th,
5th, 6th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 17th and 18th. In addition to the hearings
above specified, adjourned hearings have been held as follows: April 20th,
May 4th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 15th, 18th, 22d, 24th, 25th and 31st.
The tentative report included a brief discussion of the general prin-
ciples involved in the proposed plan and a draft resolution with accompany-
ing maps embodying the plan in detail. The tentative report and maps were
printed and distributed widely among interested individuals and associations.
Many of the maps were also printed by various newspapers. A steno-
graphic record was taken of the public hearings. The general opinion
expressed was overwhelmingly in favor of the general plan outlined. Not
a single organization and only two or three individuals expressed dissent
from the general principle involved. Many individuals and associations
testified strongly to the urgent necessity for the adoption of the plan pro-
INTRODUCTION 5
posed. Many asked for detailed modifications of the plan. Most. of these
were for the application of more restrictive regulations. A few associations
and individuals, while heartily commending the plan, urged that, especially
as to limitation of height and area covered, the plan be made more stringent.
Leading experts in various lines appeared and urged the supreme need for
the adoption of the proposed comprehensive plan in the interest of public
health, safety and generai welfare. Subsequent to the hearings, the Com-
mission considered carefully the various suggestions and protests made
to it at the hearings and through written or oral communication. Asa result
of such reconsideration it has made numerous changes in detail in its pro-
posed plan. The general plan and the principles underlying it have not been
materially changed. The revised plan is herewith submitted as the final
report of the Commission.
CHAPTER II—NECESSITY FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF
CITY BUILDING
City planning is a prime need of our city. It is plain common sense
to have a plan before starting to build. City building is no exception to the
rule. Haphazard city building without a comprehensive plan is ruinous.
The bigger a city grows the more essential a plan becomes. Traffic
problems, the congestion of population, the intensive use of land, the magni-
tude of the property values involved, make the control of building develop-
ment more and more essential to the health, comfort and welfare of the
city and its inhabitants. New York City has reached a point beyond which
continued unplanned growth cannot take place without inviting social and
economic disaster. It is too big a city, the social and economic interests
involved are too great to permit the continuance of the /aissez faire methods
of earlier days.
As has been stated by the Committee on the City Plan of the Board of
Estimate :! “ With or without a comprehensive city plan, the city will
probably spend hundreds of millions of dollars on public improvements
during the next thirty years. In addition, during this same period, property
owners will spend some billions of dollars in the improvement of their
holdings. To lay down the general lines of city development so that these
expenditures when made will in the greatest possible measure contribute
to the solid and permanent upbuilding of a great and ever greater city—
strong commercially, industrially and in the comfort and health of its
people—furnishes the opportunity and the inspiration for city planning.”
While city planning includes the street and block layout, park and
recreation system, location of public buildings, sewerage system, water
supply, transit and transportation systems, and port and terminal facilities,
these constitute but half the problem. The way in which private property,
which occupies almost two-thirds of the entire area, is developed is of at
least equal importance. No plan for the development of public facilities
can be complete and effective unless there goes with it a comprehensive
plan for the control of building development on private property.
A street layout planned for a five-story city may be wholly inadequate
for a ten-story city. Street capacity adapted to the convenient movement
of traffic of all kinds is of supreme importance to the prosperity of the
city. Street congestion means loss of economic efficiency and is a menace
to public safety and order. We cannot hope to plan an adequate street
system unless some limit is placed on the height and character of the
buildings that the street system is to serve.
A street and block system that is best suited to a residence section
may be entirely unsuited to the needs of a commercial or industrial section.
Certain types of industries are best served by large block units and broad
* Development and Present Status of City Planning in New York City, 1914, p. 12.
NECESSITY FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF CITY BUILDING 7
streets. Certain residential sections are best served by shallow blocks and
comparatively narrow streets. Without a plan of building control that will
segregate the industrial from the residential sections, it is impossible to plan
a street and block system that will be suited to the requirements of the
various sections and to the uses that it is intended to serve. New York
City has suffered serious economic and social loss because its street and
block system built up on a distressingly standardized plan has not been
adapted to the particular requirements of certain types of industrial, busi-
ness and residential use. With the existing uncontrolled and haphazard
building development a uniform street and block system was the only one
that the city could properly adopt. ;
Nelson P. Lewis, Chief Engineer of the Board of Estimate and a
leading expert on municipal engineering and city planning, testified to the
need of the segregation of industrial districts from the point of view of
improved traffic conditions, a convenient street layout and economic advan-
tage. He said: “ This city has suffered tremendous losses by the inflexi-
bility of its street system, which instead of controlling a subdivision has
been controlled by the habit of creating lots one hundred feet deep, lying
between streets two hundred feet apart, and great enterprises, a number of
which were formerly located in the Erie Basin section of Brooklyn, finding
themselves hemmed in by rigid street systems to which more or less sanctity
was attributed, have been obliged to find new sites on the New Jersey
meadows. One conspicuous instance of this is the Worthington Pump
Works.”
The City’s park system is valued at $673,000,000. Large additions to
this system will be needed to provide for the requirements of Brooklyn,
Queens and Richmond. Unless a park system can be located with reference
to the particular residential sections that it is intended to serve, its value
is greatly impaired. Various small parks and parkways have been located
in what have now become factory sections. A comprehensive plan of build-
ing control would have made it possible to have so located these parks
that their contribution to the public health, comfort and welfare would
have been vastly greater.
The adequacy of the City’s future sewerage system is also in large
measure dependent on the adoption of a plan of building segregation and
height limitation. The city recognizes that in order to prevent intolerable
pollution of the waters of the harbor it must adopt plans for sewage treat-
ment, Segregation of factories will facilitate the problem of sewage treat-
ment by making it possible to confine the special facilities required for the
treatment of certain trade wastes to certain factory districts. While the
height of buildings has comparatively little effect on the adequacy of a
combined system of sewerage, storm water and sanitary, it is of the very
greatest importance where a separate sanitary system is used. Manhattan
is undertaking in large measure a reconstruction of its sewerage system
and, in view of the necessity for the early adoption of sewage treatment,
8 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
will reconstruct its sewers on the separate system. The other boroughs,
for the same reason, will probably adopt in large measure the separate
system. Amos L. Schaeffer, Consulting Engineer, Borough of Manhattan,
an expert on sewers, testified that the adoption of the Commission’s plan
of building control will be of great assistance in planning the future sewer-
age system of the city.
The city is spending an enormous amount of money to extend and
improve its rapid transit facilities. This expense was undertaken largely
for the purpose of preventing the present indecent, unsafe and unsanitary
congestion on the transit lines and for preventing the further congestion
of population. New lines were needed, but they alone will be wholly in-
effective in preventing the continuance and increase of intolerable conges-
tion during the rush hours on all the rapid transit lines—the new as well
as the old. This rush hour congestion problem is the inevitable result of
centering all business and industry between the Battery and 59th Street.
If everyone must come to Manhattan to work it will be quite impossible
to provide adequate transit facilities during the rush hours. The remedy
lies in creating numerous other business and industrial centers and checking
the extension of the Manhattan areas devoted to business and industry,
especially the latter, combined also with a limitation on the intensity of build-
ing development in such areas. This corrective the districting plan is
designed to furnish. Daniel L. Turner, Deputy Engineer of Subway Con-
struction of the Public Service Commission, a leading expert on city pas-
senger transportation, has testified to the absolute necessity of adopting such
a plan for the purposes above mentioned. Mr. Turner said: “ Unless a very
careful housing and districting regulation, such as you are trying to carry out
here is adopted, it will be absolutely impossible for the city to cope with its
municipal transportation problem. These two problems have got to be taken
together. They are absolutely related to each other. We can provide
facilities up to a maximum of the street capacity, but we are rapidly
coming to the actual capacity of the streets, so that the housing ought to be
so controlled and the manufacturing sites and the working sites, with a view
to having the population distributed over the whole area and in that way
develop a two-way business on all lines to the very utmost.”
With increasing population and attendant congestion it becomes more
and more important and difficult to guard the public health. A districting
plan to the extent that it reduces congestion and attendant close personal
contact on the transit lines and on stairs and elevators, will prevent the
transmission of communicable disease. Dr. Haven Emerson, Commissioner
of Health, testified to the menace of the rush-hour congestion and the
importance to public health of the proposed districting plan, as follows:
“ Another point in which health authorities foresee benefit to public health
by a consistent plan for the control of the future growth of the city is
in the improved conditions of occupancy of traffic conveyances. It is appre-
ciated and acknowledged that the more congested is a traffic conveyance the
NECESSITY FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF CITY BUILDING 9
more dangerous does it become as a means of transmitting communicable
disease to others, and there is a constant proportionate increase in infectious
organisms found in the air of traffic conveyances as their congestion
increases. Observations made in the subway from the Atlantic Avenue
Station to 96th Street and back through the subway during the rush hours
have shown a constant increase of the disease breeding organisms such as
were responsible for the epidemic of infectious colds during last December,
January and February. Observations show the presence of these bacteria in
such amounts as to constitute a serious public menace. The epidemic cost
the city two thousand lives over and above the usual death rate as it pre-
vailed a year ago and for the previous five years. Those deaths were due to
organisms which were found constantly in the air in the subway cars, which
has been examined in our laboratory.”
The importance of the districting plan to the public health as related
to provision of light and air is immediate and undoubted. Adequate natural
light and air are admitted to be fundamental in health regulation. Much
of the entire districting plan is based on the desire to secure for the public
as wholesome conditions with regard to provision of light and air as are
compatible with the necessary and reasonable utilization of the land. Only
through a comprehensive plan for the districting of the city is it possible
to apply adequate and effective standards of light and air in the interest of
the public health. This is confirmed by the testimony of Dr. Emerson, who
says: “I would say that the opinions of physicians have been expressed
in reports which are almost identically worded, dating back at least one
hundred years, with exactly the same conclusions and recommendations
which might be considered parallel with those now arrived at by this Com-
mission; also that the report of 1832 and previous ones of citizens’ com-
mittees on conditions of health in this city indicated the necessity of
providing for the future. These recommendations were made when the
development of New York City had not yet reached 14th Street. We are
still without the necessary relief, which nothing but this plan of yours can
provide.” si
Sunlight destroys disease breeding bacteria. Artificial light as ordi-
narily used has virtually no effect upon bacteria. This sanitary effect of
sunlight is sufficient reason for its requirement in liberal amount wherever
people live and work. Natural light also has undoubted superiority from
the standpoint of general health and efficiency of the workers. The use of
artificial light results in an increase of eye-strain and reduced physical
resistance ‘to disease. Good air conditions are usually possible where there
is good natural light; poor ventilation is a usual accompaniment of the dark
room. This is borne out by Dr. Emerson in his testimony before the Com-
mission: “It is proved that sunlight in the living room and the sleeping
room materially aids in providing resistance against diseases like tuber-
culosis. The sun has a destructive effect upon disease breeding bacteria.
Direct sunlight is a most effective disinfectant. Direct daylight—even
10 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
though not direct sunlight, has a powerful influence in destroying patho-
genic bacteria. In addition to that, people who are able to live in well-
lighted apartments have a physical resistance which is superior to that of
people who live in dark rooms. That has been proved under exact experi-
mental conditions in laboratory tests and is a matter of common observa-
tion among human beings.’ In the same connection Dr. Emerson said:
“ Diminished resistance of humans, as with vegetation, depends upon the
artificiality of their environment. You cannot raise babies without light
and air any more than you can raise plants, and where you cannot prove
that a disease has followed congestion, you can almost always show dimin-
ished resistance.”
Health is sometimes regarded as merely the absence of disease, but
as has been pointed out by George C. Whipple, Professor of Sanitary
Engineering, Harvard University, in a memorandum submitted to the
Commission, that is not a complete conception of health. ‘ Health is more
than the absence of disease. It is something positive, and involves physique
and vitality and it is mental as well as physical. The inherent difficulty at
the present time is the absence of scientific methods of measuring this
positive element in health. Yet the world knows as a matter of human
experience that it is real and vital. The expression “health and comfort
of the people’ is centuries old, and these two ideas are inseparable.” Health
as a positive concept denoting physical and mental well-being will be
promoted in many ways by the districting plan. The public health is the
sum total of the health of the constituent individuals. Well ordered city
development cannot fail to have a marked effect on the physical fitness and
vitality of the city’s inhabitants.
Dr. Gustav F. Boehme, Jr., neurologist, testified to. the rapid increase in
nervous disorders and troubles and to the very direct relation between such
increase and the present high buildings and haphazard development and
the congestion, noise and confusion incident thereto. The necessity for
reducing the stress and strain of city life is becoming more and more appar-
ent. This is essential if the city is to be a place in which our heritage of
health and vitality is to be used, conserved and handed down to succeeding
generations instead of being abused and exhausted.
Congestion of traffic and population and haphazard building make the
city’s fire fighting problem increasingly serious. It becomes increasingly
difficult to move fire apparatus through the congested streets. Streets
densely packed with crowds of people that quickly form wherever a fire
occurs, interfere with prompt service after the scene of the fire’ is reached.
If a serious fire should break out in lower Manhattan coincident with an
explosion or earthquake shock that would cause a general panic and out-
pouring into the streets, it might be utterly impossible for the firemen to
reach the fire and a terrible conflagration might result. This is the plain
truth and it is foolhardy to utterly ignore it and go on piling up buildings
and further extending the danger zone. The districting plan will, as to
Fic. 2—USE OF ARTIFICIAL LIGHT IN OFFICES ON EXCHANGE
PLACE, FROM BROAD STREET TO BROADWAY.
The black windows indicate where artificial light was being used near the
; windows at noon on a sunny day.
aS
AE:
(A) (B)
Fic. 3—USE OF ARTIFICIAL LIGHT IN OFFICES: (A) ON NEW
STREET, LOOKING SOUTH FROM WALL STREET; (B) ON
EXCHANGE PLACE, FROM BROAD STREET WEST.
The black windows indicate where artificial light was being used near the
windows at noon on a sunny summer day.
NECESSITY FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF CITY BUILDING 11
future growth, tend to spread out business and industry, both by limiting
the height of buildings and by encouraging the development of commercial
and industrial areas in the other boroughs. In this connection, John Kenlon,
Chief of the Fire Department, said in his testimony before the Commis-
sion: “In the thirty years that I have been connected with the Fire
Department, lower Manhattan has changed from a five-story city to a
twenty-five-story city. There is great congestion there at the present time;
during the day time it is difficult to move apparatus in response to fire
calls in the lower end of Manhattan Island. Increased congestion of
people and traffic in this section will cause very serious delays in getting
apparatus to work around the scene of a fire. Even at present it is very
difficult until the police reserves arrive and establish fire lines at a safe
distance from the scene of the fire. The same condition prevails in the
uptown section from 23d Street to 45th Street, particularly at certain hours.
The men who laid out the old part of the city 250 years ago had very
little conception of the conditions that obtain to-day. Those gentlemen
could not possibly see the great 10-ton and 15-ton motor trucks running
around on our streets. Downtown to-day it is almost impossible to get
through the streets; in ten years from now horses will be a very rare sight
on the streets of New York. The small buggy has been superseded by the
Packard, which takes four times the space. The streets are too narrow
in the lower part of Manhattan to take care of the traffic. It is a serious
matter, it requires a great deal of experience, a good hand and strong arm
to drive fire apparatus through the streets of lower Manhattan. Any plan
that will in a measure prevent the increase of congestion in the central
portions of the city is a plan in the right direction.”
The segregation of residential, business and industrial buildings will
also make it easier to provide the fire apparatus in each section suitable
for the character and intensity of development in that section. It will make
it easier to provide proper safeguards against fire. It will increase the
safety and security of the homes of the people. These facts were testified
to by Chief Kenlon of the Fire Department and by Edward R. Hardy,
Assistant Manager, New York Fire Insurance Exchange.
Segregation as to use and limitation of height are also essential to the
prevention of street accidents. The injury to life and limb from street
accidents is enormous and is constantly increasing. In 1915 there were
18,139 vehicular accidents in the streets of New York City. Of these
608 proved fatal. An orderly plan of building development will reduce
such accidents. Street accidents and street congestion are directly related.
In so far as the districting plan will tend to reduce congestion it will reduce
street accidents. There is also a direct relation between the number of
different kinds of traffic using the same street, with its resulting confusion,
and the number of street accidents. The segregation of uses with its result-
ant segregation of kinds of traffic will have a direct tendency to reduce
street accidents. In the residential sections the number of accidents to
12 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
children while playing in the streets is very large. By preventing stores,
garages and factories from locating on the residence streets the vehicular
traffic on such streets is reduced and as a direct result the number of
accidents to children. Of the persons killed by being struck by vehicles
in 1915 over half were children.
Ernest P. Goodrich, consulting engineer and city planning expert,
testified to the importance of the proposed plan in effecting a segregation of
kinds of traffic and thus reducing street accidents. Edmund Dwight, resi-
dent manager of the Employers Liability and Assurance Corporation of
London, stated his experience as follows: “My experience has indicated
that accidents increase as congestion increases, and any plan* which will
reduce congestion of population in buildings or in areas of the city will
reduce the number of accidents. The proposed limitation of heights of
buildings will reduce congestion in elevators, which is one of the prolific
causes of elevator accidents. Elevator accidents are due in far larger
proportion to crowding and to carelessness on the part of passengers, and
to unskillful handling, which is itself frequently caused by crowded cars,
than to defects in mechanical appliances. The number of street accidents
also, in large measure follow increase in density of population and it is
strikingly the case that the proximity of manufacturing operations to
crowded residential districts constitutes a peril, because heavy trucking,
express and similar traffic has to be conducted through streets which are
crowded with children. There is no question in my mind that limitation
of building heights and districting for classes of use, so that manufacturing
operations would be carried on in zones, with a minimum residential use,
would each tend, in large measure, to the reduction of accidents and to the
safety, as well as to the health of the people of New York.”
Heretofore we have attacked the problems of public health and safety
as related to building development in a piecemeal way. Special regula-
tions have from time to time been provided with relation to tenement
houses, factories, garages, theatres and other classes of buildings. Such
regulations are often rendered wholly or partially ineffective by failure to
control the environment of the building. The Tenement House Law
provides for minimum size yards and outer courts which really depend
for their adequacy on their being supplemented by similar yards and
courts on adjoining lots. If, however, a towering loft building or ware-
house is built next to a tenement, the standards of light and air aimed at
in the Tenement House Law are impaired. The districting plan makes it
possible to provide suitable and reasonable regulations for each class of
buildings and at the same time preserve the advantage of substantially
uniform regulations as to building height and yard depth for all structures
within the block.
Every city becomes divided into more or less clearly defined districts
of different occupation use and type of building construction. We have
the central office and financial district, loft districts, waterfront and indus-
Roof is that of tene-
ment on front of
lot. Factory is in
what should be the
yard of tenement.
119 Ridge Street.
Suffolk Street, Between Stanton and Monterey Avenue, Near 178th Street
Houston Streets—Loft building —Rear wall of plumbing establish-
extends to within a few feet of ment is erected on rear line of
rear lot line. yards of Third Avenue tenements.
Fic. 4—FACTORY BUILDINGS CUTTING OFF LIGHT AND AIR FROM
TENEMENTS.
Aside from their noise, dust and odor, factory or loft buildings are detrimental to
nearby tenements and private dwellings in their obstruction of light and air. Tene-
ments are compelled to leave a yard in the rear of the lot, but loft and factory
buildings are not prevented from erecting a high wall upon the lot line opposite
tenement windows.
a
4
NECESSITY FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF CITY BUILDING 13
trial districts, retail business districts, apartment house and hotel districts,
tenement house districts, private dwelling districts. Generally speaking,
a building is appropriately located when it is in a section surrounded by
buildings of similar type and use. Strong social and economic forces work
toward a natural segregation of buildings according to type and use.
In general, the maximum land values and the maximum rentals are obtained
where this segregation and uniformity are most complete. One purpose of
districting regulations is to strengthen and supplement the natural trend
toward segregation.
In spite of the natural trend toward segregation, building development
in many parts of the city is haphazard. The natural trend toward segrega-
tion and uniformity is not strong enough to prevent the sporadic invasion
of a district by harmful or inappropriate buildings or uses. Once a district
has been thus invaded, rents and property values decline, loans are called
and it is difficult ever to reclaim the district to its more appropriate use.
Individual property owners are helpless to prevent the depreciation of their
property. The districting plan will do for the individual owners what they
cannot do for themselves—set up uniform restrictions that will protect
each against his neighbor and thus be of benefit to all.
While in New York City economic forces tend to the segregation of
industries of the heavier type along the water and rail terminals, and to
the segregation of certain light industries near the wholesale, retail, hotel
and passenger terminal center in Manhattan, there are many kinds of light
industry that are free from any segregating force and locate indiscrimi-
nately throughout the city. They are found scattered throughout the
business and residential sections, especially the residential sections, from
which their labor supply is recruited. The factory is usually a blight within
a residential section. It destroys the comfort, quiet and convenience of
home life. There is nothing more vital to the city than the housing of its
people. The exclusion of trade and industries from the residential streets
is essential to wholesome and comfortable housing. Stores, garages and
other business buildings scattered among the residences are a constant
menace to residence property. The concentration of all the neighborhood
business buildings on the business streets makes the transaction of busi-
ness more convenient. The segregation of dwellings on the exclusively
residential streets adds to the convenience, quiet and amenities of home life,
and thus tends to increase property values on such streets.
In New York City the purely private injury incident to haphazard
development has become so serious and widespread as to constitute a great
public calamity. Through haphazard construction and invasion by inappro-
priate uses the capital values of large areas have been greatly impaired.
This destruction of capital value, not only in the central commercial and
industrial section of Manhattan, but also throughout the residential sections
of the five boroughs, has reached huge proportions. It does not stop with
the owners in the areas immediately affected, but is reflected in depressed
14 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
values throughout the city. Market value for investment purposes is
always affected by the hazard of the business. Economic depreciation due
to unregulated construction and invasion by inappropriate uses has become
a hazard that must be considered by every investor in real estate. This
extra hazard increases the net earning basis required to induce investment,
and consequently lessens capital values throughout the city: Whatever the
capitalized amount that may be properly charged to the economic deprecia-
tion hazard, it is certainly a huge burden and one that affects not only the
individual owners of real estate throughout the city but the savings and
other large lending institutions, the municipal finances and the general
welfare and prosperity of the whole city.
There is an intimate and necessary relation between conservation of
property values as here proposed and the conservation of public health,
safety and general welfare. Throughout a city the areas in which values
have been depressed by the invasion of inappropriate uses or lack of
building control as to height, courts and open spaces, are the areas in which
the worst conditions as to sanitation and safety prevail and where there
is the greatest violation of the things essential to public comfort, con-
venience and order. The decline in property value in such districts is merely
an economic index of the disregard of essential standards of public health,
safety and convenience in building development. Moreover, a depressed
district of changing occupancy is almost always a district in which un-
wholesome home and work conditions prevail. The old building altered to
suit a new use is usually very faulty in light, air and sanitation. Declining
values make it difficult or impossible to enforce proper standards. These
depressed districts create the most difficult and perplexing problems in the
establishment and administration of housing and factory regulations.
Moreover, the enormous losses sustained by owners of loft and tene-
ment property will be a serious handicap to the provision of future build-
ings to house the increasing population and the rapidly expanding indus-
trial development. This may become a very serious matter from the point
of view of cheap and adequate housing and safe and convenient factory
space.
With some eight billions already invested in New York City real estate
and the certainty of added billions in the coming years, a plan of city
building that will tend to conserve and protect property values becomes
of vital importance not only to individual owners but to the community
as a whole. Why not protect the areas as yet unspoiled and insure that
the hundreds of millions that will be spent in the improvement of real
estate in the coming years shall contribute to the solid and permanent
upbuilding of this great city. Permanence and stability can be secured
only by a far-sighted building plan that will harmonize the private interests
of owners and the health, safety and convenience of the public.
CITY OF NEW YORK
Crp LE Dames Ha Co
Base Map Reproduced by Courtesy of Ohman Map Company.
Fic. 5-UNIMPROVED PROPERTY IN BROOKLYN
1913.
a
Black indicates unimproved land.
CHAPTER III—USE DISTRICTS
The Districting resolution herewith submitted, together with the accom-
panying use district maps, provide for four classes of use districts: (1)
residence, (2) business, (3) unrestricted, (4) undetermined. The proposed
regulations apply only to future buildings and do not interfere with any
existing structure or occupancy.
In a residence district all kinds of business and industry are excluded.
Dwellings, private clubs and most institutional buildings are permitted.
The term “dwelling” includes an apartment house, tenement house,
boarding house, or a hotel having thirty or more sleeping rooms. The usual
accessory buildings, such as private garages, are permitted but they must be
located on the same plot with the building to which they serve as accessory.
A private garage for more than five motor vehicles would, however, be
excluded. A private club that has as its chief activity a service customarily
carried on as a business, such as a garage, would be excluded. While the
regulations are not intended to interfere with a doctor or dentist who prac-
tices his profession in the usual inconspicuous way in his private dwelling,
they would exclude any business such as a store in connection with a tene-
ment, club or hotel. It is provided, however, that the superintendent of
buildings! may, after notice and hearing and with appropriate conditions
and safeguards, permit in a residence district any building or use in keeping
with its use for residence purposes.
In a business district, residence and business uses are permitted but
industrial uses are either prohibited entirely or limited in the percentage of
floor space they may occupy. A list of specified industries and uses of a
clearly objectionable character are entirely excluded, as are also all other
uses that are noxious or offensive by reason of the emission of noise, odor,
dust, smoke or gas. No building may be used for factory purposes in excess
‘of 25 per cent. of the total floor space of the building, but a space at least
equal to the ground area of the building or lot may be so used. The term
“factory ” is defined as a building or portion of a building in which six or
more persons are employed in any process or part of a process of trans-
forming or converting raw material, partly wrought material or imperfect
material into forms suitable for use2 This limited provision for factory
use in a business district is appropriate both on account of the considerable
percentage of factory use required in connection with the retail trades and
on account of the numerous customary small trades and factory uses that
are necessary or desirable for the convenience of the neighborhood and, if
limited in size, are not objectionable from the point of view either of the
business use of the street or of the residential use of the adjacent areas.
A garage for five or more motor vehicles* will be excluded from a busi-
ness district except that with the approval of the building superintendent?
* This discretion vested in Board of Appeals in Resolution adopted July 25, 1916.
* Definition of “factory” omitted in Resolution adopted July 25, 1916.
* Changed to “ more than five motor vehicles” in Resolution adopted July 25, 1916.
16 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
and after notice and hearing, a garage may be erected in a business district
on any portion of a street between two intersecting streets on which there
exists a public garage at the time of the passage of the proposed resolution.
A similar regulation is provided in regard to stables. In the tentative report
it was proposed to permit public garages and stables in any business district,
but the nuisance features incident to the indiscriminate location of garages
throughout the business districts were so great that the Commission recon-
sidered its former action. In providing that garages shall in general be
forced to go to the unrestricted districts, the Commission has increased the
number of small unrestricted sections within convenient access of the local
residence and business centers.
The terms “unrestricted district” and “undetermined district” are
used to designate the areas for which no restrictions or regulations as to
use are provided. It is assumed that the development in the unrestricted
districts will be largely industrial. In the undetermined districts either
a residential, business or industrial use may prove the more appropriate,
depending largely on future port and terminal developments. The undeter-
mined districts differ from most of the other unrestricted areas, chiefly in
that it is anticipated that when their appropriate use is more fully disclosed
it may seem wise to restrict them in part to business or residence use. The
aim has been to give the greatest possible freedom of action and to avoid
restrictions that may possibly hinder future growth and development. While
it is realized that this can only be partially successful and that any regula-
tions now imposed will have to be changed from time to time, it seems
important that they shall be so designed as to secure as high a degree of
permanence as is at present practicable.
In general, the salt marshes along and running back from the water-
front have been included in the unrestricted district. Industry very naturally
pre-empts such localities both on account of the comparative cost of the land
and the possibility of good water and rail terminal facilities. In addition,
all other navigable waterfront, where the grades and location are favorable
to a commercial or industrial development, is left unrestricted. The unre-
stricted area is allowed to extend back from the bulkhead line 1,000 feet
or more, depending largely on the slope of the land. In many cases the
boundary line of the waterfront unrestricted district follows quite closely
the 20-foot contour line. This seems to be about the normal level to which
industry will extend back from the water.
An examination of the historical maps prepared by the Commission
showing industrial development at various periods during the past sixty
years in Manhattan and Brooklyn shows surprisingly little change in the
breadth of the industrial belts extending back from the waterfronts. There
has doubtless been a great deal of change in the character of the industries
located in a particular section.. The tendency has been for the heavier
bulkier types of industries requiring large plots to move from Manhattan.
They have been replaced by a much larger number of industries requiring
NAVY YARD.
BROOKLYN. ‘
ae
ROUGH ____ Ny
>
is
Zz
>
0
PROPOSED
IMUNICIPAL RAILROAD:
AND TERMINAL
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
SANDY HOOK COMMITTEE ON THE CITY PLAN
MAP SHOWING
DOCKS and TERMINALS
NEW YORK CITY
EXUSTING DOCKS Ao TERMINALS SHOWN IN SOLID BLACK mmm AND
PROPOSED = = = = BFOKENLINES mmm VICINITY
La aSGeans 34 MILES.
Fic. 6-DOCKS AND TERMINALS IN NEW YORK CITY AND
VICINITY.
MAP SHOWING PLACE OF WORK OF FACTORY EMPLOYEES, 1913
Data Supplied by Division of Industrial Directory, State Department of Labor. Each dot represents 250 employees.
WR
es
ULES
OO
>
a5 é
ee
Ri
nm”
AR
CNN
Aah
It will be observed when comparison is made with the population spot map, Fig 20, that the area west of Broadway between Chambers Street
est Thirty-third Street, which houses a dense factory population, has comparatively few people living therein. Large numbers of the facto
tion evidently live in the densely populated area on the east side within walking distance of the factories.
ra
=
e
:
Hae
WoL
IN
oo
JIG
BIEINENEK
NE
cian
G0
Fic. 7.
Lyf
and W
popula
USE DISTRICTS 17
less ground area per industry without greatly changing the aggregate require-
ment for ground area.
The segregation of factories will directly reduce production costs. It
will make it possible to have the best rail and water terminal facilities and
the best express and mail facilities. It will reduce trucking and thus improve
street traffic conditions. It will tend to the segregation of heavy trucking
from other classes of street traffic and thus further tend toward the improve-
ment of street traffic conditions.
Furthermore, the segregation of factories along the rail and water
terminals and their consequent exclusion from the residence sections will
improve living conditions throughout the city. A factory is usually a
nuisance in a residence section. It is often directly injurious by reason of
noise, odor, dust or smoke. It always brings heavy trucking with attendant
noise and danger to the safety- of the children, especially in crowded tene-
ment districts. It often subjects the neighboring residents and property
owners to increased risk from fire and explosion.
The problem of congestion of population is closely related to the loca-
tion of trades and industries.1 Employees working long hours at low wages
can afford neither the time nor the money to live far from their work. It
has been shown that a very large proportion of such employees will live
within walking distance of their work, even though this necessitates their
living in the most congested and unwholesome quarters. While the pro-
posed plan for residential and industrial districts will not cure existing con-
ditions it will help to prevent an extension of such conditions. This is
insured by providing adequate housing areas adjacent to the factory areas
and preventing for the future the encroachment by the factories on areas
required for housing.
While economic forces are quite effective in securing the segregation
of industries of the heavier type close to the water and rail terminals, there
are in New York City an unusually large proportion of industries that are
not subject to this segregating influence. New York City is pre-eminent as
a light manufacturing center. Of the 680,510 persons employed in indus-
tries in New York City in 1909, 422,769 were employed in the following
light industries :
Artificial flowers, feathers and plumes............. 9,759
IBGOOtSFATIGESNOES a5 Late esc cere Naa os ue SE eA 9,177
JBXOS. GSS), (Gr d'd east EOE Groene So oe rH nd reg ee 9,414
Isreal aime! THIET (ROGINES, coogagacdccscc00000Gce 20,401
JEXUNMHCOFOKSN ies & aban gles 0h eye eeae ae aaa Ren ee Nan Cea 3,635
GClothintomsmienssi treme paris cia ete ee cet 77,543
Clotting ms womenssimpree seein ac unsere yeaa tcl 110,567
Comfection enyer. tan were etnias ceca ae 7,641
_ See Figure 7 and Figure 20. A comparison of these two spot maps, showing
resident and factory population, indicates graphically the relation between congestion
of factories in lower Manhattan and congestion of population in the lower East Side.
18 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Fancy) articles. 3c)j- tek aoe a elstd select eit 3,649
Fur goods si biss hahtoeetne ee ae oaks cei pee 10,719
Furnishing) goods,amenisae are eee aa eee eee 8,051
Hair work.: st Ash cate t rh he ese eee eee 2,704
Hats and scapswy.tioinanit. ha otis iciegisaeteeenteie 5,815
Elosiery. andiknitscoodsa.e ameter eee 6,082
Jewelry 0.108 diets SA hateste pro een 6,668
Mallinery and lace! s00dSes. 3-11-15 -0tieitee tenereets 24,712
Patent “medicines ys ssi oe ies ae ee 5,450
Printing and jpublishings-.ri secre einer 74,118
LObaccO! 4s Seas Rees OL Se eee Ee eee 26,664
422,769
The above enumeration includes only the larger groups that may be
classed as distinctly light manufacturing. Fully two-thirds of the industrial
employees of the city are employed in industries that do not find direct con-
nection with water and rail terminals a necessarily determining factor in
the selection of a*factory location. For these industries the questions of
labor supply and market for goods are much more important. The New
York Metropolitan District with a population of over 7,500,000 is itself the
largest consumer of the output of its factories. Moreover, Manhattan is
the great jobbing center for the entire country and this gives its manufac-
turers special advantages in the marketing of their goods. In addition the
city has the largest and most varied labor supply. Being the principal port
of entry for immigrants, it has an unlimited supply of the cheaper class of
labor from which the employees of the clothing trades and various other
light industries are recruited.
These light industries are scattered indiscriminately over © the entire city
throughout the business and residential sections. One good residence section
after another has been progressively invaded and destroyed by the coming
of the sporadic factory. This the proposed plan will prevent.
The great manufacturing section of Manhattan is not, as one might
presuppose, along the waterfronts of the North and East Rivers, but lies in
a narrow belt through the center of the Island from Canal Street to about
38th Street.1 The northward progress of the factory zone during the past
sixteen years above 14th Street has been attended by tragic consequences.
The city’s chief hotel and retail center was invaded and_ substantially
destroyed. It was compelled to move north to 34th Street and is now again
in danger of destruction. The simple fact is that under New York City
conditions, with high loft buildings and congested streets, the chief hotel,
club, theater and shopping center cannot exist in close proximity to the
factories. In the side streets along the lower portion of Fifth Avenue the
number of employees is so great that the surrounding streets are necessarily
“See factory employee spot map, Figure 7. Note the narrow black belt from
Canal street north to about 38th street.
<
South 4th Street,
Factory among
Near Berry Street.
residences.
Thompson Street, Near West Hous- East 9th Street, Between ‘Avenues &
ton Street—Factories in heart of and D—Sawmill near tenements.
a tenement house district. j
_, Prospect and 11th Avenues—This steam laundry has
retarded development in this entire section.
Fic. 8-FACTORIES IN RESIDENCE STREETS. ~
Factories in residence streets are detrimental to the public health and welfare
because they obstruct light and ventilation, disturb the peace and quiet of homes, often
emit dust and noxious odors and convert sidewalks into dangerous loading platforms.
/
lec ec ener CeCe
Sst
Fifth Avenue at 34th Street.
‘Fic. 9—FIFTH AVENUE.
West 35th Street, near Fifth Avenue.
Fic. 10—CONGESTED SIDE STREETS WITH COMBINED TRAFFIC OF
BUSINESS AND HIGH LOFT BUILDINGS.
USE DISTRICTS 19
congested with pedestrians during the hours when the workers are going to
or returning from work. At the noon hour when the workers come out
from the factories for a stroll along Fifth Avenue they monopolize the
sidewalks to the exclusion or serious inconvenience of those having business
on the avenue. An intensive factory use on the side streets is fatal to the
business use of the avenue. The sidewalk space is needed by the workmen
and the roadway space is needed for the trucking incident to factory use.
On the other hand, all the available roadway and sidewalk space would be
unduly congested if reserved solely for business use. Two bodies cannot
occupy the same space at the same time, and even if there were more space
available it would be difficult to harmonize an intensive use of roadways
and sidewalks for two such widely different purposes.
Traffic conditions are the crux of the situation. It is vital to the exist-
ence oi the city that it maintain such conditions of street traffic that the
city’s chief hotel, club, theater and shopping center may permanently be
maintained in the sole location that is suited for it. The plan proposed will
protect the entire Fifth Avenue and Broadway section south as far as 23d
Street and between Fourth Avenue and Sixth Avenue.
The exclusion of future factory lofts from the above section will also
result to the economic advantage of the manufacturing industries concerned,
to the welfare of the workers and to the relief of the city’s congested transit
facilities. The factories will be located on cheaper ground, nearer to rail
and water terminals and nearer to an adequate labor supply. They can, if
they find it desirable, maintain salesrooms in the restricted district. The
workmen will be able in greater proportion to live within walking distance
of their work. This will be a boon to the workers who walk, in that it will
save them carfare and the necessity of spending about an hour and a quarter
a day on the cars under conditions of overcrowding that are a menace to
health, comfort and safety. And just to the extent that they do this will
this condition of congestion be relieved for those who will still have to ride
on transit lines during the rush hours.
Retail business naturally tends to segregate. The grouping of a few
of the neighborhood stores and business buildings on the main avenue or
thoroughfare creates the center that attracts other stores and makes that
particular street the most desirable place in which to do business. In spite
of this strong trend toward segregation, unless prevented by law, the occa-
sional store will come into the midst of a residential community, to the
detriment both of the residential section and of the natural local business
street.
In residential neighborhoods the plan has been to preserve the side
streets wherever possible for strictly residential use. The avenues along
the ends of the block and main thoroughfares have usually been included
in the business districts. The business use on the avenue is permitted to
extend 100 feet back along the residential side streets. In the less developed
sections it has often seemed feasible to indicate only every second or third
20 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
avenue for business use and thus secure a larger and more self-contained
residential area. This, it is believed, will improve living conditions and will
conserve values on both the business and residence streets.
The amount of space needed for retail business purposes depends a
good deal on the economic condition and habits of the population. Gen-
erally speaking, the smaller the average income per family the larger the
proportion that will be spent in the purely local stores. In the case of the
very poor, practically the entire income is spent in the local stores. On the
other hand, the well-to-do make a very large proportion of their purchases
outside of the local area, The local retail section of a well-to-do neighbor-
hood may be conhned to a very limited variety of shops. Consequently, a
tenement section requires a much larger allowance of retail business space
than an elevator apartment section. It is believed, however, that even in
the most crowded tenement sections, if business had been confined to the
avenues along the ends of the blocks, sufficient business space would have
been provided and living conditions in the side residential streets would
have been very greatly improved. In an elevator apartment section a busi-
ness street every second or third avenue is ample.
. The protection of the home environment is vital to the welfare of the
state. It needs no argument to demonstrate that a business or industrial
street does not furnish the most favorable environment for a home.
Quiet is a prime requisite. The zone plan, by keeping business and
industrial buildings out of the residential streets, will decrease the street
traffic in the residential sections and thus reduce to a minimum noise incident
to street traffic. Aside from the increased vehicular traffic the business and
industrial uses disturb the quiet and peace of the residential street by the
crowds of employees and others incident to a business or industrial use.
The above evils are present even though the business or industry is in itself
entirely unobjectionable from the standpoint of noise. Dr. Gustave F.
Boehme testified that business and industrial uses on a residential street and
the noise and confusion incident thereto made such streets much less
healthful and desirable for residence purposes. He said that such conditions
tended to produce and intensify all kinds of nervous disorders.
The efficient cleaning of the streets and the collection of refuse are of
great importance to the health and welfare of the city. The segregation
of uses will make it possible to adopt more efficient and economical methods
for each particular street or section. It is recognized that for sanitary
reasons a residential street should be kept cleaner than a business or indus-
trial street. If, however, there is a mixed occupancy, residential, business
and industrial, the traffic, trade wastes and litter incident to business and
industrial use may make it physically or economically impossible to keep the
street in the good sanitary condition demanded for residential use. John T.
Fetherston, Commissioner of Street Cleaning, testified on this point as
follows:
“Tt is well known that where different public conditions exist in
any particular locality, it is impossible to adopt a single uniform
~
East 5th Street, near Avenue D—Wetwash laundry, saw-
dust factory, planing mill, near tenements.
Lafontaine Avenue, corner 179th Street West 166th Street, between Audubon
—Hat factory and tenements. and Amsterdam Avenues—Beer bot-
tling works near tenements.
Fic. 11I—THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE HOME.
The Commission believes that the environment of the home should be guarded
and protected in every possible way. °
Elizabeth Street, Corner Broome Street—
Ice plant in a tenement district. The
noise of this plant continues all night.
3lst Street and Eleventh
Avenue — Railroad
yard surrounded by
tenements.
BS VIENNA
BAKERY
IB (WEN tow
Milk Depot—Corner 180th
Street and Park Avenue.
Showing proximity of
apartment houses.
Fic. 12—NOISE AND THE HOME.
The noise and confusion always more or less in evidence in congested sections are
bad even under the best conditions, but when aggravated by heavy trucking in the
‘streets and by the machinery of nearby factories they become a serious menace.
When these noises continue throughout the night, as in the case of public garages,
ice plants and milk bottling and distributing stations, the evil is enormously increased.
Fre. 13—PART OF MAP SHOWING LOCATIONS OF
FATAL ACCIDENTS CAUSED BY AUTOMOBILES,
SURFACE CARS AND HORSE-DRAWN VEHI-
CLES IN THE BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN, 1915
PREPARED BY THE CONSULTING ENGINEER,
BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN
AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS SHOWN THUS............-+-
SURFACE CAR ACCIDENTS SHOWN THUS..............
HORSE-DRAWN VEHICLE ACCIDENTS SHOWN THUS..
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 FT.
a
This map shows a large proportion of accidents in
streets having a considerable amount of vehicular traf-
fic in congested tenement districts where children play
in streets. The freedom from fatal accidents at some
of the most congested street crossings, due to traffic
regulations, is also noteworthy.
== ae
faa] mi
a a | re YE 7 5 < ee
ma ACs fmm a
ae ———lh al
=] a == ale a
=| | =s)\2/ a
lS :
ap aA 5 ea, a | Cee, SY =) (ES
as SS — =r. ld -
= aa i PCF Ae z
oe | ee | es || eee SS 7
5h SS Sata lewizal
=
oa}
USE DISTRICTS Zil
system for cleaning streets as well as collecting refuse in that locality.
On the other hand, where the district is of a mixed type, involving
industry, manufacturing, as well as a residential section, it is not
possible to plan the most economical system of street cleaning and
refuse collection, because conditions will differ in various parts of
such intermixed districts. I would say, in general, that the develop-
ment of the zone system, involving an orderly development of build-
ing zones, should ultimatel? tend to economy in the cleaning of
streets and in the collection of refuse, as well as providing a plan and
a system which will meet particular conditions of each district or
section dependent upon the uses to which the section or district is
put. The demand for sanitation varies with the type of building occu-
pants. A residential street requires at least a higher standard of
street conditions than would a business or a mixed type of street,
and a great many complaints come to the Street Cleaning Department
from streets where mixed business and residential occupancy is in
force. If stores could be segregated, plans in that connection could
be adapted to that particular type of street, whereas, if conditions
are mixed, you can only compromise.
“There are some streets in lower Manhattan where it is hardly
possible to clean the streets during the day time on account of the
procession of vehicles which prevents the cleaners from collecting the
street dirt. On that type of street the same sanitary conditions can-
not be maintained as would be required in a residential street. In
that, respect traffic conditions in a residential locality also adversely
affect the street because there may be a residential street which con-
nects with a traffic street, and it is not possible to keep that residential
street in as good a condition as other similar streets in the same
locality, because the men cannot work advantageously while traffic
occupies the street. Even in the case of mixed occupancy of a par-
ticular block, residence, business and factory use, the factories and
business places in that particular block tend to bring heavy traffic into
the block and make it difficult to keep it in the best sanitary con-
dition.”
In a residential street the number of street accidents, chiefly to children,
varies directly with the vehicular traffic. Stores, garages, factories and
other business buildings increase the amount of vehicular traffic. Most
side streets that have no business or industrial buildings have little traffic.
Very often a single business building in the midst of a residential block
will so increase traffic as greatly to increase the number of street accidents.
This will be particularly true if it is a congested tenement district. Here
the streets swarm with children. They must have some place to play and
unfortunately there is no place but the street. A very large proportion of
‘street accidents occur to children while playing in the streets in front of
their homes. The zone plan will, as to the future, segregate the business
22 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
and industrial buildings from the residential streets and thus tend to reduce
the enormous toll of street accidents.
In the crowded tenement districts having stores on the ground floor,
the roadways are congested with vehicular traffic and push carts and the
sidewalks with business encroachments and pedestrians. There is absolutely
no place for the child to exercise natural play instincts. Play is as necessary
to the child as food and clothing. It is this thwarting of the boy’s craving
for play that leads to a large proportion of the juvenile delinquency cases
that come before the Children’s Courts. Ernest M. Coulter, for ten years
clerk of the Children’s Court, testified he had found by investigation that
this thwarting of the play instinct was responsible for at least 40 per cent.
of the delinquency cases. While the population of the city is largely
recruited from the country, the city’s criminal population is largely bred
right within its own congested centers.
The moral influences surrounding the homes are of the greatest im-
portance. The sordid atmosphere of the ordinary business street is not a
favorable environment in which to rear children. Immediate and continual
proximity to the moving picture show, dance hall, pool room, cigar store,
saloon, candy store and other institutions for the creation and satisfaction
of appetites and habits is not good for the moral development of the child.
Influences and temptations resulting from the proximity of such business
to the homes may affect seriously the morals of the youth of the community.
Under such conditions it is difficult to cultivate the ideals of life that are
essential to the preservation of our civilization.
Rowland Haynes, an expert on recreation facilities and secretary of
the Committee on Recreation of the Board of Estimate, testified to the
practical impossibility of providing enough playgrounds for the children in
the crowded tenement sections and to the relief to this situation that the
districting plan will afford by creating residential districts from which busi-
ness and industry will be excluded and which can therefore be used as tempo-
rary play spaces. Mr. Haynes said:
“The advantage to the whole recreation problem lies in having
reserved residence streets. By having streets reserved for residence
purposes it is going to be possible, since the delivery traffic in such
streets will be comparatively light, to use some of them for tempo-
rary play places, as was done by the Police Department in about 25
locations last Summer. The only thing I wish to emphasize is the
urgency and importance of such possibilities which are opened up by
the action of your Commission.
“In the first place, we have to realize that through some studies
which we had previously made we have found that wherever the
density of population exceeds 37.5 per acre, about 80 per cent., in
fact, somewhat over 80 per cent. of the children have to play away
from home, either because there is no place in their own back yards
‘UIIP]IYD ay} IO} punoisAryd we se jooI]S dy} JO Siasuep ay} IsvaIOUT AT}eaIS
Ajlyessaoau ][IM sn ssouisnq 10 A1OJOe} B 0} JUAPIOUL BuTyONI, oy T, “Usspryo oy} Jog aodeds Avid ATUO ay} ud}JO st JooIS ay} suOT}D_aS
pejsasuod uy ‘sasodind Avid 10} Sowiosaq }f snotasuep pue Ajyup ‘ozer1dosddeur s10uW 9y} 399I}s JY} UO St 919Y} SsauIsSnq d10W ay],
‘GNNOUDAV Id V SV LHAMLS AHL—$¢1 MA
‘Jo21}S JoyTeyY Teou 4oo13g Aruap *sj0011G YeOQ pue UosIpey{ UdaMjoq ‘Ja0I}5 JIAO
*S}9911G JOATO pue sowef usamyoq “490135 YeO ‘JOoIJG Siosyny Teo ‘yoo1WG AtUaTT
he
x
7
r ‘G ote be ;
USE DISTRICTS 23
or because that space is so small that they have no chance to play
any of the larger space games. Out of the 54 wards in Manhattan
and Brooklyn, all but seven exceed that density. If we take the
city as a whole, including all of the boroughs, we find that 84 per
cent. of the population of New York live in districts where the
density exceeds this figure of 37.5 per acre. Some neighborhoods
in New York go up to 18 times that density. If we take 84 per cent.
of the whole number of children in this city between 5 and 15 years
of age as the number living in these more densely populated dis-
tricts, and if we then take 80 per cent. of this 84 per cent. as the
number who will have to play away from home, we find about 680,000
children in New York City who have got to play away from home.
The average daily attendance last summer at all the playgrounds in
New York City was less than one-third of 680,000. This includes
the average daily attendance at park playgrounds, school playgrounds
and playgrounds conducted by settlements and other philanthropic
agencies. In other words, all the public and private agencies which
we now have are reaching only about one-third of the child popu-
lation who must play away from home. Seventy-five per cent. of
these playgrounds close after the summer season. This means that
larger opportunities for play are urgently needed. To purchase
enough additional places to reach the remaining two-thirds of the
children who must play away from home would bankrupt the city.
Hence we must use more intensively the land that the city already
owns. Hence the method which was introduced last summer by the
Police Commissioner of using streets reserved for play for certain
hours in the day in certain districts, it seems to me, must for some
time to come be extended. My only purpose in accepting the invita-
tion of your Commission to speak thus briefly is to point out that,
while this plan of use districts is worked out for a different purpose,
it is going to be of very genuine and fundamental value to conditions
which we don’t like but which we have got to face in the playground
and recreation situation here in New York.
“The restricting of residential streets against factories and
against stores and’ against public garages make those streets better
for play use, first, because it reduces the amount of traffic in those
streets. It makes the traffic in those streets simply delivery traffic
for household necessities, which is much less than any through traffic
or traffic to garages, or delivery traffic to and from stores. It re-
duces the amount of traffic and thus makes the burden of reserving
a street for play purposes much less. In the second place it makes
possible the reservation for play purposes of residence streets which
are near those on which the children are living. In short, it makes
possible the reservation of play streets without burden to traffic and
near where they are needed.’
24 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Fire insurance rates recognize the distinctly greater risk of the tene-
ment with stores on the ground floor as compared with the tenement with-
out stores. Increased fire risk for the tenement with stores must necessarily
mean increased fire risk for all neighboring buildings. The menace to
neighboring residential buildings in the case of an ordinary store is multiplied
in the case of a theater, garage, warehouse or factory. Even where in the
case of a tenement with a store on the ground floor the firemen succeed
in preventing the fire from spreading to the tenements above, it may cause
serious loss of life from smoke or panic. Chief Kenlon testified to the
desirability from the standpoint of fire prevention and safety of providing
for the establishment of residence districts from which stores would be
excluded. Edward R. Hardy, assistant manager, New York Fire Insurance
Exchange, produced statistics and evidence of the increased fire risk to tene-
ments having stores on the ground floor. Mr. Hardy said: “ The rate of
insurance in a store and dwelling building reflects greater insurance risks.
The ordinary private dwelling, now accepted as a building occupied by not
more than two families, if it changes its character so that the first floor or
basement is occupied for a store, with one family above, the insurance rate
is about twice as much as when it was occupied wholly for dwelling pur-
poses. This is due to the fact that the store brings always an unknown
quantity of waste material, poor protection to stoves, gas lights, care of
ashes and ordinary accumulations—the risk is about two to one. Even if
special precautions are provided to prevent the spread of fire from the
business building to the tenement above there is great danger, especially on
the ground of safety to the occupants of the tenements. The proposition
frequently advanced that the first floor is so protected that there shall be
no communication when there is a store in the basement with the floors
above, overlooks the fact that in a fire the smoke will always seek any
exit available. It will ascend naturally if there is a way. If not, it will
pour out of the doors and windows and follow up the side of the building
and enter the living floors in that way. Some of the most serious panics
have been due not to fire, but purely to the smoke condition.” _
That the invasion of the residential street by trade and industry is
generally recognized as a serious evil by the residents themselves, has been
conclusively demonstrated by experience. With the coming of trade and
industry those residents who can afford to do so leave the street, rents
fall and the lending institutions call their loans. The combination of re-
duced rents and higher interest rates leads to many foreclosures and places
most owners in such a precarious financial position that they are unable
to make needed repairs and improvements. It becomes difficult or impos-
. sible for the city authorities to enforce even minimum standards of public
health and safety.
Goerck Street, Near Rivington Street—Junk shop near
tenement, barber shop and “stoop nursery.” Note the
mother sweat shop* worker sewing coats at the stoop.
No. 16 Morton Street—Rag
and junk shop next to
tenement.
East 4th Street, Near
Lewis Street — Scrap
iron yard in rear of
tenements.
Fic. 1I5—JUNK SHOPS IN CONGESTED TENEMENT STREETS.
Junk and rag shops menace home life in tenement districts as does perhaps no
other line of business. The habitues of these places are not an asset to any street in
which children must play, nor is the storage of disease-laden rags and junk in street
and yard a desirable feature of these districts.
378 Broome Street—Horseshoer and West 24th Street, between 10th and 11th Ave-
wagon builder near tenement. nues—Horses on the sidewalk being shod.
East 92nd Street, be-
tween First and Sec-
ond Avenues—Horse-
shoer and stables near
tenements.
238 East 85th Street—
Wagon builder in
tenement house dis-
trict.
Fic. 16—HORSESHOEING IN CONGESTED TENEMENT STREETS.
Horseshoeing is especially objectionable in congested tenement districts, because
it brings horses upon and across the sidewalk and is the source of much noise and of
a particularly obnoxious odor.
807 Bedford Avenue.
Be mer
1038 Bedford Avenue.
112th Street,. west of
Lexington Avenue—Soda
fountain supplies and
carbonic gas.
Fic. 17—STORES INVADING RESIDENCE STREETS.
The usual objections to business in the midst of residences are accentuated when
extensions to residences are made to project beyond the fronts of others, thus
obstructing light and view.
HSN SSHNISOWY OL LNACGIONI SNOILONYLSAO MIVMAGIS—8I “9 -
‘
“190015 al esajoyu \\—) snuvAY Ivo
J9a14S pag ysey
‘QIN}IUINJ—y snusAy tJeou *JQ911S Up sey
“ronbiy ayesajoy \\—
D) anusay jvou ‘Jv014G pag ysey
o
12)
=
ie)
n
wn
dIdXY—3991]S yg Jesu ‘Aempeoig j4seq
eae
CHAPTER IV—APPROPRIATE INTENSITY OF THE USE
OF LAND
For city building it is not alone necessary that there shall be a plan
that will segregate buildings according to use, but it is also necessary that
there shall be a segregation according to intensity of building development.
This is essential in order to secure to each section of the city as much
light, air, safety from fire and relief from congestion, with all its attendant
evils, as is consistent with the most beneficial use of the land. Intensity
of use should be so regulated that assuming that the entire section should
be built up uniformly with buildings of the maximum height and extent
allowed the section as a whole would be appropriately improved.
The maximum beneficial use of any given block or area is dependent
on a certain measure of uniformity in its development as regards height,
yards and open spaces. Such use would, in general, be enhanced if the
property owners could enter into an agreement uniformly restricting the
height of buildings and fixing the minimum area of courts and yards. The
size of courts and yards is in most cases of as much benefit to a man’s
neighbors as to himself. It is therefore appropriate that each should con-
tribute in substantial equality to the common stock of light and air. There
can be no maintenance of healthful conditions of light and air and no
stability of values if each individual owner is at liberty to build to any height
and over any proportion of his lot without regard to his appropriate and
reasonable contribution to the light and air of the block.
The speculative builder puts up the first high building in a block. The
windows are on property lines or on narrow courts. Perhaps a five-foot
rear yard is provided. But with all the free space on the adjacent lots the
building is light and airy, is attractive to tenants and shows a good return
to the purchaser. Other buildings follow and their builders see no reason
why they should keep down lower or provide larger yards or courts than
the first. The result is tragic from either a private or a public point of view.
All this has been conclusively demonstrated by costly experience in the
recent history of the office and loft building sections of Manhattan. Whole
areas have been built up piecemeal with towering buildings having inadequate
courts and yards without much thought of ultimate consequences. Such
areas are in process of being smothered by their own growth. The streets
are inadequate to handle the traffic induced by the multiplication of floor
area to be served, and the buildings constructed without reference to the
width of the streets, yards and courts on which they abut shut out light
and air essential to health and to rental on a basis that will permit of a
reasonable return on the investment.
The social and economic desirability of limited height and minimum
court and yard provisions has been clearly established by apartment house
construction under the Tenement House Law. Had similar reguiations
26 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
been applied to the office and loft buildings, great loss would have been
prevented. All agree that the Tenement House Law accomplished a most
desirable reform in the interest both of owners and tenants in establishing
regulations as to height, area covered, yards and courts. In exclusively
residential blocks in certain of the more intensively developed sections light
and air conditions have been standardized and property values stabilized by
ensuring that each owner shall make a reasonable contribution to the light
and air of the block. :
Only by a complete districting plan can the mutually advantageous
principle contained in the Tenement House Law be applied to all kinds of
buildings, in all parts of the city. There must first be a partial segregation
of buildings according to use, and second, a gradation of height, court and
yard provisions, particularly as affecting residential buildings, in accordance
with the present and prospective intensity of use in the various sections of
the city.
The intensity of building development appropriate for each district is
dependent on the character of occupation and use in that particular district.
Certain trades and industries require structures of unusual size and shape.
A comparatively high degree of concentration is important for the facilita-
tion of business in an office district. The demand for housing varies with
the differing tastes and necessities of the inhabitants of the city. There is a
demand and a need for single-family dwellings, as well as for hotels and
apartment houses.
In building a city it is sometimes assumed that we should start with
a certain model type of residence and seek to make that type universal.
If a density of not exceeding eight families to the acre is desirable, build-
ing regulations should be devised to prevent a greater density. The problem
is not so simple. The problem of housing accommodations and desirable
densities cannot be profitably considered without reference to a par-
ticular city, with a known topographic, transit, commercial and social
organization and an assumed probable rate of increase in population. We
cannot annihilate time and space, and as long as these factors are appreciable
the problem of the appropriate intensity of the use of land must always
remain relative. There can be no absolute standard.
Most men in choosing a home in a large city must weigh various diver-
gent considerations and strike the balance that gives a maximum of satis-
faction. They have to sacrifice a desire for open space and isolation in
order to save time and money and avoid great personal inconvenience.
Many iamilies prefer Manhattan apartments for social reasons or because
of proximity in time and space to clubs, hotels and theatres, or because
of nearness to place of business or work. In choosing a home the business
man who works from 10 A. M. to 7 P. M. at his office, and the laborer
who works in a Manhattan factory from 7 A. M. to 6 P. M. are both likely
to sacrifice the numerous advantages of a suburban villa for the convenience
of a Manhattan apartment or flat.
=
Semana Soa
Se
eee An Sa
oneal
=.
Basaae
—
<
a
c—*
en Ae he
MMe SoS }
EQASSARBDHRS ASS 9
West 40th Street, Broadway to Sixth Fourth Avenue, between 24th and
Avenue. 25th Streets.
West 40th to 41st Streets, West of
Sixth Avenue.
Fic. 19—WINDOWS ON LOT LINES.
A thousand windows to catch a neighbor’s light. Most of the windows here
shown are on the lot line and subject to obstruction at the will cf the adjoining owner.
The possibility of erecting buildings such as these artificially inflates certain values
which are violently depressed by the erection of a high building adjoining. The
proposed height and area restrictions will tend to stabilize values.
APPROPRIATE INTENSITY OF THE USE OF LAND 27
That considerable areas near the heart of the city should be very inten-
sively used for tenements and apartments is natural and probably inevitable.
The demand for housing is naturally greatest in the most favorable locations.
Were it not for the ability to multiply housing area by placing one dwelling
on top of another, rents would be prohibitive in these favored locations for
practically all of those who now occupy apartments or flats. It is natural that
the intensity of the demand for housing should vary in the different parts
of a given city, the general tendency being, starting with the highest intensity
of demand near the center, for this demand to fall rapidly toward the
periphery of the city.
Beyond the central zone of the more intensive housing, the provision
of light, air and open space, may be rapidly increased. Radiating from the
common business center, the amount of land available for development
rapidly increases. When it is necessary to use a rapid transit line to get
to the business center a few minutes more or less on the train is unim-
portant. Beyond this central housing zone, therefore, regulations requiring
much more adequate courts, yards and open spaces, may properly be
required.
The assumption that an individual owner in a city should have un-
limited liberty to cover his entire lot to any height is incompatible either
with the interests of owners generally or with that of the public. It is not
possible to secure the light and air that is essential both to the profitable
use of land and to the health and comfort of the public unless the height
and area covered by buildings is limited. As Professor Whipple has well
stated: “ While in general rights in the use of land are bounded by vertical
planes, it must not be forgotten that the sun’s rays fall slantingly upon
the land while the wind movements are chiefly horizontal. These natural
elements are interfered with by excessively high and crowded buildings,
hence there are rights in land ownership which extend beyond the vertical
planes.” In a memorandum submitted to the Commission, Professor Whip-
ple discusses the importance of light and air in part as follows:
“Considered from the standpoint of light the sun’s rays pro-
foundly affect the lighting of rooms. This is a matter of common
knowledge, but quantitative relations have been shown by many
photometer tests made at points located at different distances from
windows, and by similar tests made at the windows of different stories
in tall buildings the exterior lighting of which is influenced by ad-
joining buildings. Sunlight likewise causes movements of the air.
This is due to unequal heating in different places. The air currents
thus set up are gentle and desirable. Places which never see the
sunlight are more likely than others to contain stagnant air. The sun’s
rays have a marked disinfecting action and prevent the growth of
molds and fungi, thereby eliminating odors of certain kinds. They
also destroy bacterial life, whether the bacteria are floating in the
air or are attached to the exposed surfaces of pavements, floors or
bo
~
COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
walls. To the extent to which this occurs the danger of infection
from certain disease germs is lessened. Sunlight has both a physio-
logical and psychological influence on human beings.
“ By daylight is meant the indirect lighting from the sun, that is,
lighting received from the sky or clouds and reflected from various
surfaces. While it is possible for human beings to exist without
direct sunlight and even without daylight, it is the experience of the
race that both sunlight and daylight in sufficient amounts are highly
desirable. Daylight is necessary not only for health and comfort but
for economic reasous. ‘Too little light causes eye-strain with its train
of physiological disturbances and decreases the productiveness of
work. It unfavorably influences the mental condition. Light pro-
motes cheerfulness, while gloomy rooms depress vitality. Lack oi
daylight limits the length of the working day in some industries and
increases the amount of artificial light required. Artificial lighting
with oil or gas tends to vitiate the air by increasing the carbonic acid
and moisture, and even by increasing the poisonous carbonic oxide.
Artificial lighting also increases fire risks. Lack of exterior light-
ing increases the amount of window space required and this in
turn increases the heat loss in buildings in winter. In these and other,
ways insufficient lighting not only results in inconvenience to human
beings but may be a positive menace to the health, safety and morals
of the people. The amount of daylight received in buildings is greatly
affected by adjoining buildings, by their positions, their height, and
by the character of their walls, both in color and material.
“The necessity of adequate ventilation need not be argued but
it is not as fully realized as it should be that the air which enters a
building, both in amount and quality, is influenced by the surrounding
buildings. If buildings are too close together there is likely to be a
stagnation of the air between them. The ventilation of streets, alleys,
courts and interior spaces between buildings is as much a matter of
public importance. Street ventilation is influenced not only by the
orientation of the streets and the prevailing wind movements, but
by the height, size, shape and character of buildings, and their dis-
tance apart. In cavernous streets there are excessive air currents
near the ground, and at times great air movements, especially ob-
jectionable in winter. On the other hand, at times of gentle air move-
ments there may be no currents at all near the streets and pavements
between high buildings because the friction of the air passing through
the narrow channels prevents them. In other words, narrow streets
lined with high buildings tend to produce extreme conditions of air
movement and both extremes are objectionable. In regulating the size
and height of buildings with reference to the streets the city is to a
considerable extent controlling street ventilation and the ventilation
of courts and interior spaces, and thus indirectly, the ventilation
of indoor quarters.
APPROPRIATE INTENSITY OF THE USE OF LAND 29
“ Quite as important as the volume of air taken into buildings is
its cleanliness. One of the difficulties in cities is to obtain proper air
inlets for ventilation systems. The amount of smoke and dust, foul
odors on the streets, bad smells from buildings, from passing ve-
hicles, from exposed refuse and from other sources are matters
properly subject to the control of the health department but the con-
centration of dust and smoke and foul odors is greatly influenced
by street ventilation. The regulation of buildings is a regulation of
the amount of dilution of colors and is therefore a public health
factor.”
Exposure to a vitiated atmosphere, especially if it is of long duration,
tends to break down the individual’s power to resist disease. The suscepti-
bility to respiratory affections, tuberculosis, pneumonia and colds, is par-
ticularly increased. In the treatment of disease pure air is of the greatest
curative value. The importance of direct sunlight on health is hard to
over-estimate. It serves as a beneficial stimulant to the nervous system. In
the destruction of bacteria it is better than many artificial disinfectants. An
increased supply of sunshine in an apartment means decreased dampness.
The highest medical authorities all agree that the action of the sun’s rays
upon air is prophylactic, rendering the environment more healthy. Good
natural light and ventilation alone are not enough, direct sunlight is also
important.
Light and air are so important that their provision should be required
in every section of the city up to that point at which their benefits as to
that particular section tend to be outweighed by other needs and require-
ments of city life. Under New York City conditions the upper limit would
probably be the single detached house on a forty or fifty-foot lot with
ample open spaces about it. This the proposed E district regulations would
in large measure secure. At the other extreme the minimum provision .of
light and air assuredly should not be less than that required by the present
Tenement House Law. For large areas in New York City neither of the
above extremes furnishes an appropriate standard. The one and one-half
and one times height districts and the C and D area districts will supply
the demand and need for light and air standards between these two extremes.
From the point of view of public advantage the distribution of popula-
tion is very important. Most of the evils of city life come from congestion
of population. In precisely the measure that the city’s population can be
distributed will those evils be mitigated. As the number of families housed
per 50-foot lot increases :
(1) The provision of light and air, so essential to health, vitality and
comfort decreases. }
(2) The opportunities for personal contact and thus for the spread of
communicable disease increase.
(3) Noise and confusion incident to increased street traffic increases.
30 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
(4) Each family suffers more and more from the noises from neigh-
boring families.
(5) Privacy is diminished. ‘
(6) The children have less and less opportunity for outdoor play.
(7) The danger from fire, both to life and property, is increased.
(8) The transit lines become more and more congested during the
rush hours.
It is therefore essential in the interest of the public health, safety,
comfort, convenience and general welfare that a housing plan be adopted
that will tend to distribute the population and secure to each section as much
light, air and relief from congestion as is consistent with the housing of
the entire population for a considerable period of years within the areas
accessible and appropriate for housing purposes.
In order to provide the’ people of the city with the kinds of homes that
they desire, are willing to pay for and that will bring the maximum advan-
tage from the point of view of public health and safety, it is absolutely
necessary to district the city in such a way as to encourage and conserve
particular types of building in particular sections.
The control of the intensity of use of land cannot safely be left to
economic forces. Unless for each section standards of height and area
covered are fixed, the tendency will be to build up solidly to the extent per-
mitted by the Tenement House Law. The real demand for single family
houses and for multi-family houses with adequate yards and open spaces
will not be supplied because builders and investors have learned that such
developments are in danger of being ruined by the erection of a few neigh-
boring buildings of a different and more intensive type.
Tenants move away from the congested centers in order to secure better
light and air. But if after a few years the bright, sunny building to which
they have moved becomes surrounded by buildings similar in height, yard
and court provisions to the building in the congested center in which they
were formerly located, the desirability of the new location for this class of
tenants disappears and rentable values are likely to be seriously impaired.
A proper districting plan will insure that wherever probable intensity of
demand will permit, a certain measure of the improved light and air con-
ditions that have attracted tenants to the new location shall be permanently
retained.
Private developers in suburban residence districts have found that
in order to attract purchasers it is necessary to place uniform restrictions
on the land against improvement by multi-family dwellings. The surround-
ings and neighborhood are all-important in securing desirable home con-
ditions. Unless the private residential character of the section is fixed for
a considerable number of years no one can afford to build a home. This
method of private restriction frequently fails either because the territory
covered is not sufficiently inclusive or because the restriction is limited to
a short term of years. In recent years the development of detached house
oy
x
¢ Ke 4)
Lis
Le
g
\
\ Ue. \S
x at
\\
SAS
WA
IN
ratte
nen SS
eS
DS
aX
fi
LS
TLL,
f
LLLP
JEREZ,
La
Hl
Ul
ih
i
0
Broo
IT vases
ON x G,
FANS)
a eaialth
Zell]
cee
eine
ACEI
SA rai
eat eat tee
un
i
eh
0
1 SA
i GEL OO TE
LEC SiO
CORE)
\ SS
l PRRs ae IIL Et
iit
TTL TUT > Saertic heal nat neeresem
ROR SOMA TTB Seo ae
QED MIA GEG Wal ce NCC OL AGG Te TAR
ii aut
ti (0 alae
te Pest FD ESE == AOE ngnagase gaa
f
CAO
14. O0RGE
GUO. OABBEnD
“RUD MM OSCE
GBROGNENTUIY ee
nT alin
SAR fo roe
ie
an
7
NS
=
i" \)
We
moe
WX ‘ars
SOUT tase
os
OY
WA
Fr eaa al
; :
USE)
ei WMS Es
AGEN BG
Unt
rR
a Ae
Es = li
wlll 72
We
“
roy
wel
BUGg
ssl
a
: Ka
Ne ¢eg
[=
a ann
aos
OOSGOOROOUGtoN SZ
NNGSUGO00Q0cK Np »
nntcuponenneee ) ZS.
=I,
(ll
PART
OF
POPULATION SPOT MAP
THE POPULATION AND ITS DISTRIBUTION IN EACH BLOCK
1S SHOWN BY DOTS...EACH. DOT. DENOTES.25.RERSONS
APPROPRIATE INTENSITY OF THE USE OF LAND 31
sections has been greatly retarded by the fate of many such sections where
by the coming of a few apartment houses the entire section has been de-
stroyed for private house purposes. Often in such sections the apartment
house is a mere parasite. There would be no economic reason for its con-
struction were it not for the open spaces and attractive surroundings created
by the private dwelling character of the neighborhood.
Many men and women would be unable to stand the strain of city life
were it not possible for them to live in the more quiet, less densely popu-
lated sections. A detached house with yard and garden has kept some from
breaking down under the nervous strain and has contributed to the efficiency
and vitality of many others.
It is important from the standpoint of citizenship as well as from that
of health, safety and comfort, that sections be set aside where a man can
own his home and have a little open space about it. It makes a man take
a keener interest in his neighborhood and city. It has undoubted advan-
tages in the rearing of future citizens. The setting aside of sections for
this detached dwelling type is necessary in order to retain within the city
many citizens who would otherwise move to the suburbs. The retention
of the citizenship of a greater proportion of this class of its business men
is of great importance, not only as regards the city’s taxable values, but
also.as regards civic interest and civic leadership.
CHAPTER V—HEIGHT DISTRICTS
The districting resolution herewith submitted, together with the ac-
companying height district maps, provide for five classes of height dis-
tricts limiting the height of the building at the street line to a varying mul-
tiple of the street width. The districts named in accordance with the
multiple applied are: one times districts, one and one-quarter times districts,
one and one-half times districts, two times districts and two and one-half
times districts.
In limiting the height of all buildings in relation to the width of the
streets on which they abut, the Commission has adopted a principle which for
a great many years (since 1885) has been applied to tenement house con-
struction in New York City. The Tenement House Law limits the height
of tenement houses throughout the city to one and one-half times the street
width. It has also been extensively applied in European cities. This rule
has evident advantages over a flat limitation that operates without regard
to the width of the street. A height limit based on street width is seen to
have a direct relation to street congestion and to light and air conditions.
The Commission has modified the strict application of the multiple of
street width rule by providing that for the purpose of computing the limit-
ing height on the multiple of street width basis a street less than 50 feet
wide shall be considered to be 50 feet wide, and a street more than 100
feet wide shall be considered to be but 100 feet wide. In other words, the
multiple of street width rule is not applied to very narrow streets, nor is
it applied to streets of more than a prescribed width. There is for each
district a minimum height that will be permitted and a maximum height
that may not be exceeded, regardless of the width of the street. This modi-
fication is customary in building height regulations based in general upon
street width. It is clear that a general multiple if applied to all narrow
streets in the business center might seriously interfere with an appropriate
and reasonable use of the land. On the other hand if the general street
width multiple were applied without limit to very wide streets and open
spaces, it would result in an excessive and inappropriate height for a few
buildings that would be a serious injury to the light of the neighbors on
the sides and in the rear. Moreover, in the interest of safety in case of
fire and of the prevention of street congestion in the side streets, it is appro-
priate that a maximum height at the street line be established for each
district.
The multiple of street width rule limits the height of a building at the
street line only. Above such height limit at the street line, the building
may be carried higher by means of mansards or vertical walls provided such
extended portion is set back in a prescribed ratio. In the one times district
the setback rule is one foot horizontally for each two feet of height above
the prescribed height limit at the street line. Similarly in the one and one-
HEIGHT DISTRICTS 33)
quarter times district the setback rule is one to two and one-half; in the
one and one-half times district 1 to 3; in the two times district 1 to 4 and
in the two and one-half times district 1 to 5. This secures, except for
streets less than 50 feet or more than 100 feet in width, a constant ratio
between the height of the street wall at any point and its distance from the
center of the street at such height. In other words, no part of the building
may be carried above a plane formed by the intersection of a horizontal
line through the center of the street and a line at right angles thereto drawn
through the limiting height at the street line. This will permit greater
freedom of building construction than a flat limitation of height and at the
same time will preserve a uniform angle of light down into the center of
the street.
At the intersection of a narrower with a wider street the height limit
on the wider street governs for 100 feet back on the narrower street if such
narrower street is not more than 60 feet wide. For each one foot
by which such narrower street exceeds 60 feet the influence of the height
limit on the wider street extends one and one-half feet further back on
the narrower street. Thus, if the narrower street is 80 feet wide the
height limit of the wider street will extend back 130 feet on such 80-foot
street. This will apply to all buildings within the 130-foot stretch whether
they front on the wider or the narrower street. The distance back on the
side street that the height limit of the wider street should go depends on
light conditions on the narrower street as influenced by its intersection with
the wider street and by the width of such narrower street as compared with
that of the wider street. Both of these factors are taken into consideration
in the rule applied.
As an exception to the general height and setback rule special regula-
tions are provided for dormers and towers. Above the height limit on the
street line dormers and head-houses may, with the approval of the building
superintendent, be erected on the street line provided their aggregate front-
age length on the street line be not greater than 60 per cent. of the street
frontage and provided that such percentage Shall be reduced by one for
every foot of height above the height limit on the street line. This will
permit the erection of one large dormer or a number of small dormers in
a mansard above the height limit on the street line. On a 100-foot front-
age this will mean that the dormer on the street line at the height limit can
be 60 feet wide; but at a height of 10 feet above the height limit the dormer
can be only 50 feet wide; at 20 feet, 40 feet wide and so on until at 60
feet of height the width of the dormer is reduced to a point. (See Figure
144.) It is also provided that the percentage of the total frontage to be
devoted to dormers may be increased by one for each four inches that such
dormers are set back from the street line.2 On a 100-foot frontage this will
*This proposed rule is modified in important particulars by sec. 9, par. (b) of
the Resolution of July 16, 1916. See page 237.
*This proposed additional percentage allowance is omitted in the Resolution
adopted. See sec. 9, par. (c), page 237.
34 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
permit a dormer set back 5 feet from the street line to occupy 75 feet at
its base and to come to a point 75 feet above the height limit at the street
line. This rule will weave in with the general set-back provisions and
whichever are less drastic in any particular case will govern.
If the area of a building is reduced so that above a certain level it
covers only 25 per cent. of the area of the lot, a street wall above such level
may be carried to any height provided it is distant 75 feet from the center
of the street; but for every one per cent of its full possible length that
such street wall is decreased, it may come 4 inches nearer to the center of
the street. This will permit a building on an interior lot facing a street or
open space of 150 feet or more in width to build a tower across the whole
front of the building provided it does not cover more than 25 per cent. of
the lot. Similarly on a street 100 feet wide a tower can be built across
the whole front of the building provided it sets back 25 feet from the street
line. Or if a building has a 200-foot frontage on a 100-foot street, a tower
with a 50-foot frontage can be built on the street line. If a building is on
a corner each street wall of the tower is governed by the width of the
street on which it faces. A tower on the corner of a 150-foot street and
a 60-foot street would have to set back 45 feet from the 60-foot street line.
If, however, the tower frontage on the 60-foot street were only one-quarter
of the total building frontage on such street the tower could be erected
within 20 feet of the street line. This exception in favor of towers applies
to street walls only and other walls of the tower must conform to the gen-
eral yard and court provisions wherever applicable. (See Figure 146.)
Where a building would be pocketed between buildings in excess of
the prescribed height within 50 feet on either side or directly across the
street, its height may be increased by the average excess height of such
surrounding buildings. This will permit a building thus pocketed to secure
a fair portion of the light and air that would otherwise be monopolized by
the buildings already erected. (See Figures 147, 148.)
The only district in which a height of two and one-half times the street
width is proposed is in the office and financial section in lower Manhattan.?
A height of two times the street width is allowed for the remaining por-
tions of the more intensively developed commercial and industrial sections
in a broad belt through the center of the Island from the lower office and
financial section to 59th Street. An exception is made for a portion of the
Fifth Avenue section where limits of one and one-quarter and one and one-
half times the street width are proposed. A height of two times the street
width is also allowed for a narrow belt along a large portion of the water-
front of Manhattan and along the East River waterfront of Brooklyn,
Queens and The Bronx; also for a small area around the chief office and
business center of Brooklyn. In the two-times districts on a 60-foot street
the building can go up to 120 feet or about 10 stories at the street line and
1The Resolution adopted July 25, 1916, also creates a small two-and-one-half
times district on the Brooklyn waterfront.
HEIGHT DISTRICTS 35
above that height by setting back 12 feet can go 4 stories higher. On a
100-foot street the building can go up 200 feet, or about 16 stories at the
street line, and above that height with a 12-foot set back can go 4 stories
higher.
The high building problem in lower Manhattan was carefully studied
by the Heights of Buildings Commission. The existing conditions and the
reasons for limitation are stated by that Commission in part as follows:
“The high building problem is at present confined chiefly to a
comparatively small portion of the lower half of the island of Man-
hattan. The average building height in the Borough of Manhattan
is 4.8 stories. Ninety per cent of the buildings do not exceed a height
of 6 stories. The buildings over 10 stories in height constitute only
a little over one per cent of the total. Out of a total of 92,749 build-
ings, there are but 1,048 buildings over 10 stories in height; 90 build-
ings over 17 stories; 51 buildings over 20 stories, and only 9 build-
ings over 30 stories.
“The Building Code requires that all buildings over 150 feet in
height be thoroughly fireproof. The buildings themselves cannot
burn because there is nothing combustible in their construction. All
high buildings are equipped with standpipes and ample tanks at
various levels and many of them with automatic sprinklers. Doors
and windows between rooms and between rooms and corridors are
fireproof so that fire can be confined to a single room. There are
many interesting examples of such fires.
“The fact remains, however, that tall buildings are not neces-
sarily safe. The rooms are often filled with highly inflammable ma-
terial. Unless doors are closed, fire may easily spread to other rooms.
The draft up the chimney-like elevator wells may pull the flames
across the corridor, and the flames, fed by the grease on the elevator
guides, may be carried to upper floors. Under such conditions the
danger of panic among the employees of the building would be very
real, and the higher the building the greater the danger.
“The fire department cannot fight a fire from the outside more
than 85 to 100 feet above the ground. Above that they must rely on
the standpipes in the building. If the standpipe does not work, or if
the fire is so near the standpipe as to render its use impracticable, the
fire department becomes helpless. No fatal fire in a modern high
building has yet occurred, but it is not an impossibility.
“In case of general panic or catastrophe causing the occupants
of all offices in all buildings in the high building district to seek the
streets at once, a serious situation would present itself. It would be
impossible for all the occupants of all the buildings abutting on
certain streets to move in the street at one time, even though the
street were cleared of all other traffic, pedestrian, vehicular and sur-
face car, and absolutely free from all obstructions so that the entire
36 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
width of the street might be used. The minimum space required by
a crowd moving in one direction is five square feet per person. Com-
puted in this manner, Broadway could hold but 96.3 per cent of its
occupants; Trinity Place and Church Street 86.6 per cent; Nassau
Street 69.3 per cent; New Street 44.5 per cent, and Exchange Place
only 37.5 per cent. This being the situation to-day, the question
arises as to what might happen in case of a general panic should the
entire district be solidly built up with buildings of the present extreme
heights.
“Tn areas where high buildings are crowded together most of the
rooms even on the street front are inadequately lighted and many
are decidedly dark. On New Street and Exchange Place, where the
office buildings range from 10 to 22 stories high, on a bright sunny
day at noon in midsummer it was found that in almost all of the street
rooms artificial light was being used next to the windows. The
conditions in the interior courts in parts of the tall building district
are even worse.
“ Even with modern artificial lighting of the most approved type,
the dark offices have caused a great deal of eye strain. Nothing but
adequate natural light seems to prevent it. Tuberculosis experts
testified to the Commission that they had found many cases of tuber-
culosis directly traceable to working in dark offices. A noticeable
increase in sick leave has been found among the employees of firms
that have moved from light to dark offices.
“A number of streets in the high building district are already so
congested that pedestrian and vehicular traffic is greatly impeded.
Assuming that pedestrians will use sidewalk space only and will move
in one direction only, there is room on Trinity Place and Church
Street for but 56 per cent of the occupants of the buildings located
on those streets; on Broadway, 50 per cent; on Nassau Street, 32
per cent, and on New Street, but 19 per cent. If these same streets
should be uniformly built up to an average height of 30 stories, the
above percentages would be reduced to 26 per cent on Broadway;
20 per cent on Trinity Place and Church Street; 11.9 per cent on
Nassau Street; 8.9 per cent on New Street, and 8.4 per cent on
Exchange Place. It is quite clear that under such conditions the
street capacity would be entirely inadequate to take care of the
morning, afternoon and noon hour crowds.”
Chief Engineer Lewis in his testimony before the Commission spoke
of the possible fatal consequences from panic in congested lower Manhattan.
Mr. Lewis said: “It is obvious to anyone that in certain portions of the
city, notably in lower Manhattan, the enormous day population of the office
buildings, most of whom come to their work in the morning and leave ia
the afternoon within a very limited time, now overtaxes the public streets
and, while we are reasonably free from earthquake shocks, or even tremors,
HEIGHT DISTRICTS 37
you will recall that in 1884 and again in 1886 there were violent vibrations
which caused a very panicky feeling. You may remember the explosion in
the Tarrant Building, perhaps twenty years ago, which created a great panic
in the neighborhood. It is easy to see what would happen if, in the office
building district down-town, a violent explosion or earthquake tremor were
to occur, which would result in a mad rush from office buildings to the
streets. The panic in the streets would be almost inconceivable, and would,
under existing conditions, be about as serious and fatal in its results as those
which occur when people try to leave a theatre in case of an alarm of fire.”
Tenement and apartment houses throughout the city are now limited to
a height of 1% times the street width. The proposed plan takes the
1%4-times rule of the Tenement House Law and applies it to substantially
all the residential portions of the city that are now intensively built up and
to all the commercial, industrial and waterfront sections not included in the
2% or 2 times rule and where a somewhat intensive future development is
anticipated. (See Figure 141.)
Other residential sections where a fairly intensive apartment house
development seems not inappropriate, are placed in the 14-times district.
This will permit a 6-story elevator apartment on the ordinary 60-foot street
and a 10-story apartment on a 100-foot street. By taking advantage of the
set-back provisions, two or more stories of additional height may be secured.
Under the 114-times rule of the Tenement House Law 9-story apartments
are now built in certain sections of Manhattan on the 60-foot streets. The
1% districts will prevent the development of this type, and this will be a
distinct gain from the point of view of better light and air and the dis-
tribution of population.
All other portions of the city, including those in which a 2, 3, 4 or
5 story development seems appropriate, are placed in the one-times district.
This will permit of a 5-story building on a 60-foot street and an 8 or 9 story
building on a 100-foot street. By taking advantage of the set-back pro-
visions, one or more stories of additional height may be secured.
CHAPTER VI—AREA DISTRICTS
The districting resolution herewith submitted, together with the accom-
panying area district maps provide for five classes of area districts, A, B,
C, D and E, with varying regulations as to size of yards, courts and other
open spaces.
Except in A districts, any building that is back to back with the rear of
another property and is more than 55 feet back from the nearest street must
have a rear yard. The requirement for a rear yard is reciprocal. No
building is required to have a rear yard unless a similar obligation could be
imposed with respect to any building hereafter erected on the plot immedi-
ately behind such yard. The 55-foot exemption is inserted on the assump-
tion that a building running back but 55 feet from the street can be lighted
in its most used parts directly from the street. A corner building is seldom
back to back with the rear portion of another building and consequently
would seldom require a rear yard.1 (See Figure 156.) If, however, a build-
ing runs through the middle of a block from street to street and between
lots for which rear yards are required it will be required to leave uncovered
in some part of its extent courts equivalent in size to the space that its
neighbors are required to devote to rear yards (See Figure 157.) The
depth of the rear yard at its lowest level must be at least 10 per cent. of the
depth of the lot, but need not in any case exceed 10 feet at such level. For
any building not within a residence district the rear yard may start from a
level 18 feet? above the curb. This permits all buildings in the business,
unrestricted and undetermined districts to cover the entire lot for the first
floor. For any building in a residence district the rear yard must start from
the curb level, except that the usual one-story accessory buildings may cover
40 per cent. of the prescribed area of the yard.
In addition to the percentage requirement as to the depth of the yard
at its lowest level, the yard must increase in depth with the height of the
yard being not less than one inch, two inches, three inches, four inches or
five inches in depth for each one foot of its height, according as it is located
in the A, B, C, D or E district. The increased depth of yard required as
the building increases in height may be secured by stepping back at each
story or at each two, three, five or more stories. The purpose of the regula-
tion is to preserve a reasonable angle of light for the lighting of the lower
windows.
In every building hereafter constructed in which a room in which per-
sons live, sleep or work receives its light and air in whole or in part from
a court or yard, at least one court or yard having a window opening’ from
such room shall be of the size prescribed for a required court. The least
* Under the Resolution of July 25, 1916, a corner building is specifically exempted
from the rear yard provision. See sec. 16, par. (a), page 240.
? Modified by Resolution of July 25, 1916. See sec. 16, par. (d).
*23 feet in Resolution of July 25, 1916. See sec. 16, par. (b).
‘yNOuIp pue Mojs
apeut snjeredde 14 FO JUSMIOAOU oY} pue paseasoUr st o1ued Jo AyIqissod ay} UoseSu0d jo s1oSuep [ensn oy} Sapisoq ‘jYysloy ssoq Jo
SSUIP]ING OF Pousisap 19M YOIYM sjooI]s soxejIVAO UOOS SSUIP]INq YSIy AIIA FO UorjIIa oy} Aq vore JOOH Jo UOROTdyINW sy,
“ALIOVdVD LHAYUYLS XVLIYAAO SONIGTING TIVL—I2 9M
“20JO
ysOg 94} Woz YI0U
surjooyT — AeMproig
"younyy
API, Worf yyNoS
subjooyT — Aempeoig
yo001S
jlopyuely ye MOY YyIeg
“yoany)
APUIIT, WoIZ YON
suryooy — AeMpeoig
Bs i
AREA DISTRICTS 39
horizontal dimension of a required court shall be not less than four feet.
The court must increase in width with the height of its enclosing walls,
being not less than one inch in least dimension for one foot of height, in
an A or B district, one and one-half inches in a C district, two inches in
a D district and two and one-half inches in an E district. This gives an
outer court with a least dimension at any height just one-half as great as
that for a required yard at the same height. The area of an inner court at
any height must be not less than the square of the depth of a required yard
at such height. The length of such required inner court for its minimum
area may not be more than twice its width. (See Figure 152.) The width
of an outer court besides being governed by the height of such court is
also governed by the length of the court. An outer court gets its light and
air both from above and from the end of such court opening on the yard
or street. It is appropriate therefore that the width of the outer court should
bear some relation to its length. An outer court accordingly must increase
in width with the length of such court being not less than one inch in least
dimension for each foot of length from the closed end in an A district,
one and one-half inches in a B or C district, two inches in a D district and
two and one-half inches in an E district.
The A district is essentially a warehouse district and is confined to a
narrow belt along the navigable waterfront and along the rail terminals.
Light is not required for most storage buildings. The A district is estab-
lished so that storage buildings that do not require light and air will not
need to provide unnecessary open spaces. The Districting plan makes it
possible to give such buildings a place to locate where they will be exempt
from all yard requirements. Any building in an A district, however, that
is required to have a court to light its workrooms must provide courts of
-at least one inch in least dimension for each foot of height, as now provided
in the Building Code. This does not mean that a building covering the
entire plot may not be located outside of an A district, for in a B, C or D
district a department store, for example, not back to back with another
building and with no rooms that have to face on a legal court, could occupy
100 per cent of the lot for its entire height.
In a B district rear yards must be at least two inches in least dimen-
sion for each one foot of height, and outer courts and side yards at least
one inch in least dimension for each one foot of height. This will require
for all buildings slightly deeper yards above 90 feet in height than are
now required under the Tenement House Law. This will only affect elevator
apartments above eight or nine stories in height fronting on the long side
of blocks, and the increased width of yard will not have to be carried down
to the ground, but can be provided in a set back above the 90-foot limit.
In the B districts the important change, as compared with existing con-
ditions, is the requirement of a rear yard for business and industrial build-
ings as well as tenements wherever they are back to back with the rear of
another property. The rear yard for a building 120 feet high or about
40 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
10 stories would be 20 feet in depth, and for a building 150 feet high,
or about 12 stories, would be 25 feet in depth. ‘This is not in excess of the
best economic standards and practice, and will greatly insprove light and
air conditions in the loft building and office building sections of the city.
In case the yard started 18! feet above the curb, as permitted for buildings
not in residence districts, the width of the yard at any heiglit above the
curb would be three feet less than indicated in the above examples. (See
Figure 151.)
In the C districts rear yards for all buildings must be at least three
inches in least dimension for each foot of height and outer courts and
side yards must be at least one and one-half inches in least dimension for
each one foot of height. The prescribed minimum size of yards and courts
remain about the same as under the Tenement House Law up to and includ-
ing five stories in height. Above that height, however, they gradually become
more stringent than under the Tenement House Law. In a building five
stories, or approximately 56 feet in height, a rear yard under these pro-
visions would have to be 14 feet wide, or two feet wider than required
under the Tenement House Law. An outer court would have to be seven
feet wide, or one foot wider than required under the Tenement House Law.
However, as buildings on interior lots are limited to 70 per cent of the
lot under the Tenement House Law, this is apt to require increases in the
minimum depths and widths of courts and yards, and for most floor plans
and plots a five-story tenement house covering 70 per cent of the lot
could be built under the C district regulations. On account of difficulties
in planning suitable buildings for small plottages a special exception is
made in the court requirements for a lot 30 feet or less in width. On such
lots outer and inner courts are subject to the regulations provided for
such courts in the B districts. (See Figure 153.)
For all buildings in a D district rear yards must be four inches in
least dimension for each one foot of height and courts and side yards two
inches in least dimension for one foot of height. A building on an interior
lot in a residence district may not cover more than 60 per cent of the area
of the lot; on a corner lot it may cover 80 per cent of such area. Ina
residence district the depth of a rear yard at the curb level shall be 20
per cent of the depth of the lot, but need not exceed 20 feet at such level.
The restrictions provided for the D districts are especially appropriate for
one and two-family house districts, especially where houses occur in rows.
They are also appropriate for multi-family houses, provided they are built
with more adequate courts and open spaces than is now customary. The
minimum dimensions of yards and courts are double those required for
buildings in the B districts. A tenement or an apartment house on an
interior lot in a D district covering 60 per cent of its lot, four stories, or
44 feet in height, would have to have a yard 20 feet deep and an outer
court at least seven feet four inches wide. For lots of 30 feet or less in
*23 feet in Resolution of July 25, 1916. See sect. 16, par. b.
AREA DISTRICTS 41
width outer and inner courts are subject to the less restrictive regulations
provided for such courts in C districts. (See Figure 154.)
The E district regulations are particularly appropriate for detached
or semi-detached houses on lots 40 feet or more in width. In a residence
district a building on an interior lot with its porches, wings and accessory
buildings may not occupy for the first story more than 50 per cent of the
area of the lot, and may not exceed 30 per cent of the area of the lot above
the first story. For a corner lot these percentages are increased to 70 per
cent and 40 per cent respectively. For all buildings rear yards shall be
at least five inches in least dimension for each one foot of height and courts
and side yards at least two and one-half inches for each foot of height.
For a lot 50 feet or less in width courts and side yards shall be not less
than two inches in least dimension for each foot of height. In a residence
district the depth of the rear yard at the curb level shall be at least 25 per
cent of the depth of the lot, but need not exceed 25 feet. If the building
is set back from the street the required depth of the rear yard may be
correspondingly decreased, but not below ten feet. On at least one side
of every building in a residence district there shall be a side yard along
the lot line for the full depth of the lot. For any building not within a
residence district the depth of the required rear yard at its lowest level
must be at least 15 per,cent of the depth of the lot, but need not exceed
15 feet at such level. (See Figure 155.)
It is so important to secure some segregated open space for the joint
play and recreational use of the residents of every section that is built up
with tenement or apartment houses that it is well worth while to grant
developers the option of building under less restrictive provisions as to
courts and yards if as a substitute they supply areas suitable for recreational
use. An arrangement is accordingly provided whereby an individual de-
veloper or group of property owners in a D or C district can by setting
aside 10 per cent of their land for joint recreational use, be relieved of
the court and yard requirements of the district in which they are situated
and have the right to follow the requirements of the next less restricted
district. The 10 per cent set aside for common recreational use must be
equal to at least 5,000 square feet and must be at least 40 feet in its least
dimension. This common space may be left in the center of the block or
it may be made up of any lots in the block or in an adjoining block that
are approved by the superintendent of buildings! as suitable for the joint
recreational use of the residents.
*Changed to Board of Appeals in Resolution of July 25. See sec. 13, par. (b)
and sec. 14, par. (d).
CHAPTER VII—FUTURE CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT OF
DISTRICTING PLAN
The Legislature by a recent amendment to the districting provisions
of the Charter (sections 242a, 242b) has provided a definite method, under
appropriate safeguards, by which the Board of Estimate may amend and
supplement any general districting plan that it may adopt. This amendment
was drafted by the Commission and approved by the Board of Estimate.
It is essential to the success and future development of any districting plan.
The districting plan submitted has been evolved after a careful study
of existing conditions and tendencies and a careful estimate of probable
future needs and requirements, both of the city as a whole and of each
particular section. There is no thought, however, that the plan now pro-
posed can be complete and final for all time. There are doubtless errors
and omissions that will be brought out only by actual operation. Moreover
it is recognized that any plan of city building must be modified and supple-
mented with the growth of the city and the changes in social and economic
conditions due to the progress of invention and discovery.
“No limit can be set to the growth and expansion of the city. No
amount of planning can avoid the necessity for a considerable amount of
reconstruction and change. Regardless of the requirements of an increas-
ing population, the city structure must change to conform to the changes
in the economic and industrial world. The city is but an expression of
the existing economic, commercial, industrial, social and political organiza-
tion. When invention and discovery are changing the methods of work
and of living throughout the world, it is idle to think that we can so judge
the future that our present plans for the city’s development will not require
change and modification. The ‘once for all’ method of city planning is
therefore impractical. We cannot adopt a plan and make that the Pro-
crustean mold for all future time. The plan must develop and change
with the advance of civilization. City planning to be effectual must be
sustained and continuous. It is never completed.” 4
Even now it is clear that the present plan must be supplemented and
changed when plans for certain fundamental factors affecting the physical
structure of the city have been definitely worked out. Among these factors
are, a comprehensive plan of port and terminal development, a plan of park
development in Brooklyn, Queens and Richmond, a plan for future exten-
sions and surface line feeders for the dual subway system.
Moreover the present plan has been developed along quite broad
general lines with the belief that after its adoption it would be further sup-
plemented by more restrictive provisions in various areas. A more intensive
1 Robert H. Whitten, in Development and Present Status of City Planning in New
York City, p. 18.
East 23rd Street, be-
tween Avenue D and
Clarendon Road, Flat-
bush — Apartment
house in private house
district.
Fifth Avenue, corner 74th Street—Private house making
way for 12-story apartment house.
East 19th Street, near Cortel- Beverly Road and East 18th
you Road, Flatbush—Apart- Street, Flatbush—A partment
ment house in exclusive house extends to the street
private house district. line in private house district.
Fic. 22—-THE APARTMENT HOUSE INVADING DETACHED HOUSE
SECTIONS.
Even as apartment districts are invaded by business so is the high-class private
detached house district invaded by occasional tenements which cut off light and
depress values for private residence purposes. In districts designated “E” on the
Area maps, the erection of apartment houses will be discouraged by the requirement
that a large percentage of the lot be left unoccupied.
FUTURE CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT OF DISTRICTING PLAN 43
study of particular sections will doubtless show that some streets now unre-
stricted or restricted to business may with advantage be included in the
residence class. The owners interested will doubtless in many cases petition
that this be done. Similarly and even to a greater extent the area districts
contained in the present plan will be supplemented in order to conserve
existing developments and extend the safeguard of the E and D restrictions
to other sections.
The method of amendment contained in the proposed districting reso-
lution is as follows: “ Whenever the owners of 50 per cent or more of
the frontage in any district or part thereof shall present a petition duly
signed and acknowledged to the Board of Estimate and Apportionment
requesting an amendment, supplement, change or repeal of the regulations
prescribed for such district or part thereof, it shall be the duty of this
Board to vote upon said petition within 90 days after the filing of the
same by the petitioners with the Secretary of this Board. If, however, a
protest against such amendment, supplement or change be presented, duly
signed and acknowledged by the owners of 20 per cent or more of the
frontage proposed to be altered, or by the owners of 20 per cent of the
frontage immediately in the rear thereof, or by the owners of 20 per cent
of the frontage directly opposite the frontage proposed to be altered, such
amendment shall not be passed except by the unanimous vote of the Board.”
The above provisions in relation to a protest of 20 per cent. of frontage
affected are identical with the provisions for amendment added by the
recent Legislature to the districting sections of the Charter. Under this
method it will be possible for the owners in any block frontage between
two intersecting streets to petition for the kind of restriction that will best
conserve the type of improvement most suitable for that block. We believe
that this process of amending, supplementing and perfecting the general
plan is essential to its full success.
Under the districting resolution submitted the enforcement of the plan
is vested in the superintendent of buildings in each borough, the fire com-
missioner and the tenement house commissioner under the rules and regula-
tions of the Board of Standards and Appeals. The chief control will be
exercised through the building permit and the certificate of occupancy issued
by the superintendent of buildings. The fire commissioner’s jurisdiction
will be confined to subsequent enforcement of provisions in relation to
the use of buildings. The tenement house commissioner will have juris-
diction over the application of the provisions of the resolution to tenement
houses.
The future amendment and development of the districting plan will
doubtless entail some added work for the Board of Estimate. It should
be carried on as part of the general work of comprehensive planning that
the Board’s Committee on the City Plan has in hand. It is very important
for the permanent success of the districting plan that all detailed amend-
44 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
ments should be correlated with a comprehensive plan of city growth and
development.
Respectfully submitted,
COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
AND RESTRICTIONS,
Epwarp M. Bassett, Chairman,
Lawson Purpy, Vice-Chairman,
Epwarp C. Bium,
James E. Cronin,
Otro M. Enzrtrz,
Burt L. Fenner,
Epwarp R. Harpy,
Ricuarp W. LAWRENCE,
Arrick H. Man,
Atrrep E. Martine,
Grorce T. Mortimer,
J. F. Smits,
WALTER STABLER,
FRANKLIN S. TOMLIN,
Grorce C. WHIPPLE,
Witii1am G. WILLcox.
Rosert H. Wuitten, Secretary.
APPENDIX I—CHARTER PROVISIONS
Sections 242a anp 242p or GreaTER New York CHarTer, AS ENACTED BY
CuHaptTer 470 or Laws oF 1914 anp AMENDED BY CHAPTER 497
oF Laws oF 1916.
§ 242a. The board of estimate and apportionment shall have power to
regulate and limit the height and bulk of buildings hereafter erected and to
regulate and determine the area of yards, courts and other open spaces.
The board may divide the city into districts of such number, shape and area
as it may deem best suited to carry out the purposes of this section. The
regulations as to the height and bulk of buildings and the area of yards,
courts and other open spaces shall be uniform for each class of buildings
throughout each district. The regulations in one or more districts may
differ from those in other districts. Such regulations shall be designed to
secure safety from fire and other dangers and to promote the public health
and welfare, including, so far as conditions may permit, provision for ade-
quate light, air and convenience of access. The board shal! pay reasonable
regard to the character of buildings erected in each district, the value of the
land and the use to which it may be put to the end that such regulations may
promote public health, safety and welfare and the most desirable use for
which the land of each district may be adapted and may tend to conserve the
value of buildings and enhance the value of land throughout the city. The
board shall appoint a commission to recommend the boundaries of districts
and appropriate regulations to be enforced therein. Such commission shali
make a tentative report and hold public hearings thereon at such times and
places as said board shall require before submitting its final report. Said
board shall not determine the boundaries of any district nor impose any
regulation until after the final report of a commission so appointed. After
such final.report said board shall afford persons interested an opportunity
to be heard at a time and place to be specified in a notice of hearing to be
published for ten consecutive days in the City Record. The board may
from time to time after public notice and hearing amend, supplement or
change said regulations or districts, but in case a protest against a proposed
amendment, supplement or change be presented, duly signed and acknowl-
edged by the owners of twenty per centum or more of the frontage proposed
to be altered, or by the owners of twenty per centum of the frontage imme-
diately in the rear thereof, or by the owners of twenty per centum of the
frontage directly opposite the frontage proposed to be altered, such amend-
ment shall not be passed except by a unanimous vote of the board.
§ 242b. The board of estimate and apportionment may regulate and
restrict the location of trades and industries and the location of- buildings
designed for specified uses, and may divide the city into districts of such
number, shape and area as it may deem best suited to carry out the purposes
of this section. For each such district regulations may be imposed designat-
46 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
ing the trades and industries that shall be excluded or subjected to special
regulations and designating the uses for which buildings may not be erected
or altered. Such regulations shall be designed to promote the public health,
safety and general welfare. The board shall give reasonable consideration,
among other things to the character of the district, its peculiar suitability for
particular uses, the conservation of property values, and the direction of
building development in accord with a well-considered plan. The board
shall appoint a commission to recommend the boundaries of districts and
appropriate regulations and restrictions to be imposed therein. Such com-
mission shall make a tentative report and hold public hearings thereon before
submitting its final report at such time as said board shall require. Said
board shall not determine the boundaries of any district nor impose any
regulations or restrictions until after the final report of a commission so
appointed. After such final report said board shall afford persons interested
an opportunity to be heard at a time and place to be specified in a notice of
hearing to be published for ten consecutive days in the City Record. The
boar may from time to time after public notice and hearing amend, supple-
ment cr change said regulations or districts, but in case a protest against a
proposed amendment, supplement or change be presented, duly signed and
acknowledged by the owners of twenty per centum or more of the frontage
_ proposed to be altered, or by the owners of twenty per centum of the front-
age immediately in the rear thereof, or by the owners of twenty per centum
of the frontage directly opposite the frontage proposed to be altered, such
amendment shall not be passed except by a unanimous vote of the board.
PART OF MAP SHOWING CONTOURS AND STREET GRADES
1916
Contours at 20-foot intervals are shown thus..............
Street grades 0% to 3% inclusive are shown thus...... eee
H 3.1% “ 4.9% oe oY ss
5% “ 9.9%
10% and upward
<r
|
wa
A
elie
ommend se 2]
TT
kK S
DPE:
z)
LY easel
ah ect aie Nag
p44 {|
a oa
mi
SS
=<
Ce
RE 997) careod ROY
f 2
RO
SO cali
AES
fe
i} Lene a8
‘ > 2
ey
Zo
baw
A FZ
a
ce it his
=) 1 ea.
Pee i as
ie & \ eb — r,
COP rer
7S
|
ml
ail
|
ws
j | I ; I s& = e | 2 ey 7 fen
| HY \ y 4 I : 7 a Vz q
ame Ws Vs Vis Ul A I oY
bet
PEE
=e
iar
|
' ~/Z, ‘ q
ee |_ : = >
ao |
pee bees
nd
CU
¥ fer = =
ier
|
eal} fad
eS
iT] eae
=o
yal
It will be seen by comparing the preceding Contour and Grade map
with the Use District map below, that the lower levels near the water-
front are unrestricted and that the higher levels and steeper grades are
generally in business or residence districts. The latter districts as a rule
meclude the steepest grades and the greatest elevations ; for example, the
residence districts near the southerly end of the Concourse and north of
McCombs Dam Park.
PART OF
USE DISTRICT MAP
FOR THE AREA SHOWN ON OPPOSITE PAGE
7 BIG B= ces:
ae mugen ET
Ete
eT
if
e
Se 8 Ag 5 OS Pe
A , eas So
pie was
: BS ow nee
a itil =
|
OL at aah
oneal
Elevated lines and stations are shown thus
— — =e — -
Subways and stations under construction are shown thus —-
as AAeUg
S82 mMEgos
So es sé
oo 2 Se
Ge M5 oa,
oc x, 0 2 Oen
+¥ OS xaos
A we tS
to Q.8OS &
vo S
— ESE SS
of 3
ae $a ae
= wUg
a2 SUM &
=i} ae Bo
Ow ~ ave
So shod
Loe BHkKYK gy
Baits| =—aal,
BO oS ..364
a sk Vvaes
baler SP soha
Bra vo ayn
42g 6.2 ues op
an ao 8
oh Seow - 00
ur Ow
+ eae vo
erage
Ry eel
28 fie &
as $4a.98
80 8H.
- HOoTDTO Nn
ee on ov
ss Leos
Gis ah am
Te = ee
ai Sank 2
sh .at eee
EL Poves
On ante
eoscoOngrs
Ske Sait,
+ Sic.8 onU &
nao
B wosts
SOBs ewe
re oy
n
3)
S
Su
=]
vo
3
USHOTTR
‘Fic. 25—EXISTING AND FUTURE RAPID TRANSIT LINES AND
STATIONS, LOWER MANHATTAN, 1915.
APPENDIX II—THE ZONING SURVEY
The Commission directed its staff to secure all data essential to a knowl-
edge of existing conditions and tendencies, and to an estimate of future
growth and development. This data, supplemented by personal inspection
on the ground, was used to assist the expert. knowledge and experienced
judgment of the members of the Commission in laying down the actual
district boundaries and the regulations to be enforced therein.
It was essential that the data collected should be both detailed and
comprehensive. There must be detailed information in relation to the
buildings and physical characteristics and immediate environment of every
individual block and also comprehensive or bird’s eye views of the entire
borough or city. The comprehensive view is indispensable to the determina-
tion of the number and characteristics of the various kinds of districts to
be established and also for the determination in a general way of the logical
boundaries for such districts. The detailed examination street by street and
block by block is necessary to determine the exact boundaries and also to
determine whether there is need for the exemption of certain small areas
within the boundaries of a larger district.
Topographic features
Especially in the undeveloped areas, the existing lay of the land, the
rivers, hills, valleys, marshes, highways, railroads and other physical
features, give the best indication of the probable future use of the land.
The topographic and hydrographic charts of the national government were
used, as were also the more detailed topographic and grade maps prepared
by the topographic bureaus of the boroughs. From these a map was pre-
pared showing by colors the grade percentage in each street. Twenty-
foot contour lines were also drawn covering practically the entire city with
the exception of the Borough of Richmond.
A steep street grade will often mark the boundary line between different
kinds of use or between different types of the same kind of use. It often
serves to separate the waterfront industrial or warehouse use from a busi-
ness or residential use or a business use from a residential use. A study of
the grades is helpful in determining the future traffic streets and hence the
future business streets. Steep grades in certain sections make it reasonably
certain that they will be used for residential purposes—they are unfitted for
either business or industry.
A bird’s eye view of any city discloses the fact that industry of the
heavier type seeks the waterfront and lower levels. Cheap transportation,
and sometimes also cheap land, are the attractions that bring the heavy
industries to the low levels. The railroads follow the low levels in passing
through the city, and the waterfront, as the place at which rail and water
transportation meets, naturally has the best terminal facilities. Low-lying
48 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
land bordering deep water constitutes in a city an almost certain dedication
to future terminal and industrial use. (See Figures 6, 23 and 24.)
Rapid transit system
While the location of the rail and water terminal facilities fixes the
location of industry of the heavier type, the passenger transportation system
is the chief factor in determining the location of business centers and sub-
centers and in determining the building up and the intensity of use of various
residential districts. The rapid transit system at present in operation or
under construction will necessarily determine the general lines of city growth
and development for many years to come. Owing to the automobile and
electric suburban railroad service, the local centers will continue to increase
within a radius of 50 miles or more of New York; but the great bulk of
the population of the city will continue to be housed within a five-cent fare
and a 40-minute ride of the chief business center. (See Figure 25.)
A time zone transit map was carefully worked out, showing the time
from every part of the city to the City Hall and to 14th Street. This time
includes the time required to walk from any given location served by a
transit line to the nearest station and the running time from that point to
the City Hall or to 14th Street. As a rule only the five-cent fare routes are
considered. Areas beyond half a mile or a ten-minute walk from a transit
line are not dealt with, as a half-mile belt is considered the limit of any
considerable influence of a transit line. The time zone map includes lines
planned and under construction as well as those now in operation, and is
based on estimated running time when the new dual subway system is in
full operation. (See Figure 26.)
This time zone map was in constant requisition to assist the judgment
of the Commission in its determination of the appropriate use and the
appropriate intensity of use of particular areas.
Vehicular traffic
The main roads and thoroughfares are also of great importance in
determining the lines of future growth and development. The main roads
often fix the location of future transit lines and local business streets. To
determine the relative importance of existing traffic routes, traffic counts
obtained from the various boroughs were plotted on the city map. (Fig. 27.)
Distribution of population
The figures of the 1900, 1905 and 1910 censuses were charted on maps
by enumeration districts. These enumeration districts in Manhattan, The
Bronx and Brooklyn are generally very small areas including one or more
city blocks. The 1910 figures were even more carefully analyzed and dis-
tributed within each enumeration district according to the existing housing
accommodations. A spot map was then prepared with each spot representing
twenty-five people. This is probably the most intensive study that has
—_— —
me TIME ZONE MAP
“eae, OF
ee NEW YORK CITY
GIVING TIME OF TRAVEL,
7 ee ON COMPLETION OF THE DUAL SYSTEM
ras ; FROM 14"STREET, MANHATTAN, BY
fi SUBWAY, ELEVATED, AND SURFACE LINES,
= TO ALL PLACES REACHED BY A 5 CENT FARE
EXPLANATORY NOTE
to each station platform from
Figures inside station circles are times
14th Street, Manhattan. One minute is allowed to reach the street surface
and then walking time is used at three miles per hour
led in a ten-minute
The a
It is assumed that transit lines serve an area
ca tributary to
or half mile walk from stations or surface lin
while a sur
a rapid transit line is a succession of overlapping diamon
to more frequent
face line serves a belt of territory a mile wide owing
stops.
For existing lines, rush hour schedule time is used. For uncompleted /~
speeds
lines, the running time is estimated on the basis of
'
Proposed changes in locations of existing stations have been indicates
as far as ascertainable
For transferring between cars or trains on the same level, one minut ne UR } TAD \ Je > ae . INCLUDING WALKING FROM LINES AT 3 MILES PER HOUR
has been allowed; two minutes for different levels. = K 4 oA re Il yi 3 “. :
/ ’ J J: Ne COLNE LLDPE
DISTANCE SCALE
~~ tL vba
A comparison of this map with the corresponding height
district map will show that the height of buildings allowed
in business districts, other circumstances being equal
diminishes with the time from the Manhattan busine
2 WALKING SCALE
To
center, and similarly the area which can be built upor
shown by the area district maps, diminishes as the time
from the Manhattan business center increases. It will
also be seen that the districts permitting the more intensive
\ EXPLANATION
0 To 10 MINUTE TIME ZONES =f 40 To So MINUTE TIME ZONES
r oT 2 - : MB oro . .
SEB www + - 60 MINUTES AND OVER
development generally extend farthest away from the busi
ness center along rapid transit lines
The Height District Map Section 22, for example shows
a one and one-quarter times district along the Fourth
Avenue subway extending to a considerable distance from
the Manhattan business center, while areas on either side
srea districts in Section i i BLANK AREAS OTHER THAN THOSE IN MANHATTAN WITH:
* \ te AWE : Ae IN 10 MINUTES OF 14TH STREET CANNOT BE REACHED FROM
yOUAY S ‘ 14TH STREET BY A FIVE-CENT TRANSIT LINE AND A TEN:
ry MINUTE WALK FROM SUCH LINE
Similarly the ¢
22 along the lines ¢ the Fourth Avenue
ubway and the Utrecht Avenue ele
vated line, extend further from the Man s
hattan busir center than other C dis
tricts under otherwise similar circumstance * Bean TAGRTTTCG END LOA Sine
; = * + EXPRESS STATIONS
SURFACE LINES TRANSFERRING TO TRAINS FOR 5 CENTS
—————_ 5 MINUTE TIME ZONE LINES
10 « - . .
——— UMIT OF 10 MINUTE OR HALF MILE WALK FROM TRANSIT LINES
COMMITTEE ON THE CITY PLAN
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
ohm P Fox—
Transit Exreter|
WNC
SA ae
\\se aa
f Ma NN)
a
: a 6t “ge
e
Dee i AUN Oe
ON Ny LIES 2 UK
RIE SOG Se Lg
PART OF MAP
Bere, y 4
SHOWING
1 ff
Ki
MAIN TRUCKING AND AUTOMOBILE ROUTES
WITH
TRAFFIC COUNTS
ar ecesienpet™ 1915
eat
at RED FIGURES ON MAP BELOW STREETS INDICATE AVERAGE NUMBER PER HOUR OF
TRUCKING OR TRADE VEHICLES.
BLACK FIGURES ON MAP ABOVE STREETS INDICATE AVERAGE NUMBER PER HOUR OF
AUTOMOBILES OR LIGHT PASSENGER VEHICLES,
BROKEN BLACK LINES INDICATE AUTOMOBILE ROUTES RECOMMENDED BY THE
OFFICIAL AUTOMOBILE BLUE BOOK OF 1915,
Ta ee
pm 3
TRUCKING
AND
¥}/ TRADE VEHICLES
AVERAGE NUMBER
PER HOUR BOTH
WAYS.
ee
a
AUTOMOBILE S
AND =] a
MN
LIGHT s 2
+
PASSENGER
VEHICLES,
AVERAGE NUMBER
q PER HOUR BOTH
WAYS.
Business and industry generally follow traffic routes and it will be seen that the use
district maps include the traffic arteries in business or unrestricted districts
Compare
with Use District Map Sections 9, 10, 13 and 14
MAP
OF THE
CITY OF NEW YORK
SHOWING
POPULATION CENTERS
(CENTER OF GRAVITY OF POPULATION)
BASED ON POLICE CENSUS
1915
Population in each borough and its center of population is shown
OLN ror aia ox bss ncaioie sie Ove Jaane Sapte nteleret --» 0 649,726
Population of Manhattan and Bronx and their center of population
18 GHOWS1 CHUN sie sic nals dicleivib nie Be OE ORE Ot OE OAAOROC Onin a 2,945,208
Population of Brooklyn and Queens and their center of population
is shown thus.....cccscerserrees Oe. Fo nu tactics <ctetCe MeeL hLOr,
Population of the entire city and its center of population is shown
RUSTE Pt atta al ho ainsi naia ey Sipim eieie ate Wi ei bie Slaisiexmeheigie(<ieie eins erates 5,253,206
I
aA EY Tr
AR
YO
aN
M\
x
»
we FH
iA
it
aan
nt mt ei
it
i
v SN it
JOM iu
RAMA it
SONNY Si a
Wate a cute muy
AA
\
‘
ey
NIU
Fic. 28.
TYPICAL BLOCK FROM ATLAS
SHOWING EXISTING BUILDING DEVELOPMENT.
W. EIGHTY-FIFTH ST.
Ti
UL. Y
WY,
Wj7),
SSS
SSX
Z|
SSE
SS
Zs,
fa
>
<
s
Q
<
fe)
hg
a
San
ROS
Zi
s
Sta
BEA SAy/ight (wire glass)
9 50 He oP FT.
By Courtesy of Sanborn Map Co.
Fic. 30.
The Commission has on file atlases of all the boroughs except Rich-
mond, which show in detail on a scale of 50 or 60 feet to an inch, the
use, height, and approximate dimensions of all buildings as well as many
other details concerning them. These atlases are kept up to date by
frequent revision and were constantly referred to in preparing the dis-
tricting maps. Only the data given in the atlases of greatest value in
districting is shown above.
ple My Ag
oh ae
as ee
fhe
tes
ane
3 ila.
PART OF MAP SHOWING BUILDING AND TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT
MANHATTAN—1914
Improved waterfront......--.+..+.-.+- SSS] Railroad: Hints. «/.(e'sts an 2
Factory and warehouse......--.-.s+++- c (aae| Surface Janes: o..1eeceene :
Business exclusively...-.-+--+-++-e2e+e0% hee Elevated and subway lines.. an
Residence. «25s <.ccc ci cecine cleanse eines [eae]
Business on first floor.......-+.ee+e++08 foc
Base map by courtesy of the Ohman Map Co.
a
Fic. 31.
PART OF MAP SHOWING BUILDING AND TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT
MANHATTAN—1885
It will be seen on referring to the Use District Map Section 8 that it provides a
large business district in the ‘vicinity of Broadway where the 1914 Development
map shows that most of the business buildings are located, an unrestricted district
west of Amsterdam Avenue and south of 72nd Street where there is a considerable
warehouse and factory development, and residence districts west of Broadway north
of West 70th Street and east of Columbus Avenue north of 66th Street, where many
residences and apartment houses are located. :
The 1914 and 1885 Development maps when taken together indicate the great
increase in intensity of development of all kinds in the area during the last 29 years.
Note—Scale and key are the same as for the map on the opposite page except that
no separate classification was made in 1885 of business on first floor; a store and
dwelling is classed under residence.
i
a
L
al
Be
a
Baeee
qed
ecu
|
[eet]
F
a) ee
]
Hi
Base map by courtesy of the Ohman Map Co.
Fic. 32.
iy
4
oy >, aryl
|
4
3
‘
j
‘
-
THE ZONING SURVEY 49
been made of the distribution of the population of the city. The spot map
was of great assistance in comprehending at a glance the distribution of
population throughout the city and in estimating the relative effect of various
kinds of transit facilities on the distribution of population. (See Figure 20.)
Supplementing the census data as to distribution of population in their
places of abode, data was obtained and charted to show the distribution of
factory workers in the places in which they work. At the request of the
Commission, the State Labor Department compiled from its records a block
census for all factory employees throughout the city according to place of
work. With this data the Commission prepared a spot map of factory
employees—one spot for each 250 employees. This map was valuable in
laying out the unrestricted or industrial districts and in studying the exist-
ing and possible future relation between congestion of factories and con-
gestion of population. (See Figure 7.)
The results of the police census of 1915 were plotted by census districts
and the center of gravity of the population of each district obtained, and
from these the center of gravity of the population of each borough. These
were combined to obtain the center of gravity of the population of the
entire city. This map enables one to see the relation of these several centers
of population to existing business and traffic centers. (See Figure 28.)
Existing building development
The entire zone plan as proposed by the Commission is based on a
frank acceptance of existing conditions. The zone plan not only does not
affect the continued use of any existing building, but it ordinarily does
not attempt to radically change the character of new buildings from the
type with which any considerable area is at present built up. It was very
important, therefore, that the Commission should have before it a detailed
record of the existing building development in every part of the city. (Fig.
30.)
Distribution of buildings according to use
In order to study the location of existing residential, business and
industrial buildings and areas, borough maps were prepared showing in
colors industrial buildings and use, business buildings, store and dwelling
buildings and residential buildings, including under the latter head schools,
churches and institutional buildings. These maps enabled the Commission
to determine the general boundaries of the residence, business and unre-
stricted districts, in so far as such boundaries could properly be based on
the existing building development.
The Commission based its work, however, not entirely or chiefly on
existing building development, but also upon its judgment of future growth
and requirements. In order to better judge the future growth and change
of the business, residence and industrial areas a careful study was made of
such growth and change in the past. Based on information given in the
50 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
atlases of the various boroughs published at various intervals during the
past fifty years, borough maps were prepared showing in colors the location
of industrial, business and residence buildings. In order to note the effect
of freight and water terminals and of improved transit facilities on the
location and growth of building development, the rail and water terminals
and the transit lines were carefully noted on the building development maps.
These historical maps show from period to period the expansion of the
built-up area of the city and the development and change of the industrial,
business and residence areas. (See Figures 31 and 32.)
Distribution of existing buildings according to height and area covered
In order to aid in the determination of the number and character of
the height districts to be established and the general boundaries of the
various districts, so far as they would be affected by the height of existing
buildings, maps were prepared showing in colors the height of each build-
ing throughout the city. Similarly, for the purpose of assisting the judg-
ment of the Commission in laying out area districts, maps were prepared
showing graphically the area covered by each building throughout the city.
(See Figures 33-36.)
Land values
Comparative land values are a most important and accurate measure
of differences in the kind and character of use appropriate for various
areas. Values are particularly important in determining that particular
intensity of use that is consistent with the most beneficial use of the land.
They are, therefore, particularly useful in the determination of the bound-
aries of the various height and area districts.
It is fortunate for this purpose that for the past few years sectional
maps have been published by the City Department of Taxes and Assess-
ments giving the assessed value per front foot of all land throughout the
city. In this case the unit of value is the value per front foot of an interior
lot 100 feet in depth.
From these sectional maps a map of the entire city was prepared
showing in colors the various ranges of value per front foot. This enables
one to compare at a glance, e. g., values in Flatbush with values in Bay
Ridge and values in The Bronx with those of Brooklyn. It also shows the
blighting effect on certain sections of an invasion by inappropriate or
nuisance uses. (See Figure 37.)
PART OF MAP SHOWING HEIGHTS OF EXISTING BUILDINGS
1915
BUILDINGS UP TO % OF THE STREET WIDTH IN HEIGHT ARE SHOWN THUS......... =x " \ N\A)
“ PROM %T01 TIMES OF THE STREET WIDTH IN HEIGHT ARE SHOWN THUS =)
1 1% tr WA
iw" 1% AS CF} ~
wy" 2 => e 4:
Aeky mae
OVER 2%
ie
BLE
au
tl
Haul
1000 . 1000 2000 FEET
It will be observed on comparison with the height district map for this area—
shown on opposite page, that the boundary line of the two times district includes
in general the present higher building development, while the lower buildings on
he outskirts of this higher building development are in a one and one-half times
istrict.
L
-
mje) =
Dea
ASAT: a
: SSS s3=
iV
it
)
‘|
L
er
q
ale
(0
riauneaul
TG UUEESaeNele Miata!
x eat atch a\ (IF
3 0
uu 3 \\
aT LAHAALE ee M CANA MAY
es GAO
v0 oO | WU WE
Fe Se
or COE ES Ce
UVa
WA ee ill
AV, WS: (Ser i
: Ol cea i
WSieseenil:
Gao =e Se
go ee =
‘2 SSeS
: a ae)
1 Bee
Fic. 34—HEIGHT DISTRICT MAP ‘FOR SECTION SHOWN ON OPPOSITE
; FOLDER.
ae Se Eee a, Ps
STH a ica
+ pee fist =
peor “ oe
* v eérue i ner
eur 1 ‘a
4 4 i 16
i] La) . :
hae a
. ' re s
‘ ; a
«
7 ‘
‘ ‘ 5 “ ‘
. ate a B igsh:
2 ee : ‘
ed utp iets a é
3 » _*
; ; 7
« . + ate
4 e a > t
. « a - ne -
if : 5
tu. .
y
' CL . :
; A A
*
‘ =
y é
My %
€ .
, WY tia & i cP
Bl i< m
. : oan
a . . Le he .
a 7 r - - * ;
. 5 ¥ <4 »
> “ dyes \
a : e 7 > ne aa
- ‘ aS x
A \ =~* ¥ > 7 ane
. - eS >
+ iS > * _ <r
é 4 Ar oor 2 eek
’ a aa a if J }
P, A >
. > “ .
. © ’ - y.
. y
cl n goes d
et i way * ; fe
' s », Ley a = -
‘
~~ ee 7 Y <¥ L é
W. : 3 Eye
. [ * a ae + *
»! a 7 a
are “s . +=
wf " , a he bs
- 7 ~ vd 4 A ~* >
y PY * &
: o ie
j Lea i"
* ¢ 7;
¥ , el ¢ ca 4 -
n Se a ‘ .
P < pe i=
i A (a ‘
‘
¥ al
a ‘s, az,
) “ '
“i.
Aa ‘ oe
; ‘
Wy
_ ‘
M
\
‘
)
= =F ‘
¥
Wi} 4 aS
» Y r Wy
~
‘
.
i i
€
Py it "
thee Fae,
PART OF MAP
SHOWING
PERCENTAGE OF LOT COVERED
BY EXISTING BUILDINGS
1915
Sheds and shed-like construction, usually one
story, and storage yards are shown thus......
oe
i
Isolated buildings occupying up to 30 per cent. of
rea of the lot are shown thu
(usually in rows) occupying from 30 per
area of the lot are
ouses Se Les é
cent. to er cent. of the
own Ai ae ae : .
Aas Bs usua. lly new- a tenemen i eae
rom er t er cer the area o
the | toe } Seah. as, ,, =
Buildings (i t house d s, usually
old ten nd in b districts,
business buildings) occupying from 70 per
t. to 90 of the ar f the lot are
BRLTR WIA MOULIN Boo. ctectpiscaes vies f7a cio /a\ cra a(cialptn pretweia aye/aaela
Building occupying from 90 per cent. to 100 per
cent. of the area of the lot are shown thus.... /
1000 ° 1000 2000 FEET — PS
| ~ i =
The area districts as laid out on the area district 2 = > _— fy
ap opposi te) m quite closely the character ilvces ~ . 4
he present building developr Tk he A LWA
districts on the South Brooklyn waterfront and
along the Manhattan Beach Division of the L. I
R. R., include areas now occupied to
ent by industrial buildings, covering 90 per cent. to
100 per cent. of the area Ce oe
The D district south of S t Park, th I
of Bay Ridge Avenue and f Seventh A
hat t of Old New Utrecht Road and north of
he Mant n Beach div rthe L. L. RAR
nd that t Greenwood Cemetery and i
I e will be s o include dwell
i ore or less developed with building
Il pying not more than 50 per cent. of th
area, and hich apartment houses
entered to any considerable extent.
Similarly the E districts on the Narrows south of
75th Stree e east of 10th Avenue 1 }
Bist S d the eral E distric f
J ll be seen t lude
localities in which the isting building lly oP 4 " é- S é
cover less than 30 per cent. of the area of the lot on PA it SSNS a ae +> SR te
which they are built and in which districts few or no HNN j =a) : 4 e B*) x8 4 gx p SS ss Vi
apartment houses are to be found. x= : = : nn . cS ls
aE:
N
TN
tilaX
em | ae
Tears se ee
SS to tS Wass
Leb S eae
SLA ey sts. s
lees ac
ade 2S ==
|
i
alee ~ at
Mh
meee
ee i"
Sana ical!
\ ee tp \he
KY
“Y/N
Sa
YQ
CSE
TERCERA EESTI
TY (; y) Any Dw, anf
I-Ie i ms a
MAP SHOWING LAND VALUES
PREPARED FROM TENTATIVE LAND
VALUE MAP OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
a
Na.
Da
ES <=
wy
Ie,
e MW, . =n ay 7 A
OOS oe mle an a TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS
SOS) : ea 1915
~ mn
ila ey fs] $5,000 AND ABOVE, VALUD PER | FT. FRONT 100 FT. IN DEPTH SHOWN TRUS cS
Br 1,001 - $5,006, CE gh iI Tce AIT ce uy 4 Fo si oe
Cy, \y 501- 1,000, aay
Pz Ss 251- 500, =
¢, (A 101- 250, Vereres
& Cy 51- 100, my
10 50, =
7K
1000 ° 1000 2000 FEET
The map in its entirety shows in a striking way
the diminution of land values as the distance from
the chief business center decreases, modified, how-
ever, by an increase of values at local centers and
from other special circumstances. The Height and
Area maps governing the intensity of use are seen
to follow the same law, that is, the districts per-
mitting the least height and requiring the largest
iS) courts and yards, other circumstances being equal,
: /} AN are those most distant from the chief business cen-
/| = x ter. The two-times district which includes the busi-
Rey i if N? ness center of Brooklyn, shown on Height district
| see Ce map sections 12 and 16, it will be seen includes
: lands of relatively high value, on Pierrepont, Rem-
sen and Montague Streets, lands near the East
River on John, Plymouth and Water Streets, lands
on Fulton, Livingston and Schermerhorn Streets, as
well as the area of high values between Fulton
Street and Flatbush Avenue, northwest of the Long
Island Railroad Terminal.
APPENDIX III—DISTRICTING
From THE REporT OF THE HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
DeEcEMBER 23, 1913
As applied to building restriction there are two general types of dis-
tricting. Certain localities may be set off as residential or business or indus-
trial districts. Industry and business may, for example, be excluded from
the residence districts. The restrictions may go further and attempt to
sectire a certain type of residence district. The district may be restricted
to one family or two family houses. Another type of districting is where
different general height and area limitations are applied to all buildings in
a particular district. Any thoroughgoing plan for the control of building
development must make use of both of these types of districting.
The general scope of constitutional regulation
It is clear that such restrictions as are enacted must justify themselves
as a reasonable exercise of the police power of the state. Under eminent
domain the individual is compensated for the taking of his property. Under
the police power there is also a constructive taking of property in certain
cases, but without compensation to the individuals injured. It is theoretic-
ally conceivable that a general plan of building restriction and regulation
might be entered upon by resort to the power of eminent domain, but,
practically, such a solution is out of the question. The expense and burden
of condemnation proceedings and litigation in multitudinous cases would
create a tax burden that would increase rather than compensate for the
injury to property interests. Moreover, the kinds of regulation under con-
sideration are not such as to justify individual compensation. While they
restrict individual liberty to a certain extent they do it in such a way as
to conserve individual and public interests and rights. They subject the use
of urban land to such restrictions as are appropriate and reasonable in the
nature and history of this class of property.
The police power may be used to promote the public health, safety,
order and general welfare. Protection of public health, safety and order
constitute the police power in the primary or narrower sense of the term.1
It is a power so vital as to be undoubted when reasonably and justly
applied. The exercise of the police power for the promotion of public
comfort and convenience and for the promotion of general social and
economic interests under the head of “the general welfare,’ while upheld
by competent authority, will nevertheless be subjected to more careful
scrutiny and more strict construction.
The position of the United States Supreme Court in regard to the scope
*Freund, Police Power, sec. 10.
52 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
of the police power is well stated by Justice Harlan in C., B. & Q. Railway
v. Drainage Commissioners, 200 U. S. 561, 592, decided March 5, 1906:
“The learned counsel for the railroad company seem to think
that the adjudications relating to the police power of the state to pro-
tect the public health, the public morals and the public safety are not
applicable in principle to cases when the police power is exerted for
the general well-being of the community apart from any question of
the public health, the public morals or the public safety.
We cannot assent to the view expressed by counsel. We hold that
the police power of a state embraces regulations designed to promote
the public convenience or the general prosperity, as well as regula-
tions designed to promote the public health, the public morals or
the public safety. . . . And the validity of a police regulation
must depend upon the circumstances of each case and the
Chemeter of the regulation, whether arbitrary or reasonable and
whether really designed to accomplish a legitimate public purpose.”
Again in Welch v. Swasey, 214 U. S. 91, decided May 17, 1909, the
same court through Justice Peckham concurs, at page 106, in the conclusion
of the Massachusetts court “that regulations in regard to the height of
buildings, and in regard to their mode of construction in cities, made by
legislative enactments for the safety, comfort and convenience of the people
and for the benefit of property owners generally, are valid.” Finally in
Eubank v. City of Richmond, 33 Supt. Ct. 76, decided December 2, 1912,
Justice McKenna reiterates that the police power extends “not only to
regulations which promote the public health, morals and safety, but to those
which promote the public convenience or the general prosperity.”
The New York Court of Appeals has taken substantially the same view
of the scope of the police power. In People v. King, 110 N. Y. 418, Judge
Andrews says (at page 423): “ By means of this power the legislature
exercises a supervision over matters involving the common weal and enforces
the observance, by each individual member of society, of the duties which
he owes to others and the community at large. It may be exerted whenever
necessary to secure the peace, good order, health, morals and general wel-
fare of the community. . . . In short, the police power covers a wide
range of particular unexpressed powers reserved to the state affecting free-
dom of action, personal conduct and the use and control of property.”
It is thus seen that the police power is broad and comprehensive. Yet
it is by no means unlimited. A controlling limitation is that every resort
to it should commend itself to the sober judgment as necessary, appropriate
and reasonable, the infringement of private right being not disproportionate
to the real public gain.
Freund in his treatise on the Police Power well states that a study of
the various cases in which the police power has been applied “ will reveal
the police power not as a fixed quantity but as the expression of social,
DISTRICTING 53
economic and political conditions. As long as these conditions vary, the
police power must continue to be elastic, 7. e., capable of development.”
If an informed and deliberate public opinion becomes educated to the neces-
sity for the exercise of greater control over the planning and over the
building of the city, and that such control cannot be effectively exercised
except through the police power, it is clear that the police power is suffi-
ciently elastic to meet the situation. The courts, while naturally conserva-
tive, have shown a strong disposition to favor all reasonable regulations for
the control of the height, size and arrangement of buildings. As the public
necessity for such regulations becomes more clearly apparent, we may expect
the position taken by the courts to become more and more clearly defined in
support of such control.
Bearing in mind the purposes and objects which justify a resort to the
police power our study of the problem of controlling building development
will be based chiefly on the following considerations :
(1) Public safety—Protection of property from fire and protec-
tion of the occupants of buildings from injury due to fire or panic.
(2) Public health—Importance of light, air and the prevention
of congestion to health and sanitation.
(3) General welfare—(a) The comfort and convenience of the
occupants of dwellings, offices and factories, through more adequate
provision for light and air and in the case of dwellings through the
maintenance of the essentially residential character of the neigh-
borhood.
(b) The safeguarding of existing and future building investment
values and the encouragement of an appropriate and orderly building
development by such regulations as will prevent the taking from an
existing structure of its minimum allotment of light and air and as
will tend to maintain the character of a district.
(c) The prevention of street congestion.
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF DISTRICTING
While the desirability of districting is generally recognized by all
students of this subject there is a fear on the part of some that it may be
held void as an infringement of the constitutional guarantee of equality.
The constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws constitutes one
of the most important limitations upon the police power. It means that
the government shall not impose particular burdens upon individuals or
corporations to meet dangers for which they cannot in justice be held respon-
sible, and that all legislative discriminations or classifications shall be jus-
tified by differences of status, act or occupation corresponding to the differ-
ence of legislative measures.1 The idea of equality excludes in principle
both particular burdens and special privileges, but admits of reasonable
classification.?
*Freund, Police Power, page V.
*Tbid., sec. 611.
54 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
The question of what constitutes reasonable classification comes up
chiefly in connection with districting. To what length is it permissible to go
in the division of the city into districts with varying regulations as to the
height, size and arrangement of buildings? Other forms of classification
have received quite general acceptance. Thus tenement houses have often
been put in a separate class and subjected to more stringent regulations.
This has been justified on the ground of greater importance in relation to
public health or safety. Likewise height regulations have been adopted
varying according to the width of the street. This is in effect a districting
plan. The district changes with each variation in street width. This sort
of districting is usual and approved. It may be justified directly on the
ground of health and safety. A general plan of districting such as seems
needful cannot be justified solely on such grounds. We cannot justify
more stringent regulations for dwellings in the suburbs than in lower Man-
hattan on the ground that light, air and comfort for the residents of the
suburbs are of greater public importance than for the residents of Lower
Manhattan. It seems, however, that such districting can be justified if it
can be shown to be essential to the general welfare. If regulations ad-
mittedly appropriate and reasonable for suburban areas are admittedly inap-
propriate and unreasonable for congested areas, the public importance and
necessity for districting is clearly shown.
Classification or districting for the purposes of regulation must either
be based directly on the purposes for which the police power may be
exercised or it must be justified by difference in injury to vested interests.
In order to justify more stringent regulations for dwelling-houses in the
suburbs than for dwelling houses in lower Manhattan it must appear either
that such regulations for the suburbs are more important to the public health,
safety or general welfare than for lower Manhattan, or that while equally
important for one or more of these purposes in both districts the suburban
regulations would if applied to lower Manhattan interfere so seriously with
existing property values as to render them of doubtful expediency or con-
stitutionality. The courts will insist that there be some fair relation between
the public good to be secured by the regulations and the private injury
suffered. Building regulations must be reasonable in order to be constitu-
tional. There is no absolute standard for all conditions. There must be
a reasonable relation between the public object to be gained and the loss
of property and liberty suffered. It is clear that any deprivation of indi-
vidual liberty is a real public loss that must be justified by some greater
public gain. It is also clear that extended injury to property interests may
cause widespread public loss and consequently should have for its justifica-
tion as an exercise of the police power some greater public gain. In order
to be reasonable there must be a proportionateness of means to ends. This
point is dwelt upon at length by Freund in his treatise on the Police Power.
He says (sec. 63):
“Leading courts have stated very distinctly that reasonableness
is one of the inherent limitations of the police power; so the Supreme
DISTRICTING 55
Court of Mass.!: ‘ Difference of degree is one of the distinctions by
which the right of the legislature to exercise the police power must be
determined. Some small limitations of previously existing rights inci-
dent to property may be imposed for the sake of preventing a mani-
fest evil. Larger ones could not be without the exercise of the right
of eminent domain.’ And the Supreme Court of the U. S2: “A
Statute or a regulation provided for therein, is frequently valid or
the reverse, according as the fact may be, whether it is a reasonable
or an unreasonable exercise of legislative power over the subject
matter involved, and in many cases questions of degree are the con-
trolling ones by which to determine the validity, or the reverse, of
legislative action,’ and in Plessy vs. Ferguson,* in answer to the con-
tention that the principle of separation might be carried to the length
of assigning to black and white different quarters of the city for
living or different sides of the street for walking, the Supreme Court
said: ‘The reply to all this is, that every exercise of the police power
must be reasonable.’ * * * There are few forms of control that
cannot become unreasonable by an excess of degree: and there are
many cases where no other principle of limitation is discoverable than
that of reasonableness.”
The districting of a city for building restriction purposes is made neces-
sary by the fundamental characteristic of “reasonableness ”’ which is the
essential feature of a valid exercise of the police power. Especially in a
city like New York it becomes necessary that building regulations should
vary according to the character of the district and according to the type and
use of the building. In certain districts suburban conditions of light and air
can be maintained with great public advantage and with slight private loss;
in other districts such favorable conditions of light and air, while theoreti-
cally just as desirable, are entirely impracticable, and any law that attempted
to enforce them would be clearly unreasonable and void.
A classification based on proportionateness of means to ends is recog-
nized in practically all building regulations. General maximum height regu-
lations, for example, apply only to buildings hereafter constructed. In doing
so they discriminate in favor of the owners of buildings already constructed.
A lopping off of existing buildings in excess of the prescribed height is of
no less importance to the health, safety and convenience of the public than
the restriction of the height of an equal number of buildings hereafter to be
erected. A discrimination in favor of buildings already constructed cannot
be justified directly on the grounds for which the police power may be
exercised. Such discrimination or classification finds abundant justification,
however, when we apply the controlling principle of reasonableness and pro-
portionateness of means to ends. The reconstruction of existing buildings
~ Sigart vs. Knox, 148 Mass., 368.
*Wisconsin M. and P. R. R. Co. vs. Jacobson, 179 U. S., 287 (1906).
“IG3 Wo Sa, S84
56 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
would impose burdens on private owners disproportionate to the public gain.
Such regulations would therefore be unreasonable and void. It seems that
classification or exemption essential to the reasonableness of a regulation is
itself reasonable. This principle constitutes an adequate justification for
districting.
While a specific regulation taken by itself may not seem to have a very
direct relation to the purposes for which the police power may be invoked,
yet when taken as a part of a comprehensive pian for the control of building
development throughout the entire city, its relation to such purposes may be
unmistakable. Grant that a comprehensive system of districting is essential
to the health and general welfare of the city and it follows that every specific
regulation that is an essential part of such comprehensive system is justified
under the police power.
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING
In this country comparatively little use has been made of districting.
It has been carried out most fully in certain European cities. It is coming
to be recognized as essential to well ordered, purposeful, economic and
socially beneficial city growth. Haphazard methods of city construction
result in a minimum of convenience with a maximum of cost to the public,
and in general, to the individual as well.
The welfare of the people of a city is very largely dependent on the
skill and foresight with which the city has been built. Upon this depends
their opportunity for agreeable and remunerative occupation, for the enjoy-
ment of leisure and the creation of a home. If factories and offices are dark
and poorly ventilated, the worker suffers in health and comfort. If dwell-
ings are huddled together without adequate provision for open spaces and if
dwellings, stores and factories are thrown together indiscriminately, the
health and comfort of home life are destroyed.
It will pay a city to attempt by every available means to conserve the
health and general well-being of its inhabitants. This means increased
productivity and increased productivity means higher wages for the laborer,
higher profits for the employer and higher rents for the real estate owner.
The need for the creation of special restrictions for special districts is
most clearly exemplified in the case of suburban residence districts. Here
real estate developers have often found it profitable to secure control of
large areas in order by restrictive covenants to insure to intending pur-
chasers of homes the creation and maintenance of a residence section of a
certain desired type. The surroundings and neighborhood are all important
in securing desirable home conditions. Unless the general character of the
section is fixed for a considerable period of years no one can afford to build
a home. If he does build, a change in the supposed character of the neigh-
borhood through the building of apartments, stores or factories may render
the location undesirable for a home of the character he has built and thus
greatly depreciate his investment.
se
DISTRICTING 57
Another general social factor that demands the zoning or districting of
the city for building purposes under the police power is the recognized evil
of congestion of population as exemplified on the lower East Side. All
students of the subject recognize that such congestion of population is a real
detriment to the health and civic fitness of the population of the district and
a real menace to the welfare of the entire city. The problem is to prevent
the repetition of these conditions in other parts of the city. Restrictions that
would be upheld as reasonable for the present congested area would be
clearly inadequate to prevent the repetition in other districts of conditions
almost as bad as those now existing on the lower East Side. The only
method by which this can be accomplished is by permitting the creation
under the police power of different restrictions for different sections.
Surely the prevention of undue congestion of population is a matter of such
vital importance to the general welfare that it will justify any reasonable
classification of buildings according to type and district; especially if the
injury to vested interests resulting from such classification is comparatively
small.
Manhattan with its skyscrapers is comparatively undeveloped. It is a
fact that a large proportion of the area of lower Manhattan is now so
poorly developed that the existing improvements are reckoned of no value
for purposes of purchase or sale. The bare value of the land is all that is
considered. This means that a large portion of the land of Manhattan is
very inadequately utilized. Where space is so scarce this inadequate utiliza-
tion is a great social and economic loss. This partial development and poor
utilization of the land is even more apparent in all the other boroughs. A
considerable percentage of the land even in what are considered built up
districts, is either vacant or very inadequately utilized. In the suburbs the
sprawling character of building development is everywhere apparent. The
natural result of a poor utilization of its land area by a city is high rents
for occupiers and low profits for investors. It may seem paradoxical to
hold that a policy of building restriction tends to a fuller utilization of land
than a policy of no restriction, but such is undoubtedly the case. The reason
lies in the greater safety and security to investment secured by definite
restrictions. The restrictions tend to fix the character of the neighborhood.
The owner therefore feels that if he is to secure the maximum returns from
his land, he must promptly improve it in conformity with the established
restrictions. For example, he will not be deterred from immediate improve-
ment by the consideration that while a detached house is at present an
appropriate improvement it is probable that in 10 years an apartment house
would be appropriate and that by waiting he will not only be able to reap
the advantage of greatly increased land values, but will save great deprecia-
tion in the value of the detached house due to the fact that it has become an
inappropriate improvement for the lot.
The same principle applies in the case of most types of buildings. Asa
general rule, a building is appropriately located when it is in a section
58 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
surrounded by buildings of similar type and use, all of which have been
constructed with reference to that particular use. Anything that will tend
to preserve the character of a particular section for a reasonable period of
years, will tend to bring about the uniform improvement of the section. A
large proportion of the land of New York City that is now unimproved or
poorly improved is in that condition because the owners feel that the char-
acter of the section is changing, is bound to change in the near future or
that the permanent character of the section is unknown. If restrictions
were imposed so that the general character of particular sections could be
forecasted with reasonable certainty for a period of years, owners who had
been holding back on account of the uncertainties of the situation would find
it clearly to their advantage to improve their holdings. The result would
be that these restricted sections would be more quickly built up with build-
ings of similar type and use. This should have the effect of improving
living conditions, reducing the cost of living and maintaining real estate
values.
Any growing city that fails to control building development must in-
evitably suffer enormous loss due to building obsolescence. Obsolescence
may be defined as lack of adaptation to function. It results from changed
conditions and surroundings that render the building an inappropriate im-
provement for the particular location. The total social loss does not consist
merely of the great cost of building reconstruction or of the great decline
in the rental value of the inappropriate buildings that are not reconstructed,
but there is added to this the social loss due to the retardation of real estate
improvements owing directly to the obsolescence hazard.
In a memorandum submitted to the Commission by Frederick L. Acker-
man, the importance of districting and its superiority over private restrictive
covenants, is clearly pointed out. Mr. Ackerman says:
“We should not confuse the term ‘zoning’ with the ideas sur-
rounding the present use of the word ‘restriction.’ It is true that
restrictions upon property are a necessary part of any scheme of zon-
ing, but there is a fundamental difference in the nature of the re-
strictions. When a group of individuals restrict a section of the city,
it is done for the purpose of conserving that section for a particular
use. In practice, this object is rarely attained for the simple reason
that there are parcels of property within that section which, for one
reason or another, are withheld with the result that sooner or later
these pieces are used for a purpose detrimental to the adjacent prop-
erty, causing the restricted property to depreciate in value. Oft times
the restrictions made by individual owners hamper seriously the
growth of a section, and in practice, instead of conserving the sec-
tion to a better development of the particular activity for which it
was intended, these restrictions simply serve as a check upon its de-
velopment owing to the fact that owners know that sooner or later
the restrictions will be removed, when other activities will enter and
DISTRICTING 59
disintegrate the values. , When the city places restrictions over a sec-
tion, these apply to all properties, with the result that there imme-
diately begins a more permanent development along the lines for
which the section is to be used, and properties increase in value.
“We have given too much weight to the ideas surrounding geo-
graphical location and have not considered seriously the idea that the
value of property depends upon the degree to which a certain section
is developed for a certain use. Values appreciate in sections where it
is known that the development is to be maintained along definite and
well established lines. For instance, the values in office building sec-
tions are dependent upon the degree of the development of that sec-
tion for that particular use. This idea holds in loft, factory and resi-
dential sections, shopping districts, and the like, and experience has
taught us that as soon-as new elements are introduced into these
sections of a nature tending to lower the standard of the section,
the values of the properties are correspondingly reduced. There is
no economy in the present method of continually shifting geograph-
ically the various interests of the city. We should rather foster the
idea of developing various sections for a particular use and place a
premium upon the erection of permanent, well designed structures
within that section, to be used for that particular purpose for which
the section is restricted.”
HeicuHt Districts IN AMERICAN CITIES
The chief American examples of districting as applied to the height
of buildings are furnished by Boston, Baltimore, Indianapolis and Wash-
ington.
Boston
In Boston the entire city has been divided into two districts—-District
A and District B. In District A, the business section of the city, buildings
may not exceed 125 feet in height. In District B, the residential area of
the city, buildings may not exceed 80 feet in height except on thoroughfares
over 64 feet in width. On such streets, buildings may be erected to a height
equal to 144 times the width of the street, but no buildings in District B
may be erected to a greater height than 80 feet unless its width on each
and every abutting public street is at least one-half of its height. No build-
ing, however, in either District A or District B may be of greater height
than 2% times the width of the widest abutting street. This districting
has been done under authority of a special act of the legislature through
the agency of a commission appointed for the purpose. The regulations,
which are considered in detail in Appendix IV, have been upheld by the
highest court, both of the State and of the United States.
In regard to the constitutionality of districting, the Massachusetts
court! points out that any police regulation must be reasonable “not only
*Welch vs. Swasey, 193 Mass., 364; 79 N. E., 745, January 1, 1907.
60 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
in reference to the interest of the public, but also in reference to the rights
of landowners.” If these rights and interests are in conflict “ the opposing
considerations should be balanced against each other and each should be
made to yield reasonably to those upon the other side.” The court indicates
that this consideration makes it necessary in considering the height limita-
tion to have reference “ to the use for which the real estate probably will be
needed.” The court calls attention to the fact that the value of land and
demand for space in the business district is such as to call for buildings of
greater height than in the residential district.
The case was carried to the Supreme Court of the United States and
the constitutionality of the act again affirmed. (Welch vs. Swasey, 214 U.S.
91, 29 Sup. Ct., 567, decided May 17, 1909.) It was contended by the
appellant that the real purpose of the act was to preserve architectural sym-
metry and regular sky line, and that the police power could not be exercised
for such a purpose. It was further contended that the infringement upon
property rights was unreasonable and disproportional to any public necessity
and that the distinction between 125 feet for the height of buildings in
District A and 80 feet to 100 feet for buildings in District B was wholly
unjustifiable and arbitrary, having no reference to public safety or to any
purpose appropriate to the police power. The Supreme Court rejected these
contentions, stating that the reasons contained in the opinion of the State
court were, in the opinion of the Supreme Court, sufficient to justify the
validity of the regulations in question. Justice Peckham, in delivering the
opinion of the court, refers to the justification of the districting provision
based on the greater value of land in District A, presented by the State
court. He also finds an additional reason for the districting provision in a
greater danger in case of fire from tall buildings in a residential district.
He says (at pages 106-108) :
“Tn this case the Supreme Judicial Court of the State holds the
legislation valid, and that there is a fair reason for the discrimination
between the height of buildings in the residential as compared with
the commercial districts. That court had also held that regulation:
in regard to the height of buildings, and in regard to their mode of
construction in cities, made by legislative enactments for the safety,
comfort or convenience of the people and for the benefit of property
owners generally are valid. Attorney General vs. Williams, 174
Mass., 476. We concur in that view, assuming, of course, that the
height and conditions provided for can be plainly seen to be not un-
reasonable or inappropriate.
“Tn relation to the discrimination or classification made between
the commercial and residential portion of the city, the State court
holds in this case that there is reasonable ground therefor in the very
great value of the land and the demand for space in those parts of
Boston where a greater number of buildings are used for the pur-
pose of business or commercially than where the buildings are situ-
[)
T @ T £
MAP OF
THE CITY OF
BOSTON DIRECTORY
SAMPSON & MURDOCK CO.,
SQUANTUM
f
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 1913 TO THE
HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMITTEE
OF THE
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
Hom. Geonar MAncny, CHAIRMAN
ay He
ADVISORY CONIMISSION
KDWAND M BASSETT, Caummun GEORGE @, FORD, Beunevar
RESTRICTIONS
HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS
BOSTON
Cor BIN a Ss og CoMEEREVEE YE
ise Map reproduced by courtesy of Sampson & Murdock Co.
€
B
Fic. 47—DISTRICTING IN BOSTON.
[ DISTRICTING ol
ated in the residential portion of the city, and where no such reasons
Sat for high buildings.
“We are not prepared to hold that this limitation of eighty to
one hundred feet, while in fact a discrimination or classification, is so
unreasonable that it deprives the owner of property of its profitable
use without justification, and that he is therefore entitled under the
Constitution to compensation for such invasion of his rights. The
discrimination thus made is, we think, reasonable, and is justified by
the police power . . .. The reasons contained in the opinion
of the State court are in our view sufficient to justify this enactment.’
Baltimore
A special act of the Maryland Legislature, passed in 1904, limited the
height of buildings within one block of the Washington Monument in the
City of Baltimore to 70 feet. At that time the general maximum height
limit for the entire city was 175 feet. The districting act was held to be
constitutional by the Court of Appeals of Maryland in a decision of June
24, 1908 (Cochran vs. Preston, 70 Atl., 113). The appellant in this case
claimed that the regulation was an infringement of the constitutional guar-
antee of equal protection of the laws and due process of law. The statute
applied a special rule to a certain small district, and as to that district,
provided an exemption in the case of churches. Moreover, the limitation
was not uniform for the district, inasmuch as the district was hilly and
the statute provided for a uniform limit of height, not exceeding 70 feet
“above the surface of the street at the base line of the Washington
Monument.” Under this restriction a higher building could be erected on
lower ground than upon higher ground within the district. The appellant
claimed also that the restriction was for the purpose of preserving the
beauty and architectural symmetry of the environment of Washington
Monument, and that, in the exercise of the police power, property rights
cannot be impaired for purely aesthetic purposes. In sustaining the consti-
tutionality of the statute, the court held that its purpose was not purely
aesthetic, but for the purpose of protecting from fire handsome buildings
and works of art in the locality.
The court overruled the objection raised on account of lack of uni-
formity of application. Owing to the hilly condition of the prescribed
territory, persons owning property on lower ground would be able to con-
struct higher buildings than those whose property was located on higher
ground. This discrimination was also justified on the ground of protection
against fire. The exemption of churches from the restriction was also
upheld, on the ground that churches “ do not present the same danger from
fire to the surrounding buildings as many other structures do, chiefly because
they are not liable to become very numerous in any one locality.’ On the
general subject of regulation, the court states that the use of land must be
subject to reasonable regulation, in the interest of the general welfare.
62 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
Indianapolis
In 1912 the City Council of Indianapolis passed an ordinance limiting
the maximum height of all buildings erected in the city at 200 feet. An
ordinance of 1905 limits the height of buildings erected on Monument
Place at 86 feet. Monument Place is the circular street encompassing the
Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument. It has a diameter of about 600 feet and
an outside circumference of about 1,880 feet. The constitutionality of the
ordinance has never been tested in the courts.
Washington
Washington is districted for height limitation purposes under an act
of Congress applicable to the District of Columbia. The regulations are
more stringent than those of any other city in this country, with the possible
exception of Boston. ‘The limitations in the business section are a trifle
more lenient than those in Boston, but in the residence section they are more
rigid. All streets are designated as either business streets or residential
streets. No building may be erected on a business street to a greater height
than the width of the widest abutting street increased by 20 feet, subject,
however, to an absolute limit of 130 feet. An exception to this regulation
is made in two instances. Buildings on the north side of Pennsylvania
Avenue, between First and Fifteenth Streets, are allowed an extreme
height of 160 feet. Buildings fronting or abutting on the plaza in front of
the new Union Station may not exceed a height of 80 feet. On the resi-
dential streets the maximum height limit is 85 feet, subject to certain pro-
visions. The height may not exceed the width of the street diminished by
10 feet on streets more than 70 feet in width. The height may not exceed
60 feet on streets between 60 and 70 feet in width. The height may not
exceed the width of the street on streets less than 60 feet in width. The
constitutionality of these regulations does not appear to have been tested.
REGULATION OF OPEN SPACES IN RICHMOND, VIRGINIA
By an act of the General Assembly of Virginia, passed March 14, 1908,
councils of cities and towns are authorized, among other things, “to make
regulations concerning the building of houses in the city or town, and in
their discretion . . . in particular districts or along particular streets,
to prescribe and establish building lines, or to require property owners in
certain localities or districts to leave a certain percentage of lots free from
buildings, and to regulate the height of buildings” (Acts, 1908, pp. 623,
624). By virtue of this act, the City Council of Richmond passed an ordi-
nance “that whenever the owners of two-thirds of the property abutting
on any street shall, in writing, request the committee on streets to establish
a building line on the side of the square on which their property fronts, the
said committee shall establish such line, so that the same shall not be less
than five feet nor more than thirty feet from the street line.”
TIPIM Joors “YM F4a0F CQ-OO ‘TAPUSALT + Joo QB ‘OMI !Jo0F YG ‘Ud2IS ‘Jaz GG ‘MOTTE SJo0F YET “pat ‘3007 YOT ‘aayO :SUOHRUUNT JYSIOF] 0} Ady]
‘NOLONIHSVM NI DONILOIMLSIG— 8p
DISTRICTING 63
The validity of a building line regulation under the above ordinance
came before the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia in Eubank v. City
of Richmond, 110 Va. 749, 67 S. E. 376, decided March 10, 1910. In deliv-
ering the opinion of the court Judge Whittle refers to the case of Welch
v. Swasey and concludes as follows: “In the present case the statute is
neither unreasonable nor unusual, and we are justified in concluding that
it was passed by the Legislature in good faith and in the interest of the
health, safety, comfort or convenience of the public, and for the benefit
of the property owners generally who are affected by its provisions, and
that the enactment tends to accomplish all, or at least some, of these objects.
The validity of such legislation is generally recognized and upheld.”
The case was appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States
(Eubank vy. City of Richmond, 33 Sup. Ct. 76, decided December 2, 1913).
Justice McKenna in delivering the opinion of the court first comments
generally on the police power as follows:
“Whether it is a valid exercise of the police power is a question
in the case, and that power we have defined, as far as it is capable
of being defined by general words, a number of times. It is not sus-
ceptible of circumstantial precision. It extends, we have said, not
only to regulations which promote the public health, morals and
safety, but to those which promote the public convenience or the
general prosperity. But necessarily it has its limits and must stop
when it encounters the prohibitions of the Constitution. A clash
will not, however, be lightly inferred. Governmental power must be
flexible and adaptive. Exigencies arise, or even conditions less
peremptory, which may call for or suggest legislation, and it may be
a struggle in judgment to decide whether it must yield to the higher
considerations expressed and determined by the provisions of the
Constitution.”
The court found the regulation unconstitutional, its finding being based
on the fact that under the ordinance a building line must be established
whenever two-thirds of the property owners abutting on any street shall
petition the committee on streets to establish such a line. The court holds
that an important power of this kind cannot be vested in any number of
property owners with power to use as they see fit and presumably in their
own interest and not in the interest of public comfort or convenience.
Though the particular ordinance in question was held to be unconstitutional,
the opinion of the state court and the general treatment of the case by the
Supreme Court of the United States give considerable ground for the hope
that building line regulations properly based will be held constitutional.
This is clearly the view of the matter taken by the city of Richmond, for,
following the above decision by the Supreme Court of the United States,
it passed another ordinance (April 22, 1913) prescribing the procedure by
64 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
which building lines may be established in the discretion of the council in
particular districts or along particular streets.
RESIDENTIAL AND INpDusTRIAL Districts IN AMERICAN CITIES
The legislation of the past few years shows a distinct trend toward the
creation of specially restricted residential districts. Legislation has been
enacted by New York, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Maryland
and Virginia. Ordinances have been passed in Richmond, Milwaukee, Min-
neapolis, Seattle and Los Angeles.
New York cities of the second class
The new housing law for cities of the second class, passed by the
New York legislature in 1913 (ch. 774), authorized the common council
on petition of two-thirds of the owners affected to establish residence dis-
tricts within which no building other than a single family or a two family
dwelling may be constructed. A residence district once created shall con-
tinue as such until a like petition shall be presented to and approved by
the common council. The unit of area for the residence district consists of
the lots fronting on one side of a street between two intersecting streets.
Massachusetts
In 1912 the legislature of Massachusetts passed an amendment to the
general municipal act (chapter 334, laws 1912) that permits every city and
town in the state, except Boston, to regulate the height, area, location, and
use of buildings and other structures within the whole or any defined part
of its limits for the prevention of fire and the preservation of life, health
and morals. The power extends to all buildings and other structures except
bridges, quays and wharves and structures owned or occupied by the na-
tional or state government.
Minnesota
The legislature of Minnesota at its last session (laws 1913, ch. 420)
passed an act empowering the cities of Duluth, Minneapolis and St. Paul
to establish residential and industrial districts. The city council, when
petitioned by 50 per cent. of the property owners in a district, may by a
lishment, no matter what its character, may be excluded from a residential
district. The erection and maintenance of any industrial or business estab-
lishment, no matter what its character, may be excluded from a residentia!
district. Even tenements, apartment houses and hotels may be excluded
from such a district. In the designation of industrial districts, the city
council is authorized to classify the various industries and in its discretion
to restrict each class to a definite and limited area. Upon a petition of
50 per cent. of the property owners in a district, the council may set aside
its original restrictions, and establish an industrial district out of a residen-
tial district, or vice versa.
MPN FROM EY NOLL Souk
MINNEAPOLIS
Base Map reproduced by permission of the Hudson Publishing Co.
Fic. 49—DISTRICTING IN MINNEAPOLIS.
Darker shading indicates industrial districts. Lighter shading indicates
residential districts.
DISTRICTING 65
Minneapolis has already taken advantage of this act on several dif-
ferent occasions. The city council has passed ordinances classifying and
designating certain buildings, business occupations, industries and enter-
prises as business industries and defining and designating certain districts
in the city as industrial and residential districts, within which such build-
ings, occupations or enterprises may or may not be maintained or carried
on. The question of the constitutionality of these ordinances has not as
yet come before the courts.
Wisconsin
The legislature of Wisconsin at its last session passed an act (laws
1913, chapter 743) authorizing cities of 25,000 inhabitants or more to set
aside exclusive residential districts. There are at present eight cities in the
state of this size—Milwaukee, Green Bay, La Crosse, Madison, Oshkosh,
Racine, Sheboygan and Superior.
The common council may set apart portions of the city to be used
exclusively for residential purposes and may prohibit the erection and
maintenance of factories, docks or other similar concerns within such dis-
tricts. The council may also restrain the encroachment of business houses
upon purely residence districts, and require the consent of the majority of
landowners and residents of such districts, before such business is per-
mitted. The power granted may be exercised upon the initiative of the
common council, or upon the petition of ten or more residents in the dis-
trict or block to be affected. The enactment of ordinances excluding fac-
tories, docks or other similar concerns from residential districts shall be a
final and conclusive finding that factories operated in such districts are
detrimental to the health, comfort and welfare of the residents of the city.
Milwaukee is at present mapping out residential districts in accordance with
this act.
On January 13, 1913, several months prior to the passage of the above
act, the common council of Milwaukee passed an ordinance making it un-
lawful to maintain slaughter houses, rendering plants or rag shops anywher:
inside the city limits.
This ordinance also established what is known as “the business sec-
tion.” Businesses within the business section are subject to no restrictions,
but outside the business section the ordinance forbids the maintenance of
certain businesses unless such business shall first obtain the written consent
of two-thirds of all the real estate owners within 300 feet of the space
proposed to be occupied. The businesses coming within the prohibition are:
Livery, boarding or sales stables, gas reservoirs or holders, paint, oil or
varnish works, salesrooms or storage rooms for automobiles and garages
for the keeping of automobiles for hire. When outside the business section
these businesses must be maintained in buildings that conform to the require-
ments prescribed within the fire district. An ordinance passed on January
11, 1913, imposes similar conditions on garages maintained in certain blocks
66 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
in the Business section that are of a residential character. No garage may
be maintained in a block where two-thirds of the buildings in a block are
devoted to exclusively residential purposes without the written consent of
the property owners on both sides of the street or alley in such block.
Baltimore
In 1912 the state legislature of Maryland passed an act (ch. 693) regu-
lating the erection of dwelling houses in that part of the city of Baltimore
known as Forest Park. ‘The dwelling houses constructed in this district,
the area of which is about a half mile square, must be separate and unat-
tached buildings. Frame dwellings must be at least 20 feet apart; stone
and brick dwellings at least 10 feet apart. The constitutionality of the
act has not come before the courts.
The most important classification of buildings according to character
and use in the city of Baltimore, as a whole, is that found in section 47 of
the building code. This section (subdivisions 12 and 13) limits the location
of certain buildings. These buildings are: (1) hospitals and buildings for
treatment of the feeble-minded; (2) sanatoriums; (3) livery stables; (4)
sale and boarding stables; (5) garages; (6) blacksmith shops; (7) junk
shops; (8) brick, tile and terra cotta factories; (9) stoneware and earthen-
ware factories; (10) paint factories; (11) soap factories; (12) candle fac-
tories ; (13) wood-working factories; (14) the storing and altering of pack-
ing boxes on any lot or in any building; (15) lumber yards; (16) planing
mills; (17) iron mills; (18) foundries; (19) breweries; (20) distilleries;
(21) packing houses ; (22) gas works; (23) acid works; (24) the manufac-
ture of fertilizers.
No permit for the erection of any of the above buildings is given by
the inspector of buildings except by the approval of the mayor. In granting
his approval, the mayor incorporates such regulations in the permit regard-
ing the location of the building as may, in his judgment, be necessary to
sateguard the interests of the public. Permits for such buildings are issued
only after 10 days’ public notice of the application therefor.
If protests are filed against the granting of the permit, the building
inspector holds a hearing. After hearing the protests and considering the
rights of the surrounding property owners, the building inspector makes a
presentation of the facts to the mayor. Where there is a protest, the per-
mit requires the joint approval of the inspector and the mayor. In granting
or withholding their approval to a permit, the building inspector and the
mayor are prompted by three considerations: (1) the fire hazard of the
proposed building: (2) the effect of the proposed building on surrounding
land values, and (3) the effect of the proposed building on the general
welfare of the residents in the immediate vicinity.
Seattle
Under the Seattle building code adopted in July, 1913, no building not
now used for such purposes may be reconstructed, altered or repaired to
STWAUKE
Sai listed be
By courtesy of Wright Directory Co.
Fic. 50—DISTRICTING IN MILWAUKEE.
Industries are unrestricted in shaded area.
DISTRICTING 67
be used for any of the following purposes without the consent of the city
council and the mayor: (1) confinement of insane children or adults; (2)
manufacture of cotton wadding, laps or bats; (3) refining of petroleum
or any of its products; (4) distillation of spirits of turpentine or varnish ;
(5) manufacture of explosives; (6) rendering of fats, lards and like pro-
ducts; (7) hair factory; (8) lime kiln; (9) tannery; (10) refinery; (11)
abattoir ; (12) glue factory; (13) manufacture of roofing materials of chem-
cal composition; (14) pulverizing charcoal; (15) stockyards; (16) poud-
rette works; (17) asphalt plant; (18) manufacture of fertilizers; (19)
smelter. .
Before any ordinance shall be passed authorizing the construction,
alteration and repair of any “ prohibited ” building at least 10 days’ notice
shall be given by the party applying for the passage of such ordinance by a
publication to that effect of at least four insertions in two or more daily
newspapers. This notice must specify the lot upon which such building is
to be erected, altered or repaired, and the purposes for which it is intended
to be used in sufficient detail to apprise the property owners in the vicinity
of the exact location and nature of the proposed improvement. Notice of
such application must, however, be conspicuously posted on the property.
In addition to the above, the following buildings are limited as to loca-
tion: (1) hospitals and buildings for treatment of the feeble minded; (2)
sanatoriums; (3) dairies; (4) dog pounds; (5) blacksmith shops (6) junk
shops; (7) rag shops; (8) brick, tile and terra cotta factories; (9) stone-
ware and earthenware factories; (10) paint factories; (11) silk factories;
(12) candle factories; (13) woodworking factories; (14) lumber yards;
(15) planing mills; (16) iron mills; (17) foundries; (18) breweries;
(19) distilleries; (20) packing houses; (21) gas works; (22) acid works.
No permit is issued for a “limited” building until. at least 10 days’
notice of the application has been published four times in two or more daily
papers and until notice of such application has been conspicuously posted
upon the property for a like period of time. If any owner of property
within 500 feet of the proposed location files a protest with the superin-
tendent of buildings, the matter is referred to the board of public works for
determination, after hearing. Special regulations govern the location of
stables and public garages.
Los Angeles
The first districting ordinance in Los Angeles was passed in 1909. The
entire city, with the exception of two suburbs, is divided into industrial and
residential districts. There are twenty-five industrial districts and one
residential district. The residential district comprises the whole districted
territory exclusive of the areas within the several industrial districts. It
therefore encircles and surrounds many of the industrial districts.
The so-called industrial districts do not fairly indicate the extent of the
industrial area of the city. In addition to the industrial districts there are
68 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
fifty-eight districts, known as “ residence exceptions,” in the residential dis-
trict that are exempt from the regulations applicable to the residential dis-
trict and in which business is permitted subject to certain conditions.
The industrial districts vary considerably in shape and size. The largest
district has an area of several square miles. At its greatest dimensions, it
measures five miles in length and two miles in width. The smallest district
comprises one solitary lot. The combined area of the several industrial dis-
tricts aggregates not more than one-tenth that of the residential district. The
industrial districts are, on the whole, pretty well grouped in one part of the
city.
The “ residence exceptions *
’
are all small. The largest is about a half
mile square. With this exception no “ residence exception ” covers a greater
area than two city blocks. In most instances these districts do not occupy
more than one or two lots. The combined area of the fifty-eight “ residence
exceptions” is probably not more than one per cent. of the residential dis-
trict. The “residence exceptions” are, however, scattered more widely
throughout the residential district than are the industrial districts.
In general the distinction between the industrial districts and the resi-
dential district is this: All kinds of business and manufacturing establish-
ments are unrestrained in most of the industrial districts, while certain
specified businesses are excluded from the residential district. Those bus:
nesses not especially excluded are permitted in the residential district. All
but the very lightest manufacturing is prohibited in the residential district.
The less offensive business and manufacturing establishments excluded from
the residential district may be carried on in the “ residence exceptions.” The
owners of sixty per cent of the neighboring property frontage must give
their consent to the creation of any “ residence exception.”
The constitutionality of the industrial and residential districts in Los
Angeles was sustained by the Supreme Court of California in October, 1911,
in the case of Ex Parte Quong Wo, 161 Cal. 220, 118 Pac. 714.
When the city had been districted about 110 Chinese and Japanese
laundries found themselves in the residential district. The city immediately
undertook to remove them to the industrial districts.) The present mayor,
Mr. H. H. Rose, then a police judge, upheld the ordinance and sentenced
a Chinaman, Quong Wo, to pay a fine of $100 or to serve 100 days in jail.
Wo appealed to the Supreme Court of the State, and the ordinance was
sustained.
The petitioner, a native and citizen of China, was charged with having
maintained and carried on a public laundry and wash house within the
residential district. He had conducted such laundry and wash house at said
location, occupying the premises under a lease which had two years yet
to run.
The court stated that it could not take judicial notice that there had
been unjust discrimination in excepting small parcels from the residential
district of the city as established by ordinance, and adding them to the
Fic. 5I—DISTRICTING IN LOS ANGELES.
Dark shading indicates industrial districts and “ residence exceptions.”
Unshaded portion above panhandle, residence district.
DISTRICTING 69
industrial district; the presumption being in favor of the legality of the
action of the legislative body. That small parcels, consisting of only one
city lot, were excepted by the city council from the “residence district ” of
a city as fixed by ordinance, within which district certain occupations could
not be followed, and added to the industrial district, when such parcels
were surrounded on all sides by parts of the “residence district,’ did not
of itself show unjust discrimination in excepting territory from the resi-
dence district.
The court held that lawful occupations, such as laundry business, might
be confined to certain limits in the city wherever such restrictions might
reasonably be found necessary to protect the public health, morals and
comfort. An ordinance prohibiting the maintenance of public laundries
and wash houses in those parts of the city designated as the “ residential
district ” could not be said to be unreasonable and invalid, though large
parts of such districts might be sparsely built up, in the absence of the
facts showing unjust discrimination. Whether restrictions upon the opera-
tion of a business in certain portions of a city are reasonably necessary
for the protection of the public health, safety and welfare, the court con-
strued as being primarily for the determination of the city council. Such
action by the city council, the court held, would not be disturbed by the
court, unless the regulations had no relation to the public health, safety or
welfare, or unless they clearly invaded personal or property rights under the
guise of police regulations.
In Ex Parte Montgomery, 163 Cal. 457, 125 Pac. 1070, the Supreme
Court rendered a decision that was almost identical with that in Ex Parte
Quong Wo, this time ejecting a lumber yard from the residential district.
In Ex Parte Hadacheck, 132 Pac. 589, decided May 15, 1913, the
Supreme Court again sustained the constitutionality of the Industrial and
residential districts. In this case, the petitioner owned a brick yard in the
residential district. He had acquired the land for this brick yard in 1902,
before the territory to which the ordinance was directed had been annexed
to Los Angeles. The land contained valuable deposits of clay suitable for
the manufacture of brick, and was more valuable for brickmaking than
for any other purpose. The petitioner had during the entire period of his
ownership used the land for brickmaking and had erected on it the kilns,
machinery and buildings necessary for such manufacture.
In upholding the constitutionality and ejecting the brick yard from the
residential district, the court held that the police power is not restricted to
the suppression of nuisances, but extends to the regulation of the conduct
of business and to the use of property to the end that public health or
morals may not be impaired or endangered.
The court also held that the right of the legislature, in exercising the
police power to regulate or in proper cases to prohibit the conduct of a
given business, is not limited by the fact that the value of investments
made in the business prior to any legislative action will be greatly dimin-
70 HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS COMMISSION
ished. A business which, when established, is entirely unobjectionable, may
by the growth of population in the vicinity become a source of danger to
the health and comfort of those who have come to be occupants of the
surrounding territory. If the legislature should then prohibit its further
conduct, the proprietor can have no complaint upon the mere fact that he
has been carrying on the trade in that locality for a long time. The power to
regulate the use of property or the conduct of a business is, of course, not
arbitrary. The restriction must bear a reasonable relation to some legiti-
mate purpose within the purview of the police power.
Where a region surrounding a brick yard has become primarily a resi-
dential section, and the occupants of neighboring dwellings are seriously
discommoded by the operations of the yard, the court held that a pro-
hibition of the business in the district is not objectionable, as being an
arbitrary invasion of private right, but is a valid exercise of police power
to prevent injury to others.
Where there are reasons justifying the prohibition of a business within
an area described in an ordinance adopted by a city, the court states that
in determining the validity of the prohibition, it will not consider whether
conditions in other parts of the city require a like prohibition, as that pre-
sents a legislative question.
Ontario, Canada
The councils of cities having a population of not less than 100,000 may
under section 410 of the Ontario Municipal Act pass by-laws prohibiting,
regulating and controlling the location or erection of apartment or tenement
houses and of garages to be used for hire within any defined area or on
land abutting on defined highways or parts of highways. An apartment or
tenement house is a building that provides three or more separate suites or
sets of rooms for separate occupation by one or more persons. Toronto has,
in accordance with these provisions, restricted the character of the develop-
ment of a large portion of its territory. Apartment houses and garages are
excluded from most of the residential streets of the city.
The Municipal Act of Ontario (Sec. 409) empowers the council of every
city in the Province to pass by-laws preventing, regulating and controlling
the location, erection and use of the following buildings: livery, boarding or
sales stables; stables in which horses are kept for hire or kept for use
with vehicles in conveying passengers, or for express purposes; stables for
horses for delivery purposes; laundries, butcher shops, stores, fac-
tories, blacksmith shops, forges, dog kennels and hospitals or infirmaries for
horses, dogs or other animals. The erection or use of buildings for all or
any of these purposes may be prohibited within any defined area or areas
or on land abutting on any defined highway or part of a highway. By-laws
of this character may not be passed except by a vote of two-thirds of all
the members of the council. Such by-laws, moreover, may not apply to a
building which was on April 26, 1904, erected or used for any of these
purposes so long as it is used as it was used on that date.
DISTRICTING 71
Districting in German cities’ i
Districting is most fully developed in German cities. There it is known
as the zone system. The term zone was particularly appropriate in Germany
where special regulations were applied to the successive belts of building
development surrounding the central walled city. At present, however, in
many German cities the districts are not concentric zones, and the system
might more appropriately be called the “ district system.”
The district system is a method of regulating buildings as a part of a
general city plan. It has two characteristics: it groups buildings of different
classes and it limits the density of buildings progressively, allowing build-
ings to be higher, and to cover more of the lot in the centers where land
values are greater and business needs require more concentration, and
making the requirements more and more severe as the distance from these
centers increases.
Under the German rules the height of buildings is invariably regu-
lated with relation to the width of the street upon which the building is
situated ; and also, usually, by a maximum which, irrespective of the width
of the street, it must not exceed. In many cities, in the zone or zones
of greatest concentration, a height a little in excess of the street width is
allowed; in the other zones it must not exceed that width, and in the
outer zone or zones the maximum limits it to less. Usually, too, there are
minimum courts, and all rooms constructed for the residence or long con-
tinued business use of mankind must have a window upon a court of at
least a specified size. The proportion of the lot that may be covered by
buildings, also, is almost invariably limited progressively, buildings on cor-
ner lots in each zone being allowed to cover more than those on inside lots.
The ordinances in the different cities differ in detail, but in general the
system is the same. The provisions of the Frankfort ordinance illustrate
4t as well as any other:
The older inner city is the first zone or district. Here the highest build-
ings are allowed. They must not exceed the width of the street, plus about
10 feet (three meters). Or in any case, however wide the street, about 66
feet (20 meters). This is to the cornice; the roof above this is restricted
by an angle, and in no case may exceed about 30 feet (nine meters). The
roof is more than mere roof; it is a roof story, in which there are rooms,
which, however, may not always be used for residence. The number of
stories is also restricted; in this zone it must not exceed five, and the roof
story.
Here in the inner city, also, the greatest proportion of the lot may be
covered with buildings, three-quarters—for corner lots, five-sixths. Factor-
ies are allowed but are not numerous. Solid blocks are permitted. The city
here presents the appearance of being fully built up to a fairly uniform
height.
*A_complete report on “The German Zone Building Regulations,” prepared by
Frank Backus Williams, is contained in the Report of the Heights of Buildings Com-
mission, 1913, at page 94,
NI
bo
HEIGHTS OF BUJLDINGS COMMISSION
The outer city is divided into an outer, an inner, and a country zone,
in which the height of buildings allowed progressively decreases, and the
amount of the lot that must be left free of buildings progressively increases.
In each of these zones are residence, factory and mixed sections. In the
residence sections, factories are so discouraged as to be practically forbidden.
In the factory sections, situated along the railroads, the harbor, and out of
the city in the direction so that the prevailing winds will blow the smoke
away from the city, residences are forbidden. In the factory sections, the
restrictions on height and amount of lot covered do not become progressively
greater. The mixed sections are near the factory sections, and there, too,
under certain mild restrictions, many sorts of manufacturing are permitted.
In the residence section a space between neighboring houses of about
10 feet (three meters) in the inner zone and a third more in the outer zone
is required. Groups of buildings are, however, allowed with a somewhat
less proportionate amount of free space for the group as a whole.
Certain parts of the newly added territory of the city, beyond all the
other zones, and forming a zone by itself, have been reserved for a villa
section, in which only country houses are allowed.
In all these zones the amount of the lot that must be left free pro-
gresses, until, in the villa section, it is seven-tenths of the entire lot. Thus,
also, the permissible height decreases to about 53 feet (16 meters) and the
number of stories to two. This does not include the roof story and the ac-
tual roof, which together, in this zone, must not exceed about six feet (1.8
meter) in height. In no case, however, may the house exceed in height,
except for the roof story and roof, the width of the street on which it stands.
Bauzonenplan von Frankfurt a. M
DISTRICTING IN FRANKFORT.
2
Fic. 5
a = ex a | =
waorer | gure ae rere
eenoemria, | OCT ow monic
MORO aig UNS (rah wa OMAE
OAICMD BOBO vO
ae =
« a edd |
p= Ri a oe = | = | |
7 Wii warmers
i ee ee
See cad a car
APPENDIX IV—RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS
IN RELATION TO NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
The intimate relation existing between. a comprehensive districting
plan and public health, safety and general welfare was testified to by
numerous experts at the various public hearings held by the Commission.
Public hearings were held on March 27th, 28th; 29th and 30th, and April
3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 17th and 18th. Adjourned hearings
were held on April 20th, May 4th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 15th, 18th, 22d, 24th,
25th and 31st. In addition to the testimony taken at these hearings nu-
merous statements were presented to the Commission.
Only so much of this testimony as shows the relation of districting to
the police power of the State is here reproduced. Originally much of the
testimony was in the form of questions and answers. ‘To economize space
such testimony has been put in narrative form. In this new form it has
in each case been submitted to and approved by the witness or author.
Organizations approve districting plan
Not a single organization opposed the adoption of a districting plan.
Most of them adopted resolutions specifically endorsing the proposed plan.
Others confined their activity to the recommendation of specific amendments
to more adequately protect their particular localities. Most of these recom-
mendations were for more stringent restrictions than those proposed. The
following organizations either submitted resolutions endorsing the plan or
were represented at the hearings:
Advisory Council of Real Estate Interests
Atlantic Avenue Business Men’s and Taxpayers’ Association of
East New York
Automobile Dealers’ Association
Bath Beach Taxpayers’ Association
Bay Ridge and Fort Hamilton Citizens’ Association
Bayside Park Civic Association
Bensonhurst Park Preservation Association
Broadway Board of Trade, Brooklyn
Bronx Board of Trade
Bronx Builders’ Association
Bronx Taxpayers’ Alliance
Brooklyn Board of Real Estate Brokers
Brooklyn Civic Club
Brooklyn Committee on City Plan
Brooklyn Heights Association
Central Fifth Avenue Association
Central Mercantile Association
Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York
Chelsea Neighborhood Association
Citizens’ Union
City Club
City Hotels Association
Cloak and Suit Manufacturers’ Association
Commerce Club of Brooklyn
Congestion Committee
74
COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Ditmas Park Association
Douglaston Civic Association
Dyckman Taxpayers’ Association
East Side Neighborhood Club
Kast Tremont Taxpayers’ Association
Erie Basin Board of Trade, Brooklyn
Evergreen Board of Trade
Fifth Avenue Association
Fiske Terrace Association
Flatbush Taxpayers’ Association
Flatlands Board of Trade
Flushing Association
Flushing Business Men’s Association
Greater New York Taxpayers’ Association
Greenpoint Neighborhood Association
Greenpoint Taxpayers’ and Citizens’ Association
Greenwich Village Improvement Society
Harlem Bridge Betterment League
Harlem Neighborhood Association
Highland Park South Civic Association
Kensington and Parkville Improvement League
Kings Highway Board of Trade
Improvement Association of City Island
Investment Builders’ Association
Merchants’ Association
Midwood Manor Association
Midwood Park Property Owners’ Association
Murray Hill Association
New York Board of Trade and Transportation
New York Building Managers’ Association
New York Society of Architects
North Manhattan Taxpayers’ Association
Parade Park Association
Park District Protective League
Progress Society, Far Rockaway
Prospect Heights Citizens’ Association
Prospect Park Property Owners’ Association
Prospect Park South Association
Queens Chamber of Commerce
Real Estate Board
Real Estate Owners’ Association of the 12th and 17th Wards
Save New York Committee
South Brooklyn Board of Trade
South Midwood Residents’ Association
Taxpayers Association of Dyker Beach Park
Tenement House Committee, Brooklyn Bureau of Charities
Throgs Neck Taxpayers’ Association
Tremont Taxpayers’ Alliance
Tuberculosis Committee
United Real Estate Owners’ Association
United Civic Associations, Queens
Washington Heights Taxpayers’ Association
Washington Square Association
West End Association
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 75
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
West End Board of Trade
West Side Children’s Conference
West Side Taxpayers’ Association
Women’s City Club
Wyckoff Heights Taxpayers’ Association
Financial institutions approve plan
Building operations are largely financed in New York by the life
insurance companies, the fire insurance companies, the title companies, the
trust companies and the savings banks. That these institutions strongly
favored the districting plan is shown by the following petition to the Board
of Estimate and Apportionment :
Whereas, The present almost unrestricted power to construct buildings
to any height, over any portion of a lot, for any desired use and in any part
of the city has resulted in injury to the health, safety and general welfare
of the city and also to real estate and business interests, and
Whereas, Light, air and access have been impaired by high buildings,
by failure to provide adequate courts and yards, by the proximity of inap-
propriate or nuisance buildings and uses, and
Whereas, It is recognized that there are strong social and economic
forces that tend to a certain degree of order and segregation in building
development, yet it is apparent that these natural forces are not strong
enough to prevent haphazard development or to ensure the building of the
city in a stable and orderly manner and with some regard for the amenities
of city life, and
Whereas, Through haphazard construction and invasion by inappro-
priate uses the capital values of large areas have been greatly impaired,
not only in the central, commercial and industrial sections of Manhattan,
but also throughout the residence sections of the five boroughs, thus affect-
ing the market value of real estate for investment purposes and creating
an economic depreciation that is a hazard which must be considered by
every investor in real estate, and
Whereas, This extra hazard decreases the net earning basis required
to induce investment, consequently lessening the capital values thr oughout
the city and affecting not only the individual owners of real estate, but the
large lending institutions, the municipal finances, and the general welfare
and prosperity of the city, and =
Be It Resolved, That with the some eight billion dollars already invested
in New York City real estate and the certainty of added billions in the
coming years, the lending institutions of the city, in conjunction with the
property owners, endorse a plan of city building that will tend to conserve
and protect property values because of the permanence and stability that
can only be secured by a far-sighted building plan which will harmonize
the private interests of owners and the health, safety and convenience of the
public, and further
Be It Resolved, That it is the sense of those present at this meeting
representing financial institutions, as well as such other representatives of
the financial institutions as may wish to endorse this resolution, that the
work and plans of the Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions
be accorded hearty support.
The institutions which approved of this resolution are as follows:
Astor Trust Company
Bank for Savings in the City of New York
COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Bankers’ Trust Company
Bowery Savings Bank
Citizens’ Savings Bank
Columbia Trust Company
Commonwealth Insurance Company of New York
Commonwealth Savings Bank
Dime Savings Bank of Williamsburgh
Dry Dock Savings Institution
East Brooklyn Savings Bank
Emigrants’ Industrial Savings Bank
Equitable Life Assurance Society of the U. S.
Excelsior Savings Bank
Fidelity Trust Company
Franklin Savings Bank
Franklin Trust Company
German Savings Bank of Brooklyn
Germania Fire Insurance Company
Germania Savings Bank
Globe & Rutgers Fire Insurance Company
Greater New York Savings Bank
Guaranty Trust Company of New York
Harlem Savings Bank
Home Life Insurance Company
Home Insurance Company
Hudson Trust Company
Imperial Assurance Company
Irving Savings Institution
Italian Savings Bank
Jamaica Savings Bank
Lawyers Mortgage Company
Lawyers Title & Trust Company
Liverpool and London and Globe Insurance Company
Long Island City Savings Bank
Manhattan Life Insurance Company
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York
New York Life Insurance Company
New York Savings Bank
New York Title Insurance Company
North British & Mercantile Insurance Company
North River Insurance Company
People’s Trust Company
Postal Life Insurance Company
Royal Insurance Company
South Brooklyn Savings Institution
Sumner Savings Bank
Title Guarantee and Trust Company
Transatlantic Trust Company
Union Square Savings Bank
United States Mortgage & Trust Company
West Side Savings Bank
Williamsburgh Savings Bank
N
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 7
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
STATEMENT BY THOMAS ADAMS, Town PLANNING ADvisoR, COMMISSION
oF CONSERVATION, OTTAWA, CANADA—ApRIL 5, 1916
Effect of New York’s example on other cities
In Canada we feel that New York has been responsible, owing to the
example which it has set, for the high buildings in our cities. We are look-
ing to-day to the new tendency in New York in the hope that our cities will
follow your example of providing greater restrictions on height. We have
not the excuses for high buildings that you have in New York.
Town planning in Great Britain and Canada is one of those questions
that grows stronger in its appeal to the business man as it is taken up by
local authorities, and as research progresses. Undoubtedly the latter starts
out to study it with the assumption that it is purely an aesthetic question—
the proposal to use the police power to restrict the rights of private property
in the interests of the public. But it does not take him long to discover that
both public and private interests are closely identified and that reasonable
restriction of the use of property is in the interest of all parties.
Importance of restricting vacant areas
The question of controlling development in those parts of your city
which are only partially developed is of importance and requires serious
consideration. I do not know whether it would be possible for your pro-
posals to be carried out over wider areas so as to include land which is not
yet subdivided. So far as our town planning work in Britain and Canada
is concerned we are dealing primarily with areas that are still undeveloped
and with those that are “in course of development.” We proceed on the
principle of the Jesuit who in his wisdom said, “If you give me a child until
he is eight years old you can have him for the rest of his life.’ We feel
that the really important thing is to get hold of the suburb before it is
developed. Much of the older portion of the city can only be improved
over long periods of time by gradual reconstruction. Your proposals are
needed to help in directing that reconstruction. But I think your work
should be extended to wider areas in order to get the restrictions applied to
vacant land before building is begun. In getting hold of the suburbs that
are starting to develop and applying the same principles to the open land
that you apply to the built-on land in the city, the result will be that you
will be able to apply restrictions which will accomplish something nearer to
your ideals. It is easier to prevent than to cure. You will not be required
to compromise with existing vested interests. Owners of real estate them-
selves will not only be anxious to agree to something that gives safety and
health but even to what we in Britain, call “ amenity ” in plan and surround-
ings. I am glad to give expression to our interest in the work you are doing
and am sure that the influence of your work is not confined to New York.
Town planning law in Canada
When our parliament passes a law it does so with recognition of the
English Bill of Rights. The whole constitution of Canada is framed on
what you perhaps would call the unconstitutional constitution of Great
Britain. It is not a fixed constitution, but a constitution capable of readjust-
ment and alteration by parliament itself.
Parliament in Britain and Canada recognizes the principle that private
property shall not be taken for public use except with just compensation.
But it does not necessarily allow an abuse of private property and permit a
78 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
claim to be made for compensation because of an owner being prevented
from deriving advantage from that abuse. There are cases in which land
is used for building development to such an extent that it becomes—not use
of land—but abuse of land—or abuse of the right use of land. I think
those who advocate the single tax say there are two uses of land, one is
“non-use ” and the other is “ use.” We have, however, three forms of use—
one is use, the other is non-use and the third is abuse. What we call
“improving ” land or “ developing” land may actually result in an injury
to the public. We have to recognize the rights of the man who claims com-
pensation for restrictions on his use of property; but he should not, for
instance, be permitted to demand air space from other property abutting
thereon as a right. He ought not to be allowed to claim compensation on the
ground that he is prevented from using the public space on the street or
open space on an adjoining site to provide him with light. Surely he may
properly be required to use his own property for the purpose of providing
his own air space and light. I speak of what appears to me to be equitable
although it may be without regard to what is legal.
Our Parliament recognizes constitutional guarantees of the equal pro-
tection of the laws. I don’t think there is very much distinction between
your treatment of private interests in property and our own, except that
probably we are able to secure by general law what you have to secure by
police power and you have probably to educate your courts with regard to
the interpretation of the matters that come within the scope of the police
power. You do not appear to have the same power to revise and remodel
your law to suit changing conditions.
In Great Britain and Canada a person cannot obtain compensation for
being prevented from doing anything to contravene a town planning scheme
after a given date. There is no appeal in that matter above the department
of the government. The following subsection which appears in our town
planning acts shows how much jurisdiction is vested in the department, and
therefore the reason why the matter does not come before the courts.
“Property shall not be deemed to be injuriously affected by reason of
the making of any provisions inserted. in a scheme, which, with a view to
securing the amenity of the area affected by the scheme, or any part thereof,
or proper hygienic conditions in connection with the buildings to be erected
thereon, prescribe the space about buildings, or the percentage of any lot
which may be covered with buildings, or limit the number of buildings to be
erected, or prescribe the height, character or use of buildings, and which the
department,! having regard to the nature and situation of the land affected
by the provisions, considers reasonable for the purpose of amenity and
proper hygienic conditions.” The right of our town planning authorities to
name restrictions has never been contested in the Courts, but town planning
is still in its infancy.
Where I think we seem to have an advantage in our town planning acts
in Canada is that the provinces have full power to deal with municipal
matters and questions affecting land. They pass an act and there is no
appeal from that act to any federal court. There is, however, an appeal
to the provincial Parliament to decide differences between the municipality
and the owner. For instance, in a town planning act a ministerial depart-
ment of the province—say the department of municipal affairs—becomes
the controlling authority in regard to planning in that province. The
municipalities have to apply to that department for the right to prepare their
1 Provincial Department of Municipal Affairs or Local Government Board.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 79
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
town planning schemes and for approval of the schemes. As already stated
(see quotation above) compensation cannot be claimed and there can be no
appeal on the question of restricting the number of buildings to an acre or
in fixing the character or height of buildings if the provincial department
is ERS that the restriction is reasonable for the puispose of “amenity ”
“hygienic conditions.”
Districting regulations in Canada
There are districting regulations in one or two cities like Toronto and
Hamilton. This is a matter that is subject to the owners presenting a peti-
tion and the majority being in favor of the proposal. It is done on the
initiative of the owners who may apply to have restrictions placed on prop-
erty. But we have no proper or adequate system of districting.
Objects of town planning
Both in Britain and in Canada, town planning legislation has for its
principal objects, health, safety from fire, convenience, amenity and general
welfare. Safety from fire is particularly important in Canada. We pay, I
think, six or seven times as much for fire prevention and insurance in
Canada as in England. The cost of maintaining fire appliances and fire
insurance, | think, is two dollars per capita more than in England. This is
largely due to the absence of the control of the character of buildings and
the regulation of space surrounding buildings. For instance, in an English
city you must put a certain amount of space around your building and that
must be paved.or graded with fireproof material.
Progress of legislation in Canada
Four out of nine provinces have town planning acts. One of these has
a compulsory act for the whole province, and no future development can
take place there unless it is part of a scheme. In Manitoba they have just
passed an act. In Saskatchewan the Town Planning Bill has passed its first
reading. I expect that by this time next year the whole of Canada will have
town planning acts. These acts will enable local authorities in all parts of
the Dominion to control the use and development of vacant land and also
land “in course of development,” in a way which will effectively secure
health, convenience and amenity. The acts do not apply to land already
built upon unless such land has relation to vacant land or partially developed
land. We use the words “land in course of development” to distinguish
it from vacant land on the one hand or fully built upon land on the other.
Land already “built upon,” 7. e., fully developed, has usually to be dealt
with outside of town planning schemes, under what are known as improve-
ment schemes.
There is a scheme being prepared for St. John, New Brunswick, cover-
ing twenty thousand acres, which includes ten thousand acres inside the
city and ten thousand outside the city. The City of St. John has prepared
the whole scheme and it is going outside its own territory. If you restrict
a city such as New York in order to prevent bad development within its
limits, you may indirectly encourage bad development just over the boundary
of the city unless you also restrict the area outside. That is why we insist
on co-operation between adjacent municipalities under our acts.
If in St. John, after a certain date, a few months notice being given,
any owner builds a house which contravenes the proposed scheme he has
80 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
no claim for compensation if the authorities require him to pull down the
building or alter it to fit in with the scheme.
In England a man erected four shops under a scheme. It was stated
that he should put his shops seven feet from the edge of the street, instead
of which he put them only three feet from the edge. He had a compara-
tively shallow lot. The shops projected four feet in front of the building
line. I had to report on that scheme and reported that he should pull them
down to the extent of four feet. He appealed first to the Local Government
Board, then to Parliament, and it was finally settled that he had to pull down
to the four feet, but they gave him twelve years to do so, so that he could
draw the rental for that period to compensate him for his loss. There is no
intention to allow any owner to defeat the principles of these acts. In this
case the authorities were specially generous because it was the first offense
under a new statute.
I would like to see more done to improve both cities of Niagara Falls.
In the matter of Victoria Park, we in Canada have done a great deal, but I
would like to see more effort made on both sides of the river to improve and
beautify the surroundings. It requires co-operation between our govern-
ments.
The British town planning acts have not been long enough in operation
to allow a scientific study of the effect of town planning on health. But in
Bourneville, Letchworth and elsewhere it has been shown that the death
rate need not be higher than nine per thousand. The children on the
average as compared with those of the same age in the slums are proved to
be heavier and of greater height.
The proportion of eligible men fit for military service in Britain is
greater in the healthy districts than in the unhealthy areas. There is a well
known case, which will probably be remembered, in which 8,000 out of
11.000 were rejected in one instance for the army on account of physical
defects due very largely to the social conditions under which they lived.
This happened in Manchester, and there are conditions on this continent as
bad as those in Manchester. Proof of the deteriorating influence of the
slums is not needed at this time of day.
In Britain serious efforts are being made at great public expense, to
insure that the mistakes handed down to the present generation as the result
of haphazard development in the past, may be avoided in the future. It is
essential to prepare plans and schemes on an economic basis so that the
remedy they provide may be effective and can be made of general applica-
tion. To have a fanciful plan that is too expensive to carry out is worse
than having no plan; the stimulus it provides to the imagination does not
have a sufficiently lasting effect to enable it to be of real benefit and may end
in a reaction against any form of planning. You are starting in the right
way in New York so far as the built upon areas are concerned, but I hope
you will next take up the question of preparing a scheme for the thousands
of acres of vacant land within ten miles of Manhattan Island.
STATEMENT By ANCELL H. BALt, CHAIRMAN, Boarp oF Directors, FirrH
AVENUE AssocIATIOoNn, Marcn 28, 1916
Protection of Fifth avenue
The Fifth Avenue Association, of which I am one of the representa-
tives, has a membership of over six hundred, representing millions and mil-
lions of dollars of real estate in the retail section between 23d and 59th
streets. The membership is formed of the largest property owners, retailers,
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 81
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
hotel owners and jewelers in the City, as well as other prominent business
men.
New York as a city is looked upon by the whole country as one whose
example should be followed in matters of commercial interest as well as in
civic affairs, and the example we set will have its effect upon the whole
country. What is now done by us will leave its imprint on the future de-
velopment of most of the large cities in the West.
The section alluded to is probably the greatest retail section in the world.
Already haphazard building has tended to reduce taxable values for the City
and to largely destroy the same values for the owners of property. It is
high time that some real constructive idea of development for a city such
as this should be adopted. To permit the selfish interests of an individual
to interfere with the growth of the City as a whole is entirely unreasonable.
Such selfish interests should be subordinated to the interests of the majority.
No business man would consider seriously today attempting to run his busi-
ness successfully without some-well defined and preconceived idea as to what
he wished to accomplish. No more can a city like New York grow as it
should without some such definite purpose in mind. I noticed in the papers
this morning that a few individuals opposed the plan proposed by your Com-
mission, but such opposition seems so individual and entirely personal that
in my mind little consideration need be given it.
If New York is to maintain its supremacy it must be developed along
constructive lines, and this cannot be done, if not done under the proper
control. It is of vast importance to the City that the value of real estate
be conserved, and already we have many examples showing how entire dis-
tricts and areas may be depreciated.
If the ideas as laid down by your Commission are followed values will
return and the consequent increase in revenue from taxes is an assured
result. This is of immense benefit to every dweller in the City of New
York whether he leases, or owns property, or pays rent. Manufacturing and
factories should absolutely be confined to one area, and in this area modern
loft buildings suitable for the workers as well as the owners should be
erected. Buildings in which the workers could live could be built in the
immediate vicinity, affording greater conveniences to everyone and lessening
the constantly increasing congestion in our subways and surface lines. It is
inconceivable to me that anyone who has the interests of New York at heart
could, under any circumstances, be in favor of haphazard building as com-
pared with that along constructive lines.
I sincerely hope that the people of New York will make it their per-
sonal affair to do everything that they can to aid this great constructive
work that your Commission is endeavoring to have made a law.
STATEMENT BY ALBERT S. Barn, Secretary, THE Municipar Art Society,
Marcu 29, 1916
Districting necessary for orderly development
Of the general plan to district the city into residential, business and
industrial districts, the Society has no criticisms to make. It believes that
the principle of specialization by regulation lies at the foundation not only
of any orderly development of the city, but of a conservation of property
values and the creation of satisfactory living conditions. We especially
approve of the creation and protection of exclusively residential districts.
82 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Safeguarding of parks
As to whether the particular regulations proposed go far enough, we
would like to reserve our opinion for the present. We are inclined to be-
lieve that certain of the restrictions should be substantially increased, where
present developments do not seem to block the way. In this connection,
we would urge particularly a more careful safeguarding and regulation of
property surrounding parks, and especially small parks, wien find their
highest values as residential neighborhood centers.
Aesthetic considerations
This society greatly regrets that the present constitutional situation
prevents the Commission from giving weight to aesthetic considerations,
and that the proposals are necessarily based wholly upon considerations of
public health, order, convenience, and the stabilizing of property values.
This society recognizes, however, that the introduction of orderly develop-
ment in place of the present chaos will have a tendency to improve the
appearance of the city, both directly and indirectly, and that to that extent
the proposed system is better than the existing lack of system also from the
aesthetic point of view. We think it, however, a great misfortune that the
city is not in a legal position to make a direct attempt to conserve aesthetic
values in places of exceptional beauty like Riverside Drive, the neighbor-
hood of parks and the like, where aesthetic values are in fact large factors
in the desirability of the locality. But we recognize that that effort must
wait. Americans generally are far behind many other nations in realizing
the value of beauty as a municipal asset expressible in dollars, to say
nothing of its daily contribution to the happiness of the citizen.,
STATEMENT BY Epwarp M. Bassert, May 31, 1916
Ineffectiveness of restrictive covenants
The history of private contractual restrictions in the State of New
York has not been such as to warrant the hope of permanent help there-
from. Private restrictions are effectual only between the landowners who
enter into such covenants with one another, or, as is more usually the case,
the owner of a considerable tract of land will sell portions subject to restric-
tions enumerated in the deeds. In the latter case the covenants run with
the land, as between owners who derive their title from the same source
that imposes the restriction.
These restrictions have usually been imposed to preserve localities from
nuisances, or from the invasion of business of any sort in residential locali-
ties ; to prevent the invasion of industry and business in residential localities ;
to prevent the sale of liquor, and more latterly to insure the permanence of
private residence neighborhoods, in some cases requiring detached resi-
dences. In developments that are intended to be for high-class residence
only, there have sometimes been restrictions requiring set-backs, and one-
family detached residences of a cost not less than a certain amount.
Restrictions against flat roofs have been common.
Restrictions imposed in Kings and Queens Counties thirty-five or forty
years ago were often put into the form of conditions; for instance, a deed
would provide that the land was conveyed on the condition that liquor
should never be sold on the premises, or that the premises should never be
used for business. As the violation of a condition is forfeiture, these con-
ditions rendered land almost unsaleable. After the title companies began
their work, they, as a rule, required the release of these conditions, or their
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 83
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
change into covenants before they would sanction the title. During the past
twenty-five years, in both of the above counties, restrictions have been by
covenants running with the land. A violation of these covenants can ordi-
narily be prevented by injunction, or, after a building in violation of them
has been constructed, damages can be obtained against the violator. These
covenants have sometimes been in perpetuity. The trouble with perpetual
restrictions has proved to be that the original owners could not foresee the
growth of the city or the tendency of controlling uses. Sometimes a locality
that has been perpetually restricted for residences has become surrounded
with business, so that the character of the locality has changed; in such
cases the courts have frequently held that restrictions have become in-
operative because of the change of character of the neighborhood. The
process of change has produced a turmoil in every case where the supposed
protected landowner has for a series of years been uncertain whether his
property would be protected by the courts or not. This has led to lack of
improvements, lack of proper upkeep, and to the removal of people from
the locality who would have stayed if the prospect was more certain.
More frequently, however, the restrictions have been for a certain
number of years, the date being expressed when they would lapse and
become void. The courts have not been so ready to set aside these time-
limit restrictions because of change of character of neighborhoods. They
have, however, been an uncertain and incomplete protection for a permanent
class of structures. If the locality is a small one, the surroundings some-
times grow up in a way that renders a small locality unable to carry out the
restrictions to advantage. Then, too, one owner will violate the restrictions
in a slight degree, the next owner violates them a little more, and when a
gross violation occurs the property owner applying for an injunction will
be met with the allegation that he has acquiesced in the violation of restric-
tions in former cases to such an extent that he has now lost the equitable
assistance of the court. In this way, restrictions are sometimes virtually
abolished before the time limit has run. While this gradual change is going
on the locality is in a chaotic condition and owners are afraid to build in a
permanent way. Another drawback of time-limit restrictions is that within
the last five or eight years of the restrictive period people who have vacant
land will hold it out of the use required by the restrictions, hoping that
when the restrictions expire they can build in a way that will exploit the
land which is already improved. When, therefore, prospective purchasers
come into a restricted locality and see corner lots or desirable locations
unimproved, they are thereby warned not to buy or build in that locality
because they foresee that the land that is being held out of use will prob-
ably be built up with structures that will be injurious to the surrounding
buildings.
Exploitation of restricted areas by unscrupulous developers
A tendency has grown up within recent years for land developers to
place short-time restrictions on their land, hoping that they can bring about
a high class of dwellings on that which is sold. Then the developer him-
self holds part of the property until the restrictions expire, expecting to get
a higher price for the parcels which he has retained, thus exploiting his
own prior customers. This method is akin to the method adopted by some
developers who have sold parcels to purchasers who will covenant to erect
high-class detached one-family dwellings. When the owner has sold prac-
tically all of his property except the corners, holding those entirely unre-
84 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
stricted, he will sell the corners for apartment houses, obtaining higher
prices, because the surrounding property is built up with a large amount of
open space. In one case this practice went so far that the owners of the
corner apartment houses claimed that their predecessor in title placed de-
tached house restrictions upon the surrounding land for the benefit of the
future apartment houses, and that the owners of the private houses could
not, on the ground that the character of the locality had changed, build up
their land with apartment houses in place of the detached houses.
Short term private house restrictions have throughout Flatbush and
certain portions of Queens been an invitation for the premature building
of sporadic apartment houses. In some cases the apartment house has
actually been built before the neighborhood had reached an apartment
house stage, because the unbuilt-up corners now freed from restrictions
offered an opportunity to exploit the detached house locality. Many people
will go a long way out into the suburbs to live in an apartment house if
they can have the surroundings of detached houses, when they would not
go to apartment houses in a locality so far away that was entirely built up
with apartment houses.
Therefore, I say that, on the whole, private restrictions have failed in
preserving localities for designed uses during the life of the structures that
are erected under those restrictions. Their helpfulness is only temporary.
Probably it will be the effect that if no method of municipal restriction is
put into force by the city to preserve to some extent what has been accom-
plished by private restrictions, the effect of private restrictions, as thus far
practiced in parts of the city, will be negligible.
In general, the main drawback cf private restrictions as practiced in
this city ts that the surroundings of the restricted locality is built up quite
regardless of the required growth of the restricted district; then the edges
of the restricted district are gradually hurt and in some cases the restrictions
result in a financial loss to those whom they were intended to help. Under
the zoning as seught to be done now under charter amendments, entire
localities that are suitable for a given use will be appropriately restricted,
so that the constant encroachment of unsu'table uses on the edges will be
largely prevented.
It has come to be the common saying in the four outlying Boroughs of
The City of New York that private restrictions do not restrict. To my
personal knowledge many Brooklyn and Queens residents have moved out-
side of the city, because they say the only protection of their home is to
buy a fair-sized plot of ground outside of the five-cent-fare zone. There
is a gradual and constant migration of well-to-do people to counties and
states near Greater New York on this account. Some say that a man is
a highly speculative person who will build a private house in Greater New
York that costs over $30,000.
Damages against a violator of a covenant are collected by an action at
law by the landowner within the restricted district who was injured by the
landowner within the district who violated the covenants. These damages
are very hard to prove and extremely uncertain. Almost no cases are
brought on this ground in the City of New York. The cost of taking such
a case into court would, in most instances, exceed the damages that might
be collected. There is no machinery for enforcing private restrictions
except through the watchfulness of surrounding property owners. The city
government gives no help. The only procedure for enforcing such pro-
visions is by an appeal to the court on behalf of property owners who
consider themselves injured.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 85
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
Advantages of municipal over private restrictions
One of the decided advantages of a districting plan, such as is now
proposed by the Commission, is in the fact that it is watched and enforced
by organized machinery which has facilities for inspection and follow-up
work. The courts will be less likely to set aside individual parts of a
general plan of restriction throughout the city than they would be to set
aside individual private restrictions which bear no relation to one another.
In general, the plans as proposed by the Commission will provide many of
those things which private restrictions have attempted to provide in the
way of safety, general welfare, comfort, amenity, convenience, agreeable-
ness of surroundings, etc., and in a way which is likely to be permanently
satisfactory. In particular, the general restrictions to be imposed under
the police power, as proposed by the Commission, will solve the problems
which arise from the failure of private restrictions as described above, in a
satisfactory way.
STATEMENT By L. E. BAuMANN, REPRESENTING THE GREENPOINT NEIGH-
BORHOoD Association, Aprit 19, 1916
Need of protecting parks from factories
The streets immediately adjoining McCarren Park should be restricted
to the use of residences, churches and public buildings.
I represent an organization that for years has been doing a philan-
thropic and social work in Greenpoint. We find in our summer playgrounds,
where we have 300 children per day, that the factories immediately adjoin-
ing are a detriment to our work; notwithstanding the fact that they extend
to us the most hearty co-operation, there is danger in the trucks that must
pass to and fro. There is a certain spirit of just simply “beat the game”’
that gets into the children. That develops when you have a factory there.
When you can get children apart in their games and with their whole
attention on their games, an attitude of respect and co-operation develops
among them.
McCarren Park has become the greatest center for social work in the
Greenpoint section of Brooklyn. The Park Commissioner has done a great
deal for us, and games are played there in the open in summer. This
recreation center is maintained all winter, and it has become a great factor
in the social and philanthropic work of Greenpoint. It seems to us that
the work ought to be backed up and kept in all its value for that district.
Now, there are girls who come there evenings, two and three hundred
girls, who work all day in a factory. I know from long experience in settle-
ment work that girls and men and boys, all of them, while they go to their
work willingly, like to quit their work and get away from it at nights, and
if you have the factories looming up around this park where they are going
for their recreation, it detracts from the value of that pleasure. It is bound
to. Greenpoint must be industrial for years to come. Still there are tracts
of land lying available in sections of Greenpoint that would provide for all
of the additions to industrial work for years and years to come, and it seems
to me that there is no necessity of these factories congregating about
McCarren Park.
Streets as play spaces
The Commission’s plans provide a considerable number of the side
streets restricted for residential purposes. This restriction will be of great
86 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
advantage on account of the fact that it leaves the streets more free as play
spaces for the children.
This is a very important provision. We ran a street playground last
summer and are contemplating one this summer, and we unfortunately
decided on a street that had a large manufacturing plant located on it and
before the summer was out we had to change that street playground. There
were streets all around us that were given over to residences and those
streets were filled with children. There was not nearly the danger to life
and limb on those residence streets. An association such as ours can pro-
vide for only a few of the thousands of children on the streets of Green-
point, and I think the restrictions on these streets very excellent indeed
from the standpoint of protecting the children.
STATEMENT By J. BERNSTEIN, TRAFFIC Expert, FirrH AVENUE
AssoctaTIon, Marcu 30, 1916
Traffic counts in Fifth avenue section
I wish to state with the utmost emphasis that all the statistics and facts
quoted here have been gathered with no thought to use them as arguments
for or against the limitation of building heights or the restriction in use of
buildings. All this material was collected solely from the point of view of
traffic study. Some of the figures quoted are part of a traffic count taken
during the month of November, 1915, by the traffic division of the Police
Department. Other counts were made by the New York Railways Co., and
by the Citizens’ Street Traffic Committee ; while the detailed traffic statistics
contained herein were gathered under my direction and supervision, to be
used in determining the advisability of street widenings, the removal of
building encroachments, the regulation of traffic and the possibility of sub-
surface crossings for pedestrians. These counts have been taken at various
times during the last three years.
Traffic conditions at various important points are reflected by the
following figures ascertained by the Police Department between the hours
of 8:30 A. M. and 6:30 P. M.:
FIFTH AVENUE .
Vehicles Pedestrians
iBiithsAve: andeldth: Stash steerer 11,927 45,525
Bittht Awe: cand uZOthists senate eeeieeioen 13,240 73,100
RittheAverandi2od St ae eae: 11,392 48,411
BiitheAverandwolst Stan kaei crete cee 13,490 72,000
Bitty Avetcand *s2dim Stine. se eae eine 13,760 74,610
Jodo yAKiCes: eunkal Siyal, Syes atau oc sodasdaodar 14,120 78,200
BitthyAve nan dies4theStaricrsaces ee ete nie 14,360 146,300
MibthAW enanGdeocthe Staessen ieee eee en 15,460 124,250
Biith Ave vande4Ade Stes. ee ace ont 18,800 137,780
PuitthsAvermand: 59thestry. ieee aire 14,220 24,888
SIXTH AVENUE
Vehicles Pedestrians
Sixth Awerran cal ath ae een ee eee 8,662 51,875
Sixth Avenand 25d St-scoe es pieiees creer ie 8,020 106,829
Sith Averamdescthnoteengecs iia ora aera 9,441 102,480
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 87
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
BROADWAY
Vehicles Pedestrians
Broadway amcl Z3al Stoccosccsocsocccod6ae : 1,964 85,800
Broadwasy aml 24k Stogocsascsccueecsende 9,000 62,900
Broachwary amcl Zot Sitococcoscsccccacou0ce 4,760 63,310
Biroachweny emngl S4hin Sitcssgesnocsodaeoboone 12,800 101,000
Broadway ghacl 42Gl: (Sito gcoenoeuosvococesor 19,650 90,370
While these figures do not show the direction in which traffic moved,
they do present a sufficiently vivid picture of the congestion which is the
rule at these points. It is noteworthy that near the streets where the num-
ber of high loft buildings is either small or where they are not tenanted
or only partly tenanted, the number of vehicles and pedestrians passing the
observer is considerably smaller than where the side streets house loft-
buildings filled with factories. Compare the traffic on Fifth Avenue and
14th Street, Fifth Avenue and 23d Street with that on Fifth Avenue and
20th Street or Fifth Avenue and 32d Street and you will see the difference.
Busiest corners on Fifth avenue
To visualize the crowds finding their way during ten hours to given
spots on Fifth Avenue we must realize that the 146,360 people counted on
Fifth Avenue at 34th Street exceed the whole population of the City of
Worcester, Mass. The 124,250 counted at 38th Street exceed the total
population of Omaha, Neb. The population of Grand Rapids, Mich., is
less than the number of pedestrians passing Fifth Avenue at 42d Street.
On January 26, 1916, between 8:30 A. M. and 6:30 P. M. 8,662 vehicles
went south on Fifth Avenue at 42d Street, while 7,138 went north; 4,716
went east, and 3,567 went west. Of the vehicles on Fifth Avenue less than
4 per cent are of a commercial nature; on 42d Street 33 per cent are 2H a
commercial character.
Proportion of light and heavy vehicles
South from 42d Street on the side streets this ratio of commercial
vehicles gradually increases. On 38th Street for instance, the ratio is 40
per cent; on 35th Street 42 per cent; on 33d Street 54 per cent; on 32d
Street 58 per cent; on 26th Street 61 per cent, and on 20th Street 70
per cent. How much delay is caused by the trucks delivering and receiving
goods to the high loft buildings can be seen by considering the fact
that out of a total of 1,425 commercial vehicles passing through 32d
Street between Fifth Avenue and Broadway, 612 stopped either parallel
to the curb or backed up against it. Perhaps the delays can be measured
by comparing the total number of vehicles counted in this block with
the total number of vehicles passing through 46th Street between Fifth
and Sixth Avenues. The count on 32d Street showed exclusive of
omnibuses, 1,204 passenger vehicles and 1,425 commercial vehicles. The
count on 46th Street showed, exclusive of omnibuses 4,814 passenger
vehicles and 478 commercial vehicles. Although 46th Street is of the
same width as 32d Street it accommodates easily double the number
of vehicles without crowding and without the supervision of a traffic police-
man. But 46th Street has no high factory loft buildings, while 32d Street
has a large number. A comparison of 38th, 37th and 35th Streets with
47th, 48th and 49th Streets shows the same situation. Instances like these
could be multiplied. It is, however, sufficient to call attention to the fact
88 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
that wherever there are tall buildings used as factories the police commis-
sioner finds it necessary to designate as many men as are available for duty
in the side streets in order to prevent the snarls and jams of vehicular
traffic.
Street car congestion
The street car, elevated and subway congestion in the evening rush
hour has given much concern to the Department of Health. A single trip
along Fourth, Sixth and Seventh Avenues between 6 and 6:45 P. M. between
24th and 30th Streets for instance, will reveal hundreds of human beings
pushing and shoving and actually fighting inspectors, motormen and con-
ductors of the street cars in an effort to board the already packed cars.
The same condition exists on 8th and 14th Streets west of Sixth Avenue,
and on 14th Street and 8th Street on Fourth Avenue. A mere glance is
sufficient to identify these crowds as employees of the garment factories
located between Fourth and Seventh Avenues from 24th to 30th Streets.
Elevator congestion
As to crowding in elevators, consider for a moment that some of
these loft buildings employ as many as 3,000 to 3,500 people. All of these
factory employees are compelled to ride in the freight elevators—usually
two, exceptionally three in number. It does not take much imagination
to conjure up before one’s eyes the scenes at the beginning and the end of
the lunch hour, or at the hour when all of them stop work for the day.
In this connection it is to the point to narrate an incident which oc-
curred on October 9, 1915, Fire Prevention Day. The building in question
at 105 Madison Avenue is a new 20-story loft building of the best type.
The Joint Board of Sanitary Control which exercises well defined authority
over the garment factories located in that building, had decided to have a
fire drill on some floors of that building. Let me interpolate right here,
that on no occasion has the attempt been made to have the fire alarm signal
sounded throughout the whole building. On the 9th of October it was
proposed to have a fire drill on one or two floors. The subject was broached
to the proprietors of these shops and they promptly declared that unless they
were indemnified and reimbursed for any and all liabilities, which they
might have to assume in case of an accident happening to any one of their
several hundred employees, they would not consent to have a fire drill,
because they considered it too dangerous for their employees to descend
the stairs in large numbers. Naturally no fire drill was held. What would
happen if the 3,000 factory workers in that building should try to get to
the street by means of the stairs I leave to your imagination.
STATEMENT oF J. Bernstern, Trarric Expert, FirrH AVENUE
Association, Aprit 29, 1916
Congestion of factories in New York City
Factories tend to congest in New York City because the greater part
of European immigration comes to this port and cheap foreign labor is
plentiful. This is especially true in the garment industry in which about
80 per cent of the operatives are Russian Jews and 20 per cent Italians.
A few of the foremen and cutters are of other nationalities, but the vast
majority of the employees have been in this country a relatively short time.
The industry was originally organized on the cheap-labor, sweat-shop sys-
tem, but in late years there has been a tendency on the part of the better
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 89
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
class of manufacturers to provide, and on the part of the unions to demand,
reasonable wages and sanitary shops.
Distance factory workers must travel
The workers in the factory districts of Manhattan do not as a rule
live within walking distance of their work. A large number of the artificial
flower and feather factories are located within walking distance of their
employees in the vicinity of Washington Square and during the last three
or four years clothing factories have been erected east of the Bowery where
the workers live. Also of late with the removal of the big printing plants
to the west side, considerable tenement house space has been let to employees
in the printing trade on Eighth and Ninth Avenues and in the side streets
from 25th to 42d Streets on the west side.
When the garment industry was organized some 15 or 20 years ago
the factories were located on and around Broadway between Bleecker and
Canal Streets. In those days the employees of these factories all lived
within walking distance of their places of work and it was customary for
them to go home for their lunches. The multiplications of garment factories
and their gradual removal northward diminished the chances of the opera-
tives to live near the places of their employment. When the garment
factories congregated around Fifth Avenue in the center of the City, there
remained, of course, no possibility for the workers to live within walking
distance of their factories. To-day, the bulk of garment workers live in
the Bronx, on the lower East Side, Williamsburg, and even as far away
as Brownsville.
The removal of garment factories to the district below 14th Street
would save a great deal of traveling by the workers on street cars and
elevated trains and about 40 per cent of the garment workers would live
within easy walking distance of their places of work. About 40 per cent
would save two carfares per day and could reach their places of work within
the average of 15 minutes’ walk. The ones living in the Bronx or Wil-
liamsburg would save on the average a walk of one mile—the distance they
have to walk to-day from the elevated or subway stations on the East Side
of the city to the factories west of Fifth Avenue.
Unsatisfactory luncheon and recreation facilities
There are not and cannot be adequate luncheon facilities in the crowded
factory districts near Fifth Avenue. There are about 50,000 factory em-
ployees in that district and as a rule they visit restaurants only during the
lunch hour from 12 to 1 p.m. At other hours there is practically no demand
for the service of food. The average expenditure of money for lunch on
the part of the garment workers is less than 15 cents—a sum inadequate to
give a fair return on the cost and investment of a restaurant. The item of
rent alone is prohibitive and the only lunch places patronized are of the
type which provide no seats for their customers. The workmen buy cheap
and insufficiently nourishing food or bring some food with them from their
homes. In both cases they are compelled to eat their food on the sidewalks
or in the roadway and even with utmost care the streets are littered with
refuse.
All luncheon places are overcrowded. It is not an infrequent occur-
rence that in a place where 50 chairs are provided for the lunchers as many
as 200 crowd the place, packed tightly awaiting their chances of getting
something to eat.
90 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Some of the operatives could get satisfactory food in the better class
restaurants of the vicinity. But, as a rule, they are either unable or unwill-
ing to spend the 35 cents for which a satisfactory luncheon is served in the
restaurants which are patronized mostly by office and retail store employees.
The food sold in the cheap places is of inferior quality and it is this
food which 1s mostly bought by the operatives. In connection with the lunch
question, it is important to note that those factory employees—like cutters,
pressers, etc., who have to stand at their work do not get either proper food
or rest during the lunch hour. Insufficient space in the restaurants where
seats are provided, necessitates the hustling out of the lunchers at a rapid
rate. The men, in order to smoke, have to stand or walk on the streets.
While this is a relief to the machine operator who sits at his work the cutter
and the presser get fatigued and according to some of the observant manu-
facturers their work in the afternoon falls below the standard of their work
in the morning. A great deal of friction is caused by this between employees
and employers, the former insisting upon a day wage, while the latter, in
order to shift the consequences of the decreased efficiency of the workers,
prefer a piece wage. Neither the employee nor the employer is really
responsible for this decrease in efficiency—it is brought about solely by the
overcrowding of the factory district.
Congestion on transit lines at rush hours
Work in all garment shops starts promptly at 8 in the morning and
ends at 6 in the evening except on Saturday, when work stops at 12 o’clock
noon. During the busy season, overtime work is performed from 7 to 9 in
the evening. Thus it will be seen that of necessity all the employees use
the transit lines about the same time and since they congregate within a
few blocks in their respective home districts the transit lines carry them all
practically the whole distance together. On this account the cars are
crowded to the limit of their capacity morning and evening. The Board
of Health has encountered great difficulty in attempting to prevent even
greater overcrowding.
Actual timing along Sixth Avenue and Fourth Avenue has proven that
15 minutes’ wait is the average for the individual would-be passenger be-
tween 6:15 and 7:15 o'clock. At the 14th Street and 8th Street intersections,
the workers waiting for the crosstown cars to take them to the lower East
Side or Williamsburg stand occasionally for half an hour. Twenty minutes
is the average wait between the hours of 6:30 and 8 in the evening.
Sidewalk congestion
According to a count taken on September 14, 1915, the only one of
which I have knowledge, 2,454 persons passed the observers on the east
side of Sixth Avenue from 26th to 27th Streets in the half hour from
12:20 to 12:50 p. m. To this number should be added 617 persons who
were counted standing still, making a total of 3,071. Unfortunately I have
no corresponding figures for the congestion in the factory districts. None
of the large factories in Manhattan, except perhaps the National Cloak
and Suit Company of 207 West 24th Street, has any data showing the
places where their factory employees live nor have any maps been prepared
to show such facts.
Rest rooms and welfare work in factories
In the waist and dress industry most of the better class manufacturers
provide rest rooms, lunch rooms and facilities for preparing simple food
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 91
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
for their employees. The bulk of the employees are women, and the Labor
Laws prescribe certain definite rest room and dressing room facilities. There
is practically no follow-up work for convalescents. In a very few rare
instances the employers contribute a share to the sick benefit funds of the
employees. Perhaps half a dozen concerns furnish the services of a trained
nurse in the shops and for visits to the homes of the operatives; but on
the whole the efforts of the manufacturers along these lines are a negligible
quantity. In justice, however, it must be said that the Labor Unions do
not look favorably upon any sort of welfare work on the part of the
employers. The Unions themselves furnish medical attendance, hospital
or sanitorium treatment to their members; they take care of their sick and
provide free periodical medical examinations of the workers. As far as
the male operatives are concerned, except perhaps in one or two instances,
absolutely nothing is being done by the manufacturers to provide lunch or
rest rooms or any kind of welfare or educational advantages.
The Manufacturers’ Association and the Unions of the garment workers
maintain conjunctively and on equal terms the Joint Board of Sanitary
Control, an organization which looks after sanitary conditions in the shops
and has done a great deal toward raising the standard of hygiene, ventila-
tion and lighting of the garment factories.
No data has been prepared so far as I know to show the relationship
between fires in the factories and the congestion of factory workers in such
buildings, but it is possible that the greater the congestion, the more danger
there is from illicit smoking. No time studies have been made to show
how long it would take to get operatives out of tall factory loft buildings
in case of fire or panic.
The prevailing opinion of fire chiefs and other fire experts is that in
order to prevent loss of life a building should be emptied in a maximum
interval from between three to five minutes from the discovery of the blaze.
Garment factories are filled with highly inflammable and dense smoke-
producing materials. According to Dr. Price’s experience it would need
from five to ten minutes to empty a 12-story building where there are at
least two or three exits—a condition which is rather the exception, as the
majority of buildings are not provided with three exits. It is, therefore,
probable that in case of fire or panic the danger to the garment operatives
would be very great.
In the more modern buildings provided with increased elevator facili-
ties, and where the factory employees are permitted to ride on the pas-
senger elevators at the end of the working day, and where special employees’
elevators and freight elevators are also engaged in the transportation of
employees from the working floors, the whole building is emptied in between
10 and 20 minutes, depending upon the height of the building and the
number of people employed therein.
In the older buildings, however, the elevator installation is woefully
inadequate. A large percentage of the employees are compelled to wall:
down the stairs, and 25 to 35 minutes usually elapse before the last employee
reaches the street. :
In factory buildings erected within the last three years, however, it is
the exception that anyone walks down from the fourth or fifth floor, but
in the older buildings people come down by way of the stairs even from
the tenth floor. The average height from which people wall down is about
six stories. The time it takes to get all the operatives out of a building by
means of the elevators alone depends entirely upon the type of building.
92 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
The Waldorf Building, for instance, on West 32d street and West 33d
street, has been emptied by using all elevators in less than 8 minutes—the
average lapse of time there is 14 minutes. The older buildings with highly
insufficient elevator capacity take from 20 to 40 minutes, if the elevators
alone are used.
In the modern building the elevators are of the rapidly moving type,
have roomy cars, while in the old buildings the elevators move slowly and
do not accommodate more than ten persons on each trip in each car.
Freight elevator congestion and traffic delays
In modern buildings the freight elevators are more than adequate to
handle the raw materials and goods in the garment industry, but blockades
occur when freight is delivered to or shipped from various floors simul-
taneously. No freight can be handled in the morning hour or during lunch
time because all the freight elevators are crowded with operatives going
to their places of work or going out for lunch.
Truckmen wait from 15 minutes to one hour and a half, according to
the time of the day when they make their deliveries. It is impossible to use
the freight elevator before 8:15 A. M. and between 12 M. and 1:15 P. M.—
the freight elevators are then busy transporting the workers. Outside of
these periods the fact that the incoming and outgoing freight is of relatively
small bulk, but comes from a variety of sources and goes to a multitude
of destinations, leads the individual truckman to consider it quick work if
not more than 45 minutes elapses from the time he is ready to transact his
business until he has finished it. There are occasionally from half a dozen
to a dozen truckmen waiting at the same place to deliver or to receive goods,
the number usually depending upon the height of the building and the num-
ber of concerns doing their manufacturing there.
Traffic blocks, lasting from five to twenty minutes, occur quite fre-
quently. As far as there are men available special traffic posts are main-
tained by the Police Department in the streets lined with tall factory build-
ings. These policemen are kept busy straightening out the multitude of
traffic tangles caused by the large number of trucks engaged in receiving
or delivering goods to and from the factories.
Since most of the warehouses and practically all railroad and coast-
wise steamship freight terminals are located at the waterfront in the lower
part of Manhattan the length of haul would be materially reduced by having
the factories farther downtown and nearer the waterfront instead of
having them centrally located as they are now.
Percentage of floor area devoted to manufacturing
Regarding the percentage of floor area usually required for manufac-
ture, | might say that I know of no department store which uses even as
much as 15 per cent of its aggregate floor space for factory purposes.
Dressmakers and milliners often need 25 per cent. of their floor space for
manufacturing; custom tailors use a little less. In a few instances dress
and millinery houses, doing exclusively a retail business, occupy at the
present time more than 25 per cent of their floor space for manufacturing.
This holds good particularly in the case of about eight concerns, most of
whom are the sole occupants of their respective buildings. However, the
tendency is growing to devote more and more of the available space to
selling and to locate the manufacturing department away from the selling
department, retaining only enough help in the building to do the necessary
fittings or alterations.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 93
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
If the existing loft buildings above 27th street and east of Sixth avenue
were not to be used in the future for manufacturing there is no reason
why these buildings could not be used for salesrooms, for wholesale job-
bing houses or as manufacturers’ sample rooms. Quite a number of them
could be altered at relatively small expense into office or mercantile buildings.
SraTEMENT By Ropert S. BINKERD, SECRETARY OF THE Crry CLuB oF
New York, Marcu 28, 1916
Importance of districting
It is hardly necessary for me to appear before you to say that the work
_ of your Commission has the hearty support of the City Club. You know
that in every step we have given all the assistance in our power. The suc-
cessful accomplishment of your work is not only by far the biggest thing
before the City of New York, but it is the most momentous step in city
planning undertaken in this country. It is something toward which the
minds of intelligent and far-seeing men throughout the country are already
directed.
Protection cf small parks
What I have to say deals with a few of the large questions. With
regard to details we will file a brief.
We have already stated that your preliminary plans in our judgment
do not sufficiently protect the surroundings of the small parks of the City
so as to make them the sustaining hearts and, in the future, the real neigh-
borhood centers of residential districts. In your present proposal you have
made great progress in remedying this situation. This progress, however,
still seems insufficient, as it is very important that the streets which are
immediately behind these small neighborhood parks shall also be restricted
to residential purposes. If residential streets have a park in front of them
and business and manufacturing pressing immediately behind them, their
situation will be exceedingly precarious.
We appreciate that there will be small parks in which you will not be
able to follow out our recommendations. The discovery of these parks will
be a matter of considerable moment. Wherever you cannot protect a small
park as the heart of a residence district, there is a prima facie case that a
park has been located where one ought not to be. This knowledge will be
of great usefulness to the city authorities, not only in the question of any
possible sales of such parks, but also ‘in the location of new parks.
As rapidly as we can, we are making a survey of all the small parks
of the city, which will be filed with you for your assistance.
Business on first floor of residential buildings
We think you would be able to accord fuller protection to the sur-
roundings of the small parks if you would establish a fourth classification,
which would recognize the wide-spread combination which consists of a
store upon the ground floor and of apartments and living quarters above.
We earnestly urge the creation of this fourth classification.
Protection of the suburbs
There is a natural tendency to look upon the outskirts of a city as
something which is going to more or less take care of itself. Generally not
much attention is given to the restrictions imposed upon this part of a city.
94 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
A reading of Mr. Graham Taylor’s account of the “ Satellite Cities ” is
very illuminating on this point. There are great centrifugal forces working
in our large cities to-day which are throwing a larger and larger amount
of manufacturing out toward the city’s perimeter. Every betterment of
transportation facilities apparently accelerates this movement. A very con-
siderable number of the workers of this city are going to work and be
housed in the future on the outskirts of the city. We earnestly urge you
to bear this in mind, and to give to the provisions for the outlying districts
the same degree of care and attention which are given to those nearer the
heart of the city.
STATEMENT By Dr. Gustave F. Borne, Jr., Nrurotocist, Ciinic
ASSISTANT, MANHATTAN STATE HosPITAL FOR THE INSANE, May 24, 1916
Nervous effect of high buildings
I have looked at the deleterious influence of high buildings from two
aspects, one from the attitude of the persons living in the high buildings,
and, second, from the attitude of the persons living outside of the high
buildings in neighboring structures.
Persons within high buildings, and particularly those in the upper
stories, if they tend to be heart patients, or tend to be persons given to
certain fears, or neurasthenic individuals, are prone to suffer from the alti-
tude of high buildings. There are certain types of nervous patients, for
instance, who cannot stand working at heights. If they are employed in
buildings, say 15 or 16 stories in height, the effect on such persons is that
they are going to be more or less afflicted with a wrecked nervous system
which will unfit them for other work. Another element that enters into
it is the question of the elevator. While I was studying this problem I took
the blood pressure of a number of people before ascending the elevator,
and at the top of the elevator I took their pulse rates. I was surprised to
find out that there was a marked increase in the pulse rate, and that their
blood pressure had risen.
Now, dealing with the heart patients, those who have heart trouble, for
instance, that sudden transition in the change of the blood pressure and in
the pulse rate would be very injurious. Besides, if a person who is suf-
fering from neurasthenia, or a hysterical girl is employed on the twentieth
story of a high building, the constant trip, for instance, of twenty flights,
the elevator shock with a change of pulse rate and everything else would
be harmful to her, and in a great many instances, some of the nervous
disorders that girls in the upper stories are afflicted with, can be attributed
to the elevator trip. Then, of course, there comes the question of people
who necessarily cannot live in high buildings owing to respiratory diffi-
culties. That is also to be regarded.
The rise of 150 feet in a 12-story apartment house would certainly
affect the individual living there. In fact, in Forsheimer’s statement atten-
tion was called to the fact that neurasthenics ought not to be taken to
high altitudes unless they are very careful and under the study of physicians.
We figure that the people in office buildings are all of a neurasthenic
variety. The effect of the altitude on such people aggravates their condition.
It is very hard to give any definite statement as to the number injuriously
affected. In later years there has been a marked increase in nervous dis-
orders and troubles. ;
There is a type of patient who cannot stand height, and if they are
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 95
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
all of that type you can do them a tremendous amount of damage even
toward suicidal impulse from high windows:
Court apartments unhealthy
The lack of natural light in rear apartments has a bad effect on the
health of tenants. First of all, I find a great many women suffering from
anemia due to the fact that the apartment is not properly aerated by sunlit
air. Then, because of the congestion, the noise, and the fact that the purity-
ing influences on the air of the court is not present, we find many who suffer
from marked nervous conditions. In any of the side street apartments
where there are no facilities for natural light, practically every inhabitant
is below par as an individual unless he takes care of himself, goes out and
plays golf or tennis, and so gets away from the bad influences due to non-
sunlit air.
Importance of sunlight.
Air that is not aerated by sun light is absolutely injurious to health.
If you place a tubercular patient in a room lit by artificial light—gas light—
as in a typical apartment in New York City, and let no “sunlit air come
through, you can obtain specimens of tubercular bacilli for a long time
afterward, but if the apartment is open to sunlit air two weeks afterwards
you will find a perfectly sterile atmosphere, insofar as tuberculosis is con-
cerned. The tubercular bacilli is destroyed. Of course, it is manifestly
impossible to get sun light during the whole day. At most it is perhaps
only possible to get it for an hour or two during the day. The sun light
shining on the floor during those one or two hours each day would be
sufficient to accomplish that purpose, but it would take a little longer time
than if more sun light was available. In Switzerland they put patients per-
fectly nude where the sun light can play on them, and they brown up and
become perfectly tanned, and these patients clear up more rapidly than
people who don’t undergo such treatment. In other words, air combined
with sun light becomes very beneficial. They leave them lying there with-
out a stitch of clothing on for a long time.
Any law or ordinance which will restrict multiple dwellings within the
City of New York yet to be built to five or six stories, will be a positive
benefit to the city from the viewpoint of health.
If the unoccupied area of yards and courts be made more extensive
than at present, giving more light and air to those who dwell in multiple
dwellings, 1 would look upon that, too, as a distinct advantage to health.
I would go so far as to say that there is urgent necessity, in view of the
present rapid extension of nervous disorders in New York City, for a
change in the laws which will bring about lower buildings and wider and
more extensive unoccupied areas.
Aside from the healthful effect of sunlit air there is a peculiar value
from the standpoint of preventing nervous troubles or disorders, in giving
a man having a chance to work in a garden, to take care of a lawn, or to
take care of trees and shrubs. In fact, we frequently are forced to have
city dwellers cease living in the city and send them to such places to give
them an opportunity to get next to nature. You assist them in this way.
We live in congested houses with all kinds of noises about us. We live
with the tension of having our neighbors continually spying upon us. Now,
take a man living under such conditions, and place him—if he is of a
nervous type—in a house and garden of his own. The restraint is lost, and
96 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
he feels himself as a separate individual, allowed to work out his own
salvation in his own space.
I go occasionally into the private home section of the Bronx, and I
noticed there a short while ago that the people are usually feeling better
than people living in congested districts. They seem to be able to go to
work fresher in the morning, purely because of the fact that they have
plenty of room and the section is not built up solidly.
Car-sickness
From a health standpoint, there is a very marked and particularly
harmful effect in the daily travel back and forth on the subway. I have a
patient who lives in Brooklyn—she comes to me all the way from Brooklyn.
She happens to be a stenographer downtown and travels back and forth on
the subway. The effect on her nervous system is such that every time she
comes to my office she vomits. There are certain other types of patients
who have car-sickness. They suffer from traveling on the cars in the city.
There are other people who suffer from the noise in the subway. I have
patients who simply cannot travel back and forth in the subway on account
of the noise. Then also comes the proposition of the irritable individual
due to the jostling and constant noise. J happen to have a patient of a
neurasthenic type, for instance, who lives in the Washington Heights dis-
trict. I order such patients to come down on the elevated railroad or by
the bus in preference to the subway.
I would look upon any plan for the distribution of population during
home hours and working hours, and which will cut down the time that
people spend in the subway, as a positive health advantage to the City of
New York.
Noise as a cause of nervous disorder
I feel that if it were possible for those who suffer from nervous dis-
eases, to live on a quiet residential street, it would practically amount to
living in a little house in the country, and take away a great many of the
things that produce the symptoms of nervous disorder. If they could live
there they would be away from those things.
In building a sanitorium in New York, you must look around for just
such a street. I recall specifically an instance of this kind, Lloyd’s Sani-
tarium, 155th Street and St. Nicholas Place. At the time the Manhattan
subway was under construction a great big hammering plant was in use in
front of the sanitarium. Some patients treated in that building almost went
into spasms with that plant pounding away from eight o’clock in the morn-
ing until six at night.
STATEMENT By J. H. Burton, CHairMAN, SAve NE TORK M) EE,
St N Vig tals 18) i N, SAvE New YorK COMMITTEE
Marcnr 28, 1916
Elimination of factories from Fifth avenue
The plan of the Zoning Commission is of vital importance to the City of
New York as it affects its very existence and future welfare.
I represent the movement which has received the name of the Save
New York Movement, which has for its object the elimination of factories
in the localities north of 32d Street. We heartily endorse the plan of this
commission.
When this Save New York Movement started, the basic idea was to
keep the factories from destroying the vast wealth in real estate, in business
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 97
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
and in homes, north of 32d Street, without benefiting anyone. But since
this movement has assumed its present proportions, speaking for the Com-
mittee who started it, we consider that success not only means a great deal
for the section of New York above 32d Street, but a great deal more for
all the rest of New York as far down as Worth Street. It will tend to bring
back the deserted section. It will add to the values of the tenement houses
in the lower part of this city. It will improve conditions in Greene Street,
of which the statement has been made that from Canal Street north there
is hardly a single building that has not a “for sale” or “to let” sign on
it, with the exception of the United States Post Office.
It will mean more in ultimately increasing the assessed value of New
York real estate, and therefore in reducing future taxes than any other
plan; and further, it will mean a great deal to the cloak and suit manu-
facturers and those kindred manufacturing interests, because it will tend
to reduce their overhead charges, as they can secure space for manufactur-
ing purposes downtown at 30 or 40 cents per square foot, as against 80 to
90 cents uptown, and it will mean a great advantage to the working men if
the factories they work in are in sections near their homes so they do not
have to spend an hour every day in subways and also spend money in
car fares.
We believe that in the end the plans of your Zoning Commission will
mean more to the City of New York than any civic movement that has
ever been undertaken, and that what our “ Save New York Committee ”’ is
appealing for applies to the heart of the city, and, unless you help the
heart of the city you cannot help the rest.
I wish to repeat that when this “ Save New York Movement” started
a few months ago we had in mind only the preservation of the section
north of 32d Street, but we realize now that our obligation is towards
every part of the city, and the preservation of this section accomplishes that
object.
I have received, as the chairman of this committee, three hundred
letters a day from every part of New York, from people on the
Bowery, on Washington Square, and people who have had no interest
whatever in the future of the city, and they seem to think that this move-
ment is going to mean a great deal for this city in the future—a great deal
more than anything that has ever been undertaken.
Prominent business men through the West have written to us and said
that it was of the utmost importance, and that they take just as much
pride in New York City as anyone that lives here. We feel it would be
dangerous to allow factories to come in and destroy the heart of New York.
We wish to endorse, in every way, the plan of the Zoning Commission.
STATEMENT By Hon. Wittiam M. Carper, Aprit 11, 1916_
Residential values depreciated by invasion of laundry
Mr. Calder stated that the erection of the Pilgrim Laundry at Prospect
and 11th Avenues had done more than any other thing in that part of
Brooklyn to depreciate the value of residential property. This laundry, he
thought, had in that section reduced the taxable value of real estate by
50 per cent.
98 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
STATEMENT By Mitts E. Case, Secretary, Potice DEPARTMENT,
Jury 24, 1916
High buildings congest streets
I would respectfully report that after careful study of the data at hand
I am convinced that high buildings are important factors in causing street
accidents and that the presence of business houses and factories in a resi-
dential district increases the probability of street accidents.
Street accidents increase with congestion
There are so many factors tending to cause accidents that it is a matter
of some difficulty to state fairly how much or how little any one factor
should be blamed. I have not had as much time as I should like for the
study of this interesting problem in its details, nevertheless I believe that
the main points are well established and trust that the following considera-
tions will make this clear.
I have selected ten precincts in Manhattan which fall into three groups:
I—Precincts with factories and business with a large population: 35th,
39th, 43d, 7. e., the Upper East Side above 79th Street, population 416,000.
Il—Precincts with very considerable business and a large population:
7th, 13th, 15th and 17th, i. e., the Lower East Side from Manhattan Bridge
to 14th Street, population 458,000.
I1I—Residential districts with a small amount of business: 36th, 40th
and 42d, 1. e., the West Side above Cathedral Parkway (110th Street),
population 213,000.
In the first group the number of accidents per 1,000 of population
during the first half of 1916 was 1.70; in the second group, 2.21; in the
third group 1.43. The population in thousands per mile of street in these
groups is approximately 7, 10 and 12, respectively. From this it appears
that accidents per 1,000 inhabitants increases rapidly as congestion (popula-
tion per mile of street) increases; hence, increase of height of buildings
increases accidents.
Mixed occupancy increases street accidents
~ The question of mixed use is complicated with that of congestion, but
a study of the individual precincts in the following table will help to dis-
entangle it:
Population Accidents, Accidents,
Miles of Population Per Mile First Half Per M
Precinct Street (000 Omitted) of Street 1916 Population
Bb lnattee mete 14.5 127 8,760 163 1.28
BO Leake heen 23. 192 8,350. 363 1.89
ABs heeteets 17. 97 5,700 182 1.88
54.5 416 7,140 708 1.70
RRO o iil ss 2 6,340 128 1.78
Bese mets 10. 112 1,200 325 2.90
SR esata ches 15 155 10,300 372 2.40
L7jesee Cee 11.28 119 10,600 187 157,
47.61 458 9,820 1,012 vail
SOspreieng cee 25 87 3,480 142 1.63
AQ) dite cence 30. _ 66 2,200 76 eS
42 tee eee 51.28 60 1,170 86 1.43
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 99
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
The 35th precinct lies between 79th Street and 96th Street and is
, distinguished from the other two precincts in Group I by the existence of
high class residences in its western half. This reduces its accident rate from
1.88 or 1.89 to 1.28.
The 17th precinct has proportionately less business than the 15th
precinct, though it has a greater density ; this reduces its accident rate from
240 to 1.57. The 7th precinct is similar.
It may be objected that the 36th precinct with a density of only 3%
thousand per mile has an accident rate of 1.63, as against 1.57 in the 17th.
The explanation lies largely in the fact that the streets run at dangerous
angles and that there is considerable business on Broadway, Amsterdam
Avenue and Manhattan Street.
Now compare the 43d precinct and its factories with the 7th, which is
slightly denser, and note that the accident rate is 1.88, as against 1.78.
TSS, I think, measures the effect of factories.
STATEMENT OF Ernest K. COULTER, SUPERINTENDENT, NEw YorK SOCIETY
FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO CHILDREN,
May 24, 1916
Juvenile delinquency
Congestion of population is a, large contributing cause to juvenile delin-
quency. Some years ago, while in the Children’s Court, I made an extensive
study of the matter. As a result of that investigation, I would say that at
least 40 per cent. of the charges of juvenile delinquency result from the
thwarted desire of children to play. This desire in a child is God-giver.
But in the denser districts the opportunity to play properly and normally is
denied these children. The result is that often they give vent to their
pent-up energies by doing things which infringe on the rights of others.
The bigger the crowd the less the rights of the individual. To play ball,
cat, or shinny in the street is against the law, and yet any one of these
games 1s wholesome for a child under proper conditions. Being denied
the opportunity to play wholesome games, the suggestion is made to the
boy in the crowded districts that it is great fun to steal something from a
pushcart. He goes into it chiefly to gratify his desire for adventure and
activity. There is the excitement of the chase and that means more to him
than the value of the trifling piece.of property he has taken. In time that
boy is led to more serious stealing and perhaps becomes a pickpocket.
It is in those districts where the greatest congestion of population exists
that the more serious delinquencies are found. Crime, delinquency and
disease thrive in the dark. Where there is serious congestion, darkness and
bad living conditions exist. Of course, not all delinquency nor cruelty to
children is confined.to the congested districts.
Exclusion of stores from residential streets
Something has been said about exclusion of stores from_ residential
streets. I believe that if stores could be kept out of tenement houses, con-
ditions would be improved. Dr. Price has testified regarding herding people
in the back rooms of these stores. That is a serious thing. The families
of the proprietors and often boarders are crowded into rooms that have little
light or air. Physical and moral conditions in such surroundings cannot
but be bad. Then there is another factor—the obstruction of the street
space that the children and residents need. The sidewalks are cluttered up,
100 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
pedestrians are often forced into the roadways, litter is thrown about and
conditions are generally bad.
I look upon any plan that will result in a greater distribution of popula-
tion as most desirable. To attempt any radical reconstruction of buildings
that now exist, would, perhaps not be feasible, but I feel strongly that meas-
ures should now be taken by the city to prevent further growth of the con-
gestion which now exists on Manhattan Island and some places in the Bronx.
Some years ago it was found that there were more than forty blocks
on Manhattan Island where the density of population was greater than 1,200
to the acre. In places it ran as high as 1,600 to the acre. I do not mean
to say that all of the 40 blocks were together, but most of them were on a
narrow area of the island. The congestion in the Bronx is becoming quite
serious.
Tenement cellars as living places
As to the use of tenement cellars as living places, according to figures
which I obtained some years ago, there were 25,000 tenement cellars used
in Greater New York for tenant purposes. I remember where twenty
persons lived in one cellar. Of the 25,000 tenant cellars used for living
purposes, a little less than 15,000 were on Manhattan Island alone.
If we are to take any thought for the future of this city, we must do
something now to bring about a more reasonable and wholesome distribution
of population.
STATEMENT BY JOHN B. CreigHron, PResmpent, Fiske TERRACE
AssocraTion, Brookityn, Aprit 17, 1916
Preservation of private house districts
As representing the Fiske Terrace Association I can say that no asso-
ciation in the whole City.of New York has followed with greater interest
the movement for the restrictions which you have before you. Our organi-
zation is assessed for two and a half million dollars. We pay $50,000 a
year to the city treasury. We have one hundred and sixty-five families in
that association. We are bounded on the east by Ocean Avenue, on the
west by the Brighton Beach Railroad, on the north by Avenue G and on the
south by the Long Island Railroad, a very compact and well-organized com-
munity. We are spending $1,500 a year in paving streets and keeping up
the parks and lawns.
Fiske Terrace is one of the beauty spots of Flatbush and we are very
much interested in these districting regulations and we have actively sup-
ported them ever since they have been discussed in our meetings. We wish
to commend as an association, the efforts of your Commission as second in
importance only to the dual subway contracts. As the dual subway con-
tracts represented the first scientific and broad constructive work in laying
out a rapid transit system, so districting is a broad and scientific effort to
conserve the city and to lay it out as a great and growing city should be
laid out.
We have canvassed one hundred and sixty-five families and we have
got ninety-five per cent. of them to sign for an unlimited restriction. Our
restrictions ran out in 1915 and immediately two apartment houses were
erected on Ocean Avenue which we regard as rather spoiling Ocean Ave-
nue. We feel that Ocean Avenue is destined to be an apartment house street
and probably never can be saved from apartment houses, but that it even-
tually will be like Lenox Avenue in New York, one solid mass of apartment
houses from Prospect Park to Sheepshead Bay.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 101
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
We want you to classify in the “E” section everything inside of the
Ocean Avenue frontage. We have there to-day exactly what you planned
to place in an “ E” section everywhere else. The fact that there is a possi-
bility of apartment houses being erected on these interior plots has had a
tendency to cheapen values. A house that was bought originally when the
Ackerson development was made for $16,000, was sold last week for $12,000
because the parties in interest were afraid that an apartment house would
be built on a vacant lot next to it. This is a criterion of values dropping
from a fear of apartment houses going in there. Now you will conserve the
values to the extent of $4,000 per house by restricting, and you will also
actually relieve the taxpayers from the greater fear of what might come to
them. I think that is in brief the story of Fiske Terrace. We can show
you a map with ninety per cent. of the property owners asking for unlimited
restrictions there.
STATEMENT BY Epmunp Dwicut, Resmpenr Manacer, THE EMPLoyers’
Lrapiniry AssuRANCE CorporaTION oF Lonpon, May 18, 1916
Districting will reduce number of accidents
T heartily approve of the program of the Commission. From the stand-
point of accident prevention and accident reduction, any legislation which
will reduce congestion is of the utmost importance.
I have been for thirty years the New York Resident Manager of the
Company that began the business in the United States, of insuring against
liability arising out of personal accidents, and during that period there have
been reported to my office more than 200,000 accidents, the majority of
which have occurred in New York City. These have included accidents to
the public caused by the use of elevators, and in the streets from vehicles,
as well as from many other causes in buildings and in streets.
My experience has indicated that accidents increase as congestion
increases, and any plan which will reduce congestion of population in build-
mgs or in areas of the city will reduce the number of accidents.
The proposed limitation of heights of buildings will reduce congestion
m elevators, which is one of the prolitic causes ot elevator accidents.
Elevator accidents are due in far larger proportion to crowding, tc
carelessness on the part of passengers, and to unskillful handling which is
itself frequently caused by crowded cars, than to defects in mechanicai
appliances.
The number of street accidents also in large measure follow increase
in density of population, and it is strikingly the case that the proximity
of manufacturing operations to crowded residential districts constitutes a
peril, because heavy trucking express and similar traffic has to be conducted
through streets which are crowded with children.
There is no question in my mind that limitation of building heights
and districting for different classes of use, so that manufacturing operations
would be carried on in zones with a minimum residential use, would each
tend, in large measure, to the reduction of accidents, and to the safety of
the people of New York.
As an owner of property in various parts of New York, I am satisfied
that while in individual cases there might be some hardship, resulting from
the proposed system, it should work as a whole to the enhancement and
stability of real estate values, and to the great welfare of the community.
The plan of this commission provides for certain residential streets
102 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
from which trade and industry will be excluded. This, in my judgment, will
undoubtedly tend to reduce the frequency of street accidents. Manufac-
turing operations carried on extensively in sections of the city which are also
used for residential purposes and which involve an extensive use by truck,
vans and express wagons, in residential streets, increases the number of
accidents in the street. I believe that the same would be true if the mer-
cantile use of the streets could be eliminated or reduced in residential
sections.
No general statement can be made as to the time necessary to take
tenants out of high buildings by means of the elevators, because the condi-
tions in each of the buildings vary. There are, undoubtedly, some buildings
of more than twenty stories in height in which it would require considerably
more than half an hour to take the occupants out by means of the elevators
There are others, in which this could probably be accomplished in approxi-
mately a quarter of an hour. The higher the building, the longer the time
necessary, in proportion to the number of floors.
As a very rough test, I think that upon the average, it might be stated
that an office building was well equipped which could discharge its occupants
by means of the elevators, at the rate of a minute a floor. Ina loft building,
the time required to clear the building of occupants by means of the ele-
vators is greater than in an office building of the same size, because the
elevator equipment is less complete in proportion to the number of persons
occupying the building.
The fact that elevators used by the employees in loft buildings are also
used for freight purposes, makes the danger from panic more serious in the
case of loft buildings, than in the case of office buildings. Freight elevators,
or combined freight and passenger elevators, cannot be made as satisfactory
for the quick movement of passengers as elevators used solely for
passengers.
STATEMENT BY ABRAM I. Etkus, UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO TURKEY,
May 24, 1916
Work of the State Factory Commission
I was counsel for the State Factory Commission. The work of this
Commission, which occupied between three and four years, covered factory
conditions in cities of the first and second class, and in some other parts of
the State and also industrial conditions in mercantile businesses, and then
there was an investigation into wage earning conditions, upon which a report
was made to the Legislature with reference to a minimum wage commission.
The results of our investigations were published in a report of thirteen
volumes.
Districting a great benefit to city
Knowing conditions as I do, particularly in the factory and working
districts of the City of New York, I would say that the plans proposed by
the Commission are an urgent necessity at the present time from the stand-
point of health, safety, convenience, comfort and general welfare. It would
be a very great benefit to the whole community to have it districted, not only
to those who do the work, but to the general citizenship.
I look upon most of these things as having an economic value besides
merely a health benefit to the persons directly involved, for the reason that
it has been proved over and over again, if you adopt measures which make
for the safety of life and the preservation of the health of the people, you
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 103
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
lessen the number who are likely to become public or private charges, and
that redounds to the benefit of the taxpayers. It is so all along, and was
illustrated before the Factory Commission by a number of men. For
instance, | remember very well in one of the cities up in the State that a
gentleman came before us and said that he had already installed various
improvements in advance of what we were going to compel factory owners
to do, not from motives of philanthropy or because it was a good thing he
said, but because he thought it was the best thing to do since it would pay
him to do it. And he said it is purely a matter of dollars and cents. I can
get more work out of the employees and better work! I have not the
slightest doubt that I will save my own city in taxes by preventing these
people from becoming sick or ill and being public charges. That has been
proved to be true in a great many instances.
T have not the slightest doubt that with these districting regulations you
are going to furnish people with not only a better place to work in, and
better situated buildings to work in, but improved conditions surrounding
their work. You will find that they will do better work, and do more work
and a higher class of work, and that you won’t find so much sickness. In
other words, it is the old case of prevention, that is better than cure. Of
course, it is going to hurt in the transition. That is the great danger to be
avoided, by making the transition as easy as possible. If we could rebuild
the City of New York, I presume the ideal thing to do would be to put the
factories all along the waterfront, where you have transportation right at
the door, and then put the dwellings for the workers on a line inside next
to the factories so that the employees can walk to their work, and then put
the retail shops in the center of the city. I don’t suppose you can do that.
I take it that this Commission is going to do the next best thing, and restrict
the future use of the streets so that they will be of the utmost benefit to the
great majority of the people.
Co-ordination needed in building regulations
Many of the advantages of the factory law are lost by reason of the
fact that its scope is limited to the particular building in which the factory
or workshop is located, and not to the locality of the factory. Many of the
advantages, for instance, of having large windows, well ventilated rooms,
are lost by persons who are next door to the skyscraper buildings which shut
off their light. The same may be said of the Tenement House Law. It does
not regulate any structures but tenements and therefore it does not control
other buildings which are erected adjacent to tenement houses. Any measure
that brings about a co-ordination in these laws or in the buildings covered
by these laws, distributing them in districts, where buildings of certain types
may be located, would be a distinct benefit to the city from the standpoint
of health and safety.
As a matter of fact the modern high building is much better built than
the old buildings. Of course, | am not a physician. I do not pretend to
say anything about the results to people working in high buildings, but as a
matter of fact the modern loft building, which is usually for factory pur-
poses, and which is more than six or seven stories in height, is built much
better as far as safety in case of fire, and sanitary conditions are concerned,
than the old law buildings.
Old buildings converted to new uses
The worst factory buildings were found to be those which were con-
verted tenements or warehouses. They are patched up in order to try to
104 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
comply with the law. They had no light, no guard against fire, no extra
means of exit, and the sanitary conditions were very poor.
We ought to try to make permanent certain localities in the city to be
used for certain purposes and that would permit of buildings being erected
adapted for such purposes, or altered for such purposes permanently, instead
of requiring changes to be made periodically, and instead of permitting the
old buildings to be changed and changed rapidly. It does seem to me at
times that it is a very great hardship if a man erects a building and complies
with the then existing law and does everything he can do to make it comply
with the law, to then have the Legislature come along, for very good reason
I will say, and decree that he should change it or alter it at great expense
to himself and with no apparent benefit, and then, of course, to have another
man come along and construct a building complying with the new law right
next to him, which is far superior to his—sometimes I feel really that the
State ought to compensate the man for his building.
Greater safety in low buildings
Any plan that proposes to reduce to six and seven stories in height the
kind of buildings that formerly were permitted to go as high as twenty-one
stories, would be a positive benefit from the standpoint of safety. Our
whole Factory Law shows that. We increase the safety guard as the build-
ings become higher. They must be of a certain kind of construction above
a certain height. They have to have a sprinkler system above a certain
story. They must have all sorts of restrictions and means of escape as the
buildings become higher and house more people. But, if you could cut off
the buildings and make them all lower you would certainly conduce to
safety. There is no question about that. Now, take present conditions in
the old buildings. Personally I say I would rather be in a twelve-story or a
twenty-story modern fireproof building that has a sprinkler system and all
of the modern conditions for safety, than I would in a five or six story
building that was not under the same conditions.
Manufacturing in tenements
All manufacturing, to my mind, ought to be taken out of homes, for
economical reasons, as well as for health reasons. We have made a very
thorough investigation of manufacturing in tenements, and the results
showed very bad conditions, not only to health, but as I have already said,
for economical reasons which ought to be established. They are due to the
extension of the factory to the home without any of the requirements which
cover factory work being extended to it. In other words, if a man employs
people in his factory he must have a certain number of safeguards and give
his employees a certain amount of air space. He must have all sanitary
arrangements. He has to do a great many things for their safety and for
their care—perhaps not enough—nevertheless he has to do a great many
things ; but, in the home that same man can send the very same article to be
manufactured, and none of these conditions that I have mentioned have to
be complied with. Manufacturing is done in the living rooms of tenements
with all the family present, because labor conditions do not have to be
observed there. You can’t do anything in that matter just now. I don’t
think you can be too strong about this home work proposition.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 105
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
STATEMENT BY Dr. Haven Emerson, CoMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
Hearty, City or New York, Fepruary 10, 1916
Regulation of cornices
Not only do cornices, as used in the past in New York City, generally
detract from the simplicity, beauty and architectural attractiveness of the
buildings and the streets, but by their overhanging they deprive the passing
citizen and the neighboring and opposite dwellers or occupants of light and
heat from the sun, to which they are entitled and which are of value to the
health of the community.
Further, it is a matter of common observation that the dripping of rain
water and melted snow and ice inconvenience the foot passengers and main-
tain the kind of nuisance from wet pavements which is forbidden from other
kinds of projections, such as hanging flower boxes, food safes, etc. Actual
bodily danger is suffered as the result of icicles hanging in some cases over
one-third of the width of the sidewalk.
In permitting cornices on the set-back walls to have a greater width of
projection than those on the street wall, I trust some provision can be
inserted which will prevent such cornices from encroaching on the line
established by projecting the line from mid street to top of street wall
upward and backward.
STATEMENT BY Dr. Haven Emerson, ComMissioNer, DEPARTMENT OF
Hearty, May 4, 1916
Sanitary conditions of office buildings
Dr. Emerson stated that the Health Department had made a survey of
the health conditions of the persons employed in the office buildings within
the block bounded by Broadway, Nassau Street, Liberty Street and Cedar
Street. This block is immediately north of the Equitable Building, which
has a height of 36 stories. This is a representative business block in the
downtown section, containing buildings of both the older and more modern
types.
The air used in these buildings, which is generally supplied through an
artificial system of ventilation, is generally far below normal in its humidity
and above normal in its temperature. Artificial light is used practically
every hour in the day and every day in the year by 85 per cent. of the
occupants of these offices. A census showed this block to be inhabited by
an office population of 2,400 persons. The number of persons visiting this
block each day to transact business is about 16,000. The total number of
persons accommodated in this block daily is therefore 18,400. The absence
of natural light, and the abnormal conditions of the temperature and
humidity in office buildings constitute, according to Dr. Emerson, a situa-
tion that is detrimental to health, not that it causes disease, but that it
promotes lack of resistance and lack of proper physical and mental vigor.
Tuberculosis in old law and new law tenements
An investigation made by the Health Department of the patients suf-
fering from tuberculosis in the twenty-fifth census district, which is bounded
by Broadway, East Houston Street, West Broadway, Waverly Place,
Sixth Avenue, 14th Street and the Hudson River, clearly demonstrated
that, not only are there fewer cures among those living in old law than in
new law tenements, but the ratio of secondary to primary cases is higher
106 CQMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
in the old law than in the new law tenements. Secondary cases are those
which have been acquired through contact with primary cases. In the
new law tenements the incidence of secondary cases is decidedly lower than
in the old law tenements.
About 45 per cent of the tuberculosis patients in this district shared
the same room and the same bed with other people. This intimate personal
contact, of course, encourages the spread of the disease. Of the rooms
occupied by patients with tuberculosis 6 per cent were absolutely dark; 16
per cent dimly lighted; and 78 per cent lighted by windows in such a
manner that artificial light was not required all the time.
Necessity for districting
Adequate and effective standards of light and air in the interest of
public health, in Dr. Emerson’s opinion, can be obtained only through a
comprehensive districting plan.
[ would say, that the opinions of physicians have been expressed in
reports which are almost identically worded, dating back at least one hun-
dred years, with exactly the same conclusions and recommendations which
might be considered parallel with those now arrived at by this Commission ;
also that the report of 1832 and previous one of citizens committees on con-
ditions of health in this city indicated the necessity of providing for the
future. These recommendations were made when the development of New
York City had not vet reached 14th Street. We are still without the neces-
sary relief, which nothing but this plan of yours can provide. These health
conditions have not improved and the demands for reform have not yet been
met. There is no control at the present which would prevent the re-creation
of exactly the same unsanitary conditions that have resulted from previous
lack of control.
One of the difficult things, aside from the present sanitary inconvenience
and danger, is the condition that was met with in providing space {or
offensive trades, such as chicken slaughter houses. The device that was
used by the Department of Health to protect adjacent owners and still give
the property owners the right to select their own neighbors has never met
with entire public approval. A great many of the advantages created
through sanitary and housing reform have been lost by reason of the fact
that these various laws, which were an improvement over what went before,
were not co-ordinated with one another.
Street cars and communicable diseases
Another point in which health authorities foresee benefit to public health
by a consistent plan for the control of the future growth of the city is in
the improved conditions of occupancy of traffic conveyances. It is appre-
ciated and acknowledged that the more congested is a traffic conveyance
the more dangerous does it become as a means of transmitting communicable
disease to others, and there is a constant proportionate increase in infectious
organisms found in the air of traffic conveyances as their congestion
increases.
Observations made in the subway from the Atlantic Avenue station to
96th Street and back through the subway during the rush hours has shown
a constant increase of disease breeding organisms, such as were responsible
for the epidemic of infectious colds during last December, January and
February.
Observations show the presence of these bacteria in such amounts as to
constitute a serious public menace. The epidemic cost the city two thousand
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 107
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
lives, over and above the usual death rate, as it prevailed a year ago and for
the previous five years. Those deaths were due to organisms which were
found constantly in the air of the subway cars, as it was examined in our
laboratory.
That epidemic extended over a period of from eight to ten weeks,
during which time it prevailed in our large centers of population in this
country, and it occurred at the time of the maximum crowding of stores
and places of amusement and traffic conveyances and at a period of maxi-
mum of fatigue and exposure, owing to weather conditions and the holiday
trade, and it is at such times that we may expect an annual wave of increased
respiratory disease. We may expect a repetition of it annually in a greater
or less degree as the period of the year comes around when the windows
are shut because of the lowering of the temperature, and respiratory dis-
eases begin and steadily increase. There are two large episodes in the
death rate, one infant mortality—deaths in July and August, and the other
the increase in respiratory diseases during the cold months of the year,
and that is ascribed by sanitarians to the crowding of people within confined
spaces so inadequately provided with means of ventilation that personal
resistance becomes too low to avoid infection.
To indicate the extent to which the Board of Health has considered
public danger through the crowding of cars, I would call your attention
to orders which were issued to forbid the crowding oi cars on certain lines
m the city where traffic conditions would permit of such control being
put in force. The most noticeable instances were the cross-town lines in
Manhattan, at 86th Street and 59th Street, where the companies admitted
that service could be provided sufficient to avoid the crowding of cars to
over 50 per cent of their seating capacity, and on Staten Island a similar
condition prevailed. When it was called to the attention of the street
railways companies that infection of humans occurred as the result of
persons crowding in conveyances, they accepted the orders of the Board
and complied. This aroused opposition on the part of people whose real
estate development was predicated upon permission to carry the crowds
tegardless of congestion. The Board of Health has thought that the
time has come when such crowding should be forbidden, not as a matter of
personal convenience, but as a matter of community danger—community
health hazard.
Importance of sunlight
The causes that take off a large percentage of the lives in a great city,
particularly New York City, could be summed up in the words, opportunity
tor personal contact and diminished personal resistance. Congestion is a
term that can be twisted variously. Diminished resistance of humans, as
with vegetation, depends upon the artificiality of their environment. You
cannot raise babies any more without light and air than you can raise plants,
and where you cannot prove that a disease has followed congestion you
can almost always show diminished resistance.
We should expect less communicable respiratory disease in detached
houses than in tenements, but inasmuch as the reporting of respiratory
disease is not compulsory, there is no record anywhere in this country
of the incidence of respiratory diseases other than tuberculosis. We have
no morbidity statistics of the City as a whole and there are no comparative
figures to prove it.
It is proved that sunlight in the living room and the sleeping room
108 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
materially aids in providing resistance against diseases like tuberculosis.
The sun has a destructive effect upon disease breeding bacteria. Direct
sunlight is a most effective disinfectant. Direct daylight—even though not
direct sunlight has a powerful influence in destroying pathogenic bacteria.
In addition to that people who are able to live in well lighted apartments
have a physical resistance which is superior to that of people who live in
dark rooms. That has been proved under exact experimentatal conditions in
laboratory tests and is a matter of common observation among human
beings.
The morbidity of tuberculosis in the old law tenements is twenty per
thousand of population, and in the new law tenements it is fifteen per
thousand of population. The morbiditity of tuberculosis in the twenty-fifth
census district is ten per thousand, and for the entire city one-tenth per
thousand.
It is the popular impression that all artificial light is detrimental to the
nervous system and causes a deterioration of nervous control; but the
damage to people’s individual resistance is probably a more important factor
than the actual damage to special senses, except where the light is obviously
insufficient or excessive.
As much damage has been caused by an excessive supply of light in
certain places as has been by the absence of sufficient light in other places.
One can stand a superfluity of sunlight and benefit from it. In a room
where there is the same amount of light supplied by an artificial means,
very serious nervous disabilities result, owing to the entirely different
physical qualities of most artificial light.
Effect of vegetation on humidity and temperature
Continuous high temperature of a hot spell in the city is higher and
more prolonged in areas where stone or brick or concrete construction is
continuous, than where there are open spaces. Radiation during the night
does not permit of the same reduction of temperature in densely built-up
areas as occurs in other parts of the city where those conditions do not
exist. Our general experience is that most of the heat prostrations occur in
districts where there are few or no open spaces.
Humidity is maintained more nearly the normal point in the vicinity
of open spaces where there is a vegetation. Other things being equal, the
temperature tends to be lower in the neighborhood of parks.
Relation of stair climbing to health
Iexcessive stair climbing and excessive standing when fatigued in
crowded conveyances unduly aggravate certain disabilities from which
women suffer. Climbing stairs is not per se any more dangerous for women
than for men, but the disabilities from which they commonly suffer are
apt to be aggravated more than the disabilities from which men suffer.
The class of people who suffer much more than women is the large army
of children with cardiac diseases, and there are 16,000 children in the
public schools of this city who have now such damage to their hearts as will
probably permanently handicap them.
At least two per cent of the children in the public schools have organic
diseases of the heart, resulting either from infection acquired congenitally,
or acquired as the result of scarlet fever, tonsilitis, rheumatism, chorea, etc.
These children, if they live in such places as one and two family houses,
for instance, or premises where they have but little stair climbing to do,
are going to be able to adjust themselves and compensate for their physical
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 109
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
defects during their early years, so as to become fit and effective self-
supporting citizens; whereas, if during this period their only possibility of
residence is where they have to do much stair climbing, the chances of their
permanent injury is considerable.
Dust
Probably the danger of dust is not so much in its carrying the actual
germs of disease as in irritating the respiratory passages and making them
more accessible to invasion. The amount of dust which people inhale makes
the nose and throat more accessible to the invasion of infection when
crowded in traffic conveyances immediately after coming from the street,
so, with that proviso, I should say this: That where there is excessive dust
or excessive draught and spreading of dust through crowds of people in
the streets, there is going to be a diminished local resistance of the respira-
tory tract to such diseases as people are commonly exposed to in crowded
premises, such as moving picture theatres, traffic conveyances, and many
places of public assembly.
Effect of congestion on health
The infant mortality rate is usually higher in the most congested places,
except for certain characteristic racial differences. The congested colored
section gives an infinitely higher rate—I should say three or four times,
as I recall the infant mortality statistics, than an area similarly congested
occupied by Jewish people. There are racial differences involved, so that
I cannot make a very broad general statement. The colored infant mor-
tality would be three hundred and the Jewish ninety per 1,000 living births,
with similar congestion in similarly constructed buildings.
I should say we could anticipate with perfect certainty a diminished
sick rate, a diminished incidence of infectious disease, and a diminished
death rate, in all areas of the city limited to residence developments. The
portions of the city which have the small family house development show
a lower death rate than prevails elsewhere in the city, under equal economic
conditions. Children who are brought up in single or two family houses,
where there is plenty of land about, are more likely to be healthy than those
brought up in an apartment or a tenement house.
STATEMENT BY WILLIAM Emerson, ArcuiTect, Marcu 28, 1916
I take pleasure in expressing my hearty approval of the purpose and
work of the Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions.
This approval is based on the following convictions :
1. That those occupying houses or apartments or carrying on legiti-
mate business will be safeguarded in a continuance of their occupations.
2. That it will result in establishing and standardizing real estate
values, thereby insuring fair activity and profits and eliminating excessive
profits or losses resulting from sudden changes.
3. That such an assurance enables citizens to devote their time and
energies to the fullest development of their business and civic interests with-
out anxiety for the future.
4. That it will give to each citizen a proper share of light and air and
prevent the monopolization of these essentials to health and happiness.
5 That the proposed legislation will upset to the least extent estab-
lished values, keeping in mind the general benefit that will inevitably result
from its enactment.
110 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
The only anxiety is concerning the surest means to guarantee the per-
manence of these benefits while at the same time leaving open the necessary
field for improvement and development.
STATEMENT By Bruce M. Fatconer, ATTORNEY FOR THE FrrrH AVENUE
AssociaATIon, May 18, 1916
Approval of regulations proposed by the Commission
On June 19, 1913, the Fifth Avenue Association submitted to the
Heights of Buildings Commission of New York City, the predecessor of
the present Commission, a full statement of its arguments in favor of the
limitation of building heights, which was printed in the report of that Com-
mission at pages 211-223.
With the exception of the height rules prescribed for one district, which
it regards as too liberal, the Fifth Avenue Association is in hearty accord
with the height limitations prescribed by the present Commission, and as
to this exception the association has already submitted to the Commission
in writing the restriction desired by the association. The recommendations
as to area are entirely in accord with the views of the association. The
necessity for some such reasonable rules as those prescribed by the Com-
mission and the desirability of providing to some extent for courts and
yards appear so obvious and the regulations in this respect have, to our
knowledge, been so entirely unopposed as to need no argument here for
their support. This statement will be confined, therefore, entirely to the
limitation of the use of buildings.
History of the factory invasion of Fifth avenue
Up to twenty years ago Fifth Avenue was exclusively a residential
thoroughfare, with the exception of a few retail stores located between
14th and 23d Streets. With the advent of these few retail stores specula-
tive builders conceived the idea of buying a few lots on Fifth Avenue and
erected a few office buildings. These buildings were rather flimsily and
cheaply constructed. The building laws at that time were not stringent
enough to prevent the erection of flimsy buildings. The space in these
buildings was quickly rented. The residents in that part of Fifth Avenue
began to move further uptown and more speculative builders secured land
and proceeded to erect more office buildings.
About 1900 the supply of office buildings had so far outstripped the
demand for space that the owners of a number of these buildings found
themselves without any income, because of their inability to rent the space
in the office buildings. They then looked around and decided that cloak
manufacturers would take the vacant space. To this end they procceded.
These manufacturers were told that the Fifth Avenue address, in itself,
would be a great asset to their business. They were also told that the
nearer they were to the retail trade the better would be their business, and
by giving more similar promises the speculative builders induced a few of
the cloak manufacturers to move from the neighborhood of Broadway and
Spring Street to Fifth Avenue between 15th and 18th Streets. It so hap-
pened that the first three or four of the manufacturers who moved into
that region did increase their business. This was taken for proof that in
order to succeed in the manufacturing of cloaks and suits it was necessary
to be on Fifth Avenue. Very quickly after this practically 70 per cent of
the space in the office buildings on Fifth Avenue below 22d Street was
taken by cloak and suit manufacturers.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 111
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
As time progressed new loft buildings were erected east and west of
Fifth Avenue in the side streets and by 1910 the section lying between 14th
and 23d Streets was practically given over to cloak and suit manufacturing.
Because of street congestion on the part of employees and the consequent
absence of shoppers and loss of business and for other reasons outlined
below, due te the presence of factories, the retail stores were forced to
move. The offices in that district became equally undesirable and cloak-
making was really the only industry or business which flourished there at
this time. After 1910 the gradual march northward began. The cloak and
suit manufacturers crept up to 25th, 26th and 27th Streets and by 1914
their northern limit was 32d Street. During the last two years they have
kept on going up and up, until to-day some of them are located as far north
as 38th Street. Even above this point and for a half mile or so there have
of late become located many wholesale jewelry manufacturers employing
hundreds of persons.
Arguments in favor of the limitation of the use of buildings for factory purposes
in the Fifth avenue district. Sidewalk and street congestion caused by
employees
Between the hours of 11.30 A. M. and 2 P. M. the sidewalks on Fiith
Avenue become thoroughly congested with multitudes of employees from
the factories in the side streets up to 34th Street. In some places there are
merely groups of four, six, eight or twenty men standing on the sidewall
and the roadway debating in strange tongues conditions of labor and other
kindred subjects and stopping the free movement of the pedestrians along
the sidewalks. At other places, notably between 27th and 33d Streets, the
crowds marching four abreast north and four abreast south at a snail’s
pace are so dense that it is impossible to wallk on the sidewall unless one is
prepared to shove and fight one’s way through crowds. As many as 1,500
people have been counted on one block congregated on the sidewalks.
Almost touching each other front and back they usually move at the rate
of about one mile an hour or less up and down in stretches of from four to
six blocks, and continually stop to exchange greetings with their friends.
The Police Department finds it extremely difficult to keep them moving
even at such a slow rate of speed. It becomes utterly impossible for any-
body to enter a store or a building, where these crowds block the sidewalks,
with any kind of physical comfort, and these conditions are particularly
unpleasant for women, who constitute the great majority of shoppers. It
naturally follows that customers will not trade in the stores so obstructed.
Under such conditions the value of the property for business purposes is
slowly but surely reduced and the tenant is forced to move.
In addition to the above described discomfort caused by these crowds
it has become customary on the part of the clothing manufacturers to use °
the streets as an employment office. It is a frequent occurrence that during
the hours of the greatest congestion a foreman will run out and ask for a
number of workers. In the slack season hundreds of them promptly
organize a rush into the building carrying everything and everybody who
happens to be on the sidewalk with them into the building.
If it is realized that, according to the census of the State Labor Depart-
ment, nearly 4,300 people are employed in one particular block in the lower
part of the district and that practically all of them are men who come out
during the noon hour for fresh air, a smoke and a meeting with their
friends, it can vividly be pictured how the sidewalks look. Some photo-
graphs furnished by the Fifth Avenue Association to the Commission por-
112 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
tray the conditions in such a plain manner as to make further comment
superfluous.
Conditions are of course also very bad in the morning and evening at
the beginning and end of the working day. In the afternoon especially the
sidewalks on the side streets are crowded with tens of thousands of workers
scurrying eastward, all leaving work about the same time.
Congestion of vehicular traffic
There is a very close relation between the presence of factories in such
a limited area and the presence of traffic congestion. Why this is so is at
least im some respects quite obvious. The manufacturer’s goods, when
finished, must be transported elsewhere in trucks. But this close relation-
ship need not be surmised at or reasoned out. The entire point of Vehicular
Congestion is so fully covered in the statement relating to traffic, dated
March 30th, submitted by the Fifth Avenue Association to the Commission,
as to require no further restatement here.
Congestion in factories
The factories themselves are crowded to the utmost capacity. Rents
and overhead charges are high in the Fifth Avenue district, and the manu-
facturers must use every inch of floor space in order to produce the neces-
sary income. The height of the factories varies from ten to twenty stories ;
and the number of those employed from 150 to 200 people on a floor. The
elevator facilities provided for this large number of employees consist
merely of the freight elevators, and, of course, receiving and shipping
freight takes precedence over the transportation up and down of the em-
ploy ees. How much time is lost to the individual employee is plainly shown
by the fact that at the noon hour the majority find it more convenient and
quick to walk down the stairs even as high as from the ae floor in order
to reach the street promptly. Very often one elevator will be out of com-
mission at lunch time, because the elevator boy is out to ici Pushing,
shoving and actual fighting for a place in the elevator is a daily occurrence
in some of the buildings. In the morning the employees dribble in. It
takes about three-quarters of an hour for ‘them to come. In the evening,
all of them leaving at the same time, every exit facility, elevators and stairs
alike, are taxed to the utmost. In spite of this, however, 45 minutes elapse
before the tall buildings are emptied.
What a contrast is found in the factories further west, near and beyond
7th and 8th Avenues, where rents are cheaper and the necessity for economy
of floor space not so vital! Whereas in the Fifth Avenue factories there
are generally only two elevators or less, in the district further west the
average number per factory building is four to five. In the Fifth Avenue
district there are practically never over two elevators per factory, while only
two or three blocks west there are practically never under two
Reduction in values
When the speculative factory movement began the market value of
real estate between 14th and 23d Streets on Fifth Avenue increased and
kept on increasing until it struck the high level about 1906. Since that
time the decrease. has been gradual but ‘constant. The same thing holds
good for the side streets. When loft buildings replaced private dwellings
used for boarding houses assessed valuations were raised, but afterwards
the assessments were slowly reduced and are still on the decline.
The question of decreased assessments is a very complicated one. Asa
rule assessments were on the increase below 23d Street up to about 1910.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 113
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
The increase from 1895 to 1910 amounted to about 45 per cent, roughly
speaking. Since 1910 the decrease in the assessed valuation has been at
the rate of 10 to 25 per cent a year in some years, and five per cent in
other years. Today the decrease in assessments is about 40 per cent from
that of 1910. Above 23d Street the assessments were gradually raised
until in 1912 they reached the maximum in the district between 23d and
“30th Streets. During seven years assessments were increased by from
20 to 60 per cent, according to location, averaging about 35 per cent for
the block square. The first cut in assessed valuations berween 23d and
28th Streets appeared in 1914, and 1915 and 1916 present some more cuts
im assessed valuation. On the average, the reduction in assessment for
taxation purposes amounts to about 28 per cent per square block, and
specific cases of decreased assessments are to be found everywhere. Prac-
tically none of the buildings erected prior to 1910 is today assessed at
more than about 65 of 70 per cent. at the utmost of the assessed valuation
in the period from 1910 to 1912.
According to the Real Estate Record and Guide land value maps in
1911, five years ago, the front-foot value for assessment purposes of lands
along Fifth Avenue ranged from $8,500 at Twenty-sixth Street (Madison
Square) to $17,000 at Thirty-fourth Street. Today they are appraised by the
same authority, the Tax Department, at from $6,300 to $14,000.
Owing to the factory invasion and the decline in values the Fifth Ave-
nue real estate market has been stagnant below 34th Street. There has
been little change in the owners of property during the last two years in the
region lying between 14th and 34th Streets. But during the last three years
at least eleven parcels of land with the buildings erected thereon were sold
at auction in proceedings to foreclose the mortgage. The equities in the
properties, after deducting the first mortgage, which amounted to about 50
to 60 per cent of the assessed valuation, were wiped out.
Let us take a few specific instances of reduction in assessments. The
building at 34 to 46 West 23d Street, the old Stern Brothers building, de-
creased in valuation from $3,330,000 in 1908 to $1,119,000 in 1915. The
property at 27 to 29 West 16th Street, on which there is a practically new
factory building, in 1908, before the improvements had been put in, was
assessed at $118,000, and in 1909, after the improvements, at $248,000, stood
on the tax books in 1915 at $190,000. The building at 186 Fifth Avenue,
southwest corner of 23d Street, assessed at $620,000 in 1908, stands now at
the assessed value of $220,000.
General desirability of stability of use in districts
In this city, as in any other city, stability in use of certain geographical
sections makes for stability in values and stability along certain lines of
business. The downtown section, for instance, which has been now for
nearly a century the financial center of the city has as a district undergone
few vicissitudes from the point of view of property and rental values. As
an example of the contrary policy, we have the district lying around Canal
and Walker Streets, west of Broadway, which today is practically empty and
unused. This is a great detriment not only to the owners of the property
there, but also to the city on account of the loss of taxes. Wherever there
is any district where any attempt of permanency is made values are apt to
be stable or to rise and the district has an architecture of its own suitable
to the uses to which the buildings are put. An incentive is also given to
builders to put up as good buildings as can be profitably erected. On tha
114 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
other hand where districts jump from one part of the city to the other values
and appearances must necessarily suffer. Everybody wants tu get the bene-
fit of the new district right at the start. Speculative and cheap buildings
are encouraged and ultimately both the city and the property owners sustain
losses.
And what of those whose security for loans is real estate, the thou-
sands of smaller investors in mortgage loans, the scores of great financial
and insurance institutions who hold mortgages? Why, the future of their
investments may be as insecure and unstable as water, as has been instanced
and mentioned above with regard to lower Fifth Avenue, where many
equities have been completely wiped out and more, as has been pointed out
above. What chances has the holder of a second mortgage got under pres-
ent conditions in some districts? And of what use are the best brains, the
most expert judgment, the largest experience, and the fullest foresight on
the part of officers and directors when they are up against an unregulated,
haphazard, kaleidoscopic condition of affairs such as has resulted in the
Fifth Avenue district? New York is now like a picture puzzle, the pieces
shaken up in a bag and thrown on a table, with the pieces placed alongside
each other just as they happen to fall out of the bag. We cannot even now
have the perfect picture, but what we can do is to try to fix at least some
of the pieces where they belong, and keep them from being shaken up in
the bag again.
Transportation of workers
Transportation of the workers is greatly hindered by having the gar-
ment factories on and near Fifth Avenue. No workingman can live within
walking distance of his employment. From the far outlying districts like
the Bronx and Williamsburg, as well as the lower east side, the workers
come in crowded cars, elevated and subway trains, jammed to such an extent
that the Board of Health has found it necessary to interfere. In most cases
it means two car fares on each trip. In good weather the employees may in
some cases save one car fare by walking. In bad weather thousands of
these are compelled to walk on account of insufficiency of transportation
mediums. Lunch rooms are not provided and cannot be provided for in
sufficient quantities near the places where these people work. The relatively
high rent makes it impossible to utilize a lunch room merely during the
noon hour. As a result of the lack of accommodations a great many of
these factory employees do not get sufficient or proper food for the noon
meal. A large number of them bring their lunches with them and eat them
on the streets, adding to the litter thereon by throwing the refuse on or
near the curb.
Transportation of goods
If we are correctly informed a large majority of the goods manufac-
tured in the Fifth Avenue district are shipped to points outside of tlie city
and principally in the west. Consequently the factories in the Fifth Avenue
district are most unfortunately located from the point of view of their dis-
tance from the freight terminals. This handicap is greatly accentuated by
the fact that the avenues and streets in the district are already the most
heavily congested thoroughfares anywhere in the world, because of the mer-
cantile, shopping and pleasure traffic necessarily concentrating there, and be-
cause Fifth Avenue, owing to its central location, freedom from elevated and
surface car lines, and for other reasons, is the main traffic artery of the
city. This vehicular congestion is infinitely worse above 23d Street than
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 115
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
below it. From the point of view of this long and difficult haul the fac-
tories would be best off near the waterfront, but if they are to remain near
the avenue they are far better off below 23d Street than above it. Not only
would their presence in the other locations benefit the manufacturers, but it
would be a tremendous relief to the traffic situation.
The finished garments are transported from the factories, first of all,
to a packing house located in the district. It is not often that any one man-
ufacturer ships a car load or even three or four cases to the same destina-
tion. In order to receive more favorable rates it has become customary
for the various manufacturers to ship their goods in small quantities to one
of the several packing houses which specialize in this kind of freight. In
this packing house are delivered the goods of three or four or even two
dozen manufacturers, where they are repacked again and finally delivered
to the receiving stations of the railroads or the steamships, on the North or
East River, where most of the receiving stations are located. All this means
double handling and double hauling and a double strain on the traffic
situation. ;
Proximity of buyers
It has been said that one reason that the factories located in the Fifth
Avenue district above 23d Street was that manufacturers of garments must
have their factories located within easy reach of the hotel district and the
retail stores; that no buyer coming from out of town will go very far from
his hotel to buy his goods; and that in order to buy intelligently the buyer
must be close to the retail district in order to see the variety of styles. This
argument sounds plausible, but a little investigation will quickly show the
futility of it. Of course, in the old days, the buyers who stayed in uptown
hotels were a long way from the factories. But referring to the present,
in the Fifth Avenue Building, to speak only of one instance, there are a
number of salesrooms maintained by garment manufacturers who make their.
goods hundreds of miles away from New York. They find no difficulty
in getting buyers to come down and look at their goods. Strange to say,
the very New York retail houses, in whose vicinity garment manufacturers
are located, find it to their advantage to buy their goods as far out of
town as Cincinnati, Rochester, Baltimore, or Cleveland, not to speak of
Philadelphia. There is no sound reason why a manufacturer cannot logically
do all his manufacturing where the rent is cheaper, where a workingman
can live closer to his work, and where his overhead expenses are greatly
lowered. If need be, should the manufacturer be too far away from the
general vicinity of the buyer, there is nothing to prevent him from having a
salesroom and office on or near Fifth Avenue.
Difference between garment-factory workers and office and retail-store employees
There is a decided difference in the character of the employees working
in offices, retail stores and factories. By habit and training the employees
in offices are courteous, mindful of the rights of others and not prone to
interfere with the orderly and regular use of the streets. To a degree
the same holds true of employees in the various retail stores. They are
mostly the products of our public school system and have learned their
lesson in behaviour. When we come to the garment factory employees we
are confronted with the fact that the vast majority of them are relatively
recent immigrants and not many of them are familiar with the English
language. They do not readily fit themselves into the conditions which are
so different from those under which they have lived in their native coun-
116 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
tries. But among the garment workers a distinction must be made between
the younger generation and the older. The women in the trade are of a
better fibre than the men. As a rule, in their contact with other people,
they are less prone to make themselves offensive. As a matter of fact
certain particular trades, in which the majority of the employees are
women, are not objectionable from the point of view of the noon-hour con-
gestion. As a rule these women eat their lunches in places set apart for
them in the factories. Quite a number of employers have provided sanitary
and healthy, even attractive, lunch rooms for their female eniployees, and
at the present time the Labor Law prescribes lunch rooms and rest rooms
in every factory which employs more than 20 women. Of course, even at
the best, the women add to the congestion of the streets in the morning and
in the evening. They form a material percentage of the crowds which seek
transportation in the street cars, subways and elevated trains and they are
seriously endangered by the risk of fire or panic in any of the tall buildings.
The men, however, do not find lunch or smoking rooms provided for
them in the factories. They are compelled to go out in the street. A few
experiments have been tried along the line of using the roofs for these
men. In each instance, however, the experiment has failed. The roofs are
not capable of accommodating the large mass of men who work in one of
these buildings. At the best, the expense of strengthening and properly
safeguarding the roofs to make it possible for a large number of the men
to congregate on them is costly, and they would in addition have to be
roofed over to protect them from the elements. So the attempt to take
the men off the streets and have them congregate on the roofs has met with
no success.
Necessity for preservation of the Fifth avenue district as the retail center
The high-class retail stores which have been forced, by the invasion
of factories, to move further north on Fifth avenue have now reached the
limit of their northern migration. When the sections below 23d Street, and
then in turn between 23d and 32d Streets, were invaded by factories there
was a stretch from 34th to 59th Streets into which the retail stores could
move. This section, however, is now fairly well built up. Incidentally it
may be remarked that this is the only section of the city where assessed
valuations have been rapidly increasing during the last three years. Should
factories be erected to encroach further on this territory the retail stores
must look for an entirely new section in the city. Central Park is a barrier
to all trade. On the east side of Fifth avenue, facing Central Park, are
the very costly homes of our citizens, and still more costly apartment build-
ings are now being erected there. These two barriers prohibit the migration
of retail stores above 59th street. It is hard to think of any locality which
would be available should the territory from 34th to 59th Streets be further
endangered by factories.
This is not a local question—it is a matter affecting the entire city,
yes, the whole country. It is in the interest of all that this district shall
be preserved as the great retail district of the city and country. It is
impossible to foresee or prophesy what will happen if the northerly spread
of factories is not checked in the immediate future. Hundreds of millions
of dollars are invested in the greater and smaller retail businesses in this
district, and hundreds of millions have been spent in the erection of beau-
tiful store buildings intended to be permanent, as well as on churches, clubs,
hotels, public buildings and residences. To endanger these investments, to
ee
EO
—
Fifth Avenue, at 3lst Street—12:30 P. M.
Sixth Avenue and 27th Street.
Fic. 53—LUNCH HOUR CROWDS OF FACTORY WORKERS.
118 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
alter the character and ruin the beauty of this section would be a public
calamity affecting not only the whole city, but it would be felt and deplored
by the entire nation, which is bound up to this retail centre of the country
by many commercial ties and which has a just pride in its most famous
and historic thoroughfare.
Other districts more suitable for factories
The logical place for factories would seem to be in the neighborhood
where the workers live. New York City is fortunate in having a tremen-
dous waterfront where shipping facilities are of the best. Whether it be
possible to move the factories to or near the waterfront is doubtful, but
it is unquestionably possible to have factories near the places where the
people live. The great east side, parts of the west side, the Bronx, Brooklyn
and Queens, as well as Richmond, give plenty of opportunities for the
erection of factories at not too great a distance from the workers. It is
quite possible to have the various industries located in groups. Let the
clothing industry be in one section of the city, the printing industry in
another, the leather industry in still another, and so on. This has been
accomplished in certain European cities. In our own cities, trades and
businesses already congregate in groups. We find the wholesale district,
the silk district, the coffee district, the drug district, the leather district,
and so on, in well defined localities, and there is no reason whatsoever to
doubt that the industries could be grouped in a similar way.
If the garment factories are to remain in the Fifth avenue district at
all they are far better off below 23d street, assuming that proper buildings
will be constructed there, than they are above it, in the district from which
the Fifth Avenue Association has requested that they be excluded in future,
for the following reasons, among others:
1. Because they would be arousing no opposition or hostility on the
part of the public, the city and the business interests from 23d to 59th
Streets.
2. Because they could not do any harm there to values, appearances
and in other ways that has not already been done.
3. Because they would fit in with the general city plan and there have
a district of their own.
4. Because it would help to solve the problem of the transportation of
employees and a very large percentage of the workers would be within
walking distance of their homes.
5. Because the vehicular congestion is infinitely less there than in the
district above, and the transportation of goods to terminals could be more
easily and quickly effected.
6. Because rentals are cheaper below 23d Street.
Between 12th and 23d Streets buildings used exclusively as offices or
salesrooms bring the rental of about 85 cents per square foot on the avenue
and 70 to 75 cents on the side streets. Manufacturers pay between 65 and
75 cents per square foot. From 23d to 34th Street, office buildings and
salesrooms pay about a dollar to $1.20 per square foot on the avenue.
Police power
It requires but little thought or study to see that every one of the argu-
ments covered above, save that of “ Proximity of Buyers,” is based directly
on one or more of the elements of the police power, such as the public health,
safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare. They may be grouped
roughly as follows:
Y i <a
27th Street, Near Madison Avenue.
Fic. 54—CONGESTED SIDE STREETS IN FIFTH AVENUE DISTRICT.
120 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Congestion in sHactoniesmaas eee eee ee |
dransportation Ot | WOLrkersscrij.-)-1- 11 ieee Health, Safety,
Differences Between Garment Workers and{ Comfort, Convenience.
Other -Hmployeess ie -y.osmeee)le seen: J
Pedestrians Goncestiona-e ene eeneeneernee
Mehiculars Convestionmenecermerricome nieces | Pies. » Commonts
imansportation of \GoodSm a.m) ec J paca
ReductionsolValuess emer eee
Desirability of Stability of Use Districts....
Aesthetics Connected with the General Wel-
PALE weer sre wisilteGapetsnatos ouceeayetsentbepes aici eee General Welfare.
Necessity of Preserving the Retail District. .
Necessity of Protecting Hotels, Churches,
(Glubs Hetcas eee ena e ee eee
Other Districts More Suitable. ..Health, Safety, Comfort, Convenience,
General Welfare.
STATEMENT BY JoHN T. FETHERSTON, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
STREET CLEANING, May 22, 1916
Economy in street cleaning
I would say, in general, that the development of the zone system involv-
ing an orderly arrangement of building uses, should ultimately tend to
economy in the cleaning of streets and in the collection of refuse by provid-
ing a basis for a work plan which will meet particular conditions of each
district or section. I can illustrate this by stating that where congestion
exists on account of height of buildings there may be in the same locality
other types of. structures which might better be served’ by a method ot
street cleaning or'refuse collection not suitable for the congested building
district, yet the department to-day has a large compromise system which is
not so economical as if all the districts were homogeneous.
Difficulty of keeping’ streets clean in mixed districts
It is more difficult to keep a mixed district containing stores and dvwell-
ings‘clean’ and sanitary than a residential district. That is apparent all
over the city. The demand for sanitation varies with building occupancy.
A residential street requires at least a higher standard of street conditions
than would a business or'a mixed type of street. A great many-complaints
come to the Street Cleaning Department from streets where mixed. business
and residential occupancy is in force.
In the heavy traffic ‘districts there are streets where it is hardly pos-
sible to clean the roadway during the day time on account of the procession
of vehicles which prevents the cleaners from collecting the street dirt. On
that type of street the same sanitary conditions cannot be maintained as
in a residential street.
In the case of mixed occupancy of a particular block (residence, busi-
ness and factory use) the factories and business places in that particular
block tend to bring heavy traffic into the block and make it difficult to keep
it in the best sanitary condition. The cost of cleaning a mixed street is
greater than one used wholly for residential or industrial purposes.
Location of garbage plant
There is one item which might be advanced for the consideration of
your Commission, and that is the possibility of setting aside some location
in the city for the disposal of the city’s waste.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 121
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
For six months the city has been struggling to let a contract for the
disposal of garbage from the boroughs of Manhattan, Bronx and Brooklyn,
and for at least four of the six months the city has been defending law
suits brought by property owners in the location where the plant was pro-
posed to be erected. Every locality demands garbage and rubbish and ash
removal and the work must be done expeditiously and regularly, regardless
of conditions. Necessarily this material must be disposed of in some way.
Yet, local sentiment is so strong and brings such power to bear upon
officials that every locality in the city objects to the erection of disposal
works within its particular confines.
In the present instance three sites suitable for the erection of a garbage
disposal plant were proposed: First, Riker’s Island, between the East River
and the Long Island Sound; second, Barren Island, in Jamaica Bay; third,
marsh land on the westerly side of Staten Island.
The city has used Barren Island as a garbage disposal location for over
twenty years. The residents of that locality have sought relief from the
nuisances which existed at the old plant, and have repeatedly brought suits
against contractors as well as the city to abate this nuisance.
In the latter part of last year the city recognized the necessity for im-
proving the treatment of garbage and eliminating the existing nuisances.
Two contracts were advertised, one of which was for the erection of a
plant on Riker’s Island, and the second allowed the contractor to erect 2
plant in any suitable locality except Jamaica Bay and the Borough of
Manhattan. The Board of Estimate approved Riker’s Island as a suitable
location for a garbage plant, but the Board of Aldermen, influenced by local
sentiment in the Boroughs of The Bronx and Queens, refused to ratify the
contract. The only alternative left was the acceptance of a proposal for a
garbage plant on the westerly shore of Staten Island, in an isolated location.
This particular contract was approved by the Board of Estimate and Appor-
tionment, but the contractors have been delayed in the construction of the
plant on Staten Island on account of local objections. So that the three
available locations now existing within the city limits which are suitable
for a garbage disposal plant have all been objected to by residents of the
adjoining localities. In each case the garbage plant would be situated in
an industrial and waste land section, with very few houses within a mile
of the plant.
I believe that the treatment of garbage has progressed to a point where
modern methods of treatment will eliminate nuisances, and as the health
of the whole community is involved it may be possible for your Committee
to set aside a locality where the treatment of waste materials may be carried
out economically and with the greatest conservation of properties. In other
words, a waste treatment zone might be considered as part of the city plan
and a location so selected as would have the least adverse effect upon other
properties. within the city limits.
STATEMENT BY JoHN C. GepHart, SECRETARY, TENEMENT House Com-
MITTEE, BROOKLYN BuREAU oF Cuaritigs, Aprit 4, 1916
More stringent area restrictions desirable
The Tenement House Committee of the Brooklyn Bureau of Charities
is particularly interested in restricting congestion in Brooklyn. We know
there is still a great deal of undeveloped territory in Brooklyn and that in a
sense Brooklyn is therefore the hope for the housing of the future popula-
122 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
tion of New York City. We believe that the tentative restrictions that have
been imposed by the Commission are not nearly severe enough. In most
cases the restrictions are much more lenient than the type of building that
is now being erected in the various sections, with the exception of the “E”
district restrictions. The greater part of Brooklyn is covered by “C”
districts, and yet the “C” district restrictions are not effective below the
fifth story. From that point they are not so much greater than the restric-
tions now imposed by the tenement house law, as to check land overcrowding
to any extent. :
Our Committee has recently had a study made of congestion in the
newer tenements in Brooklyn. We find they are building in certain sections
of Williamsburg six-story “ walk-ups,” housing from 25 to 35 families.
Now, of course, we don’t want to see that sort of construction repeated in
the undeveloped sections of the borough. Yet there is nothing in your
recommendations to prevent that sort of construction in sections now
devoted to one and two family houses and small tenements. We were sur-
prised in making a study of the “ D” districts to note that even in these
districts a rather intensive type of construction would be allowed. In the
“T)” district houses may occupy only 60 per cent of the lot, while the
tenement house law permits 70 per cent of the lot to be occupied. Yet on
60 per cent of the lot a four-story tenement, housing four or five families
on each floor, could profitably be built. That is to say, so far as your recom-
mendations are concerned, one could build 16 and 20-family tenements in
these sections which are now for the most part given only to one and two
family houses, and which, according to the report of the Commission, it is
your desire to retain for such use. On the other hand, your restrictions
would make it practically impossible to build a three-family tenement in a
“T)” district. You would have to provide a court 15 by 15. On 20 and 25-
foot lots on which these three and six family houses are usually built, it
would be impossible to build a house with that size of court which would
be a paying investment. Your restrictions would make it impossible, there-
fore, to build the smaller type of tenement in a “ D” district. At the same
time they would allow and would furnish an incentive for the larger type
with four and five families on a floor. This of course defeats the very
purpose of your Commission. We believe the restrictions should be so
framed as to discourage large tenements and encourage small ones in “ D”
districts.
We concur pretty generally with the report of the Brooklyn City Plan
Committee. We believe, generally speaking, that most of the districts
which are now designated by “ D” ought to be made “ E” or villa districts,
and most of the districts which are now “ C” could very well be made “ D”
districts. We have not vet worked out a definite plan, but we shall be
pleased to submit one within a few days. We want to save New York City
from the large tenement house and do not want to see these great tenement
houses appearing on land which is undeveloped and where land values, the
economic trend and the public interest do not warrant such a high rate of
congestion.
Advantage of uniform area provisions for all buildings
The erection of factories adjacent to tenements to a large extent nullifies
the advantages obtained from the Tenement House Law. This is especially
the case where the tenement house has been built with an inner court on the
lot line; a factory can come along and shut off the light that theoretically
should come from the neighboring building. There are a good many cases
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 123
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
of that kind. Besides, residence streets have been ruined, made unattractive
and undesirable by the invasion of undesirable trades and industries which
have no place there.
Larger courts and yards in lieu of parks
Many one and two family house sections have large open spaces in the
rear or front where the children can get recreation and fresh air. If we are
going to allow these sections to be taken up by large tenements we are going
to take away that feature from their lives. The relatively small park acreage
of Brooklyn should be considered in this connection. In Brooklyn only 2.29
per cent of the area is given over to parks, whereas in the Bronx 15.13
per cent and in Manhattan 10.25 per cent is reserved for such use. It is
necessary, therefore, to compensate for this loss by providing larger open
spaces about the houses. This we feel you have not sufficiently considered
in your recommendations.
Overcrowded schools
In some of the congested sections of Brownsville, the schools are not
only overcrowded, but overcrowded to the extent of violating the Sanitary
Code. Many of the rooms have a placard which says, “legal capacity 45,”
yet they probably have 60 children. This condition the Department of
Education has to meet as best it can. The point is that the neighborhood is
too congested for the school facilities which the city can provide. Besides,
many children can go to school only half-time because of the overcrowded
condition. By spreading the population over wider areas and in smaller
housing units this problem would at least be partially solved.
STATEMENT BY Ernest P. GoopricH, CONSULTING ENGINEER,
Marcu 30, 1916
Height limit will stabilize real estate values
I believe that a limitation of the height of buildings will stabilize condi-
tions and consequently make rents and sale values more uniform, and
thereby remove that condition which is called a gamble in real estate. To
that I attach very great importance and believe that there will not be so
many changes in occupancy if we have these height restrictions.
Traffic
Iam more familiar with traffic conditions. Traffic conditions make
real estate values. In Newark where we took traffic statistics, one of the
requests that was made was by the Board of Appraisers, who wanted to
modify their appraisals on the basis of the people who walked in front of
the show windows, believing that a larger number made property of greater
value. I can give you an instance in connection with the Borough of Man-
hattan. One man came to the office and objected to an encroachment
removal. When the statistics were shown him that 35,000 people walked
in front of his window, he scratched his head and said, “I will raise the
rent’ and the consequence was that without further objection he went
back and removed the encroachment.
Relation of districting to health
You are endeavoring to arrange this limit on the basis of business
policy, so as to conserve health and preserve life and limb and thereby con-
124 COMMISSION ON BUILDING. DISTRICTS
serve property. The conservation of life and health is through reduction in
crowds, both in buildings and on the streets of the City.
I want to call your attention to the report of the Board of Health of
February in which some observations on the recent outbreak of grippe are
discussed. In that report the congestion of pedestrians, particularly in the
street cars, is cited as the probable cause of the rapid spread of the infec-
tion. The health matter, therefore, is of intimate relationship to the number
of people who occupy the street cars and who move about the streets. It
also has to do with accidents to pedestrians crossing the streets, and, in con-
nection therewith, the number of vehicles which use the streets.
Street accidents
I exhibit for your information the number and locations of fatal acci-
dents from vehicles in the Borough of Manhattan during the year 1913. If
you study this carefully you will find that accidents vary, first with density
of population, and second with density of vehicular travel, as well as with
pedestrian travel.
A careful study of this map would be very illuminating as to condi-
tions where building heights should be restricted on the basis purely of
the accidents which happen every day.
Danger of panic
Panics have occurred within the memory of all, at the Baltimore fire,
the Charleston earthquake, and the San Francisco earthquake and fire. We
often hear the statement made that New York is not subject to earthquakes.
The same statement was made with regard to Charleston that it was impos-
sible. Now, it was not impossible. New York may have an earthquake
as well. Almost anything that can be done to prevent panic under such
circumstances will be considered by the court as entirely proper and
reasonable.
Determination of height limit
This has a relationship, not only to the maximum limit of building
heights, but it has to do with conditions in the buildings. If you simply
place a maximum height, without relation, for example, to the present
maximum height, you are raising the factor of loss and of difficulty up to
that probable maximum. It seems to me that the reasonableness of the case
should dictate to you reducing the height limit below the maximum condi-
tions which now exist. If three buildings out of fifteen exist which are
over the limit which might be more or less arbitrarily fixed, it would seem
to me that the thought of what would happen if all buildings were raised
to the present maximum, would dictate also a limit within that present
maximum, and the court would sustain you in reducing such limits.
The conservation of property is always acknowledged as a proper exer-
cise of the police power with reference to fire losses, and thieving of course.
We know that pickpockets frequent crowds. Perhaps it is a long stretch
of imagination, that building heights should be restricted to prevent pick-
pockets. It is entirely within the police power, and it should be so con-
sidered.
My idea as to the proposed height limit is that it is too high. I would
take a district of a dozen blocks and analyze it roughly and if fifteen per
cent of the frontage exceeded a given height, I would use that height as a
limit, and let the higher buildings remain, but limit height in future to the
lower level.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 125
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
Regulation of traffic
The regulation of traffic has come to be the most important exercise
of the police power. It is not primarily now-a-days for the prevention of
loss of life and prevention of accidents, but has to do with the expediting
of travel so as to save money to the public. It is not entirely the conser-
vation of life and limb. It is the conservation of property indirectly. When
the police power is accepted by the people to this extent, it seems to me that
it is logical that regulation of those things contributing to the congestion in
the streets and consequent loss of money to the people who use the streets,
should be considered a reasonable exercise of the police power.
Sidewalk congestion
Take the ordinary sidewalk, which in most of the streets downtown is
fifteen feet wide, and assume the normal rate of speed of pedestrians walk-
ing along the streets to be two miles an hour. I have made many observa-
tions, in Boston, Chicago, and elsewhere, but the ordinary congested con-
dition of the streets causes the average speed per person to be less than two
miles per hour and it runs down to one and a half miles an hour. Of
course, a person walking rapidly may do three miles an hour, but that does
not occur normally. A person on a street where such conditions exist
has only eleven square feet of space in the street assigned to his use. We
know that in buildings the limit is thirty-two square feet for most manu-
facturing uses. In other words, our streets are not as well off from a health
point of view as buildings are, under present conditions.
The question as to what is a congested sidewalk is particularly inter-
esting, and the problem has been approached in this manner. A diagram
was prepared of conditions on Nassau street such as exist every day.
Pedestrians on one side of the street are shown in red, and on the other
side blue; north and south bound differently indicated in each case. Those
who are pushed off into the roadway are shown in the center, north and
south bound separately. You will notice at a certain time of the day the
number of persons in the roadway suddenly jumps. At the same time those
on the sidewalks also jump in numbers. Conditions for some time pre-
vious to that particular time on both sides of the street show a less number
of people on the sidewalk. That is, during the previous fifteen minute
interval. Therefore it is natural to assume that when the conditions of
the sidewalk are as indicated by the diagram on the two sides just preceding
the period when they tumble off into the roadway, a condition of congestion
exists there. People seem naturally to avoid any further congestion on the
sidewalk. If we assume the condition indicated on the diagram as a con-
gested condition, we can work out statistics which will show that in case
of panic, conditions are almost impossible. This measure of congestion is
figured at four and a half to six persons per foot of width of sidewalk per
minute and all encroachment removal work comes down to that figure. We
don’t remove encroachments unless the number of persons on the street
during the most congested fifteen minutes of the day exceeds six persons
per foot width per minute, and naturally they are then being pushed off the
sidewall into the street.
If we assume a fifteen foot sidewalk with a certain amount of lost room
because of encroachments against the buildings and hydrants against the
curb, only twelve feet of space usually remains and if we assume five per-
sons per foot wide per minute, that means sixty people per minute will pass
a given point. Some of the points on the diagram run as high as fifteen
126 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
per foot per minute. One place of tremendous congestion is the approach to
the Brooklyn Bridge, another is on Fifth avenue during the lunch hour.
I have studied conditions at 23d street and Fifth avenue and I can give
you statistics on that also.
A ten-story building one hundred feet deep will have on a strip just
one foot wide 1,000 square feet. At 331/3 square feet per person, that
means a maximum of thirty persons per front foot of street space for a
street that is filled with ten-story buildings. Now, at thirty persons per
front foot on a basis of sixty persons per minute along a sidewalk, there
will be required from 1/6 to 1/2 a minute per person per foot front to
carry away the people. An 800-foot block would require from four hun-
dred down to one hundred and thirty minutes to empty one side of the
street. That means from six hours down to two hours according to the
rate at which you figure people to move, assuming all were on the sidewalk.
Six hours down to four hours is the time if sidewalks only are used, and
four to two if they cover the whole street. If, on the other hand, there is a
panic, the whole street would be absolutely jammed with people in the
majority of streets in lower Manhattan, where I may say 750,000 people
from the outside come in every day for business.
It would seem to me that the Commission would do a service to the
community by saying that in case of panic every employee should go toward
the waterfront, away from the large buildings—go as directly as possible
to those districts where the buildings are lower and not to move through
the obvious lines of communication.
Special conditions such as those on Nassau Street, in which we have
very often had fifteen persons per foot width per minute, are exceedingly
common. On Fifth Avenue—at the southwest corner below 23rd Street,
from twelve-thirty to twelve forty-five on April 29, 1915, there were ten
and a half persons per foot width of sidewalk per minute. At that inter-
section the heavy stream turns from the west where it varies from seven
and a half to nine and nine-tenths, and it went as high as thirteen and a
third at one particular point along Fifth Avenue. In 1911 (and conditions
have not changed in some ways, and have materially: changed in others),
the number of pedestrians varied from 33,000 at 14th Street to 14,000 at
23rd Street, 26,000 at 33rd Street, 24,000 at 42nd Street, and then down to
2,000 at 78th Street and up again to 18,000 at 116th Street. But you must
take into account not alone the people on the street, but the vehicles also.
It is the combination, and the pedestrians crossing the street that make for
accidents. I could give you statistics on that also.
Population of Manhattan
Single block lengths where residences now exist should be restricted
for residence use. If the people have to go clear across Manhattan to get
from their work to their residence, as they do now across 14th Street, acute
congestion occurs steadily. If, however, every third block north and south
were made a business block or a manufacturing block, and the intervening
two blocks residences, each person could live within two blocks of his work
and there would be no such congestion as there is at the present time. I
think that would be a very important thing for the good of the com-
munity as a whole. I decry any of the talk about loss of population in
Manhattan. We have made a special analysis in my office showing the
available unbuilt-upon spaces. They would house one and a half million
more people, if all vacant spaces were used. By simply tearing down the
old two and three story houses and putting up five story tenements you
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 127
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
could house another three-quarter million. There is no reason at all for
Manhattan’s falling off in population from a congestion point of view. The
only thing is proper distribution by not focusing all the residences in one
part of the island, the business section in another part, and the manufactur-
ing in still another part. Distribute it more uniformly all through the island
and you will conserve conditions and it will certainly reduce the congestion
in the streets.
STATEMENT By Maptson Grant, CHAIRMAN OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE,
New York Zootocicat Society, May 5, 1916
Protection of park areas
I feel reasonably certain that the courts will sustain restrictions
designed to maintain the character of parks or parkways. Where the city
has spent huge sums for the purpose of acquiring land for parks and park-
Way purposes, it seems hardly reasonable to suppose that the courts will
regard as unreasonable any limitations imposed upon the borders designed
to maintain them as recreation or park centres. The general value and use
of parks and parkways are to the city as a whole rather than to their
immediate boundaries and the local interests therein. It would be a very
serious matter for your commission not to do everything possible to pre-
serve the parkway character wherever it can be justified.
STATEMENT By JuLIUS Harper, Arcuitect, May 5, 1916
Lot and block unit
To begin at the beginning, a commission with as broad functions as
has this one, may properly formulate general and fundamental recommenda-
tions which would be preventive of at least some of the ills which this
commission seeks so far as possible to prevent in future. As a first propo-
sition I would advise the general adoption of 20 feet as the unit of lot width
instead of 25 feet, and as a second, the adoption of 240 feet as the standard
block width in place of 200 feet. The advantage is not susceptible oi
mathematical demonstration. It is a fact, however, that architects generally
in planning buildings upon lot areas have found the 20-foot width much
more mobile—the 150-foot depth too great as against an insufficiency in the
100-foot depth dimension. While elusive of exact analysis it appears never-
theless true that there exists a relation of the “human scale” to lot area,
which is much more in harmony with a 20 by 120-foot unit than the 25 by
100 feet.
Such a recommendation might still be productive of good results in
Queens and Richmond. There is a notion abroad that the City Tono-
graphical Departments design the street plan. Such is not the case. The
city only “accepts” the new streets after the first “ possessors ” have dis-
placed the stakes planted by the half-paid surveyors in the employ of the
early real estate speculators, when it is already too late to correct the
general street plan without moving all the buildings. What the situation
may be at the moment as to Richmond in this regard I do not know, but
as to Queens, I do know that hundreds of land tracts just in process of
transition from farm land to building lots have laid down the unfortunate
200-foot block width, and if nothing occurs to alter the usual course of
events, these must all in course of time be “accepted” by the City. This
situation might still be saved by appropriate action.
128 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Value of different kinds ot courts
Approaching the subject of free air space of tenants I would urge the
recognition of the following general principle as fundamental, that is:
A “through court,” extending from street to yard is twice as good as an
“outer court.” An “outer court ” is twice as good as an “inner court.”
In practical effect the “through courts” would be given preference, as
against the penalization of the “inner courts.’ It would encourage “ semi-
detached ” planning in the form of isolated and lesser units. This would
result beneficially not only with reference to light and air circulation, but
also as to accessibility, sanitation and fire hazard. Financing, ownershiy
and marketability become more mobile. The “inner court” on the con-
trary makes for larger units and, by duplication, for the enclosure of the
entire block area, the “rear yards” themselves becoming aggregated into
an “inner court.” If this principle were established the difficulties relating
to outer courts would disappear. Designers would favor the through courts
and plan the principal rooms upon it, leaving baths, staircases and smaller
rooms to find a location upon the inferior court for which the present
reguirements of the Tenement Law would be ample.
Minimum dimension of courts
The determination of the related minimum dimensions of yards and
courts depends entirely upon what skillful planning permits of as feasible.
Obviously the least dimension of the court should bear some relation—first,
to the depth of the room space located upon it, and secondly, to its other two
dimensions. No scientific rule as to this has been devised, so far as I am
aware, which would apply at all reasonably to a wide diversity of lot dimen-
sions, to say nothing of a wide diversity of uses of buildings. The present
tenement rule was born of a large number of plans submitted in competition
for standard tenements by over 100 architects and was made to fit specific
types of tenements about six stories in height upon 25 by 100-foot lot units.
The 12-story tenement of Manhattan and the blocks of various shapes and
dimension in Queens and Richmond were not considered at that time and
the Tenement Law does not fit these cases.
lf it be the object to hold an outer court above a fixed minimum, it
would be more certain of operation to fix an arbitrary minimum width of
five, six or seven feet, particularly as the height also enters into considera-
tion. In practice it is found that long outer courts occur with low buildings,
while the shorter and wider courts accompany higher structures. Perhaps
a rule something like this would work out acceptably :
The minimum width of a “through court” shall be 4 feet.
The minimum width of an “ outer court” shall be 6 feet.
The minimum width of an “inner court” shall be 10 feet.
A limitation of length may thus be omitted.
STATEMENT BY Epwarp R. Harpy, Assistant Manacer, New York
Fire INsuRANCE ExcHANGE, May 22, 1916
Districting will reduce fire waste
Any plan which would establish a uniform character to a district as
to height, use and occupancy, will, in the main be beneficial in reducing the
fire waste. This is due primarily to the fact that with no restrictions there
creeps into business districts businesses which are altogether out of propor-
tion to the ordinary fire risks in that district. That is, they threaten the
whole district, as a block may be spoiled from a fire standpoint, by a single
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 129
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
industry carried on in that block. Again, it will tend to make the problem
of furnishing adequate fire fighting facilities simpler if we have the restricted
zones. There is not needed in a true dwelling district the amount of appa-
ratus, nor of water supply that is needed for the industrial or business
districts, but, with no restrictions it is practically necessary to furnish the
same facilities for the whole city. With restrictions the fire department
will also be able to better concentrate its forces for handling the different
districts where an entire district is subjected to the same use.
Effect of business on insurance rate
The rate of insurance in a store and dwelling building reflects greater
insurance risks. The ordinary private dwelling, now accepted as a build-
ing occupied by not more than two families, changes its character, so that
the first floor or basement is occupied for a store, with one family above,
the insurance rate is about twice as much as when it was occupied wholly
for dwelling purposes. This is due to the fact that the store brings always
an unknown quantity of waste material, poor protection to stoves, gas
lights, care of ashes and ordinary accumulations—the risk is about two to
one.
Fire statistics
Eyen if special precautions are provided to prevent the spread of fire
from the business building to the tenement above, there is great danger,
especially to the occupants of the tenement. The proposition frequently
advanced that the first floor is so protected that there shall be no communi-
cation when there is a store in the basement with the floors above, over-
looks the fact that in a fire the smoke will always seek any exit available.
It will ascend naturally if there is a way. If not, it will pour out of the
doors and windows and follow up the side of the building and enter the
living floors in that way. Some of the most serious panics have been due
not to fire but purely to the smoke condition.
In connection with this subject a report of the Bureau of Fire Investiga-
tion of the City of New York, for the quarter ending March 31, 1916, is
herewith submitted. It gives the character of the stores in which fires
occur, showing that out of a total of 375 fires, 291 originated in stores
situated in residential buildings.
One thing that stands out prominently from the Fire Chart of the Bor-
ough of Manhattan, prepared by Mr. A. Niflot, for the years 1910 to 1912,
is that those districts occupied by the mixed conditions, as stores and
dwellings, have by far the larger number of fires proportionately than
any other portions of the territory shown. Where the use is uniform,
that is, either dwellings, business, or manufacturing, there is then an appreci-
ably less number of fires than in the mixed districts.
130 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
PART OF MAP
SHOWING THE NUMBER AND LOCATION OF FIRES
IN THE BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN
DURING THE YEARS 1910, 1911 and 1912
From the Fire Chart of A. Niflot
Each dot represents a fire and its location
et )
ww ” Ves 7. '
4° @ 721A B TOD 17408 RN 7728
pe 8 UPS $ SS Teune. || Glo
ve &| | MOUNT MORRIS UP ia | ae
é 4A, geal al
ng
=| °
1's eg 3 yee
ri $ g 5
3-4-3 A1-3-2Y o-3-, E 6-
=
ID ion § 77a WV 69K § GI
4 8 Sin a ie
] ol —
=> lt =
Elen i718 21% ima 2 17468
ao _pee oy e etane
c
a
oP 74
BS tee
4-11-10 N 6~7-,
2H 16458 nS 4 * ‘
m2 @ elo 1587 ~
h) ls
ao 8 eonnce >
L E|N/O,x
eS
2
z
Lig
E117" ST.
1666 z
£. 167" ST. s
cerry
()
Be
238
aia
RL 4-7-4
eweet?
) erry
(a7)
q BS
rus
>
g 0
aN
3 = 1622A
eoeeseree NL es tevecten
oe)
1596
A comparison of this map with the Building and Transit Development
map prepared by the Commission, shows that the blocks between Fifth
Avenue and Lexington Avenue in which a large number of fires occurred
had many stores on the ground floor of the tenements, and that where such
stores were absent the number of fires was much less. This deduction is
confirmed by a careful study of the entire map and indicates the importance
of districting in such a way as to exclude stores from tenements.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
131
Bureau or Fire [Nvestication, Ciry or New York, Quarrer Enpinc Marcu 31, 1916
Character of Stores in Which Fires Occurred
mo}
pe S
2 is)
& bn n
Ba
2 C= 4, 2 3S
3S n 3 “s} is m &
mo Gee Be a a
Ors u ur an +=}
BS eR ES Be 8 Re Teale
a SS Gol ee ts Balan ahts)
(a) (a) fy ex aay © op) I (a
Automobile Supplies ......... Ne 1 Ws 20 ae 1 2
IBAKErIeSp 5 a.tresner wether onmiouins 3 x ae Be ee 7 10
Rarer SMOMS coascccccc00cc0 2 1 1 5p A 4 8
BilliardwandmPoolkeer ceric: : zh Go wa oe wis 1 1
BitchenmShopsmereeeeereee 2 Me ee a 1 7 10
Cafe, Liquor Stores.......... 5 4 be ae 2 Wy
Cigars and Stationery Stores. 6 4 2 ZA 5 30 47
Chenilks aracl SitiSsccoacccuccae 1 Be 1 2 1 7 10
GContectionenysesaeeeie eee: 1 a He ee se 9 10
Cotton Goodsmeny- ena ae ae is fe 2 2
DWelicatessSeneeeea see dees 2 es me 1 6 9
ID SPIES esl ocho Cho McheERS Re eI DCO 1 if 1 1 3 6
Day (Coeds. gacacnsccsnggcnada 2 is a 4 8 14
Dyeing and Cleaning......... a oo i 1 1
Embroideries and Laces...... se 1 1 2 4
lDNiaa Tusa pe sotaricicondoeets af a aa Ee re
IEWBUHERS cocoodacco0s0b00008 2, on 1 5 8
Furnishings (Men’s) ........ 1 1 a 1 3
Furnishings (Women and
Children) aseiccee cic ecules KS 1 3 1 as vs Se 2 4
Groceries and Dairies........ ae 10 a ste os 1 4 37 52
Hair Dressing and Hair Goods ef ee AG Oe aS az Be 2 2,
Hardware, Housefurnishings. Be 1 ee ae at i 1 7 9
Hats and Caps (Men’s)...... a ca Se ce aie hs an 9 a
ILEMAGIEES gp gboooboncboooueKnc oe 4 ay BS she ae 1 3 8
Millinery and Feather........ Bi Be a 1 ae 1 1 2 5
Notions and Novelties........ Pe 1 a Be ae ae 4 4 9
RaintswandalOilseemeeeeneeee a 1 via 1 ie 1 2 5
Plumbers and Tinsmiths..... Be 1 Fe Ns bie us 4 5
IRCHENETAMIS Go oag06009g00000c 1 3 1 6 2 1 6 12 32
Rucsmands Garpetsaeeeeneas ie a. me ie ae 6 Se 2 ae he
Shoe and Leather Goods..... 3 1 1 ae 8 13
Sporting Goods ............. 1 Ap x3 oe a 1
Malorsm @Mlents) mereeeeeeeeen 2 1 AG 4 13 20
Tailors (Women’s) ......... 1 ae a a 9 10
Tailors (Trimmings) ....... uh oe a BS a Be
(Wpholsterersmep eee ore: ue Ne a 1 wy 1
Mpscellaneousieaance eee ec 5 2 1 5 11 24
Woolen and Worsted Goods. Hy ae ae oe 1 1
IGmiini Chie: lanapee Man sca serdosa 1 1
MRotalitasaes myer eee 1 62 1 25 6 6 Al 27) S55
132 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
STATEMENT BY RowLAND HayNEs, SECRETARY, COMMITTEE ON RECREATION,
Boarp oF Estimate, Aprit 18, 1916
Residential streets as playgrounds
The advantage of use districting to the whole recreation problem lies
in having reserved residence streets. Thus it is going to be possible, since
the delivery traffic in such streets will be comparatively light, to use some of
them for temporary play places, as was done by the Police Department in
about 25 locations last summer. The only thing I wish to emphasize is the
urgency and importance of such possibilities which are opened up by the
action of your Commission.
Great need for additional playgrounds
In the first place, we have to realize that through some studies which we
have previously made we have found that wherever the density of popula-
tion exceeds 37.5 per acre, about 80 per cent, in fact, somewhat over 80
per cent of the children have to play away from home, either because there
is no space in their own back yards or because that space is so small that
they have no chance to play any of the larger space games. Out of the 54
wards in Manhattan and Brooklyn, all but seven exceed that density. Ii
we take the city as a whole, including all of the boroughs, we find that 84
per cent of the population of New York live in districts where the density
exceeds this figure of 37.5 per acre. Some neighborhoods in New York go
up to 18 times that density. If we take 84 per cent of the whole number of
children in this city between five and fifteen years of age as the number
living in these more densely populated districts, and if we then take 80 per
cent of this 84 per cent as the number who will have to play away from
home, we find about 680,000 children in New York City who have got to
play away from home. The average daily attendance last summer at all
the playgrounds in New York City was less than one-third of 680,000.
This includes the average daily attendance at park playgrounds, school play-
grounds and playgrounds conducted by settlements and other philanthropic
agencies. In other words, all the public and private agencies which we now
have are reaching only about one-third of the child population who must
play away from home. Seventy-five per cent of these playgrounds close
after the summer season. This means that larger opportunities for play are
urgently needed. To purchase enough additional places to reach the chil-
dren who must play away from home would bankrupt the city. Hence we
must use more intensively the land that the city already owns. Hence the
method which was introduced last summer by the Police Commissioner of
using streets reserved for play for certain hours in the day in certain dis-
tricts must be extended for some time to come. My only purpose in accept-
ing the invitation of your Commission to speak thus briefly is to point out
that, while this plan of use districts is worked out for a different purpose,
it is going to be of very genuine and fundamental value in improving condi-
tions which we do not like but which we have got to face in the playground
and recreation situation here in New York.
Districting will reduce traffic on certain streets
The restricting of residential streets against factories, stores and public
garages makes those streets better for play use, first, because it reduces the
amount of traffic in those streets. It makes the traffic in those streets simply
delivery traffic for household necessities, which is much less than any
through traffic, or traffic to garages, or delivery traffic to and from stores.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 133
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
It reduces the amount of traffic and thus makes the burden of reserving a
street for play purposes much less. In the second place it makes possible
the reservation for play purposes of residence streets which are near those
on which the children are living. In short, it makes possible the reservation
of play streets without burden to traffic and near where they are needed.
Streets the only playground for most children
Certain types of stores, namely, those where much loafing is done, have
a very undesirable moral effect on the children living nearby. I do not
think, however, that the restriction of residence streets against stores will
make much difference on that score, because the stores will not be very far
away. The corner drug store will not be very far away, even in a residential
district. So I think we cannot assume that it will reduce very much the
harmful influences that come from some stores.
In a locality that is built up with apartment houses and business places
covering from 70 to 90 per cent of the land, where there are no play-
grounds, the children are compelled to play in the streets. About 90 per
cent or more of the children in the crowded districts play in the street now,
if they play outdoors at all, during the seasons when most of the public
playgrounds are closed. We feel that it is vital that children should have
places in which to play. Ten per cent or more of the school investment in
New York City is wasted because children outside of school hours or after
school years form habits which waste what they get in school. A very
lengthy investigation would be necessary to find the exact amount of the
educational loss in this way. Studies which have been made in cities
throughout the country show that about 40 per cent of the children, even
in cities only one-tenth as big as New York, who are outdoors outside of
school hours, are idle because there.is no place for them to play. Children
‘who are doing nothing are not developing habits of push and initiative that
they must develop in order to use their school training. The wholesome use
of out of school time is a big asset to any city.
Dedicating every part of the city to apartment houses would have two
effects. First, it would reduce the amount of open space, and second, it
would increase the number of children per acre. It would reduce the
amount of open space because it would be possible to build up to 70 per cent
of the lot. Then, by piling up the homes, the number of children per acre
would be very largely increased. Thus the play conditions would become
more and more acute and more and more difficult to handle. I should not
be advocating play streets 1f we could afford anything else, but we cannot
afford enough play places at present to reach all the children. We must
provide some temporary expedient.
Tenement yards not desirable playgrounds
The rear yards provided by the Tenement House Law are neither
adequate nor desirable as play spaces. The noise from the playing in such
narrowly enclosed areas would be intolerable. One great problem which we
have to face, even in a reserved street, which is much larger than the tiny
back yard wells you have described, is how to overcome the noise of play.
Minimum play space standards
In London the school board is reported as having set apart a minimum
of 30 square feet of play space for each child as a standard. Most
134 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
American schools are trying to get 40 and 50 square feet per child for their
play use. There comes in the problem of the times in which the play areas
are used. That is the reason why we are interested in a duplicate school
plan in New York City. With the present system, a large number of chil-
dren are thrown on small play areas at half past three in the afternoon. If
the duplicate school system is extended, it makes possible the use of the
small area over and over again. If you have 30 square feet reserved for
each child all the time, it uses up a great deal of space, but if you can use
that amount of space over and over again by different sets of children
through the day, you have an opportunity to make that 30 square feet really
adequate and you will not require the 50 square feet which some cities are
trying to get.
I usually say that you can handle about 300 children per acre at one
time, but that you can count on an acre’s handling a thousand children
adequately during the day since it is shown that there is a flux back and
forth even without the regulated flux which comes with duplicate schools.
When I spoke of duplicate schools I was not referring to school problems.
I am particularly interested in the duplicate school plan, not from the stand-
point of the educational problem, but from the standpoint of the recreational
problem. Such a plan makes possible, by co-operation between the School
and the Park Departments, the wider use of both school and park play-
grounds. For the park playgrounds, it means that instead of having park
playground leaders who are more or less unemployed part of the day, we
should have park playground leaders who would be employed all day because
of the different shifts of children coming to them on the park playgrounds
from the nearby schools.
Studies in four or five cities indicate that the average child of twelve
years will not go more than a quarter of a mile to play. However, a slight
modification comes in time; that is, after a playground becomes established,
after the parents become confident of its good management, the children are
drawn from a little wider area. But it is true that little children won’t go
more than from two to six blocks, sometimes less.
STATEMENT By JosEPH J. HoLWELL, PRESIDENT, GREENPOINT TAXPAYERS’
AND CrtizENs’ AssocrIATION, ApRIL 10, 1916
Need of protecting parks from factories
I feel that McCarren Park ought to be made a great playground. It
is the only big public breathing spot we have in the Eastern District. We
as a community are not a community of men and women who are able to
get out of Greenpoint for recreation purposes. You who are familiar with
Brooklyn and particularly the Eastern District know that a manufacturing
center is a tenement house center, and that the people who reside in those
tenements have not the wherewith in most cases to get out of such a section
for recreation purposes. It is considered a great boon once or twice each
vear for these people to go to Coney Island or Rockaway Beach. There-
fore, we must bring recreation centers to them, and inasmuch as the City
has paid over $1,300,000 for McCarren Park, I think it should be developed
into a great public playground and park. It can be made such by prohibit-
ing the erection of factories in the future on private property fronting on
the park.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 135
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
STATEMENT By RaymMonp V. INGERSOLL, CoMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
Parxs, Brooktyn, Aprit 10, 1916
Injury done parks by factories
The factories already located on the borders of McCarren Park, and
particularly one of them—the Kings County Iron Works—have been in-
jurious both to vegetation and to the recreation activities in that park. The
Board of Health has taken action a number of times, but we have not yet
obtained satisfactory results. There is one factory that emits smoke and
fumes which darken the sky and which leave a heavy deposit of soot, so
that within 24 hours after a snowstorm you will often find the snow almost
black with this soot. Now, that does not tend to promote the healthfulness
of McCarren Park as an outdoor play space, and it seems to me that it
would be feasible to put this within your district restricted for resi-
dences and business, and exclude industry for the future. Of course,
the result of that would be that there will be some industry around the
border of the park for some years to come, but some of those industrial
plants are gradually becoming obsolete, and if they move away for any
reason, we will gradually approach the condition which we would like to
have there.
STATEMENT BY Raymonp V. INGERSOLL, CoMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
Parks, Brooktyn, May 25, 1916
Effect of districting
I believe that, without doing any violence to existing conditions, this
plan, 1f it goes into effect, will check the unnecessary growth of congestion
of population in certain sections, diminish the fire hazards, decrease unneces-
sary street congestion and the dangers from street congestion, particularly to
children who have to play in the streets; that it will be a very great aid
to the City in properly locating its schools and libraries and other public
buildings by its tendency to make the growth normal and to make it possible
to anticipate it; in other words, a general substitution of harmony and plan
for chaos and ugliness.
Importance of protecting small parks
As the members of this commission know, I have been particularly
interested in this plan in relation to the surroundings of the parks and
parkways and particularly to the small parks and playgrounds scattered in
the various parts of our borough, and I have been in touch with the Com-
mission for a good many weeks on that subject, and I must say that I have
been very much gratified that the Commission has seen its way clear to meet
the park point of view to so great an extent in regard to the surroundings
of these small parks. We have a very wholesome tendency now, noticeable
in Brooklyn, to build public and semi-public buildings along the borders of
these smal! parks, helping to embellish them and to make them more attrac-
tive and impressive, to protect them from smoke and noise and to make them
what they are intended to be, genuine centers of recreation and civic centers
for these various neighborhoods. The Commission has met our views in
most respects with the exception of one or two small parks located in indus-
trial sections.
I think it is extremely important that we should have a few attractive
residence areas around these little parks and playgrounds. It is the natural
136 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
place for the best residences in that particular section to line up along the
parks and playgrounds, and it is valuable from many points of view.
Streets as play space
The child spends a great deal more time out of school than in school.
The time the child is out of school is at least double the time it is in school.
If we do not develop, protect and make attractive the small neighborhood
places for playing, the child will play in the street, exposed to the dangers
of street accidents, also exposed to moral danger, through lack of super-
vision, such as we have on the playgrounds. The natural tendency of such
children is to gather together in small gangs and to develop the ethics of
the street gang, the fundamental point, as I take it, in which is solidarity
of feeling in opposition to the government, that is, in opposition to the
police. That’is the one prevailing point of view which you find in a gang
of street boys.
~ As the policeman is obliged to restrict their play activities and ask
them not to play ball for fear the ball will break windows, constantly sup-
pressing some of the natural play instincts these boys have, and prevent
them doing things which, if out in a lot and playground, would be the
natural and right thing to do, they very soon, even the best of them, develop
a feeling of resentment against the policeman, and to their minds he repre-
sents organized adult society and this fosters in the minds of the children
a very dangerous and unwholesome attitude towards society in general, and
a great many of them grow up with it.
That is just one point of view in regard to the moral aspects of the
question. The physical side of it seems to me rather obvious. The street
is no place for children to play either for safety, comfort, health, or for
their moral and mental development.
It is desirable to preserve the exclusive residential character of streets
so as to provide safer and healthier places for children to play until ade-
quate space can be provided. I think there are ten children playing in the
streets in Brooklyn to one playing in the playgrounds. Now, that is a very
conservative statement. That is simply because our supply of playgrounds
is so inadequate. The old law that no schools shall be built without a play-
ground has not been observed. Now we have not a sufficient supply of these
playgrounds. Land has become so expensive that there is no immediate
prospect for years to come, of our having an adequate number of play
spaces distributed through the various parks of the borough. So I believe
the Commission is warranted in taking that situation into account and it can-
not be answered even by saying “ Well, the thing to do is to supply these
playgrounds.” The cost of doing that on a sufficient scale would be entirely
beyond the present financial ability of the city. It would be a project com-
parable to the building of the subways to start out to get sufficient neighbor-
hood spaces for play throughout the city. While we wish to get these spaces
as far as we cat, we shall be grateful for any wise consideration in the
making of this plan which will help to make the streets where the children
actually do play a little more safe than they now are, and I believe that
end can be furthered by separating industrial from residence districts, and,
in so far as is compatible with the convenience of the residence sections, to
separate the stores also, keep them off as many blocks as conditions will
warrant.
Distribution of population
I admire the work of this Commission and its report most profoundly.
I think if any mistake has been made as applied to Brooklyn it has been
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN kELATION TO 137
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
in the direction of too great moderation and it is unnecessary, it seems to
me, to assume that with the opening up of future transit lines—all of this
fan-like system spreading in every direction-—it is unnecessary to assume
that it will be natural to have anything like a repetition of the building
development which took place up in The Bronx when that was the only line
of rapid transit connecting up with the central part of the city; and I am
sure that the Commission has been very moderate in its height and area
restrictions so far as the Borough of Brooklyn is concerned. I believe it
could safely go a little farther in that direction, and while that is not the
subject directly connected with my official work, it has to do with housing
conditions, to which in the past I have given quite a little attention.
Stores on residential streets objectionable
I think that a reasonable degree of separation of stores from residence
districts is desirable. Take for instance, the rattling through the streets of
delivery wagons. Of course, there always must be delivery service from
the stores to the residential districts, but if you have stores scattered indis-
criminately through the residence sections there is just that much more
noise and that much more danger of accident from the traffic that has to
go through those streets, and it seems to me that your Commission has
shown a very great deal of discretion in trying to separate the stores from
the residence districts, and yet not to put them too far away, but always
have them within reach, which, of course, is important.
STATEMENT By CLARENCE H. Kesey, PRESIDENT, TITLE GUARANTEE &
Trust Company, Marci 30, 1916 ;
Need for districting
I have no doubt that ithe city has a right to direct future building de-
velopment in accord with a well considered plan, and believe that it
ought to exercise it immediately and firmly. If it does not do so, it is
failing to protect itself and property values as well. Its present policy of
allowing every owner of real estate to do as he pleases with his own, is a
policy of self-destruction.
I do not wish to discuss the plan in detail, and I do not think the Com-
mission should attempt to hear a vast number of property owners’ individual
views as influenced by the effect of the plan on their properties and attempt
to reach a conclusion by reconciling these conflicting views, for the more
property owners discuss the details, the more confused the situation will
become. The Commission, if it is to succeed, will ultimately have to decide
for itself, on broad general principles, what is best for the city’s future
development and adopt it without expecting to get the approval of a majo-
rity of the individual property owners. The conclusion should be based
on the general good and made effectual by right of the power of the city
government to do what is best for the city at large.
I have no doubt that a great many property owners will see their
particular properties limited in usefulness and somewhat depreciated in
value, but if the plan is not adopted, I believe there will be a far greater
depreciation affecting a far greater number of people.
On values as a whole, I have no doubt of the favorable effect of this
proposed control of the improvement and use of real estate. There has
been a great recession in values during the last five years, and it has affected
not only those who have gone counter to the new regulations sought to be
138 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
established, but those who have not; and those who may complain of the
effect of these regulations on their particular properties and who think that
they should be left free to build as high as they please and use as they
please, may, if nothing is done, and they do anticipate their neighbors and
make a greedy improvement, find a much greater loss confronting them in
the future depreciation of their new buildings. I believe such depreciation
is sure to come from a continuance of the present policy, and such owners
will lose less by the adoption of the restrictions now proposed. These
restrictions will tend to steady values and enable all real estate owners to
make reasonable use of their property. This is certainly better for the city
as a whole than to continue to allow a few out of many to make unfair use
of their property and depress still further the value of the remaining prop-
erty and ultimately their own as well.
STATEMENT BY JOHN KENLON, CHIEF OF THE Frre DEPARTMENT, May
18, 1916
Traffic congestion an obstacle to movement of fire apparatus
In the thirty years that I have been connected with the Fire Depart-
ment, lower Manhattan has changed from a five-story to a twenty-five story
city. There is great congestion there at the present time; during the day
time it is difficult to move apparatus in response to fire calls in the lower
end of Manhattan Island. Increased congestion of people and traffic in
this section will cause very serious delays in getting apparatus to work
around the scene of a fire. Even at present it is very difficult until the
police reserves arrive and establish fire lines at a safe distance from the
scene of the fire. The same condition prevails in the uptown section from
23d to 45th street, particularly at certain hours. The men who laid out
the old part of the city 250 years ago had very little conception of the con-
ditions that obtain today. Those gentlemen could not possibly see the great
10-ton and 15-ton motor trucks running around on our streets. Downtown
today it is almost impossible to get through the streets. In ten years from
now horses will be a very rare sight on the streets of New York. The small
buggy has been superseded by the Packard, which takes four times the
space. The streets are too narrow in the lower part of Manhattan to take
care of the traffic. It is a serious matter; it requires a great deal of ex-
perience, a good hand and a strong arm to drive fire apparatus through the
streets of lower Manhattan. Any plan that will in a measure prevent the
increase of congestion in the central portions of the city, is a plan in the
right direction.
Fire fighting in high buildings
We never attempt to fight fires from the street level in very high build-
ings, except where the fire occurs between the curb and the sixth floor.
Such buildings must have the means of controlling fires from within; that
is, they must be furnished with standpipes, pumps, hose, and all other
auxiliary fire appliances necessary to combat a fire. From the sidewalk
we can not combat a fire at a greater height than 100 feet. The Fire De-
partment is better equipped to fight fires in the heart of the city than in
the outlying sections. We have provided more powerful apparatus and
stronger equipment there. But I would not use that as an argument for
limiting the height of buildings. We can change our equipment to meet
changing conditions, the difference being in the cost. High buildings, tf
1
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 139
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
constructed along safe lines, have no terrors for me; subdivide floor areas
with horizontal fireproof partitions, equip the building with an up-to-date
automatic sprinkler equipment and put in smokeproof fire towers. Do
that, and I care not how high you go.
Segregation of buildings will lessen fire danger
T should like to have hazardous trades, especially the storage, transporta-
tion and sale of all explosive and combustible materials segregated in dif-
ferent parts of the city. Segregating business of a hazardous kind would
lessen the fire danger; we would not get what we call a conflagration
breeder stuck in among a lot of other buildings. It would also facilitate
the fighting of fire.
If you can confine stores to broad avenues and good substantial build-
ings, and reserve side streets for residences, there would be a great deal
less danger from fire.
I think you are on the right line for the health and safety of the people
in establishing residential and industrial districts. I am heartily in accord
with the plan of the Commission. I have seen New York grow, and grow
very rapidly. Take Harlem, for instance, north of Central Park. I re-
member very well when there were very few houses on that great plain.
At the present time it is solidly built up, and at night is one of the most
congested parts of the city. 133)
Segregating buildings according to occupancy in different sections of
the City will restrict the area in which a conflagration can occur. It will
be a help to the Fire Department in laying out and equipping fire houses.
I think it will greatly lessen the cost of fire protection.
Wider yards and courts would prevent fire
If we can apply to the outlying sections provisions that will prevent
so great a percentage of the lot being covered by buildings, by laying out
wider yards and courts, the safety of the city will be promoted. Such a
plan would tend to prevent the spread of fire. Where the area of the yard
is increased on both sides and the courts are larger the danger of the spread
of fire is considerably less. The proposed plan requires a rear yard for
every building back to back with another building. This yard must increase
in width with the height of the building, being generally in Manhattan a
yard of 10 feet for a five-story building and one of 20 feet for a ten-story
building.
This requirement in my judgment, would, in many cases, prevent the
spread of fires and make it less difficult to fight fires.
STATEMENT By ALFRED R. Kirkus, Aprit 17, 1916
Need for districting
The slogan of “ safety first” is heard on every side, except in a man’s
own dwelling, and there he seems to forget it. The necessity for preserving
health and safety in living conditions is frequently overlooked in the
struggle for dollars and cents. It is, therefore, particularly interesting to
examine the magnificent work already done by the Commission on Building
Districts and Restrictions, and every effort should be made to carry out, or
improve upon, the comprehensive plan which they have suggested. We are
so used to herding, in our travel, our business, and, alas, often in our homes,
that anything that will wake us up to the value of restricting this habit and
140 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
give us light, air and safety should be welcomed and supported. There is
no question that the regulations suggested by the Commission are absolutely
necessary to public safety and he aith, and the proposed restrictions should
be adopted : an early date, subject to some slight modifications.
The Borough of Manhattan has been ser iously injured by the promis-
cuous erection of buildings. Buildings equal to four or five times the height
suited to the width of the street have been built, stealing from the adjoin-
ing owners light and air, and, at the same time, destroying the light and
air of that owner. It is quite apparent now that if the high: building in
Manhattan had been prevented several years ago, our acreage of compara-
tively unproductive property would have been built upon, the congestion
along certain lines would have been prevented and travel distributed over
broad areas, instead of concentrated into narrow ones. The plan your Com-
mission has adopted will prevent in the future this result, and large sections
will be saved from the destroying elements that have existed in the past, but
the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens must be saved now from the calami-
ties which are apparent in Manhattan.
Residing as I do in the Flatbush section of Brooklyn, and owning other
property than my own residence, I am, therefore, vitally interested in the
proper restricting of that most beautiful section of Greater New York. Con-
sequently I wall take up, as briefly as possible, requests for amendments to
the plans of the Commission strengthening the restrictions in certain locali-
ee where I do not think they are made strong enough.
My residence is on the south side of Bev erly road, within two hundred
feet of a station from which within two years I shall be able to reach the
centre of Manhattan in fifteen minutes for 5c, and from which I can reach
the ocean front in fifteen minutes for 5c. I not only want my neighbors
restricted from destroying my home, but | want to be restricted from de-
stroying theirs. In front of me to the north is a section, Prospect Park
South, that is an example of what, restricted for homes, a section can be
made. Filled with beautiful detached houses, surrounded by gardens, it is
unique in its close proximity to the business places of the owners. Few
cities can boast of such garden spots so near to, and yet so completely de-
tached from, the noise and turmoil of a great city. This section is re-
stricted against apartment houses, of no matter w hat quality, for nine more
years. Is it not utterly unreasonable that I, directly across the street, by
having my property unrestricted, can erect tenements, or cliff dwellings, as
I call them, facing this beautiful location; and why should I, having pur-
chased for the purpose of maintaining a private individual house, be men-
aced by the possibility of those on either side of, or behind, me putting up
tenements.
I would recommend that the “ E” district area limits be increased
slightly so that the building above the first story shall not exceed 40 per
cent (instead of 30 per cent) of the area of the lot and 60 per cent on
corners.
Exploitation of private home sections
The idea seems to exist that great pecuniary gains can be made by the
owners of property by abandoning their homes and erecting apartments. I
think this is not only a mistake but a most selfish one. My personal opinion
is that lots located within fifteen minutes’ travel from the centre of Man-
hattan will be in great demand for many, many years; that if the present
houses are inadequate for the land values they can be replaced on the “ JE’
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 141
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
district plan and produce a profitable investment and.a large return on the
original investment. This entire section put under the “C” plan would
permit of buildings, practically governed simply by the tenement house
law. Rows and rows of solid buildings, occupied by hundreds of families,
could be erected upon these lots and throughout the entire neighborhood,
and the advantages of the property, as laid out originally, could be destroyed
by one or two vandals, who, being the first, might reap a pecuniary advan-
tage at the expense of the neighboring owners. This must be stopped and
absolutely prevented now. We must not wait until the neighborhood has
been spotted with the excrescences that have defaced certain adjacent sec-
tions already, and if a person wants to take his property and erect a multi-
family house let him do it under the restriction of the amended “ E” dis-
trict plan, and he can still retain or enhance the value of his property, but
do it in a way that will harm no one. No owner in this garden spot need
be afraid of accepting this ““ E” district plan. It only needs a few figures
and a little information to prove that property will not deteriorate by this
plan. A first-class apartment house, with a fine garden and court space
around it, will bring much more, permanently, than buildings with their
walls abutting or with little alleyways between and no trees or gardens.
All the people in New York have not yet become cliff dwellers, and anyone
who has moved to this section from even a three or four-story house in
the ordinary old sections of Manhattan or Brooklyn, has immediately real-
ized the enormous benefit to health by having windows all around instead
of simply front and back. How often do you find people going from these
detached houses back to the old style. The move is generally to still more
suburban or country life. I do not include in these those individuals who
prefer to-'sleep in a box and spend their time in cabarets and places of amuse-
ment, because they are never home makers. I am talking now of the respon-
sible citizen, the citizen who wants to rear and bring up properly a family
of future citizens, and who takes an interest in the progress and improve-
ment of the community generally.
A large electric sign has just been erected, through the influence of the
Flatbush Chamber of Commerce, at Flatbush Avenue and Malbone Street
as follows:
“This is the Entrance to Flatbush—The Garden Spot of the City of
Homes.”
How long will the sign mean anything if the majority of the “ garden
spot’ can be covered with apartment houses under plan “ C”’?
Exception may be taken to this district plan because of the exceptional
transit facilities, but these facilities are largely provided for through travel
from Manhattan to the ocean front, and would not have been provided
otherwise, and as industrial or factory development is not included in the
Commission’s plans in this section, the districting as proposed will accom-
modate all the population likely to inhabit same in a healthy and safe manner.
SraTEMENT By S. AporpHus Kwnopr, M. D., Marcr 24, 1916
Tall buildings
A tall building, fifteen to twenty stories high, with all the modern im-
provements and conyeniences and sufficient fire protection, situated on a
public square, park or playground, which does not take away the light or
air of neighboring buildings, is a monument to man’s ingenuity and archi-
142 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
tectural skill. The same building, no matter how handsomely built, situated’
in a narrow street with buildings close to it on either side, or at the front
or rear, so that those living in less high buildings are deprived of light and
air, is a manifestation of man’s thoughtlessness or, what is worse, selfishness
and greed.
Sunlight
Sunlight and air are as essential to man’s well-being as water. If I
shut off water so that my neighbors cannot procure any, I should be prose-
cuted as a criminal, and justly so, for thus I take away what does not belong
to me. In that case I should be a thief pure and simple. Yet I may con-
struct in any narrow street as high a building as my means and the builder’s
skill will permit, thereby depriving a great number of my fellow-men of the
light and air which are necessary to, hee health. In other words, I may
steal from them the sunlight and air which God has given all his children,
and to which all should be entitled by right of being free-born American
citizens. There is as yet no law which will punish me for this crime, for
that is what it is.
Deaths from tuberculosis
Tuberculosis, which is propagated by bad air, foul air and lack of sun-
light, causes annually a loss of 200,000 citizens to the United States. In
the City of New York during the last statistical year it was responsible for
10,000 deaths. This disease could be largely prevented if we lived and
worked in pure air, in air relatively free from mineral and vegetable dust,
and, last but not least, if we were to construct the buildings in which we
live and labor so as to allow sunlight to enter more freely. Tuberculosis
is far more prevalent among the workers in our downtown tall office build-
ings than is generally known and much more than should be the case when
one considers the wealth which is represented there and the relatively good
pay the bookkeepers and clerks receive as a rule.”
Tuberculosis among garment workers
Carefully gathered statistics show that in the City of New York the
garment workers are afflicted more frequently with tuberculosis than any
other class of workers. The majority of these workers do not, as is often
thought, work in their homes. They work in the tall crowded buildings,
situated in congested districts, ten, twelve, twenty, or more stories high,
where every floor masses hundreds of workers. Many are tuberculous
without knowing it. Others know that they are tuberculous, but, perhaps
fearing discharge, hide their disease as long as they can; but in the mean-
time they disseminate the germs of tuberculosis by coughing in their neigh-
bors’ faces or over the clothing they manufacture, or, what is still more
frequent, spread the disease by careless expectoration on the floor. During
luncheon hour they crowd the streets and avenues, and those afflicted with
the disease expectorate freely on sidewalks and streets. The infectious
sputum dries and pulverizes and is inhaled with the dust and causes tuber-
culosis in any susceptible individual who may frequent that street.
Fifth avenue
And now, not content with the many altogether too tall buildings already
lining the part of Fifth Avenue south of Tw enty-third Street and the ad-
joining streets, some (let me hope not greedy but only thoughtless) capi-
talists wish to increase the number of disease-breeding and death-trap sky-
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 143
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
scrapers and erect them in the one principal and most beautiful street of
New York City, where there are as yet relatively few of these unsanitary
and unsafe structures.
A second danger, although not purely medical, but which as a citizen
and physician I nevertheless have the right to call attention to, is that of fire.
Standpipes have not proven sufficient protection for most skyscrapers. It
is for this reason no less than for the others already mentioned that the time
for limiting the height of buildings in our crowded streets has come. Too
many lives are sacrificed directly and indirectly through the erection of too
tall buildings. '
The section of Fifth Avenue between Twenty-third Street and Fifty-
ninth Street is bound soon to be lined with business structures. Let these
business structures be sanitary, beautiful and safe and limited in height.
Let us not make a canyon of this section. It is not merely a question of
beauty or aesthetics but of danger to property in the event of fire that there
should be a limitation to the height of buildings, on what is left of Fifth
Avenue. This limitation is an urgent necessity because it will help to
diminish the danger from infectious deadly diseases and fires.
There is one more danger arising from allowing factory buildings to
be located in the zone above mentioned. I refer to the danger from con-
gestion in strikes or other labor manifestations, as was clearly shown only
yesterday when there was a stoppage of all traffic for nearly an hour near
34th Street—the center of the shopping district of New York.
STATEMENT By Netson P. Lewis, Cu1ErF ENGINEER, Boarp or ESTIMATE
AND APPORTIONMENT, May 4, 1916
Effect of high buildings on street traffic S
It has seemed to me that in considering the control of the height and
arrangement of buildings, their use and occupancy, consideration should
be given to the effect upon street traffic of the uncontrolled and unrestricted
development of the city through building operations, and the entirely uncon-
trolled location of industries and business.
It is obvious to anyone that in certain portions of the city, notably in
lower Manhattan, the enormous day population of the office buildings, most
of whom come to their work in the morning and leave in the afternoon
within a very limited time, now over-taxes the public streets, and while we
are reasonably free from earthquake shocks, or even tremors, you will
recall that in 1884 and again in 1886 there were violent vibrations which
caused a very panicky feeling. You may remember the explosion in the
Tarrant Building, perhaps twenty years ago, which created a great panic in
the neighborhood. It is easy to see what would happen if, in the office
building district downtown, a violent explosion or earthquake tremor were
to occur, which would result in a mad rush from office buildings to the
streets. The panic in the streets would be almost inconceivable, and would,
under existing conditions, be about as serious and fatal in its results as those
which occur when people try to leave a theatre in case of an alarm of fire.
I am speaking now only of pedestrian traffic, but the vehicular traffic
which will result from the over-intensive use of land in the city must also
be considered.
Use districts will segregate different kinds of traffic
Perhaps there are.those who might fear that the result of a segregation
of heavy manufacturing, of light manufacturing and business, and of resi-
144 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
dences might aggravate present traffic conditions. I think there need be
no fear on that score, whereas the greatest delays and dangers incident to
public traffic are those resulting from the indiscriminate mixture of traffic
of various classes. In heavy manufacturing districts we will have heavy
trucking with slow movement and, if the traffic is nearly all of that class,
the speed would be fairly uniform and confusion would be much less than
in the case of mixed traffic. Similarly, in districts devoted to light manu-
facturing or business, the extraordinary dev elopment of the motor vehicle
will result in greater flexibility of the traffic and its separation, to a large
extent, from the very heavy traffic which will frequent the industrial districts
and the pleasure traffic which will be found in the residential districts and
on pleasure drives.
It appears to me that the entire problem of traffic control will be sim-
plifed rather than aggravated by such a limited degree of segregation as
I think the Commission has in mind.
Effect of automobile on traffic conditions
Let me further point out that the extraordinary development of the
motor vehicle which lately has taken place, while increasing the number of
vehicles, may actually simplify some of the problems which might be
expected to result from the segregation of business and industries.
The Secretary cf State’s office advises me that in the New York
district, which includes not only the city, but the Counties of Nassau,
Suffolk, Westchester, Rockland and Putnam, the registration for the
entire year of 1915 of motor vehicles for pleasure traffic was 82,751
vehicles; for commercial uses, 13,640. That was for the twelve months
ending February 1, 1916. For the first three months of the present year,
from February Ist to May Ist, the registration in that district of pleasure
motor vehicles was 9214 per cent of the total for the preceding twelve
months, while the registration for commercial vehicles was 14 per cent
greater than for the entire twelve months of the preceding year. You may
think this is irrelevant, but it indicates to me very clearly that the sub-
stitution of the motor vehicle for the horse-drawn truck, through its shorter
length and less occupation of street space, through its greater speed and
greater flexibility, will result in a far greater capacity, and that you can
dismiss as groundless any fear that the “segregation of industries involving
very heavy trucking, of light manufacturing or business using light com-
mercial vehicles, or of residences, will aggravate the traffic “problem, I
think it will actually tend to simplify it.
The net result to the city of this simplification will be a greater traffic
capacity in our existing streets, a more intelligent and economic arrangement
of the streets, so far as subdivision into roadway and sidewalk is con-
cerned and greater safety to the public using the street by avoiding in a
large degree “the mixed traffic which we have to-day, and which, I think, is
a greater source of danger than intensive traffic of any one class.
Need for districting
While I am thoroughly convinced, not only by my own reasoning, but by
what I have seen in other cities and in other countries, of the great need
of some such control as the Commission proposes to recommend, I feel that
if it is to be done, it should be done quickly, as there is no question but
that there will be a rush to the Bureau of Buildings to get plans approved
as far in advance of actual construction as possible, before any restrictive
ordinance goes into effect. I fancy that if these building plans are once ap-
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 145
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
proved under existing ordinances, the approval will be good and valid and
that you could not prevent the carrying out of building plans which have been
approved by competent authorities. Consequently, the effect of a delay of
many months m applying the zoning plan would be very serious and would
nullify in no small degree the very purposes which your Commission has
in mind. I think that the city has suffered seriously from the lack of such
a plan in the past, and with the increasingly rapid growth of the city the
plan becomes all the more urgent.
Meaning of garden city movement
We have heard a good deal about the garden city movement which,
I think, is quite generally misunderstood. It is not so much bringing the
garden into the city, or taking the city into the country, as it is a protest
against further centralization. Its real purpose is decentralization and the
avoidance of the aggravated conditions which we find in Manhattan
Borough, and in some other parts of the city to-day, and that would be in
no small degree avoided by-such regulation as the Commission proposes.
Lack of districting increases cost of streets
I may say that one of the serious problems confronting my office in
passing upon street plans has been the need of providing what may be an
excessive width of streets where land is cheap, for fear that the building
of a new transportation line, putting this land in close touch with the busi-
ness centre, will result in an intensive development by apartment houses,
so that we have been obliged to guard against conditions which formerly
prevailed on the east side of Manhattan and to insist upon a minimum
street width, which is more than the real need of the territory if reasonably
restricted. If such development were confined, for instance, to two or
three story houses, or in some cases to detached houses, we would not have
been obliged to impose upon the property owners the cost of acquiring and
then improving streets of a greater capacity than they would need, if there
were some sane, reasonable plan for preventing over intensive development.
The present extension of the rapid transit system is another reason
why the plan should be adopted now. It is the present extension of the
rapid transit system that makes me refuse to recommend what, were it not
for the danger of intensive development along these lines, would be a
sufficient and reasonable street plan for a suburban development with
detached houses or houses of limited height.
I think districting is a necessary concomitant or supplement to the rapid
transit plan, unless the city is going to have a distorted, unbalanced growth,
with strips of intensive development along the transit lines.
Development of slum areas
Within the last two decades there has been a great influx of European
immigration of constantly increasing volume. The racial tendency of these
people on arriving in New York is te segregate in certain quarters. This
is true not only of New York, but every other industrial centre. [ven
though employees in mills and factories have received compensation which
would really permit them to live decently, they have been disposed, in many
cases, if quarters were available, to herd in a few rooms, cutting dawn their
rental to a minimum, in order that they may within the shortest possible time
save enough money to go back home. If it is possible to crowd together in
tenements, they will take advantage of the opportunity.
146 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Stores on residential streets undesirable
As I have already pointed out the greatest danger from traffic is where
there is a mixed traffic—commercial and pleasure traffic—moving together
along the same limited roadway at different speeds and constantly stopping.
I think that it is obvious to anyone that where there are stores in tene-
ment quarters, stores with four or five or six stories of apartments above
them, the streets become dangerous for children to play in.
Land subdivision and districting
It would be a more desirable condition if the ordinary house could be
put on a lot more nearly square, so that it would have light on all sides.
I would like to give you an illustration showing an alternative method of
subdivision of an indentical area in the Borough of Brooklyn. <A triangular
tract of twenty-odd acres, bounded on all three sides by wide streets, is now
subdivided in the conventional fashion by streets sixty and eighty feet wide,
and has been evidently designed for detached houses on plots containing
two units, that is, plots forty feet wide by one hundred feet in depth. The
alternative subdivision is for streets forty and fifty feet in width, with lots
sixty feet in depth and fifty feet wide. A little neighborhood park is set
aside for the use of the residents and there is a larger number of the fifty
by sixty foot plots. The result is to decrease the cost of each plot, not-
withstanding the greater expenditure for sewers, by reason of the greater
length of streets, the greater expenditure for curbing, and for sidewalks,
but a much reduced cost of pavement, owing to narrower roadways, the
result being that the plots themselves, with all improvements, cost appre-
ciably less than in the case of the forty by one hundred foot units.
At the last annual convention of the National City Planning Conference
the general feeling was that under existing conditions the best typical lot
unit was twenty-five by one hundred feet, because allowance had to be
made for convertibility at any time to business or industrial use. Lots
fifty by sixty feet are not as readily convertible to business or industry as
lots twenty-five by one hundred. This, in my judgment, proves the necessity
for districting the city in order to obtain an ideal street and block layout for
residential use.
This city has suffered tremendous loses by the inflexibility of its street
system which, instead of controlling a subdivision, has been controlled by
the habit of creating lots one hundred feet deep, lying between streets two
hundred feet apart, and great enterprises, a number of which were formerly
located at the Erie Basin section of Brooklyn, finding themselves hemmed
in by rigid street systems, to which more or less sanctity was attributed,
have been obliged to find new sites on the New Jersey meadows. One
conspicuous instance of this is the Worthington Pumps Works. The city
has suffered materially by compelling a large number of factories to go into
other States in order to secure adequate sites.
Height limit should be more drastic
I cannot speak for those whose chief interest is the value of real estate,
but I believe that the man who wants to maintain a house in a certain dis-
trict would welcome the one times street width limitation and feel that the
ordinary street width, which we will call sixty feet and i in some cases eighty
feet, would permit as tall a building as he wants to see in his neighborhood,
and in a great many cases—I am speaking now of my own personal prefer-
ence—he “would like to see a height limit of the street width less fifteen or
twenty per cent. In other words, I believe there are many people who will
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 147
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
express the wish that the Commission had gone even further in its limita-
tion than is proposed.
Undoubtedly, a comprehensive transportation system could be more
intelligently planned if those responsible for planning it knew in advance
what kind of development would be possible in the various districts through
which it would pass.
Sensational building along subway
I remember the sensational development. of the Washington Heights
district on the completion of the present subway. It came very suddenly,
and you will see the same thing happen in Corona in a very few months, in
a district nearer in time and distance to the center of Manhattan and where,
in deference to the persistent demands of property owners to save the
expense of widening some streets which were originally laid out at fifty
feet, those old widths have been maintained, and unless there is some
restriction upon the kind of development which can occur, I think we will
have a serious problem for the city to deal with in that district.
Sewerage
This sudden and unusual growth of apartment houses and tenement
houses has severely taxed the sewer system of the city. They have made
it quite obvious that steps have got to be taken to protect the harbor and
the rest of the city from being fouled by this sewage, although when we
talk about taxing the existing sewer system, I think that as a hydraulic
problem it is very much exaggerated, as we are still providing sewers to
accommodate both surface water and house drainage, and the amount of
house sewage is almost negligible in comparison with the surface water
for which provisions must be made. Large sections directly,along the new
lines of the dual rapid transit system are as yet unsewered. There would be
an extensive development of tenement houses in a number of these sections
were it not that the tenement house law prohibits the occupancy of a tene-
ment house unless it has a sewer connection. There are a number of tene-
ment houses in Queens to-day which cannot get occupancy permits because
there are no sewers to connect with.
The sewage problem is greatly intensified where the only system is a
sanitary system. By that I] mean that the sanitary system does not permit
even of a connection of a yard and a roof of any building with the sanitary
sewer without danger of surcharging the sewers yet the Tenement House
Law requires that all courts, yards and roofs shall be connected with the
sewer. In many cases the only sewer in the street is a sanitary sewer, and
to connect the roofs and yards and courts with it would surcharge it,
causing a backing up into other houses.
Districting a protection against fire
After a study of the great city fires and conflagrations, like the Balti-
more fire, the Chicago fire, the Salem fire and the San Francisco earthquake
and fire, I think it is manifest that the segregation of industrial buildings
should be had in the City of New York, purely from a fire fighting point of
view.
Effect of districting on land values
_ In my judgment, the adoption of this plan, while it might check sensa-
tonal increases of value in certain districts, will undoubtedly result in a
greater total tax value, far better diffused than has heretofore been the
ease.
148 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
STATEMENT BY SAM A. Lewisonn, or Apo_tpu Lewisoun & Sons, Marci
24, 1916
Need for districting
Many of us who have been giving our attention to municipal matters
have regarded the work of your Commission in providing for height and use
zones for the city as probably the most important piece of constructive work
for the city’s progress that has been carried out in the last decade. The dis-
tricting plan as I understand it is merely a provision for * enforced co-
operation.” Anyone, like myself, who has followed real estate for even a
short number of years realizes what a fundamental need the districting plan
is, both as it applies to the heights and cubage of buildings and to the use
for which the building is to be built, and how we have suffered in the past
for the lack of such a plan. Irretrievable harm has indeed been done not
only to the health and comfort of the community, but to real estate values
themselves by the absence of such a system as is contemplated. Well
recognized examples are the useless deterioration of certain parts of the
city by erratic changes in use, the building up of skyscrapers to shut out each
others’ light and air, and the invasion of residential districts by skyscrapers
on the one hand and by undesirable commercial establishments on the other.
STATEMENT By SAM A. LewisouNn, oF ApotpH Lrewisoun & Sons, May
1, 1916
Restrictions too liberal
I have personally been very much interested in the work of your Com-
mission, and was very glad indeed to write you expressing my belief that the
work you are doing is as important a piece of work as has been carried
forward in this city for the past decade. Upon studying your tentative
plans, however, much as I have been impressed by the devotion and thor-
oughness with which you have approached this difficult task, still I feel, as
do many others, much disappointed over the fact that the liberality of your
allowance on height and area is such as to render it doubtful whether the
hoped for results will be obtained.
I have read with interest the memorandum submitted to you by the
Committee on City Planning of the City Club of New York. I fully concur
with most of the suggestions contained therein, particularly with reference
to the stricter provisions for districts other than Manhattan, especially the
Brooklyn and Queens districts, which are still to be developed. As one who
is interested in property in such districts, particularly in the outlying districts
of Queens, I can assure you that in the end real estate holders will welcome
provisions that will force a type of building which will have a slighter
resemblance to the old type tenement; in other words, the substitution of D
districts for most of the B and C districts and the establishment in a large
part of the borough of districts more restricted than are D districts. Once
the temptation to follow in the rut of the old-fashioned tenement is removed,
the landlord will reap the benefit in the larger rents which will accrue in
a district developed in the more enlightened way. From my study of the
tentative report of your Committee I fear greatly that even the D provi-
sions will permit a type of building that will differ but very slightly from
certain types of tenements already objectionable. Many of us who look
to the outlying districts for developing an improved and more enlightened
type of dwelling for the less wealthy members of our community feel that
such a result would be a calamity, particularly as once such a type of
dwelling is established it will be impossible to change the regulations, and
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 149
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
we will have the conditions as at present existing in some of our congested
districts, or certainly only a very small improvement.
Too liberal restrictions penalize better developments
By not having strict enough regulations you are penalizing the landlord
that would attempt to use his ingenuity to develop an enlightened type of
dwelling; in fact, it is almost impossible to attempt any schemes in this
direction unless the surrounding district is protected. On the other hand, if
there is adequate protection the ingenuity of the builders will be taxed to
provide an adequate building within the regulations enforced. I do not
believe, therefore, that your Commission should‘hesitate through any fear
of supposed opposition on the part of real estate owners—an opposition
which I do not believe will be encountered—to provide an adequate regu-
lation.
I hope you will understand the spirit in which the above suggestions are
made. I have only been impelled to make them because of the enormous
significance the regulations-adopted by your Commission will have upon the
future of New York City.
STATEMENT BY FRANK Lorp, VicE-PRESIDENT, Cross & BRowN COMPANY,
ReaL Estate AND INSURANCE, Marcrt 29, 1916
Condition of real estate
After an experience of 41 years in New York business real estate, I
cannot remember a time since 1875 when the plan of restricting heights and
limiting areas would have caused less disturbance to real estate values than
now. Values have been greatly reduced and activity almost suspended in the
districts below Chambers Street, where high building and light monopoliz-
ing has been most prevalent. In the districts where activity and stable
values have prevailed above 34th Street, high buildings have until recently
been considered unnecessary and will work great harm if one or two build-
ings of the superdreadnought type are constructed to appropriate and con-
centrate in one or two spots the business activity which should be spread
over a reasonable area and impart benefit to a large section.
In the midtown section of the mercantile district, say from Canal Street
to 23d Street, where there has been almost complete prostration, the restric-
tion of the height of buildings can work no possible harm and may encourage
the construction of eight to ten story buildings, with all Labor Law require-
ments that will command reasonable rents. This district will then gradually
regain its lost character and in a measure its activity and value as a manu-
facturing center will be re-established.
New York has had a high building debauch and I believe has learned
that there is some analogy in after-effects between high buildings and low
vitality in inverse ratio. It is too much to expect that building restrictions
will create value, but it is fair to believe that the reasonable restrictions
proposed by the Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions will
conserve value and stabilize districts.
Present appropriate time for districting
The permanent location of two great railway terminals at 33d Street
and at 42d Street, the building of the Broadway or Central Subway, the
Seventh Avenue or west side subway on Seventh Avenue, and the Lexington
Avenue or east side subway, mark this time as the most appropriate in the
150 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
recent history of New York to inaugurate this great plan and to plan with
certainty a specific kind of building for a given locality without incurring
the danger of having the value of the improvement partly or wholly de-
stroyed by improper uses of adjoining or neighboring premises. I believe
that the adoption of the proposed plan of restricting and limiting the height
of buildings will attract a large amount of capital to build better homes in
better localities and appropriate buildings in appropriate localities, that will
be to the advantage of the entire city both in healthfulness and permanent
values, and to help prevent the congestion of New York streets both through
concentrated shipping and the gathering of operatives at certain hours of
the day.
New York has prospered under apartment house building restrictions ;
no one complains, everybody is satisfied. Why should not business districts
enjoy the same measure of protection that has been gained through the wise
provisions of the apartment house law? Those who have had the welfare
of New York at heart have recognized for the past twenty years the
necessity of some form of control over business buildings and for the pro-
tection of business and residence localities ; and the work of the Commission
on Building Districts and Restrictions is but a tardy response to the urgent
need for action, and in my opinion it would be a grievous loss to this city if
the work of this Commission should be lost through failure to recognize its
value to the entire city.
New York is at present at a disadvantage in that investors are running
great risks in erecting almost any kind of a building while the city is left in
its present haphazard condition and at the risk of having either its residence
population or business houses driven out of certain districts through uncon-
trolled action of speculative builders and inconsiderate owners. F
High buildings make tremendous demand on the city’s service and
resources; they overtax its narrow streets and the land which carried two
or three superimposed buildings pays no more land tax than the modest four
or eight-story building.
STATEMENT BY Dr. Marton B. McMitran, Assistant SANITARY
SUPERINTENDENT, DEPARTMENT OF Hearty, Marcu 30, 1916
Sanitary condition of office buildings
I had the pleasure of conducting during the last four months an investi-
gation leading toward the establishment of better sanitary conditions in the
office buildings located in the financial district. I shall give a short sum-
mary of data I obtained in a trial block between Broadway, Nassau Street,
Cedar Street and Liberty Street.
In looking over the block we have taken into account 928 office rooms,
in which the total number of employees was 2,380 people. The percentage
of individuals working eight hours and over in this district was 92.71 per
cent, and the number under eight hours was 7.29 per cent. Of the 2,382
individuals working there, over 92 per cent worked eight hours and over,
a day. The per cent of the entire number provided with natural light was
14.67. 85.33 were subjected to artificial light. In going over the point
of public health and the relation of the office worker to public health under
present conditions, in our large financial districts, we found that the indi-
viduals who are most affected are the clerks and stenographers ; individuals
with low salaries. It is among this class of individuals that the Department
of Health finds the heaviest per cent of tuberculosis and it is in this class
of individuals where the case incidence of disease per year is highest.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 151
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
Artificial illumination in office buildings
There is a direct relationship between the growth of bacteria and the
quantity of light. The conditions on Cedar Street have changed greatly
since the construction of the Equitable Building, this building cutting off
75 per cent of the natural light from the north side of the street. This
makes it necessary for the individuals in these offices to use artificial light
practically every working day in the year.
In looking over the direct injuries resulting to workers from the use
of artificial light I found that a very large per cent of them are suffering at
the present time from eye strain toa marked degree. In some instances it had
generated nervous and hyper-nervous conditions, symptoms especially mani-
fest in the afternoon, between the hours of four and five o’clock. The lack of
light was just as demonstrable as the use of too much light. This was especi-
ally the case where electrical installations had been badly placed. I have dis-
cussed this subject with many physicians of the city and that is their
general opinion too. I have conferred with them especially with regard
to light, and they have stated to me that the number of cases of eye strain
with the resulting use of glasses in the City of New York, has increased in
the last five years almost - 30 per cent and in some instances even as high
as 50 per cent.
It is possible by artificial means to approximate conditions of day light
in office buildings, but whether it is commercially possible I do not know.
It seems to me it is commercially impossible at present. I know there is a
glass which cuts off approximately 85 per cent of the artificial light, but the
quality of the light when finally discharged approximates daylight very
closely. From the point of view of eye strain natural light is better than
artificial light.
The experience of most physicians with regard to the use of artificial
illumination has been that little, if any, approaches the actual composition
of daylight. The newer lights, such as the tungsten and the nitrogen light,
are so intense in their rays that it is with difficulty that they are used with-
out really producing too much light. Now these rays have got to be modified
and diffused in such a way as to do away with the eye strain which follows
their use. Perhaps it is only a slight fancy on my part, but I believe that
some day, looking into the future, we will see that individuals who work
all the time under artificial light will gradually develop adaptability to that
kind of light at the cost of their adaptability to day light.
I base this belief on the fact that employees in our factories manufac-
turing electric globes sit. there and standardize globes continuously during
the first week, and suffer much from intense inflammation of the retina, the
interior portion of the eye, but that gradually goes away and the individual
accustoms himself to the new conditions.
In natural light we understand the invisible rays to be the most active,
both chemically and bacteriologically. In artificial light we only have a
small per cent of these entering into its composition, and sometimes none
gral On this account the bacteriocidal effect of artificial light is practically
nil.
I found in one instance in one of our large banking houses, individual
efficiency was increased 25 per cent by changing the system of lighting and
the quality and kind of light. This was admitted to me by the office manager
himself. This was in the adding machine department.
iS¥ COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Ventilation of office buildings
The point that the Department of Health wishes to make before this
Commission is that it is detrimental to health to have an unlimited height
of office buildings, and to have large buildings in close proximity to each
other, not only on account of the lighting problem but also as regards the
free access of air, unless artificial, mechanical ventilation is used. As a
matter of fact when I was in one of the most advanced sanitary bank build-
ings that I could find in that district, I found forced ventilation employed
only on the first and second floors. Most of the building was provided with
natural ventilation. People in these office buildings often do not use natural
ventilation on account of the fact that they complain of suffering from
colds and draughts. Failure to use natural ventilation is particularly notice-
able where air shafts exist.
Floor space per office employee
The number of square feet of floor space per employee in this block was
as follows:
From 5to 50 square feet per person.......... 26%
From 51to 71 square feet per person.......... 22%
From 76 to 100 square feet per person.......... 24%
From 101 to 150 square feet per person.......... 16%
From 151 to 200 square feet per person.......... 8%
Over 200 square feet.
Need for districting
Not only do I think it advisable, but I think it is a question of actual
necessity as regards the enforcement of the public health laws in the City
of New York, that restrictions of the character proposed by this Commis-
sion should be enacted and clearly defined.
High morbidity rate in offices
I find a more than normal per cent of case incidence in office workers
who are confined to poorly ventilated and ill lighted offices. The case
incidence in New York of disease we roughly estimate to be 2.82 per cent,
that is from all diseases. In some of our office buildings downtown I
found, in going over the investigations made, case incidences running up as
high as 9.68 per cent which would indicate something which was not normal
compared with the rest of the city.
Tuberculosis has been particularly prevalent in the office buildings.
Eye strain and diseases of the nose and throat, catarrh, colds, etc., are also
very prevalent. Absence due to sickness runs from .32 per cent to as high
as 9.68 per cent—it varies between these figures.
Humidity of office buildings
In offices we find low humidity—very low humidity as compared with
the outside—sometimes a change of 40 per cent from the atmospheric
humidity. There is a very marked difference in the humidity in rooms
inkabited by one person or in which one person is continuously working
and one where a number of persons work. The humidity increases in direct
proportion to the number of people in the room.
Humidity, ordinarily speaking, is not of importance from the point of
view of health until we have high temperature linked with humidity, and
then the question of ventilation becomes very important. Reduction of the
temperature on the surface of the body naturally is important. I think
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 153
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
we lose sight of one point when it comes to respiratory troubles. Where
the necessary humidity is taken out of the atmosphere there follows a con-
gestion of the mucous membrane of the nasal passages due to the continuous
breathing of dry hot air. When an individual is subjected to a change of
temperature of from 25 to 30 degrees by going from his house into the
street, coupled with a change in the humidity of over 20 per cent, an inflam-
matory reaction follows. It is due to this, I think, that we suffer a great
deal in New York City, from catarrhal conditions.
STATEMENT BY BenyAMIN C. Marsu, SECRETARY OF THE NEW
York Concestion CommMitrter, Aprit 27, 1916
The Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions has made the
most painstaking and careful study of existing conditions of development,
use and future needs of New York City, ever made in this country, and
probably in the world.
The principles of your report must commend themselves universally,
the districting of the city to prevent the construction of as high buildings in
the outlying boroughs, as have injured Manhattan, and the restriction of
districts against industry.
It seems to us, however, that these restrictions can be applied more
fully than you have done. We submit, therefore, the following suggestions:
LIMITATIONS ON THE SIZE OF BUILDINGS SHOULD Be More Drastic
Very few tenements (except high class apartment houses) will have
elevators, unless they are over five stories high. It is undesirable to require
any family to climb over three flights of stairs, above the first floor ; although
five-story tenements are permitted, under the tentative plans of the Com-
mission, in The Bronx and Queens up to the City Line, throughout Brooklyn
and in almost all of Richmond. It would be wiser to increase the acreage
that is entirely restricted, to lower the heights of buildings used for resi-
dential purposes, to increase the area restricted to one and two-family
houses, and to permit more intensive use of land in unrestricted areas for
business and industrial purposes than for residential purposes.
Height limitation alone, in relation to street width, is not adequate, be-
cause the width of streets varies greatly within the same height districts.
The maximum number of stories for each height district should be
established, in addition to the height limitation, with a sliding scale per-
mitting an additional story for every additional 10 per cent of the lot area
left unoccupied above the requirement for the district.
To equalize conditions of specially intensive development, a regulation
might be adopted that when 50 or more per cent of the frontage of a block
is more intensively developed than the regulations permit, the rest of the
block may be similarly developed.
SuGcEsTIonsS REGARDING NUMBER OF STORIES AND HEIGHTS
Manhattan
No building should be permitted to exceed in height one and three-
quarters times the width of the street, with a maximum of sixteen stories,
except in the area in the center of the lower end of the island, where the
Commission recommends a height of two and a half times the width of
the street. The area along the water front, where the Commission recom-
154 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
mends a-height of twice the width of the street, should be limited to one
and a half times the width.
In the northern part of the island, at least north of 156th Street—if
possible, north of 126th Street—the height should be limited to once and a
quarter times the width of the street.
The Bronx
The area in which the Commission recommends twice the width of the
street should be limited to one and a half times the width.
The area north of this strip along the waterfront up to 17th Street
and Tremont Avenue, from the Ship Canal to Bronx Park, should be limited
to one and a quarter times the width of the street, with a maximum of five
stories, west of the Bronx River.
The area bounded by 177th Street, Tremont Avenue, Bronx Park,
Fordham Road, Webster Avenue, 200th Street, Jerome Avenue, Kingsbridge
Road and Spuyten Duyvil, the area south of the Bronx and Pelham Park-
way, east of the Bronx River and a block each side of Broadway from
Spuyten Duyvil to City Line should be restricted to once the width of the
street, with a maximum of four stories.
The rest of the borough should be limited to once the width of the
street, with a maximum of three stories.
Brooklyn
The maximum height in Brooklyn should be one and a half times the
width of the street. This should be permitted only along the waterfront.
The Brooklyn Heights section, Eastern Parkway, Court Street and the
main business streets should be restricted to a height of one and a quarter
times the width of the street, with a maximum of nine stories.
The rest of the borough should be restricted to once the width of the
street, with a maximum of four stories in Greenpoint, Williamsburg, South
Brooklyn to Sunset Park, and the northern part of Brownsville, and three
stories in the rest of the borough. Areas not near industrial districts, where
the predominating value of land is less than $5.00 per front foot, should
be restricted to single or two-family houses.
Queens
The waterfront area, for which the Commission recommends a height
twice the width of the street, should be restricted to one and a half times
the width.
The rest of Long Island City and the main business streets of old
Flushing and Jamaica should be restricted to a height of one and a quarter
times the width of the street, with a maximum of five stories.
The remainder of the borough should be restricted to once the width of
the street, with a maximum of three stories, and with the same restrictions
to one or two-family houses as suggested for Brooklyn.
Richmond
This borough should be limited to one and a quarter times the width of
the street, with a maximum—along the northern and eastern shores—of
four stories, and in the rest of the borough of three stories, with the same
restrictions to one and two-family houses as suggested for Brooklyn and
Queens.
AREA Restrictions RECOMMENDED
In areas designated B, by the Commission, only 65 per cent of the
area of interior lots should be occupied, and 85 per cent of the area of
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 155
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
corner lots; for C districts the areas should be respectively 60 per cent
and 80 per cent; for D districts 55 per cent and 75 per cent, and for E
districts the number of families should be limited to fifteen per acre.
These suggestions may seem severe for outlying boroughs, but except
in rare instances they will not affect existing land values materially, nor do
they involve as much restriction as the limitations proposed by the Com-
mission for lower Manhattan.
Areas adjacent to existing parks, and playgrounds should be restricted
As the City cannot at present make ideal provision of parks and play-
grounds, the areas adjacent to existing ones should be restricted against
industry.
New district needed
A new district or type of restriction should be adopted against industry
of any kind, 7. e., excluding the use of two stories, or 25 per cent of the
floor area for manufacture, but permitting retail stores.
Areas which should be restricted against industry
In every borough a much larger area should be restricted against in-
dustry. In general, no large area should be unrestricted in a district now
chiefly, or even largely, tenement. In established and developed areas, few
blocks should be unrestricted in which there are at present less than five
hundred workers in factories.
Manhattan
Seventh Avenue, south of 13th Street, should be restricted, also many
more blocks and side streets, in Greenwich Village, on the lower East
Side and on both sides of the borough to 34th Street, except a few blocks
back from the waterfront.
The Bronx
The unrestricted area along the waterfront should be narrowed to
not over half to three-quarters of a mile, especially along the [ast River
from the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad to the Sound and
on Eastchester Creek.
’
Brooklyn
In Greenpoint the residential district should be extended north to
Dupont Street, between Franklin and Oakland Streets.
In Williamsburg a larger area should be restricted and the unrestricted
area along the waterfront should be narrowed.
A large part of the Red Hook District should be restricted.
The area around Jamaica Bay now “undetermined ” should be defi-
nitely restricted.
More of the area bounded by Grand Street, Flushing, Nostrand and
Lexington Avenues should be restricted; also more of Brownsville.
Queens
Much more of Long Island City should be restricted; the unrestricted
area along the East River and Newtown and Flushing creeks should be
narrowed.
The area around Jamaica Bay, now “ undetermined,” should be defi-
nitely restricted. The unrestricted area, east of Flushing Bay, should be
reduced.
‘
156 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Richmond
The area “ undetermined ” should be definitely restricted, and the wire
stricted area on the waterfront should be narrowed.
”
STATEMENT BY HENRY Moskowitz, PRESIDENT, MUNICIPAL CiviL SERVICE
Commission, May 25, 1916
Exits in factory loft buildings
I have had experience as Secretary of the Joint Board of Sanitary
Control, which makes semi-annual inspections in the cloak and suit industry
and the dress and waist industry.
The number of operatives in the busy season for the two industries,
I should say, is fifty thousand for the cloak and suit industry and thirty-five
thousand for the dress and waist industry, making a total of eighty-five
thousand operatives.
The effect of congested factory conditions among the high loft
buildings is bad for a number of reasons. One of the chief difficulties in
these loft buildings is the inadequate elevator accommodations. ’ As a
consequence the girls are compelled to go up on the freight elevators in the
back of the building during the rush hours. It is very difficult to provide
adequate safety from fire in these buildings without a fire wall. This at
least the majority of them do not have. They simply have stairs and
fire escapes for exits. In general I think that the average factory loft
building is unsafe above the eighth floor. In case of a fire, the exit facilities
would be inadequate.
In certain buildings employers have refused to order fire drills on
account of the danger attached to possible panic and also the danger of
actually walking down the stairs.
The present form of fire escape is not only dangerous but it is difficult
to handle, especially in those factories where girls are working. The girls
are more nervous and more liable to become panic stricken than men. Then
the fire escape is very inadequate.
The fireproof enclosed stairways, the fire towers, and even the so-called
smokeproof towers, in my judgment, are less smokeproof than advertised.
We have found in a great many cases that what was deemed an adequate
exit in case of fire proved inadequate under special circumstances. I long
ago came to the conclusion that we shall never have adequate safety from
fire unless we have a fire wall or some arrangement on the principle of a
fire wall.
T haven’t found any fireproof building I could call reasonably safe.
Lunch facilities in loft buildings
The lunch service for these factory workers is not adequate from a
health standpoint. In some of the newer buildings there are provisions for
lunch rooms. But that depends upon the good will and the point of view
of the manufacturer. The rents are very high and they want to use the
maximum space. As a consequence the girls have in many factories inade-
quate lunch rooms, so they eat their lunches at their machines, among the
garments that they are sewing. As a result they sometimes make grease
spots on the new garments. One of the frequent causes of dispute between
employer and worker is that the girl has made grease spots on the garments
while eating her lunch.
Such public restaurants as may be found in the locality are so jammed
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 157
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
at noon that a satisfactory luncheon is impossible. But that applies also to
the people who work downtown in the overcrowded business buildings.
Lower East Side
The congestion of the East Side was created by the needle work in-
dustry. If the garment factories were not located on the east side or
near the east side of Manhattan, the East Side as a neighborhood for work-
ing people would not exist. The condition of the East Side with reference
to congestion is particularly the result of a lack of a City Plan. If thirty years
ago the area of the City of New York had been laid out into zones much
of this tenement legislation and much of the work that reformers have had
to do because of congestion would have been unnecessary.
Districting will prevent a duplication of the evils of congestion in the
newer sections of the city. The areas near the new rapid transit roads in
Queens ought to be saved from the fate of the lower east side. Sections in
the Bronx ought also to be saved. You can save them yet.
Tenement house manufacturing
Manufacturing in tenements is harmful to every resident of the tene-
ment. I consider it harmful to the operatives. I consider it harmful to the
purchaser of goods, because the regulation of contagious diseases in tene-
ment houses is bound to be inadequate, and I think that tenement house
labor ought to be absolutely abolished. I say this with regard to all kinds
of manufacturing in tenements because you cannot regulate the sanitary
conditions of tenements and you cannot regulate danger from contagion.
I think it is better, especially for the people that have to work, that they
work in factories rather than in tenement homes.
STATEMENT BY JoHN J. Murpuy, ComMMissIoNER, TENEMENT House
DEPARTMENT, May 9, 1916
Results accomplished by Tenement House Law
My duties as Commissioner have brought me into close contact with
existing conditions in the City of New York. I have studied all the types
of old tenement houses erected before the passage of the present law and
some which were erected when there was no law on the statute books
affecting tenement houses. When I first came to New York to live thirty-
four years ago I lived in a district which, while having formerly been a
residential district, was at that time used for tenement house purposes in
fact. I may, therefore, say that both by personal experience and official
opportunity I can speak on the subject as one who has reached certain
definite conclusions. There can be no question that the provisions of the
law providing for limitations on the height of non-fireproof buildings, the
provision of such yard and court spaces as the law now requires for provid-
ing light and ventilation to interior rooms, the control of sanitary arrange-
ments of multiple dwellings, and the requirement of adequate means of
fire escape have greatly added to the welfare, safety, and longevity of
dwellers in congested districts.
Observation of the enforcement of the law has developed the fact that
more stringent requirements would have accomplished more, but it seems
that, at the time the law was passed, in view of then existing conditions,
these requirements were all that could be enforced.
158 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
The tenement house law represents after all the minimum which the
people who were working for better public sanitation would accept and the
maximum that they were able to obtain.
Districting a benefit to health
I am of the opinion that any reasonable regulation tending to increase
open spaces will inevitably tend to the production of more healthful condi-
tions. I believe that the elimination of factories from tenement districts
will be helpful, especially if the regulation prevents the existence of facto-
ries in tenement houses. Experience has shown me that the use of tene-
ment houses for business or manufacturing purposes, above the ground
floor, is injurious to the health and morals of the occupants.
Exit facilities in tenements
The width of stairways and the capacity of fire-escapes and fire passages
in tenement houses was based upon the presumption that the building will
be occupied by not more than the normal family occupancy of such a
building, and to create a condition in which the exit facilities would be called
upon to serve more than that number of people in an emergency would be
likely to create dangerous conditions.
Business and industry are now allowed above the ground floor in tene-
ment houses. Factories are permitted under regulations of the State Indus-
trial Commission. Businesses are regulated as to their hazardousness by
the city ordinances and the Tenement House Department, when it finds
that any business is installed in a tenement house, above the ground floor,
places extra requirements in the matter of exits, but, in view of the fact
that to provide any new exits would call almost for a reconstruction of the
lower parts of certain buildings, the means of exits now resorted to are
frequently below standard.
Height of tenements
The limitations on buildings require them to be fireproof, if over six
stories in height. This establishes a sort of automatic check on the height
of tenements. There has been no tendency noticeable in Brooklyn outside
of Williamsburgh for the four-story house to develop into the six-story
house. There has been very little tendency in The Bronx for five-story
houses, with which they practically started to build tenements up there, to
develop into six stories. It seems as if certain types have imposed these
conditions. The extra climb in non-elevator apartments makes it very dif-
ficult to reach the sixth floor, and so they have not put them in in certain
sections. Of course, there has been a certain tendency for fireproof build-
ings to go higher and higher. I think there again the 150-foot limitation
served as a check. That was imposed by a regulation of the Bureau of
Buildings and not by ourselves, except as far as the check afforded by the
width of the street was concerned—that, of course, we have in operation.
Disastrous effects of haphazard development
It is a fact that in many instances the splendid results, flawing from
the enforcement of the Tenement House Law as to light and ventilation, are
interfered with and in some instances almost frustrated by the erection of
adjacent buildings used for other purposes. I would supplement that state-
ment by saying that one of the things that the law sought to secure as much
as possible was interior block ventilation and that purpose is often frustrated
by the erection of buildings which are unrestricted as to depth under present
conditions running through blocks.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 159
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
Many of the things that are prohibited by Section 39 of the Tenement
House Law in tenement houses or on the same lot with tenements are fre-
quently found upon adjacent lots and in adjacent houses. Under such cir-
cumstances the damage to the occupants of the tenement houses is nearly as
great as if there were no tenement house law. The prohibition of the
storage of excelsior, straw, hay, and other combustible material in tenement
houses which are considered sources of fire or conflagrations is only half
effective by reason of the fact that our housing reform measures have not
been co-ordinated and have not had the support of kindred laws governing
other kinds of buildings in the city of New York.
Deaths in tenement house fires
There have been many lives lost in tenements since the passage of the
Tenement House Law. In all of these cases, possibly with one or two excep-
tions, the buildings were equipped with exits and fire escapes and other
fire prevention equipment, as required by the Tenement House Law. The
fatalities have come in spite of the provisions of the law. I would charge
a large proportion of this loss of life up to panicky conditions that have
obtained among people who live in these houses.
I think the experience of other cities, Chicago, for example, indicate
that no loss of life need be feared in tenement houses that are not more
than three stories in height. We have had one bad case of loss of life in
a three-story building in Williamsburg due to suffocation. The people had
not awakened and the smoke filtered in through cracks in the floor and suf-
focated people in their beds, but with this exception, and with the provisions
of the means of fire escapes, which the law now requires it would be almost
certain that we would have no loss of life by fire in tenement houses.
Our universal experience is that people are usually suffocated rather
than burned to death in tenement house fires. It may fairly be said that the
greatest proportion of the loss of life in tenement house fires has been
due to suffocation, panic and ignorance as to the means of escape provided.
Tf I should be asked what I thought was the most serious factor in the loss
of life by fire in tenement houses I would say it was ignorance of how to
use the means of escape actually provided.
Size of outer courts
In some sections of the City, I feel that it is desirable to increase
the requirements of the Tenement House Law as to courts, yards, and
open spaces and to decrease the height of buildings allowed under the Tene-
ment House Law. This is desirable in the interest of public health, safety
and general welfare. In the new law tenements, the undesirability of the
light and ventilation in rear apartments is fairly indicated by the reduced
rentals that they bring.
An outer court on the lot line, six and one-half feet wide and sixty-five
to seventy feet long, as allowed under the Tenement House Law in a six
story building does not adequately light the lower rooms facing on the court,
neither does a nineteen-foot rear yard and a nine and one-half foot outer
court on the lot line adequately light the lower stories of a twelve-story
apartment house.
The present provision of the Tenement House Law allowing the length
of an outer court to be ten to twelve times its width, does not admit ade-
quate lighting in that portion of the court which is nearest the closed end.
The maximum length of an outer court should not exceed eight times its
width if proper allowance is to be made for light and ventilation.
160 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
STATEMENT By W. A. Mourriti, Assistant Director, New York
BoranicaL Garpen, Bronx Park, Apriz 15, 1916
Factories injure vegetation
Botanical gardens should be zealously guarded against conditions that
factories will most certainly bring. Most of the botanical gardens in Europe
have suffered from such conditions and have had to move to the suburbs of
cities. The New York Botanical Garden was located in its present position
to avoid such conditions and it would seem a pity to impose them upon
it now.
Many of the rare and beautiful plants grown in botanical gardens are
extremely sensitive to gases from factories. The fir trees and their rela-
tives are particularly sensitive to smoke and dust. Botanical gardens must
depend largely upon the character of the people in its immediate neighbor-
hood for the protection of its plants. The beauty and usefulness of bo-
tanical gardens, as well as of parks, are not enhanced by ugly buildings and
the unfavorable conditions surrounding factories.
STATEMENT By FREDERIC B. PRaTT, CHAIRMAN BRoOKLYN COMMITTEE ON
City Pian, Marcu 27, 1916
General approval of Commission’s report
The Executive Committee of the Brooklyn Committee on City Plan has
examined with care and with great interest the tentative report of the
Commission and has studied the maps proposing districts and restrictions
prepared by your experts.
The Brooklyn Committee desires to congratulate the Commission on
the approaching completion of so valuable a piece of work. It is evident
to all who have studied the report, plans and proposed resolutions, that the
work of the experts has been painstaking to an unusual degree, involving
close consideration of the existing conditions and prospective development
of individual blocks as well as of districts.
Brooklyn’s inadequate park system
In seeking to formulate plans and regulations which might apply equally
to districts in the different boroughs at equivalent distances from the busi-
ness center of Manhattan, we feel, however, and venture to suggest, that
the peculiar needs of Brooklyn and the desires of Brooklyn people have
been to some extent subordinated to a general plan.
For instance, the Bronx is already provided with a magnificent system
of parks. Brooklyn is not at all equally favored, and it is self-evident that
no equal system of open spaces can be provided in Brooklyn at equal dis-
tances from the business center of Manhattan. It seems to us to follow
from this that much stricter building regulations should be imposed on
Brooklyn territory, so that the open spaces which cannot be provided in
large areas may be secured in a measure through closer restrictions on the
amount of land to be covered by buildings.
More stringent restrictions desired for Brooklyn
We believe, moreover, that it is the general desire of the people of
Brooklyn that the borough should never attain to the congestion which is
found in Manhattan, but we notice on the map of tentative area districts that
it is proposed to permit the same dimensions for residential buildings which
are deemed proper for the greater part of Manhattan, to extend in Brook-
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 161
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
lyn from the Heights to and a little beyond Prospect Park on the south
and Throop and Bushwick Avenues on the east, while the still larger C Dis-
tricts, extending eastward to Forest Park and beyond it southward over
most of the area to Bay Ridge and poutegesinsed Bay, are scarcely less
restricted.
The difference between the restrictions in the B districts and the
C districts is so small, not beginning, in fact, to take effect for buildings
less than 60 feet in height, that the Brooklyn Committee recommends to
the Commission that all of the B districts should be made C districts, ex-
cepting perhaps a few small areas on the Heights, the Park Slope and the
Hill. In the judgment of the Brooklyn Committee no injustice would be
done if the borders of the C districts were extended to include all of the
B districts.
It is likewise the thought of the Brooklyn Committee that the limits of
the D districts should be extended from the fringe of the borough toward its
center by considerable extensions. In the D districts only 60 per cent of
the lot may be covered by tenement or apartment houses; while in A, B
and C districts 70 per cent may be covered. Also in the D districts the yard
must be at least 21 feet in depth for a building 50 feet in height, while
in the A and B districts it need be but 15 feet in depth for a building 90
feet in height, and in the C districts 18 feet 9 inches for a building 90 feet
in height.
For similar reasons we would urge an extension of the E districts, with
their still closer restrictions.
We believe not only for reasons already mentioned that closer restric-
tions should be applied to Brooklyn than to Manhattan or the Bronx, but
that the value of Brooklyn territory in the aggregate will be greater with
such restrictions than without them; and, further, that such restrictions
will tend to elevate the level of citizenship throughout the wide extent of
this rapidly growing borough, which is destined for many years to come to
be an increasing factor in determining the future destiny of the Great
Metropolis.
Yards of non-residential buildings should extend to the ground level
Regarding non-residential buildings in residential districts, we observe
that such buildings are permitted to cover the whole of the lot area in the
B and C districts to a height of 18 feet above the curb. This seems to us
an injustice, while residential buildings are obliged to preserve a rear yard
of at least 12 feet in depth. We attach much importance to the preserva-
tion of clear open spaces through the middle of each block. We would urge,
therefore, a modification of the regulations for non-residential buildings in
B and C districts to provide that wherever the rears of lots facing on pro-
posed business streets abut against the rears of lots facing on residential
streets, the rear 10 feet in depth of the business lots shall be left as open
yards from the grdund level.
Suggested amendments to the use maps
May we also call the attention of the Commission to the fact that its
map of use districts shows a factory district laid out between the Eastern
Parkway extension and Highland Park, so that it may become impossible
to pass from the Eastern Parkway to Forest Park and out on Long Island
without passing through or along the borders of a factory district for a
distance of approximately half a mile. May we urge a revision of the use
162 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
plan in this particular? This seems to us within the scope of the Board of
Estimate and Apportionment on recommendation of your Commission as
tending to “ promote the public welfare ” and to “ enhance the value of land
throughout the city.”
Referring to the tentative use map and the assignment of streets to
business or residential purposes, the Brooklyn Committee has determined
to leave to the residents of, or owners of property in, the various districts
of the borough, expression of their own preferences.
STATEMENT BY Dr. Georce M. Price, Drrector, JoINT Boarp oF SANITARY
Controt, May 24, 1916
Joint Board of Sanitary Control
The Joint Board of Sanitary Control has charge of two industries—
the Cloak, Suit and Skirt and the Dress and Waist industry. They have
jurisdiction over 1,800 shops in the cloak, suit and skirt industry and over
700 shops in the dress and waist industry. They are mainly in the loft zone.
In the two, there were working at the last investigation 85,000 employees.
We come into close contact with all the shops and workers. We have also
made a medical examination of a great many of the workers. We have in
the last five years examined 14,649 men and women workers in these two
industries.
Nervousness among garment workers
Diseases which have been predominant among those workers are mostly
those of the nervous system. We have about 28 per cent of all the workers
suffering from neurasthenia; there is also a large percentage who are suf-
fering from digestive diseases. We have an undue percentage of tubercu-
losis, two per cent among the workers. Among tobacco workers and bakers
whom I have examined for the Factory Investigating Commission a smaller
percentage of tuberculosis is found than in our industries.
There are a great many factors contributing to the large extent of
nervous diseases. It would be difficult to say that one condition or even
several conditions are causative. There is no question, however, in my mind
that the conditions of work, economical as well as sanitary, have a great
deal to do with this nervousness. The workers are compelled to work in
very high buildings. They are apprehensive of dangers, as to fire condi-
tions, and rightly so. They also have much difficulty in getting down for
their lunch because of the height of the building and on account of the con-
gestion at noon time. At that time it is hardly possible for all of them to
come down the elevators, especially in those big buildings. Then, again,
the work of the sitting trades is itself fatiguing. Also, they mostly belong
to such races as the Hebrew and Italian, and both of these peoples are
excitable and more prone to nervous disorders than others. It is the current
opinion among medical writers that there is a comparatively larger average
degree of nervousness and proneness to nervousness and nervous disorders
among Hebrews and Italians than among the other races which are working
in the trades I represent.
There ought to be no building where work is done above the twelfth
story. Such buildings at present in use number 177. We have 18 build-
ings twelve stories in height and 21 buildings more than twelve stories in
height. One building is 19 stories in height and one building 20 stories in
height. I have made several investigations of the workers in those higher
buildings—in the twelve-story buildings and in those which are higher, and
>
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 163
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
I have invariably found that the workers in those buildings are much worse
in respect to their nervous and digestive condition than in the buildings that
are less than twelve stories. I ascribe this to their apprehension of danger
of fire and also to inadequate facilities and bad lunches.
Elevator sickness
A great many of our girls—and 75 per cent of the workers in the
dress and waist trade are girls—suffer from what they call elevator-
phobia. They cannot ride in the elevators. The sudden jar of the start and
the ascent or descent in elevators has a certain effect upon their nervous
system. As a result of that a great many girls prefer to walk down. Of
course, they can hardly walk up, but they can walk down. Some of them
have a feeling of nausea. I believe we had two or three cases of fainting.
I know of one factory—a 20-story building—where there were 200 workers
on the top floor, and at a certain time a number of the women workers were
pregnant. It was very bad for them to ride up and go down in the elevators.
This condition was fraught with so much danger that fire drills in that shop
were discouraged for fear they might produce a sudden panic. Fire drills
may have a very bad effect upon women in the condition mentioned. The
fire drills, therefore, were discontinued during that time. Several times
when we have had fire drills in these high buildings we have been com-
pelled to station men on that floor to ask those women workers not to go
down. We practically control all the buildings in our trade and all the shops
in those buildings are wholly under our control.
Fire drills
We are at the present time conducting fire drills in 800 shops, prac-
tically the only fire drills that are conducted in the city, with the exception
of a very few conducted by the Croker Company. We have found when
people are called out on these fire drills that there is tess trouble in build-
ings up to twelve stories in height then in buildings above twelve stories in
height. Even though the latter may have more exits, and even though they
are more completely fireproof, and even though they may have fireproof
towers, there is more apprehension and more nervousness and more evi-
dences of panic among the employees in such buildings than among those
in the lower buildings that I have mentioned.
It frequently happens that during the drill someone drops or someone
faints. The result is that we very often have stoppages and obstructions,
which in the case of a real fire would be fraught with a great deal of danger.
We have several times been compelled to send away girls in ambulances.
I have always instructed our men to watch out for such cases. As soon as
they see that a girl drops and faints they remove her and take her upstairs
or downstairs, whichever may be best.
Even in fireproof towers there is danger of smoke getting in and adding
to the panic. They are supposed to be Cy but they cannot be
smoke-proof for whenever a door is opened the smoke will come in.
Data gathered by the experience of three years of our Fire Drill Divi-
sion, which at present operates in about 780 shops in the cloak and suitsand
dress and waist industries, throws some light on the problem of getting
operatives out of tall factory buildings in case of fire or panic. These drills,
however, show only the time which it requires operatives to leave the floor
where they work and not the building as a whole. Our records show that
an orderly exit off the floor is usually made in from about thirty seconds
164 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
to two minutes. There have been very few fire drills conducted simul-
taneously by all the shop owners in a building and therefore the time in
which buildings may be emptied cannot as yet be determined.
The several experiments which we have made in emptying buildings
show that where the whole building is drilled by us and where the individual
shops have been previously instructed and drilled, and where the exits are
at least two or three outside of the fire escapes, which we do not consider
as exits, a twelve-story building may be emptied within five to ten minutes.
Lunch facilities in factory loft district
A great many people suffer from gastric troubles. This is due in the
first place to the fact that the people are compelled to eat a dry lunch, sand-
wiches, etc. They live too far from their residences to get something warm
to eat. It is also due to the fact that they have a comparatively short period
for lunch and they are obliged to eat their food very quickly. It is also due
to the congestion. It is hardly possible for a great many of the factory
employees, especially on the higher floors to have the time to go down and
eat their lunches in a neighboring restaurant and then have time to come
back again to their work in the high buildings. They might have time if
there were not such congestion. But at the noon hour the congestion in
buildings is very great. All want to go down the elevators at one time,
and it is manifestly impossible for them to go down all together and have
time for lunch and then come back in time for their work. The time the
employees have to wait at noon or at night for an elevator depends, of
course, on the building, on the employees and upon the shop. The girls
have frequently asked to be allowed to begin to dress themselves half hour
or twenty minutes before the time of closing. They claim that if they all
go out at six o’clock they will lose fifteen or twenty minutes standing near
the doors of the elevators in the jam and after a day’s work it is quite a
hardship upon those girls and the men as well to compel them to lose fifteen
or twenty minutes of their time waiting until the elevator takes them down.
We have in some buildings made arrangements for the employees by which
the workers have been divided into squads. Some are allowed to go five
minutes earlier and they come so much earlier in the morning, so that they
all don’t go out at the same time, but that is only in single instances and
cannot be done throughout all the buildings and shops.
Daylight in factories
The light in the shop depends very much, not only upon the window
itself, its character, size, etc., but upon where the window opens to—
whether to street, courtyard, etc.; also upon the height of adjoining build-
ings and the story in which the shop is located.
In garment factories with average windows opening upon a street of
ordinary width, the operatives may work without artificial light, as a rule,
between 10 A. M. and 4 P. M. to about twenty-four feet from the window.
This refers to garments of light shades; on black or red garments artificial
light will be necessary beyond fifteen or eighteen feet from the window.
As a rule, the light is adequate in the better class of shops lighted with
electricity or well-arranged gas lights.
Eye trouble
We have found that one-third of our shops use artificial light during
the day time on account of the defective illumination. A special study was
made of the lighting and illumination conditions in our shops by the United
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 165
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
States Public Health Service. It was found in their report that the illumi-
nation was inadequate in one-half of the buildings. We have also investi-
gated eye conditions and have found a great many eye defects among the
workers due to the strain and to the defective lighting. In 69 per cent of
3,000 workers defective vision was found.. In 11% per cent the eyesight
was corrected by glasses.
The defective vision in so large a number of people was due to the
defective illumination of a great many of our shops. Our shops are gen-
erally in buildings 50 to 100 feet wide, running from street to street. The
front part of such buildings is occupied by showrooms. The best ilumi-
nated part of the building is occupied by the showrooms while the rear part
of the building is occupied by the workers. They have high partitions
between the front and the rear part that entirely separates the two. The
result is that the workers are almost always in the dark part of the building.
There is no limitation as to the ground area that may be covered by fac-
tories as is the case in tenement houses. You can build on 100 per cent of
the lot and the most of the factory buildings are so built. In many instances
they run through the entire block.
Fire hazard in loft buildings
A great many of the benefits that are calculated to flow from the Labor
Law are lost by reason of the fact that there is no co-ordination between
the Factory Law and other laws on the construction and occupancy of
buildings. Moreover, it is one thing to put a law on the books and another
to administer and enforce it. We found 91 per cent of the buildings had
violations. The law was violated as far as the fire-alarm system was con--
cerned. Eighty-nine per cent were violating the law of fire egress, and
38% per cent were violating the law in relation to automatic sprinklers.
We have found that out of 928 buildings 747 have only a single
stairway, and 186 of these stairways are of a winding type, which, in our
Opinion, is a dangerous form. We have found one stairway only 20 inches
wide, which is hardly sufficient for a stout man to pass through.
I have said many times that under present conditions if a fire should
occur in some of the twenty-story buildings that have a single or even a
double exit and even with the fire-alarm system that some of them have,
I believe the calamity would be so much greater than the Triangle or Dia-
mond factory fire that it would be appalling. This possibility is due pri-
marily to the height of buildings and to the insufficiency of exits which is
usual in these high buildings.
Tenement house manufacturing
We have at present 300 stores on the east side occupied by the cloak
and suit and dress and waist shops. These shops are mostly in tenement
houses. The rear of the shop or store is generally used as a workshop.
There are from two to fifteen and even twenty workingmen in these shops.
The conditions there are abominable more particularly because of the place,
which is not intended for manufacturing purposes; also because of the
lack of light, the unsanitary conditions, etc., and the danger of contagion on
account of families living together. There are also at present 200 cellars
on the east side which are used as places to work in by clothing and other
industries. We have eliminated most of them in the two industries which
we control.
I would prohibit all manufacturing in any residential building. I only
want manufacturing done in buildings erected for that specific purpose.
166 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
So far, however, as factories can be located near residential zones, it
would decrease the rush-hour congestion on our transit lines, and, what is
more important, it would give the factory workers more time to sleep, more
time for lunch, and more time for themselves, instead of spending their
time as they do now in the cars, the subways and the elevated.
STATEMENT By LAwson PurpDy, PRESIDENT, DEPARTMENT OF TAXES AND
ASSESSMENTS, May 8, 1916
Value of real estate depreciated by haphazard development
I have been President of the Department of Taxes and Assessments
since 1906, and during that time there have been an average of eight to ten
thousand applications for the reduction of the assessed value of real
estate filed annually with the department. I have personally examined and
been familiar with more than fifty per cent of such applications. These
applications gave reasons in behalf of the owner of the property for his
conclusion that the assessed value is more than the actual value. By the
examination of these applications I have become familiar with many of
the causes for the decline in value in real estate in various parts of the city.
A very large proportion of such applications contain allegations to the ef-
fect that the value of buildings has been depreciated by the erection of
buildings in the neighborhood, sometimes adjoining, which covered too large
a proportion of the area of the lot, or are too high, or both. Many applica-
tions have stated that the character of the neighborhood has been depreci-
ated through the erection of buildings of great height and housing a very
large number of factory workers. This intense use of the land has re-
sulted in street congestion, both for vehicular traffic and pedestrian traffic.
It has, moreover, so darkened the streets and the interior of blocks as to
render neighboring buildings unprofitable.
As a result of my experience I am confident that in order to preserve
the value of land, which is another mode of expressing the idea of pre-
serving the opportunity to put land to its most profitable economic use, and
to preserve the value of buildings, it is essential that no building should be
permitted which would not serve as a suitable type, both as to height and
as to area of land covered, for the development of all the territory suitable
for the erection of such buildings. The proper height and area of land to be
covered must depend upon the character of use. There must be room for
vehicular and pedestrian traffic on streets. And there must be adequate light
and air for every building without stealing light and air from neighbors.
Depreciation of values in loft section
The evil effects of failure to protect property owners from the ill-
considered action of their neighbors, is well illustrated by the decline in the
value of the land between Union Square and Madison Square, and between
Seventh Avenue and Broadway. In 1911 land on Twenty-third Street, on
the south side between Fifth Avenue and Sixth Avenue, was assessed at
$285,000 a lot; in 1916, at $80,000 a lot. In 1911, between Fourteenth
Street and Twenty-third Street, on Sixth Avenue, land was assessed from
$85,000 a lot to $175,000 a lot; in 1916 the same land is assessed at $50,000
a lot to $80,000. In 1911, the lowest assessment on Fifth Avenue, between
Fourteenth Street and Madison Square, was $100,000 a lot, rising to over
$200,000 a lot. In 1916, the assessment ranges from $75,000 to $90,000.
In the intervening cross streets, from Fifteenth Street to Twenty-second
Street, loft buildings were erected, twelve stories ‘high, and when first
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 167
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
erected paid so well because they stole light and air and street space
from their neighbors, that owners were induced to build similar buildings,
or builders were induced to pay extravagant prices for land and erect sim-
ilar buildings on the theory that 1f one twelve-story loft building was profit-
able any twelve-story loft building in that zone would be profitable. Experi-
ence has shown that when the first leases for three or five years expired, and
similar loft buildings had blanketed the first building, leases could not be
renewed at the old figures, and often could not be renewed on any terms
that would pay carrying charges. The supposed values were a delusion.
The erection of loft buildings drove neighboring owners to erect loft build-
ings, for their old buildings were no longer suitable for the neighborhood,
the value of such buildings was destroyed, and the value of the land seemed
to have acquired double its former value or more. Today the assessed value
of lots in some side streets has declined to a sum less than the land was
worth prior to the boom. The old buildings although often so well con-
structed as to last for one hundred years have practically no value at all.
Depreciation of values in downtown office section
Somewhat similar results have followed in the office building zone from
the iailure there to protect the owners of buildings of reasonable height
irom deprivation of light, air and access, by the erection of neighboring
buildings of monstrous heights, and covering all the land the law allows,
which is substantially all there is. I suppose I have heard applications for
reduction of the assessed value of at least three-fourths of all the buildings
of more than ten stories high south of Chambers street. The reasons for
the requests have been similar to the reasons for the requests for the re-
duction of the assessed value of many of the loft buildings in the middle
of the borough. An office building which was profitable when it stole its
light and air was rendered unprofitable when there was no longer light and
air to steal. The value of land has been inflated on the theory that on
certain streets the appropriate improvement is a building approximately
thirty stories in height. It must be obvious that the land cannot be covered
with buildings thirty stories in height and profitably rented, even if there
were people enough who wanted to do business in that territory to fill the
buildings. There would be no room for the people to walk in the streets.
They would all work by artificial light, and ventilation would be wretched,
except when we had violent gales which obtain around lofty buildings
when there is a moderate breeze. I have in mind one parcel of land on
which there is erected a twelve-story office building of good construction,
not more than twenty years old, it is full, at fair rentals. The gross rent
is-$55,000. The assessed value of the land is $500,000. The building was
assessed last year at $150,000. One of the best appraisers of the city ap-
praised the property for the owner at a total sum of $550,000, of which
$50,000 was assigned to the building. I asked him what sort of a building
he would erect if that building now on the property were destroyed by fire.
He said he could not erect a better building than the one that stands there
now, that it would not be profitable to erect a higher building. I then asked
him whether such a new building could earn four per cent on its cost and
four per cent on the value of the land that he had assigned to the lot after
paying operating expenses and taxes. without any allowance for depreciation.
He said it certainly could not. After some discussion we both concluded
that while it is necessary to appraise the land as having a value of about
$500,000, based on sales of neighboring property, and on the opinions of
168 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
those best informed, and on the rental values obtained in buildings within a
few hundred yards, which were more than twenty stories high, and still
can steal light and air from their neighbors, that nevertheless, such a land
value was a mirage and an illusion; that no use to which the land could be
put would yield a return of four per cent on such a value. There are
many such cases and I| describe this in detail to illustrate what I ‘call a fic-
titious value that comes to land based on the erroneous theory that all
land in a given neighborhood can be put to as an intensive use as the
most intensively used land. And again we come back to the proposition that
no building should be permitted which would not serve as a suitable type
for the development of the entire area appropriate for such buildings. I
have known a number of cases where office buildings, when first erected,
were profitable, and subsequently they were hemmed in by other buildings
to such an extent that the rentals were seriously reduced on account of the
lack of light and air. I have in mind a building on the corner of two streets,
which for some years enjoyed the light and air that belonged to its neigh-
bors on the south for about sixteen stories of its height. It also had a
similar advantage on the east. A few years ago an office building of equal
height, about twenty-two stories, was erected south and east of it, and
the owner thereupon requested a reduction of the assessed value and made
the allegation that as to a large percentage of the rooms having windows
to the south and east the rent was reduced by two-thirds, because the
windows were in most cases entirely closed up, and in others the windows
were on a court, to small to give any light and ventilation to amount to
anything below three stories from the roof. I knew the building in its
condition prior to the erection of the building adjoining and I know it well
now, and if it were not for very good management I can hardly see how the
southerly rooms could be rented for anything but storage.
Effect of Equitable Building on surrounding property values
A notable illustration of the evil effect of the erection of a building
that is too high and covers too much of the land is that of the new Equitable
Building, at Broadway, Pine and Cedar streets. After the old Equitable
Building was destroyed, the owners of some of the land that surrounds
that block negotiated with the Equitable for the purchase of an easement of
the light and air from a point above eight stories from the ground; in
other words for a limitation upon the Equitable to the construction of a
building eight stories high. JI am informed that for two and a half million
dollars the Equitable Corporation was willing to sell such an easement and
that the owners of the surrounding property subscribed two and one-quarter
million dollars to buy that easement. The project failed because the owners
who would have been required to contribute the additional quarter of a
million were not in a favorable position to make their proportionate con-
tribution and were unable or unwilling to do so. One of the owners who had
agreed to contribute a large part of the sum required told me that he
regarded the advantage to the property that he represented as being at least
twice as valuable as the sum he had agreed to contribute.
Since the commencement of the present Equitable Building, a structure
about forty stories high, the owners of practically all the property sur-
rounding it have asked for and obtained a reduction of the assessed value
of their property. on proof of loss of rents due to limitations of light and
air and other advantages they enjoyed when the Equitable Building was
only nine stories high.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 169
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
Need of protection against reckless building
An illustration of the evil effect of the failure of the city to protect the
owners of property from the erection of improper buildings is found in the
territory lying near Broadway between 59th Street and 125th Street, and
on West End Avenue, Riverside Drive, and the east and west streets lying
between. The Tenement House Law, which limits the height of a building
to one and a half times the width of the street, and imposes some slight
limitations on the area of ground that may be covered, has been of value,
but these limitations are entirely insufficient and have been insufficient so far
as tenement houses themselves are concerned. The limitation upon hotels
is only a limitation of area, and has proved wholly inadequate. There are
today a few apartment hotels in the territory described which are but
twenty-five feet wide and rise to a height of thirteen stories. The intrusion
of these wretched buildings has depreciated the value of the neighboring
single family dwelling houses, and I am informed that they themselves are
regarded as such extra hazardous investments that their value cannot be
predicated upon rentals secured while they steal light and air for nine
stories of their height. Should these buildings be blanketed by others they
would probably, with a reasonable regard to the health of the occupants, be
uninhabitable, and it is clear that the same restrictions as to height and pos-
sibly more onerous restrictions as to area should apply to hotels as apply
to any other buildings for human habitation. A hotel should no more be
allowed to steal its neighbors’ light and air and street area than any other
building. And the same principle applies in this territory as applies in all
other sections—that no building should be permitted which would not serve
as a suitable type as to height and area for the complete development of the
whole district, leaving to all adequate light, air and access, and safety
from fire.
Invasion of private house sections by apartment houses
Tenement houses, more euphoniously called apartment houses, built to
the full limit allowed by law, have intruded into. a territory beautifully de-
veloped with single family dwellings at great cost, well constructed, in con-
dition to last for a hundred years, and have destroyed their value in large
measure. The first tenement house when it can freely steal its light and
air is profitable. When it must depend on the light and air it furnishes for
itself, on its own lot, it frequently becomes unprofitable. When a wide
street is developed from end to end with buildings one hundred and fifty
feet high, the buildings on the street to the rear are deprived of light and
air to such a degree that they are no longer profitable as a rule and fre-
quently must be unhealthful. The servant problem, ever with us, is com-
plicated and rendered impossible of decent solution by the fact that in such
blocks there is not one single light kitchen—not a kitchen into which a direct
ray of sunlight ever enters.
Fictitious land values
In the whole territory just described we have cases again of fictitious
land values—values predicated upon the possibility of the erection of a
twelve-story tenement house that steals light and air as I have shown.
When that larceny is prevented profit is not there, and land values prove
to have been a mirage. The pathetic instances of single family dwellings
sandwiched between buildings of ninety feet and one hundred and fifty
feet appeal to one who knows what sacrifice of value has resulted and what
‘
170 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
miserable conditions of human habitation exist. Any sixty-foot street that
may fully be developed with nine-story apartments ninety feet high, is in
my opinion unfit for human habitation, and exercises a like influence upon
the adjoining parallel street. On the other hand, a street sixty feet wide,
developed with six-story apartments, is a reasonably fair street. Personally,
I think the height is too great, and that were it now possible, it would be
infinitely better to restrict the height to once the width of the street. An
angle of forty-five degrees produced by the rule of once the width of the
street is insufficient to give direct sunlight on short winter days to the lower
stories. Surely, that should be the limit. > THe
Districting a benefit to real estate
Not only will the plans as tentatively submitted by this Commission not
work any general hardship upon owners of real estate, but I shall be greatly
surprised if there is any hardship anywhere of any consequence, and I am
profoundly convinced that the future welfare—financially—of the owners
of real estate is dependent upon the speedy enactment of restrictions as to
height, area and use, at least as restrictive as those now presented by the
Commission.
In my opinion the isolated cases wherein an individual owner may
suffer some hardship because of the peculiar location of his property will
be very few. Some such possibilities have been presented to the Commis-
sion, and it seems possible that in some few localities a certain relaxation
of the rules will be made. Such relaxations, if any, should be made solely
to meet the improper conditions that have been produced by the failure to
impose proper restrictions in the past.
The failure to impose proper restrictions upon uses to which buildings
may be put has caused enormous loss to the owners of real property, and
has in many cases rendered buildings of good character hardly suitable for
human habitation by reason of the deprivation of adequate light, air and
access, as well as the objectionable noises and other like incidents of a
manufacturing industry.
There are many instances where the owners of adjacent properties have
erected artificial structures to shut off the light from the windows of build-
ings erected adjacent to their property. In other words, individual owners
have conducted schemes of retaliation in defense of their property. Some-
times such structures have not been erected as schemes of retaliation, but
solely to shield tenement houses from obnoxious sights and odors.
In practically every case where there are tenement houses or single
family dwelling houses, and a stable or a garage is erected in proximity to
them, there follows a request for a reduction of assessed value of the
property near by, which is almost always injuriously affected in its value
by the proximity of such a building so used.
Lack of regulation harmful to city owned property
The shifts and changes of populated centres which come about from
the reasons already described, that is, intrusion of factories into residential
territory, cause direct loss to the city through rendering unsuitable for the
location, schools erected at large expense and also court houses. _ Little
parks that have been acquired for breathing spaces, or playgrounds, become
useless for the purposes for which they were designed when the residents
of the neighborhood move away in consequence of the destruction of the
tenement houses and their replacement by factories. This sort of change
usually comes because of the intrusion of one factory which starts the pro-
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 171
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
cession. The only way to deal with it is by laws excluding factories; and
this is only a protection of the rights of the property owners themselves.
The plan proposed by this Commission is absolutely necessary to save the
city in the matter of its own public buildings inestimable loss as well as
the frustrating of the full fruit and results of the purpose for which a
large portion of these public buildings have been erected. We have seen
such destruction of value happen in the past, and it will come in the future
in the same way to a greater degree unless we speedily adopt appropriate
restrictions, and the restrictions now proposed seem appropriate for the
purpose.
Assessed value of city owned property
The assessed value of the property owned by the City of New York in
1915 was $1,502,000,000, while the aggregate assessed value of all the real
property that is taxable was $8,108,000,000. Of this great investment of a
billion and a half by the city, $123,000,000 represented the assessed value
of school sites, schools and other property under the jurisdiction of the
Board of Education. The assessed value of parks was $673,000,000. The
assessed value of the property under the jurisdiction of the Departments of
Charity and Correction, which includes numerous hospitals, amounted to
$54,000,000. Property of a semi-public character, owned by private cor-
porations and exempted from taxation because of its semi-public character,
was assessed in 1915 for $392,000,000. That sum included $36,000,000
for hospitals, $46,000,000 for colleges and schools, and $192,000,000 for
churches, parochial schools, and their usual adjuncts.
For 1915 the aggregate number of buildings that were assessed as
taxable was 386,000. Of this total number 338,000 buildings were devoted
to human habitation, of which 153,000 were houses constructed for single
family dwellings, 78,000 were two-family dwellings, and 103,000 were tene-
ment houses. It will be noticed that the number of buildings devoted to
human habitation is about 88 per cent of all the taxed buildings in the city.
The assessed value of all the structures that are subject to taxation was
$2,884,000,000. It is apparent, therefore, that the conservation of the value
of these buildings is of immense importance to the general welfare of the
community. :
From what I have already said in regard to the effect upon the value
of the land of the intrusion of inappropriate uses and inappropriate struc-
tures, it must be clear that to conserve the financial stability of the city and
its power to incur indebtedness and pay its debts, it is most important to
conserve the land value. The value of ordinary land, that is, land other
than special franchises, and the right of way of public service corporations,
was assessed in 1915 for $4,643,000,000.
STATEMENT BY Martin S. Rourke, REAL Estate AND INSURANCE, APRIL
29, 1916
Effect of gaseous fumes on vegetation
Mr. Rourke stated that the gaseous fumes emitted by the chemical com-
panies in the vicinity of Newtown Creek destroyed the paint on neighboring
buildings within forty-eight hours of its application. Truck gardening in
this locality he stated was just as impossible as in the Desert of Sahara, the
gaseous fumes killing all vegetation.
Ve COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
STATEMENT By AMOS SCHAEFFER, CONSULTING ENGINEER, BorouGH OF
Manuattan, May 15, 1916
Sewer systems
All sewer systems for carrying off domestic sewage and surface drain-
age from cities are generally divided into two classes, namely, combined and
separate. In the combined system, sewers are built to take both the storm
water drainage and the domestic sewage, which is usually discharged into
some adjacent stream or harbor. In the separate system there are two
independent systems of sewers, one of which carries off the storm water
and the other the domestic sewage. The latter system is generally installed
when it is intended to purify the domestic sewage before it is finally dis-
charged.
Inland cities and towns which discharge their sewage into fresh water
streams usually are required to treat their sewage to a high degree of
purity before discharging it, because the same stream is frequently used
as a source of water supply by some other municipalities.
Operation and final disposition
The combined system of sewers practically requires no attention for its
operation with the exception of seeing that the sewers are cleared of obstruc-
tions and are kept in proper repair.
The sewage from the separate system of sewers is usually purified to a
sufficient degree of refinement so as not to pollute the waters into which the
effluent is discharged. These purification plants generally consist of grit
chambers, screens, sedimentation tanks and filters. One or all of these
processes are used according to the degree of purity required in the final
effluent.
Development of the sanitary system
Before the introduction of a water supply into cities, the domestic
sewage is usually allowed to flow into cesspools. When a municipality has
increased sufficiently to require a general water supply, the sanitary condi-
tions also require improvement and cesspools are usually superseded by
sewers built in the public highways, which serve all the property fronting
on them. In the case of seaboard cities, these sewers usually discharge
into the adjacent harbors without any purification.
Condition of sewers in New York City
Sewers were constructed in this city as early as 1840 or thereabouts.
At that time cement was not available and the mortar used in their construc-
tion consisted usually of oyster-shell lime and sand. Due to the chemical
action of the sewage, the mortar has deteriorated to such an extent that a
great many of the sewers have practically none left in the joints, as a con-
sequence of which they are collapsing. At the time these early sewers were
constructed the science of sewer design had not advanced to the degree of
accuracy of to-day.
The conditions under which these sewers were designed were also dif-
ferent from the present. The pervious area was very much larger than it is
to-day, in consequence of which a considerably smaller quantity of rain
water reached the sewers and a much larger quantity was absorbed by the
soil. The roadways of the streets were usually paved with a waterbound
macadam or with some other material which was much more pervious than
the present pavements, and sometimes they were not paved at all; and the
sidewalks were frequently paved for a width of only four feet. The build-
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 173
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
ings usually occupied a smaller percentage of the lots and the portion not
occupied by buildings was cultivated as a garden or a grass plot, whereas
at present the back ‘lots, in the most populated sections of the city at least,
are paved with an impervious material such as bluestone, cement or asphalt.
It was, therefore, quite proper that the sewers should have been
designed for a considerably smaller run-off of rainwater than at present.
In consequence of these conditions and the more or less inaccurate theory
of sewer design based upon them a great many of the sewers which were
built at that time are inadequate for present requirements, so that during
heavy storms property is frequently damaged on account of the backing up
of the sewage through house drains. In fact, there are some locations
in the city where in excessive storms the sewers overflow on the surface of
the street and over the sidewalks.
Need of reconstruction of sewers
Tt will be seen, therefore, that there is need of reconstruction of sewers
in the older portions of the city for the two reasons hereinbefore described,
namely, on account of deterioration and on account of inadequacy.
Redesign of drainage areas
Before a general reconstruction of the sewers can be undertaken it will
be necessary to redesign the drainage areas and provide for sizes and grades
of sewers in accordance with the changed conditions and the present science
of sewer design.
This practically means the installation of a new sewer system, because
it will readily be seen that very few of the older sewers can be incorporated
in the new system. Of course it is not the purpose, when the reconstruction
of sewers is undertaken, that all existing sewers should be dug up regardless
of their physical condition, but it is the purpose to bring about this change
gradually, as the sewers deteriorate or are inadequate.
Pollution of the harbor
Since the time that New York City has used the present water carriage
system of sewers, the sewage has been discharged into the adjacent w aters
of the harbor without any treatment, with the “exception of a few installa-
tions in the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. The purification plants in
these boroughs have been constructed comparativ ely recently and they treat
a very small percentage of the total volume of sewage w hich is discharged,
so that their influence upon the pollution of the harbor is comparatively
insignificant.
~The harbor waters, therefore, are more or less saturated with the
sewage which has been discharged into them during the last 75 or 100 years.
In some of the more confined portions of the harbor, such as the East
River and the Harlem River, where the tidal movement does not extend to
the purer waters of the Sound or the ocean, this pollution is so great that
offensive putrefaction is liable to set in at any time under ‘favorable
conditions.
Purification of the sewage
In the design of a new sewer system it will therefore also be necessary
to take into consideration the purification of the sewage before it is dis-
charged into the harbor. The City of New York is practically committed
toa “general purification of its sewage, although this may not be ;necessary
174 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
at every individual outlet. In order to treat the sewage under the tidal
conditions which exist in the harbor waters, it will be necessary to install a
separate system of sewers, at least in certain portions of the drainage area,
to take the place of the combined system which has been generally in use
up to the present time.
Sewage purification plants will be installed to purify only the domestic
sewage and a small quantity of the storm water. To purify the domestic
sewage in the combined system it is necessary to construct a weir or some
other device to divert all the domestic sewage to the purification plant. By
this device the early run-off from the street, which contains a ‘considerable
quantity of street sweepings, is also carried to the disposal plant. It is
only after a rainfall of two or three times the volume of domestic sewage
that it overflows directly into the harbor without purification. In the latter
case, however, the sewage is very much diluted and therefore carries a com-
paratively small quantity of organic matter into the harbor.
Effect of height of buildings on sewage purification
While the quantity of domestic sewage from even very tall buildings
does not exert a very marked influence upon the size of the sewers required
under the combined system, it adds very materially to the quantity of
sewage which has to be purified. It can be seen readily that while the area
still governs the quantity of storm water which reaches the sewer, but which
will not be purified, the quantity of domestic sewage which will be purified
depends entirely upon the consumption of water, which in turn generally
depends upon the population and the height of the buildings and also upon
their use.
In order, therefore, that a purification plant may be designed of proper
capacity to treat the sewage from a certain area, it should be known in
advance what the development of that area will be, both as to the population
which will occupy the buildings, which is directly dependent upon their
height, and also upon the use to which they are put.
The segregation of factories to certain areas is, therefore, very desir-
able, from the standpoint of sewage disposal, so that purification plants may
be designed for the particular kind and quantity of effluent which manufac-
turing industries contribute, because it is frequently necessary to adopt a
method of purification adapted to the particular kind of trade waste which
is produced. If it is known, therefore, what the quality of the sewage in
the different sections of the city is, purification plants can be designed to
treat it.
It is my opinion, therefore, that the regulation of the use, height and
area of buildings will have a large economical influence upon the design
and installation of the sewers and purification plants.
STATEMENT By WM. JAY SCHIEFFELIN, CHAIRMAN, Citizens’ Union, May
5, 1916
City should have been districted long ago
The Citizens’ Union recognizes in the work of your Commission the
first belated step on the part of the city toward an orderly development and
the protection of property owners against their own short-sightedness.
Your tentative report indicates the care and thoroughness with which the
work has been conducted. The principles followed and the recommendations
made in this report must, in the main, meet with the approval of every person
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 175
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
seriously concerned in the safeguarding of property values and a growth
which will insure better and more stable working and living conditions.
The districting of the city, as finally determined by the Board of Esti-
mate, should represent the highest standards which can properly be estab-
lished throughout the city, based upon a study of community conditions and
a forecast of the character of future growth. It would manifestly be unfair
to a locality to set its standards too low and attempt to raise them later
after the mistake had become apparent as a result of extensive building
operation. Under such circumstances the city would be placed in exactly
the same position in which it now is with respect to much of its built-up
territory. It is in the hope that this possibility may be reduced to a minimum
that we urge your serious consideration of the recommendations of the City
Club to your Commission, as contained in the communication of Mr. Frank
B. Williams, Chairman of its City Planning Committee, dated April 11, 1916,
in which we most earnestly concur.
More stringent restrictions desirable
We desire to emphasize briefly what we consider the three most serious
defects in your proposals, knowing that your tentative report was made
public primarily for the purpose of honest criticisms:
(1) We believe you are inviting the defeat of your purpose to exclude
industry from business districts by permitting the use of 25 per cent, or
two floors, of any building in a business district for industrial purposes.
Two-story factories are possible, in fact, common in outlying boroughs. To
insure strictly “business districts,’ this allowance must be materially!
reduced.
(2) Examination of the height district maps convinces us that there are
many districts, particularly in Brooklyn, where the height limit should be
set at a much lower point. When an area is generally built up with two to
four-story residence buildings, are you not encouraging an unnecessary
invasion by permitting eight and nine story structures? The stricter
standard should be established where possible. It is easier to lift a restric-
tion than to impose it later if experience proves it to be undesirable.
Moreover, we must not overlook the fact that the height restrictions
imposed by your plan are not maxima. By stepping back higher buildings
may be erected if they are economically necessary: But if there must be
such additional congestion, some amelioration should accompany it. That
is provided by the stepping back and increased court and area requirements.
(3) The area limitation for residence buildings under Class “C”
should be more stringent; especially for buildings under eight stories in
height. The requirements should be increased wherever possible. We
believe you will find it possible in a great many districts.
We consider these phases of your report deserving of reconsideration ;
in fact, we feel that a revision along these lines is essential if the principles
underlying your work are to be carried out.
STATEMENT By Lourts ScHrAc, Marcu 28, 1916
Car barns
Car barns should be excluded from the business districts. A car barn
not only ruins the block in which it is located, but also the block on either
side of it. Car barns should be put in the unrestricted districts.
176 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Stables and garages
Livery stables and public garages should also be prohibited in the
business districts. Both depreciate property values. The Concourse in The
Bronx is an illustration of a thoroughfare laid out as a fine residential
boulevard, which has been ruined by the invasion of public garages. This
is particularly the case in the vicinity of Fordham Road, where a half dozen
public garages have been built. Here, instead of the fine residential develop-
ment which was expected, cheap tenements are being built. Public garages
and stables should be obliged to go into the unrestricted districts. The
unrestricted districts are so situated that this limitation would not incon-
venience the business of either stables or garages.
Private garages and stables need not, however, be restricted to the unre-
stricted districts. They do not interfere with business.
STATEMENT BY THE REVEREND WILLIAM J. STEWART, MANAGING DrreEcrTor,
ALLIED CATHOLIC CEMETERIES, APRIL 18, 1916
Injury done by chemical factories
Chemical factories should be restricted in the vicinity of Calvary
Cemetery. We know that they do irreparable damage to bronzes, to Carrara
marble statues, to granite foundations, to grass and trees. We know that
for a fact, but when we go to the authorities of these factories to make a
protest and ask if they cannot do something and get their chemists at work,
the same as they did in some other chemical factories, and use the wastage
over again that comes from the chimneys, they say, “ well, prove to us that
we do it and we will stop it.” Well, now, they ought to be able to prove it.
We can see the damage done. We know that on the bronzes there is a
verdigris and there is a peculiar scale on the vegetation. We have difficulty
in making the grass grow. All our trees are dying. We cannot make it
what we would like to make it, park-like and a breathing place for the
people. It is really dangerous for people to travel at certain times of the day
to Calvary Cemetery on account of those acid fumes.
STATEMENT By HERBERT S. SWAN AND GEORGE W. TUTTLE OF THE STAFF
OF THE COMMITTEE ON City PLAN, Marcu 15, 1916
Relation of height and area regulations to sunshine
The building requirements in Manhattan have in the past been so lax
that it is safe to say that a preponderating majority of rooms in the existing
shops, factories, offices and apartments receive absolutely no direct sun-
shine on the shortest day in the year.
The height and area regulations now being considered will have the
tendency of remedying this condition. By limiting the height of buildings
with reference to the street width and by requiring all windows to open
out on either streets or open spaces of a prescribed size the zone plan will
provide a larger supply of direct sunshine not only in the interior of all
new residence and business buildings but also in the streets.
The following paper shows the relation of these provisions to the dura-
tion and quantity of direct sunshine obtained under different conditions at
New York City (40° North Latitude) as on December 21st.
Length of shadow cast by different skyscrapers
At noon on the shortest day in the year the shadows of different sky-
scrapers envelop large areas. The Adams Express Building, which is 424
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 177
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
feet high, casts a shadow 875 feet in length; the Equitable Building, which
is 493 feet high, one 1,018 feet in length; the Singer Tower, which is 546
feet high, one 1,127 feet in length and the Woolworth Tower, which is 791
feet high, one 1,635 feet in length.
The effect of skyscrapers casting shadows from a sixth to a third of a
mile in length on surrounding property is well illustrated in the case of the
Equitable Building. Its shadow, which at noon on December 21st is about
one-fifth of a mile in length, completely envelops an area of 7.59 acres.
The area of the Equitable Building is only 1.14 acres.
The shadow cuts off all sunshine from the Broadway facade of the
United States Realty Building, which is 21 stories high. The Title Insur-
ance Company Building, 14 stories high, and the Washington Life Insur-
ance Building, 19 stories high, though in the next block, are both completely
shaded. The south side of the Singer Tower is shaded to a height of 27
stories. The nearest part of the City Investing Building 400 feet away is
in shadow for 24 of its 26 stories. Even part of the New York Telephone
Building north of Cortlandt Street is shadowed by the Equitable Building.
For almost a fifth of a mile this giant skyscraper casts its shadow. The
area cut off by it from all noonday sunlight extends to within 100 feet of
Fulton Street.
Cedar Street, the street immediately north of the Equitable Building,
has an average width between Broadway and Nassau Street of 34 feet.
The height of the Equitable Building is 1474 times the width of this street.
On a north and south street of this width in New York, uniformly im-
proved on both sides with buildings having a height equal to that of the
Equitable Building, only 9.31 ver cent of the windows would receive any
direct sunshine at noon on the shortest day in the year. On north and
south streets only the windows nearest the top for a distance equal to 1.35
times the width of the street would receive direct sunshine at noon on
December 21st at New York (40° North Latitude). The windows in the
first 34 stories nearest the ground would receive absolutely no direct sun-
light. Direct sunshine would only enter those windows in the four stories
nearest the top. Not a single window within 447 feet of the street level
would receive a ray of direct sunshine!
Per cent of windows receiving direct sunshine with buildings of different heights
The Equitable Building is, of course, an extreme case. But even in
much lower buildings a considerable number of the windows on north and
south streets receive absolutely no direct sunshine at the winter solstice.
Up to a height equal to 1.35 times the width of such a street all the windows
(assuming they fulfill the standard requirements described below) receive
some sunshine. If the street, however, is improved with buildings one
and one-half times the street width in height only 90 per cent of the win-
dows obtain direct sunshine. If the height be increased to two times the
street width the proportion receiving direct sunshine is reduced to 67.5
per cent. The number of windows receiving direct sunshine on north and
south streets with buildings of different heights is as follows: two and one-
half times, 54 per cent; three times, 45 per cent; four times, 34 per cent;
five times, 27 per cent; and six times, 22.5 per cent.
Duration of sunshine period in rooms
In this connection it must be remembered that all windows receiving
sunlight do not obtain the same amount. Even though there be no buildings
178 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
on the opposite side of the street 28 per cent of the sunshine period on
a north and south street is cut off by the thickness of the wall in which
the window is set. Where the opposite buildings rise to a height above the
window equal to .2 times the width of the street, 35 per cent of the sun-
shine period is cut off; where it rises to a height .4 times the width of the
street, 44 per cent is cut off; .6 times, 54 per cent; .8 times, 65 per cent;
1.0 times, 77 per cent; and 1.35 times, 100 per cent. This is for a wall
14 inches thick. For a thicker wall the percentage would in each case be
more; for a thinner wall less.
A window in a north and south street situated in a position where the
height of the buildings opposite it is .2 times the width of the street above
its center level receives direct sunlight for a period the length of which is
only 72 per cent of that received by an unobstructed window; where the
height of the buildings opposite is .4 times, 50 per cent; .6 times, 33 per
cent; .8 times, 21 per cent; and 1.0 times, 12 per cent.
The duration of the sunshine period on the facade and in the rooms
on a north and south street at the winter solstice is shown in the following
table for different points below the top of the opposite buildings:
SuNSHINE Periop oN NortH AND SourH Srreer at NEw York, DeceMBeER 21sr (40°
Norra Larirupe)
Per Cent of
Period That
Height of Op- Minutes of Per Cent of Sunshine En-
posite Build- Minutes of Sunshine En- Sunshine Pe- ters Window
ings Times Sunshine Strik- tering Window riod of Street at Different
Street Width ing Entire in Wall Four- Facade Cut Off Heights in
Above Center Street Facade teen Inches From Window Terms of That
of Window Thick at Each Height Entering Un-
obstructed
Window
0 275 198 28 100
al 247 170 31 85
a2 219 142 35 72
a 195 118 40 60
4 175 98 44 50
a5 156 79 49 40
6 142 65 54 33
Bh 129 52 59 26
8 118 41 65 21
a) 108 31 71 16
1.0 100 23 77 12
1.35 77 0 100 0
—
Sunshine obtained on the street
A north and south street at New York improved with buildings on
only one side of the street receives at least four hours and 35 minutes of
sunshine at the curb level on all parts of its surface on December 21st. If
buildings are erected on both sides to a uniform height of one-half times
the street width the entire surface of the street at the curb level
receives but two hours and 36 minutes sunshine. If the buildings are in-
creased in height to one times the street width the pavement receives only
one hour and ten minutes sunshine. In case of buildings two times the
street width the sunshine period is one hour; two and one-half times, 47
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 179
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
minutes; three times, 41 minutes; four times, 34 minutes; five times, 30
minutes; and six times, 27 minutes.
To obtain a half hour sunshine on the entire surface of the street at
the curb level on a north and south street in New York on the shortest day
in the year, the buildings must be limited to 3.7 times the street width in
height; 45 minutes, 2.4 times the street width; one hour, 1.8 times; an
hour and a quarter, 1.4 times; an hour and a half, 1.1 times; an hour and
three-quarters, ._9 times; and two hours, .8 times.
Volume of sunshine entering windows
The volume of sunshine received in rooms is of just as much impor-
tance as the sunshine period. A room, for instance, may enjoy direct sun-
shine for-a considerable period and yet have a comparatively small portion
of its cubic contents aerated by direct rays from the sun. The best unit
for measuring the effect of sunshine entering rooms is the cubic foot sun
hour, that is, a cubic foot of space illuminated by the sun for one hour.
The amount of direct sunshine entering a window decreases far more
rapidly with increased height of buildings than does the sunshine period.
The data given below for the amount of sunshine is calculated for a
window with a pane 32 inches wide and 61% inches long, the opening be-
tween the stop beads being taken as 36 by 66 inches and the inside dimen-
sions of the masonry being taken as 40 by 70 inches. The room considered
is one 14 feet square. The distance between the center of the window and
the south wall of the room used in the computation is five feet and the
height of the window sill above the floor of the room two and one-half
feet.
The volume of sunshine entering the room through this window,
whether obstructed or unobstructed, is shown graphically by the curve in
Figure 56. The amount of sunshine in cubic foot hours entering the window
is shown by the curve in Figure 58. The cross section of a bundle of sun
rays entering this window is shown by the curve in Figure 57.
At the winter solstice a standard window on a north and south street
in New York fulfilling the above requirements and set in a 14-inch wall
and situated at a point equal to one-tenth the width of the street down
from the top of the buildings on the opposite side of the street enjoys a
sunshine period 85 per cent as long as that enjoyed by an entirely unob-
structed window. The amount of sunshine enjoyed is, however, only 71
per cent of that obtained by an unobstructed window. This disparity be-
tween the sunshine period and the sunshine quantity increases with added
height of buildings. At a point equal to one times the width of the street
below the top of the buildings on the opposite side of the street the sun-
shine period enjoyed by a window is 12 per cent of that enjoyed by an
unobstructed window though the amount of sunshine is only about one
per cent. Here again the thickness of the wall is to a large extent the con-
trolling factor. Where the opposite building obstructing the window is a
low one the disparity between the sunshine period and the sunshine quan-
tity is not very much greater in a thin wall than it is in a thick wall. This
disparity, however, increases considerably in the case of high opposite
buildings. The quantity of direct sunshine admitted by a window. set in
a wall 8 inches thick on a north and south street and situated at a point
equal to one times the street width below the top of the opposite buildings
is 6.5 times that admitted by the same window similarly situated but in a
14-inch wall. :
DISTRICTS
oa
I
Ft
dt
COMMISSION ON BUILDING
+—1.
a
&
S © § Ba
shen po!
* =.
N & $ = LL
8 Seat putk “hee Ww “GYPIM J924S
GIDIM faaL{S JO SUI2{ U/ buypying jo fyb1ay wail hg pasdijja s/ UNF YoIyM {oO alll]
29/18/08 Ja{UIM
N.O% BUHOT (29L{S Y{N0S PUD
yssou uo buivedo MopUuIM UaAlb JoJ pafopng/O)
MOONM OMA ZLNI SAVE NNG 10 TTONNG SO NUILITS SSOLI
180
S
S$
3
®
S,
g
3
iy
S|
S$
%
>
Ss
Ss
2
SS YIM f2aHe
“YLPIM {92ad{8 JO SUID, UT
buipping Jo bY uohe ith oadyoe S/ UNS _YOIYM £0 OIL
N.OF @PNII{OT [29ANS Y{N0S PUD Y{sOU UO bul
-U3d0 MOpUIM YIM Wood UaAIB 404 pajojn2jop
MOGNIM AG CFILLINGY FMIHSNNS SO TIWNTOA
181
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
DISTANCE BELOW TOP OF BUILDINGS IN TERMS OF STREET WIOTH
AMOUNT OF SUNSHINE IN CUBIC FOO
~ > in)
Sy S
7 HOURS
00£
Abs
OGf
EL
Ht
! a 4 oi
[ia el | =o aie
mae
MOUNT, OF SUNSHINE ADMITTED BY WINDOW\—
Calculated for given room With window ope Sl - aons
ing on Cae and south street, Latitude 40N. a
{| Winter solstice.
BSS ac it | ae
ceeeee, | i
mi BE: | | | 1 |
Png dame
Fic. 55 SUNSHINE ADMITTED BY WINDOW.
182 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
The quantity of sunshine admitted in terms of cubic foot sun hours
by our standard window, the center of which is located at different distances
below the top of the opposite buildings is indicated in the following table.
This table shows the quantity of direct sunshine admitted by a window set
in a wall 14 inches thick, one eight inches thick and one of infinitesimal
thinness.
Wrinpow OPENING ON NortH AND SoUTH STREET
Cubic Foot Sun Hours Admitted by Standard Window
———
Distance of Center So
of Window Below In Wall In Wall
Top of Opposite Fourteen Eight In Wall
Buildings in Terms Inches Inches of Infinitesimal
of Street Width Thick Thick Thinness
x0) 267 ol 312.9 391.2
pil 189.2 232.8 316.9
ae, 138.4 168.1 248.0
5c} 84.1 132.0 184.2
4 54.4 88.7 158.4
45) SoeZ 62.4 135.2
6 24.0 47.9 108.8
Y/ 14.6 33.6 84.8
8 9.2 24.5 63.9
9 a8) 19.2 552
1.0 2.8 18.2 46.2
|
|
STATEMENT By Hersirt S. Swan AND GeorcE W. TUTTLE, OF THE STAFF
OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE City Pian, Marcu 31, 1916
In the lighting of buildings, daylight is more important than sunshine.
Daylight is the sunlight diffused and reflected by the sky and clouds as dis-
tinct from that received directly from the sun. Sunshine is obtained from
but one point, viz., the sun. Daylight, on the other hand, is obtained from
the whole visible sphere of the sky.
Professor O. H. Basquin, of the American Luxfer Prism Company, in
1907 made a series of observations with a flicker photometer recording the
intensity of the zenith skylight at Chicago under varying conditions. These
measurements which were taken daily at 9 a. m., 12:30 and 4:30 p. m.,
covering a two year period, showed the mean annual brightness of the zenith
sky at Chicago to be 500 foot candles per square foot. The intensity taken
as a working minimum was one-half of the mean annual brightness or 250
candles per square foot. This amount was generally available as a daily
average except on one or two days a month—on days with either a clear
blue sky or a stormy sky, both of these conditions giving a minimum illu-
mination. The sky at various altitudes gave substantially the same illumi-
nation as at the zenith.
The curve showing the brightness of the sky follows quite closely the
mean daily and yearly sunshine curve. The per cent of annual sunshine
to the maximum possible varies in different cities of the United States all
the way from 36 to 84 per cent. In New York it is 58 per cent. The hourly
per cent of the maximum possible sunshine in New York is shown by the
curve in Figure 59.
Assuming that Prof. Basquin’s data for Chicago is true for New York
after allowing for the difference in the per cent of annual sunshine the
mean annual brightness of the zenith sky in New York is 560 candles per
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
as|_ HOURLY. PERCENT OF MAXIMUM POSSIBLE eal
SUNSHINE INNEW YORAC
| #0, + AVERAGE 1894-190. +
|e =
yy 7? T
SI
he
Sea
Ls
S 55
R50
Sep
8 +
x 25
20
| 15
Ss IR | :
pose ee ees
aa = TEESE aay.
Fic. 59.
pS Pecal|
DAYLIGHT ILLUMINATION IN FOOT CANDLES.
183
002
SasE
gears wee
an
DISTANCE BELOW TOP OF BUILDINGS /N TERMS OF STREET W/DTH.
Fig. 60.
184 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
square foot and the corresponding working minimum 280 candles per square
foot. The illumination received at an unobstructed point on the surface of
the earth is 880 foot candles. The illumination on the side of a building
at the ground level where half of the sky is obstructed is 440 foot candles.
Illumination on street
Increasing the height of buildings reduces the amount of daylight fall-
ing on both the street level and the street facade. A street improved with
buildings once the street width in height receives only 71 per cent as much
illumination from the sky at the curb level as one improved with buildings
half the street width in height. For a street improved with buildings twice
the street width in height the direct illumination from the sky is only 42 per
cent; thrice the street width, 29 per cent; four times, 22 per cent; five
times, 18 per cent; and six times, 15 per cent.
Illumination on street facade
The illumination on the street facade diminishes even more rapidly
with an increased height of buildings than that at the street surface. A
point on the facade once the street width below the top of the opposite
buildings receives only 53 per cent as much direct daylight illumination as
one situated half that distance down from the top. At a point twice the
street width below the top of the opposite buildings across the street the
illumination is only 19.2 per cent of that one-half times the street width
down from the top; three times the street width, 9.4 per cent; four times,
5.5 per cent; five times, 3.5 per cent; and six times, 2.5 per cent.
The illumination in foot candles in the street and on the street facade
due to direct skylight is shown in the following table for different points
below the top of the buildings assuming the street in each case to be uni-
formly improved on both sides with buildings of different heights. The
curve in Figure 60 presents this data in graphic form. ;
Foot Candles
Height of Buildings . c <3
Times Street Width On Street Level On Street Facade
Ov Wa.loaa Rs aeirnd lock en tena 880. 440.
MBS cove tye ayo chicka s oer eres 486.8 243.3
Wey Se act ao nuance aheteteeeet Uaacena ates 345.2 128.9
At a eee oe “Aspapee tees 296.4 96.5
LA ee acc oe Oe eee 258.1 73.9
CARA Ar MER SEH OC ey OLS 204.0 46.6
DIE Ss Se ietoia, 0, ak steele 16755 31.6
RM erc.o oon mot kee 141.6 22.9
1 AE ET, ce co 107.7 13.2
iat en aA eres oy eve aeons 86.6 8.6
Oe lay et eee Ws) 6.2
Illumination in inner courts
The minimum size prescribed by the Tenement House Law for an inner
court on the lot line in a tenement 60 feet high is 12 feet by 24 feet. The
law contemplates that this court should be complemented by a court of
similar size on the adjacent lot, but it does not enforce this provision. Let
us assume that the adjoining building when erected does not have its courts
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 185
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
co-ordinated with those on the lot considered. Then if this building is
also 60 feet high, our tenement, which is once the width of the street if
built on a 60-foot street is served by a court only half as large as that con-
templated by the law. In that event the direct illumination obtained from
the sky at the bottom of the center portion of the side wall is only 2.1 foot
candles while that at the center portion of the end wall is only 3.8 foot
candles. The street facade, assuming the street to be uniformly improved
with 60-foot buildings, receives at the bottom 128 foot candles. In other
words the direct illumination received at the bottom of the court is only
from one and one-half to three per cent of that received at the correspond-
ing point on the front facade of the tenement.
Assume that the complementary court 12 feet by 24 feet is provided on
the adjoining lot, making a combined court 24 feet by 24 feet, the direct
illumination at the bottom of the wall would still be only 7.5 candles or 5.8
per cent of that obtained at the bottom of the street facade.
The direct daylight illumination obtained in an inner court the length
of which is twice its width and the height of which is expressed in multiples
of its width is stated in the following table. The illumination given is that
received on a vertical surface at the bottom of the court wall half way be-
tween its ends.
Illumination in Foot Candles
Height in Terms of , r ; ~
Width of Court On End Wall On Side Wall
Ilse cC aS Re CRE ALA nce ey a 103.9 109.9
DEE wih epee ct cba ae nk M43 25.9
Sscasatal aia oih cached NOnG CHOC COA itt ates 14.2 9.0
AV ES SATs eee ena Ny Ra 7.0 40
Sr RE Ns Ve ace ar Men eae i ore Lane 3.8 Beil
OA SRA eae cscs onan liaks Dn® il
Daylight entering windows
The quantity of daylight entering an.ordinary front window is between
40 and 75 per cent of that falling on the street facade. From 25 to 60 per
cent of the daylight received by the facade is cut off from penetrating into
the rooms by the frame in which the window is set. ‘This is the situation
with an unobstructed window. If there are buildings on the other side of
the street opposite the window the percentage of daylight received by the
room is, of course, much smaller, the exact amount depending upon the
height of the obstructing buildings.
Barring obstructions, it is the size of a window with reference to the
thickness of the wall in which it is set that determines the amount of daylight
admitted into a room. A small window in a thick wall admits propor-
tionately less daylight than a large window in a thick wall. Thus an unob-
structed window two feet wide and four feet high set in a wall one foot
thick has 53 per cent of its light cut off by the thickness of the wall while
a window-twice as large, four feet wide and four feet high, set in a wall one
foot thick, has only 40 per cent of its light cut off by the thickness of the
wall. For an unobstructed window of a given size the proportion of the
daylight received which passes through the window diminishes with the
186 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
thickness of the wall. For a given thickness of wall it increases with the
height and width of the window.
In all the calculations relating to the amount of daylight entering
windows in this paper it has been assumed that the window pane would
fill the entire window opening.
In an unobstructed window two and one-half feet wide and six feet
high set in a wall one foot thick the flux of daylight admitted is equal to
only 76.1 per cent of that through a window set in a wall one-half foot
thick. If obstructed by buildings on the opposite side of the street one-half
times the width of the intervening space in height the window set in the
one-foot wall would admit only 71.6 per cent as much daylight as the one
set in the half-foot wall. For obstructing buildings different times the street
width in height above the level of the window the amount of daylight
received by a window set in a one-foot wall as compared with that in a half-
foot wall would be as follows: one times the street width, 65.6 per cent;
one and one-quarter times, 61.6 per cent; one and one-half times, 59 per
cent; two times, 52.2 per cent; two and one-half times, 45.3 per cent;
three times, 34.3 per cent; and four times, 18.7 per cent.
The curve in Figure 61 shows that obstructing buildings are more detri-
mental to the lighting of rooms than the thickness of walls. Inordinately
thick walls cut off a considerable portion of the direct daylight, but excess-
ively high buildings cut off more.
An unobstructed window receives some direct light even though it is
set in an extremely thick wall but a window set in a comparatively thin wall
receives absolutely no direct skylight illumination when obstructed by a
high building. The exact point at which all such illumination is eclipsed
depends upon the thickness of the wall in relation to the height of the
obstructing buildings. Thus, a small window say two feet wide and four
feet high set in a one-foot wall receives absolutely no skylight if situated
at a distance three times the street width below the top of the opposite
buildings. A window two and one-half feet wide, six feet high and set in a
wall of the same thickness-on the other hand receives direct illumination
from the sky even though it is situated four times the street width below
the top of the opposite buildings. This latter window if placed in a wall
one-half foot thick would receive some direct light even at a point six times
the street width below the top of obstructing buildings.
The following table shows the flux of daylight in foot candles per square
foot admitted by a window two and one-half feet wide and six feet high
when set in a wall of different thicknesses and obstructed by buildings of
different heights:
Height of Obstructing Building in Terms of Street Width
Se
Thickness of ‘ Sy
Wall in Feet None One-Half Once Oneand One-Half Twice
0 6,600 3,649 1,933 1,110 699
5 4,976 1,440 375 114 41
1 3,784 1,029 246 68 21
2, 2,280 540 102 20 3
3 1,485 299 54 3 0
In all of these calculations only the direct illumination obtained from
the sky has been considered. The actual illumination in any particular case
exceeds that stated here on account of the reflected light received. When
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN. RELATION TO
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
Flux of Wight errering WINDOW
Lstt wide and brt high Foor Canales
8
:
eal eal |
FLUX OF DIRECT DAYLIGHT
ENTERING GIVEN WINDOW.
Calculated for window 8ef Ip walls oF
Wer el ICKNCSSES ONG ObSIT UCTED
Ly ouildings of aUirerent helgnis.
\ | | |
| !
Helglt Of OOSTKUCTIG BUMONGE.
| No obsifUucrion. :
One half Fires He street Wid?
Once the strech width
qQAWY
mice ihe streel widhe
One arr On € POUT TMCS ME SIC 1G
8
Ss
DS
Ss
8
a
+——
=
0 Cig 7-0" 176" 2:0" . 26
Thicrness of wall lp WhiCh Window 18 Ser
Fic, 61.
187
188 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
the walls are light in color the reflected light is a considerable part of the
total illumination. The importance of light colored walls in the daylight
illumination of buildings cannot be too strongly emphasized.
STATEMENT BY Herpert S. Swan, Expert INvestiGAtor, COMMITTEE ON
City Pian, May 19, 1916
Relation of high buildings to street congestion
Buildings in the downtown section of Manhattan have been erected
without any reference to the street width. The average frontage height
on Trinity Place and Church Street, between Morris and Chambers, is
9.18 stories; on Nassau Street, between Wall and Frankfort, 9.21 stories;
on New Street, 12.24 stories; on Broadway, below Chambers, 13.92 stories;
and on Exchange Place, 14.90 stories. On Trinity Place and Church Street
this is 1.8 times the average street width; on Broadway, 2.5 times; on
Nassau Street, 3.0 times ; on New Street, 4.6 times, and on Exchange Place,
5.6 times.
The effect of these extreme heights is to render the street width
absolutely inadequate to care for the traffic accompanying such heights.
The ordinary lot in New York is 100 feet deep. The average net
rentable floor space per occupant in an office building is about 75 square
feet. The approximate number of occupants on any given street, assum-
ing the street to be used entirely for office purposes with a rentability of
100 per cent may be ascertained by using these factors in connection with
the average frontage height in stories. Proper allowance must, of course,
be made for the progressive diminution of net rentable floor area accom-
panying each increment in height.
To make one street comparable with another, proper allowance must
also be made for any space occupied by parks, public spaces, public build-
ings, churches and cemeteries. In making these estimates, the portion of
the street frontage devoted to such purposes has been deducted from the
total frontage. The street intersections have, however, been regarded as
belonging exclusively to the street under consideration in each case. These
might more appropriately have been apportioned between the particular
street under consideration and its bisecting streets, but the difficulty encoun-
tered in doing this made it infeasible. Each street is considered as a unit.
The inclusion of the street intersections makes the congestion appear smaller
than is actually the fact.
Estimated on this basis, New Street has at present an office population
of 16,952; Exchange Place, 18,401; Nassau Street, 26,109; Trinity Place
and Church Street, 37,702, and Broadway, below Chambers Street, 55,540.
The total office population of these five streets is 154,704.
What the office population on these five streets would be at different
average frontage heights may be summarized as follows:
Broadway, Increase
Height Trinity Place Below Over
in Nassau andChurch New Chambers Exchange Total Present
Stucries Street Street Street Street Place Population Population
15 40.230 58,080 20,415 59.580 18,525 196,830 42,126
20 51960 75,000 26,360 76.940 23.980 254.240 99,536
25 62.525 90,275 31.725 92.625 * 28,875 306,025 151,323
30 72,150 104,190 36,630 106,860 33,33C 353,160 201,840
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 189
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
The investigation shows that it would be impossible for all the occu-
pants of the buildings abutting on these streets to seek the street level at
one time, since the street—even- though it were cleared of all other traffic,
pedestrian, vehicular and surface street car, and absolutely free from all
obstructions so that the entire width of the street might be used—would be
unable to hold them. The minimum space required by a crowd moving in
one direction is five square feet per person. Computed in this manner,
Broadway could hold but 96.3 per cent of its occupants; Trinity Place
and Church Street, 86.6 per cent; Nassau Street, 69.3 per cent ; New Street,
44.5 per cent, and Exchange Place, 37.5 per cent.
Stated in other words, the crowd on Broadway, below Chambers Street,
would be 1.1 persons deep; on Trinity Place and Church Street, 1.2 per-
sons deep; on Nassau Street, 1.4 persons deep; on New Street, 2.2 persons
deep, and on Exchange Place, 2.7 persons deep. New Street and Exchange
Place, it will be noted, would barely afford adequate standing room for their
respective occupants.
For practical purposes, however, the street must be divided into road-
way and sidewalks. The entire street cannot be used exclusively by pedes-
trians ; it must be used by both pedestrians and vehicles.
If the crowds were to keep on the sidewalks, moving in one direction
as above with a minimum space allowance of five square feet per person,
the occupants on Trinity Place and Church Street would be piled up 1.8
persons deep ; on Broadway, 2.0 persons deep; on Nassau Street, 3.1 persons
deep; on New Street, 5.2 persons deep; and on Exchange Place, 6.6 persons
deep.
If the average frontage height on these streets were increased to 30
stories, the occupants would be piled up 4.0 persons deep on the sidewalks
on Broadway, below Chambers Street; 5.1 persons on Trinity Place and
Church Street; 8.5 persons on Nassau Street; 11.4 persons on New Street ;
and 11.9 persons on Exchange Place. These estimates are based on the
assumption that the sidewalk width would remain unchanged. The follow-
ing table shows the estimated sidewalk congestion on these streets if im-
proved with buildings of different average frontage heights, the figures
showing the number of persons deep the occupants would be on the side-
walk, each occupant being allowed five square feet of sidewalk space:
Height i
in Trinity Place and Broadway, Below Exchange
Stories Nassau Street Church Street New Street Chambers Street Place
15 4.8 2.8 6.3 2.2 6.7
20 6.2 8.7 8.1 2.8 8.6
25 7.4 4.4 9.6 3.4 10.4
30 8.5 5.1 11.4 4.0 11.9
The sidewalks are incapable of caring for more than 56 per cent of the
present office population on Trinity Place and Church Street; 50 per cent
on Broadway; 32 per cent on Nassau Street; 19 per cent on New Street,
and 15 per cent on Exchange Place. If the buildings on these streets were
increased to a uniform height of 30 stories, then the sidewalks on Broadway
would afford sufficient space for but 26 per cent of the occupants; 20 per
cent on Trinity Place and Church Street; 11.9 per cent on Nassau Street;
8.9 per cent on New Street, and 8.4 per cent on Exchange Place.
190 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
STATEMENT BY Danie L. Turner, Deputy ENGINEER OF SUBWAY
Construction, Pusiic SERvicE Commission, First
Disrict,* May 11, 1916
Increase in subway congestion
The subway was originally expected to develop a traffic of from 400,000
to 500,000 passengers per day. It commenced operation the latter part of
1904, and carried 72,723,000 passengers in 1905.
The next year, 1906, the traffic had increased to 137,917,000 passengers.
That is practically double, an increase of 100 per cent within one year
after operation. This increase was contrary to the expectations of a great
many who felt that embarking upon subway construction was a hazard
from a financial standpoint for the reason that people would object very
seriously to riding underground in subway lines. It was thought that the
business would be very slow in developing. On the contrary, the growth
was astounding.
The figures constantly increased of course, but not at such a rate of
increase as in the first year of operation until we are now carrying 345,-
586,000 people a year. That is an average of very nearly a million a day.
Of course, the business during the year has fluctuated exceedingly. There
is a daily fluctuation in business. I will speak of that later on. There is
a monthly fluctuation in business dependent upon traffic conditions. At
the busiest time of the year, around the holiday season, in December, the
number of passengers carried per day is over a million and sometimes
nearly a million and a half per day.
The exceedingly rapid development of business and the popularity of
subway travel is indicated when you consider the fact that all the elevated
lines in Manhattan, that is, the Second, Third, Sixth and Ninth Avenue
lines, in 1915, only carried 301,793,000 people, as against 345,586,000 for the
subway. The subway is now carrying more passengers per year than all
of the four elevated lines in Manhattan combined.
Another comparison that is interesting is that in 1905, the first year
the subway was in operation the several elevated lines in Manhattan carried
in round figures 266,000,000 passengers, as against 73,000,000 passengers
on the subway. In the period which has since elapsed the number of pas-
sengers carried on elevated lines has increased from 266,000,000 to 302,000,-
000 per year, whereas the number of passengers carried in the subway has
increased from 73,000,000 to 346,000,000 per year.
This tremendous increase has been taken care of without any increase
in the number of lines, simply by increasing the length of the trains and
decreasing the train intervals. The schedule at the start was two minutes
for the express service. Now the schedule for the express service has been
reduced to one minute and forty seconds. Besides this considerable decrease
in the interval there has been an increase in the length of trains—the express
service has been increased from eight to ten cars for each train. Of course,
overloading has increased enormously. At the beginning there was an
overloaded condition, but it was nothing comparable to the overloading that
is carried now. I have known counts to be made in subway cars, carrying
close to 200 passengers. We figure as a rule about 125 persons to a car
as the number for a load, whereas the seating capacity is a little under
fifty—we put it at fifty. The seats are nineteen inches wide. The 1914
* This statement has been compiled from answers made to questions asked
Mr. Turner.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 191
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
increase in the 181st Street station business over 1913 is 385,000 passengers.
The total business at that station during 1914 was 6,133,000. That is an
average of about 18,000 a day. .1 count 340 days to a year. During 1913
it was 16,000 a day, 1912, 14,000, 1911, 12,000. This is an increase of
50 per cent in three years. This is a station where the only means of getting
to the surface from the subway platform is by elevators. The unusually
large business at 181st Street is due to the extensive building around that
point. The same result is bound to come at any point along the route of
the rapid transit system if there is any sudden building.
On the Broadway branch from 96th Street north before the subway
went into operation there were no rapid transit facilities. There was abso-
lutely no population in that area. The traffic during 1914 on the Broadway
branch was 44,000,000 passengers. That is more than 10 per cent of the
total business of the whole subway.
The territory traversed was absolutely virgin territory before this rapid
transit line was located there. These figures show the tremendous effects
that transit facilities have in developing a new section.
If there is no control or regulation over tenement buildings, the distri-
bution of the population which the transit lines are designed to effect will
be to a large extent nullified, and the tenements in favored sections will
continue to pile up on top of each other.
If there is no control over housing or building regulations such as
proposed generally in the program of this Commission the provision of
additional transit facilities simply increases congestion. In fact, I would
say, just at this particular time that the new rapid transit facilities are about
to be opened up, that this is the psychological time for the adoption of a
program such as is proposed by this Commission. In fact, if you do not
adopt a program such as is proposed by this Commission or a similar one
you will lose the benefit of the rapid transit facilities.
Air space per subway passenger
The subway cars are nine feet wide and fifty-one feet in length, includ-
ing the platforms.
The height of the subway cars is twelve feet above the base of the rail.
The body of the car is about eight feet high. These dimensions give the
subway car a cubic content of approximately 3,672 cubic feet. Counting
200 passengers to the car each person would have an air space of eighteen
and a half cubic feet.
Standard for limiting subway congestion
My theory is that rapid transit lines, or any municipal transit lines,
ought to be permitted a capacity at the rush hour, of about fifty per cent
over the seating capacity. The rush hour of course, is not the peak—the
peak, where the load is very much in excess of the average for the hour, is
fifteen or twenty minutes only in duration. I arrive at this carrying capacity
during the rush hour from the standpoint of permitting free circulation
in the cars. That has no bearing on the health standpoint. I had a talk
with Dr. Emerson, the Commissioner of Health, and he arrived at the same
conclusion from the health standpoint—about fifty per cent overload.
You understand that we could not accommodate, or take care of the
business of New York on such a basis. We have to carry to business in
New York City, over all lines—surface, elevated and subway, somewhere
in the neighborhood of half a million people in one direction in one hour.
192 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
A seating capacity standard is financially impossible. Neither would it be
a physical possibility under present conditions.
Rush hour traffic
The proportion of daily travel in New York during the rush hours is
a very variable proposition. The rush hour traffic, that is, the traffic in
one hour in one direction past the maximum load point varies all the way
from four to five per cent in the subway to twenty per cent on some of the
surface lines—of the total daily business in both directions.
I have no doubt that people let three or four trains go by before getting
on at the Grand Central Station during the rush hour. You can get com-
fortably into a train at the Brooklyn Bridge during the rush hours. Every-
body at this station bound for a certain destination is able to get into the
first train to that destination which arrives. They may not all get a seat,
but undoubtedly they all get in. There may be some little waiting at 14th
Street. There was a time when 14th Street was simply a swarming mass of
people. They frequently had to wait five or six minutes before they could
get on a train. Now the waiting has moved up to 42nd Street, in my judg-
ment. This is just a general observation that I am speaking of. I have
not had any actual count made.
Average length of time spent in subway
I should not think that the length of the average trip would amount to
much more than twenty-five or thirty minutes. I made some careful obser-
vations some time ago, and the average ride on the subway was then about
five miles. I think it may be a little greater than that now. This average is
for the whole day. The average for the rush hour ride would run some-
where around thirty-five to forty minutes. The time spent in the subways
by those who travel during the rush hour, therefore, average about eighty
minutes per day.
Possible increase in subway capacity
I would not say that the limit has been reached in the present subway
with respect to the length or number of trains. I think that the terval may
yet be reduced somewhat.
At the peak of the rush our new contracts as a matter of fact, require
a minute and a half interval, forty trains an hour. Some of the operators
maintain that we are not going to be able to quite accomplish this. From the
best evidence that could be obtained, after careful study of the situation,
the contracts were drawn to require that the equipment be provided to
maintain the necessary speed and that a signal system be provided which
would permit that interval. Now if the traffic can be controlled so as not
to congest the lines, but can be distributed so that cars are not excessively
over-loaded, then station stops will be reasonably short. I believe under
such conditions that the 114-minute interval may be accomplished. That is
our feeling anyhow. I know that we could do better in the present subway
if we could reduce the time of the stop. The Grand Central station stop
which is practically a controlling stop on the present subway runs close tc
a minute, when really it ought not to be more than half a minute—that stop
stalls everything on the line behind. When the subway was originally put
into operation the stop then necessary retarded the operation for the reason
that the signals did not permit the trains to approach the station because they
had to maintain a running distance and the result was that the train in the
station got a clear signal to go ahead and the other train not only had to get
into the station and stop, but had to travel some distance from behind.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 193
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
After the congestion became intense the condition was improved by
installing the speed control signal which permits a train to come right up,
behind the other train, to the station, so that when it does get a clear signal
to go ahead it has only a short distance to run into the station. With the
signal development of the present time it may be practicable to maintain such
operation and thereby decrease the interval between trains.
Districting as a remedy for subway congestion
You not only have to distribute the workers but you have to distribute
the places of abode and also distribute the places where they work. This
is the prime essential. The difficulty to-day is that one part of New York
City is the objective point of so many people. As it stands now, practically
everybody wants to go somewhere between 42d Street and the Battery
during the peak of the rush. Practically all the lines are built in order to
carry people to that one location. I do not think there is any necessity for
such a condition. j
There ought to be localized business centers surrounded by residentiat
areas, away from the one general center, which would be traversed by those
transit lines which connect the outer sections with the general center. There
would then be created a two-way traffic movement to such localized centers
from the contiguous residential areas.
Unless a very careful housing and districting regulation, such as you
are trying to carry out, is adopted, it will be absolutely impossible for
the City to cope with its municipal transportation problem. These two
problems have got to be taken together. They are absolutely related to
each other. We can provide facilities up to a maximum of the street-ca-
pacity, but we are rapidly coming to the actual capacity of the streets so
that housing and manufacturing sites and working sites ought to be con-
trolled with a view to having the population distributed over the whole
area and in that way develop a two-way business on all lines to the very
utmost.
I think districting is absolutely essential to the transportation problem
of this city. That is the only way in which the excessive rush hour conges-
tion can be eliminated.
To illustrate what I have just been saying, the transit plan, as it has
been laid down, is to distribute the population throughout the whole city.
It is essential, however, in order that the plan may be effective that
there may be some control over housing regulation near the business center,
for the reason that 1f you permit tenements to be piled up near a business
center, thereby reducing the ride to twenty minutes or half an hour, people
are going to insist in living in these areas rather than going out into the
undeveloped and new areas which the rapid transit system has made ac-
cessible.
Tf there were cross-connections between Long Island City and the resi-
dence portions of Brooklyn, it would tend to draw factory workers out of
Manhattan into the outlying boroughs and make it easy for them to get
back and forth to places of work which would not have to be in Manhattan.
I think that the traffic conditions I have pointed out will undoubtedly
continue even after the new subways are completed, unless a districting
plan is adopted. Unless you have your districting plan or something similar
to it carried out, the transit problem of the city will come to such a point
that it will be impossible for the city to cope with it.
{94 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Anything that would tend to restrict the available factory area in cen-
tral Manhattan and to increase the residential areas in central Manhattan
would undoubtedly tend to decrease excessive congestion on the rapid tran-
sit lines, especially if the residential area is located within a short distance.
It might intensify congestion if a segregated manufacturing district was
more than walking distance from a segregated residential section.
I think that the location of homes within walking distance of workshops
is usually the condition abroad which makes the per capita ride so much
less. The per capita ride in 1910 on the rapid transit lines was 161, to-day
itis 176. The total per capita on all lines in 1910 was 321. To-day it is 358.
These are fare passengers. When you consider the transfer riders the
figures enormously increase. There is no other intensity of riding com-
parable with ours anywhere else in the world.
On the average an individual rides 358 times every year. That means
practically everybody rides once every day. It is an indication of the in-
tensity of the use of the municipal transit lines which is very much greater
than any other lines, simply because of the general conditions that indus-
tries are not located near home sections for the workers so that many may
walk.
Length of walk from subway stations
The average person will walk about one-quarter of a mile to a rapid
transit station. I don’t believe that you will get many people to walk half
a mile to a station. That is particularly during the rush hour. During non-
business hours they will easily walk more. There are very few people
compelled to walk more than half a mile in Manhattan or Bronx to get to a
station.
Capacity of dual subway system
On the dual system we have doubled transit facilities and by doubling
the facilities we have trebled the capacity and this has been done chiefly
by utilizing the two-way movement through business centers. I mean by
this that the trunk line that is built through a business center has a branch
or feeders at both ends of it, so that all trains originating, we will say, in the
Bronx in the morning come down town fully loaded, go through the busi-
ness center, lose their loads, go over to Brooklyn, fill up and come back
through the business center again, so that we have a four track trunk line
through the congested part of the city where most of the people want to go
every track of which is utilized by a fully loaded train.
There are twelve tracks in the existing rapid transit system, five utilized
by empty trains and seven by full trains. When I say the existing rapid
transit system, I do not mean to include the Brooklyn elevated lines, be-
cause they are not city transit lines—they simply serve Brooklyn. They
do not bring people through the business center. I mean Manhattan ele-
vated lines and the subway lines. Under the dual system we have increased
the capacity to nineteen tracks, five of them empty and fourteen utilized by
full trains. In other words, we have doubled the number of full train move-
ments through the business center. We still have a potential capacity for
increase by running some more branches to Brooklyn without building
hardly another foot of subway through Manhattan.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 195
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
STATEMENT BY GEORGE C. WHIPPLE, PROFESSOR OF SANITARY ENGINEERING,
Harvarp University, May 29, 1916
Building restrictions and the public health
The Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions of New York
City, has formulated tentative regulations governing the area and height of
buildings which may be erected in different parts of the city and the uses
against which the buildings in each district may be restricted. Authority for
doing this was granted by the State Legislature. The Legislature has
delegated to the Board of Estimate and Apportionment the power to put such
regulations into effect. This is clearly an exercise of the police power
which resides primarily in the State. The right to so delegate it is un-
questionable. It is of vital importance, however, to ascertain whether the
proposed regulations do as a matter of fact fall within the proper scope of
the police power. This is a matter for the courts to decide, but the de-
cision of the courts should be anticipated as well as possible by considering
the relation of the facts to established legal precedents. Do the restric-
tions of the bulk and the use of buildings in a city like New York mate-
rially involve the health, safety or morals of the people? If they do the
action comes within the accepted scope of the police power, and is con-
stitutionally sound.
I believe that there is a vital relation between the public health and the
buildings in and about which people spend their lives, and I believe that
in a City a reasonable restriction of the height, area and use of buildings is a
justifiable exercise of the police power.
The proof of this cannot, in the nature of the case, be direct or sus-
ceptible of support based on definite experiment. Public health is a matter
which is influenced by so many things that it is almost impossible to select
one factor and consider its effect apart from all others. The proof of the
relation between housing and health must necessarily be axiomatic in charac-
ter and based upon the accumulated experience of mankind generally ex-
pressed. Studies of the statistics of disease and death for people who live
or work in buildings of different kinds and under different conditions have
been collected by sanitarians in various places in the world, but these
lead to no definite conclusion, for the very good reason that housing is only
one of the factors, and not the principal factor, which influences disease
and death in the community and for the further reason that disease and
death are not a complete index of health. Nevertheless the fragmentary
statistical studies which have been made point to a relation between housing
and health which hygienists and sanitarians have not hesitated to accept.
Health
At the outset it is important to get a full conception of what is meant
by health. At the present time public health activities are coming to be
dominated by the bacteriologist and epidemiologist. Attention has been
focused especially on communicable disease. All the world knows that
the efforts of the new public health movement in reducing the suffering and
misery of mankind have been the most remarkable in the world’s history
and must long be continued. The results have been measured in terms of
death rates and sickness rates. Naturally enough health has come to be re-
garded by some as the absence of disease. But that is not a complete
conception of health. Health is more than the absence of disease. It is
something positive, and involves physique and vitality, and it is mental as
196 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
well as physical. The inherent difficulty at the present time is the absence of
scientific methods of measuring this positive element in health. Yet the
world knows as a matter of human experience that it is real and vital. The
expression, ‘health and comfort of the people,” is centuries old, and these
two ideas are inseparable.
Public health, of course, is the sum total of the health of the con-
stituent individuals. We measure public health inversely in terms of
death-rates because at present we have no means of measuring health-rates.
We take a part as an index of the whole.
Fundamental concepts
Light, air, water, food and shelter are essential to life. Modern sani-
tarians would perhaps qualify this statement by adding the idea of cleanli-
ness, and say that clean air, clean water, clean food and clean human beings
are essential to healthy life.
The regulation of buildings is intimately connected with the factors
mentioned—light, air, water, food, sanitation—and is therefore itself a
factor in public health.
Relation between internal and external conditions
In cities people live an indoor life to a greater extent than they live
out-of-doors. During the last fifty years cities have increased greatly in
size and indoor life has become correspondingly more common and more
important. The advent of steel construction has changed the shape of
many buildings, increasing height and producing congestion. It has also
had a tendency to reduce the size of rooms and has led to what is termed
a cellular type of housing for dwellings and offices.
As far as health is concerned indoor conditions are on the whole more
important than outdoor conditions in a city like New York. Indoor con-
ditions are dependent largely upon the plan and construction of buildings
and upon occupancy, all of which are well recognized as coming within
the control of the police power. But indoor conditions are also and to a
large extent controlled by the conditions out-of-doors. It is the outside en-
vironmental conditions to which the tentative regulations of the Commis-
sion are chiefly directed. The amount of. daylight which enters a building
depends upon the amount of sunlight which falls upon the exterior, and
upon the proximity of other buildings, their height, and their bulk. The
amount of air which enters a building is also influenced, and sometimes very
greatly, by the surrounding buildings. The purity of the air is likewise
affected by outside conditions. Thus while spoken of, and properly so,
as the regulation of buildings it is the regulation of the space between
buildings which is the object in view, a system of regulations designed to
prevent one lot owner from interfering with the light and air required by
his neighbor. While in general rights in the use of land are bounded by
vertical planes, it must not be forgotten that the sun’s rays fall slantingly
upon the land while the wind movements are chiefly horizontal. These
natural elements are interfered with by excessive high and crowded build-
ings, hence there are rights in land ownership which extend beyond the
vertical planes.
The following are some of the points to be considered in connection with
this subject.
Sunlight
The rays of the sun bring light and heat to the earth and both are
absolutely necessary to man’s existence. Considered from the standpoint
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 197
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
of heat the sun’s direct rays are beneficial or prejudicial according to cir-
cumstances. Heat is absorbed by walls of brick, stone or concrete, with the
consequence that the air near them is heated; heat is also transmitted
through building walls to the rooms. In winter this is an advantage in
this climate, but in summer it may be a disadvantage. Walls shaded from
the direct rays of the sun tend to make houses cooler. In summer this is
desirable but in winter undesirable. The direct rays of the sun influence
the moisture of the air as well as its temperature. The evaporation of
water is increased, but as the capacity of air for holding moisture is also
increased by heating the relative humidity may be decreased. At all events
the sum total of the effect of sunlight is to raise the sentient temperature,
that is, the temperature shown by the wet bulb thermometer. It is this sen-
tient temperature coupled with air movement which affects the health and
comfort of human beings.
Sunlight likewise causes movements of the air. This is due to unequal
heating in different places. The air currents thus set up are gentle and
desirable. Places which never receive the sunlight are more likely than
others to contain stagnant air.
Considered from the standpoint of light, the sun’s rays profoundly
affect. the lighting of rooms. This is a matter of common knowledge, but
quantitative relations have been shown by many photometer tests made at
points located at different distances from windows, and by similar tests
made at the windows of different stories in tall buildings the exterior light-
ing of which is influenced by adjoining buildings. The sun’s rays are re-
flected in various ways from exterior surfaces of buildings so that the
exterior conditions materially influence the interior lighting, and the nearer
the buildings are together the greater is the importance of this factor.
The sun’s rays have an effect on vegetation, as will be mentioned later.
Sunlight tends to remove moisture from particles of dust in the air thereby
improving a foggy atmosphere. It tends to dry pools of water which might
otherwise become breeding spots for mosquitoes. The sun’s rays have a
marked disinfecting action and prevent the growth of molds and fungi,
thereby eliminating odors of certain kinds. They also destroy bacterial life.
whether the bacteria are floating in the air, or are attached to the exposed
surfaces of pavements, floors, or walls. To the extent to which this occurs
the danger of infection from certain disease germs is lessened. Sunlight
has both a physiological and a psychological influence on human beings. To
these may be added the aesthetic effect of light and shade produced by sun-
light. In these various ways sunlight is desirable for the health and comfort
of human beings, while the complete absence of sunlight is correspondingly
detrimental.
Daylight
By daylight is meant the indirect lighting from the sun, that is, lighting
received from the sky or clouds and reflected from various surfaces. While
it is possible for human beings to exist without direct sunlight and even
without daylight, it is the experience of the race that both sunlight and
daylight in sufficient amounts are highly desirable. Daylight is necessary
not only for the health and comfort but for economic reasons. Too little
light causes eye-strain with its train of physiological disturbances, and de-
creases the productiveness of work. It unfavorably influences the mental
condition. Light promotes cheerfulness, while gloomy rooms depress
vitality. Lack of daylight limits the length of the working day in some
198 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
industries and increases the amount of artificial light required. Artificial
lighting with oil or gas tends to vitiate the air by increasing the carbonic
acid and moisture, and even by increasing the poisonous carbonic oxide.
Artificial lighting also increases fire risks. Lack of exterior lighting in-
creases the amount of window space required and this in turn decreases the
heat loss in buildings in winter. In these and other ways insufficient lighting
not only results in inconvenience to human beings, but may be a positive
menace to the health, safety and morals of the people. The amount of day-
light received in buildings is greatly affected by adjoining buildings, by their
positions, their height, and by the character of their walls, both in color and
material.
Ventilation
The necessity of adequate ventilation need not be argued, but it is not
as fully realized as it should be that the air which enters a building, both in
amount and quality, is influenced by the surrounding buildings. If build-
ings are too close together there is likely to be a stagnation of the air between
them. The ventilation of streets, alleys, courts, and interior spaces between
buildings is as much a matter of public importance, as the ventilation of
rooms is a matter of individual importance. Street ventilation is influenced
not only by the orientation of the streets and the prevailing wind move-
ments, but by the height, size, shape and character of buildings, and their
distances apart. In cavernous streets there are excessive air currents near
the ground, and at times great air movements, especially objectionable in
winter. On the other hand, at times of gentle air movements there may be
no currents at all near the streets and pavements between high buildings
because the friction of the air passing through the narrow channels prevents
them. In other words, narrow streets lined with high buildings tend to
produce extreme conditions of air movement and both extremes are objec-
tionable. In regulating the size and height of buildings with reference to the
streets the city is to a considerable extent controlling street ventilation and
the ventilation of courts and interior spaces, and thus indirectly the ventila-
tion of indoor quarters.
Quite as important as the volume of the air taken into buildings, is its
cleanliness. One of the difficulties in cities is to obtain proper air inlets
for ventilation systems. The amount of smoke and dust, foul odors on the
streets, bad smells from buildings, from passing vehicles, from exposed
refuse and from other sources are matters properly subject to the control
of the health department, but the concentration of dust and smoke and foul
odors is greatly influenced by street ventilation. The regulation of buildings
is a regulation of the amount of dilution of odors, and is, therefore, a public
health factor.
Vegetation
It is becoming more and more recognized that vegetation is very desir-
able in residential districts for reasons of health and comfort. Vegetation
cannot thrive without sunlight and it is a matter of history that the increas-
ing height of buildings has driven out the trees from streets, while the
extension of buildings over large percentages of the lot have left little
chance for vegetation of any kind. Trees, shrubs, and grass tend to cool the
air during hot weather. Trees produce desirable shade, and yet in winter
they do not obstruct the sunlight. Trees therefore furnish a shade which is
automatically adjustable, increasing when it is most needed and decreasing
when objectionable. In this respect the shade of trees differs from the
shade of buildings.
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 199
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
The effect of vegetation is local. Trees and grass concentrated in parks
cannot take the place of vegetation on streets and individual house lots.
;
Protection of the senses
In addition to furnishing essential living requirements such as air, light,
water and food (the last two not here considered), it is necessary for the
health and well being of human beings to have their natural senses properly
protected. Sight, sound and smell are all influenced by housing conditions
and come within the proper scope of building restrictions. The relation
- between odors and street ventilation has been mentioned. Sound is likewise
influenced by the proximity of buildings to each other, by their height, and
by the character of their walls. Large high buildings placed near together
greatly increase the amount of noise in the street. Buildings of stone, brick
and concrete reflect sound and produce echoes. Wooden buildings are less
likely to reflect sound. The character of the pavement is of course an
important element. Noise greatly increases fatigue, notably the fatigue of
mental workers. It is especially objectionable in ‘residential districts because
there it may affect the very young and old, and the infirm, as well as all
people during their hours of needed repose.
The importance of outlook, the psychological effect of view, especially
sky view, is a matter closely connected with public health. Here again the
aesthetic influence of vegetation is important. Nervous diseases in cities are
on the increase. The protection of the nerves of the people by preventing
offense to the senses is a matter which properly comes within the bounds of
public health administration.
Need of districting
Tt may be. argued by some that while all of the foregoing statements are
admitted the regulations governing buildings should be general throughout
the city and not different for different districts. This, however, is not the
case. Ina city like New York there must be buildings of different character
suited to all sorts of uses, and even in residential buildings there are bound
to be differences due to the vauyins financial ability of the people to provide
homes for themselves.
Granted that indoor eondigions are more important than outdoor condi-
tions, but to a considerable extent dependent upon them, it is obvious that
architects cannot design buildings so as to obtain the best interior conditions
unless the exterior conditions are definitely established. Nothing in the
history of housing has been more distressing than the objectionable condi-
tions which arise from the changes which take place in entire districts. The
residential section of to-day becomes the business section of to-morrow;
houses are vainly altered to meet the new conditions, the results being almost
always unsatisfactory. Individual houses built to secure the maximum
amount of light and air suddenly find their windows blanketed by high walls
on adjoining property. Had this been known in advance the original
building would have been constructed on different plans. It is so obvious
that it need not be emphasized that the more permanent the space between
buildings, the better can the architect adapt the interior to the exterior con-
ditions. This is in itself a sufficient justification for the regulation of the
height and area of buildings, and for the imposition of different restrictions
on different districts.
Residential districts need more severe restrictions than other districts ;
industrial regions need less severe restrictions than business districts. It is
200 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
to be granted that restrictions are needed from the standpoint of residence;
it is in the interest of conservation to divide the city into different districts
in order that all of the land may be fully used to its proper limit.
But the regulation of the bulk of buildings is not enough. Their use
must also be regulated within limits, for the use of buildings also affects the
health, morals and safety of the people. The best use cannot be made of
any building unless the use which is to be made of adjoining buildings is
also known. It is not possible, however, to regulate the use of buildings
too minutely, and the divisions suggested by the tentative regulations pro-
posed by the Commission offer a reasonable solution of the problem, namely,
restriction of districts to residential, business or industrial uses.
Without going into detail, attention may be called to the fact that the
use of buildings in a district may influence the public health, in ways similar
to those already mentioned. Certain industries produce smoke, dust, fumes
or odors, which are objectionable and which tend to make these industries
undesirable in a business or residential district. The nature of the industry
or business controls the volume and character of the traffic on sidewalks and
streets. It may affect the nature of the pavement required and the noise of
vehicles and the odors from the streets ; it may also affect the safety of those
using the streets. The location of residential, business and industrial areas
also influence transportation and the manner of transportation has an in-
fluence on public health. Mention might be made of churches, schools,
hospitals, public buildings, the relation of business and industrial establish-
ments to the homes of the people, but it would be going too much into detail
to pursue the subject further. In many individual instances the public health
authorities have been called upon to abate individual nuisances. The tenta-
tive regulations proposed by the Commission are directed not to the abate-
ment of nuisances, but to their prevention. While these regulations are
likely to have their greatest use in increasing and stabilizing real estate
values in the city, a more vital reason for their adoption is that they will
enhance the health, safety, comfort and morals of the people.
Congestion
We now come to what from the standpoint of disease transmission is
the most important benefit to be derived from a districting of the city;
namely, the relief of congestion. If there is any one thing which has been
definitely established by the new science of public health it is that com-
municable diseases spread through a community in proportion to the oppor-
tunities for personal contact, or, to be more specific, for the excretions of
one person to be conveyed to other persons. This personal contact may
occur in the home, in the school, in the place of business, in public convey-
ances, or on the street, or wherever people meet. Crowding tends to increase
opportunities for contact, and overcrowded cars and overcrowded rooms are
both objectionable. In proportion as people are divided into groups so that
the members of each group do not come in contact with the members of
other groups the opportunities for contact are lessened. It is not difficult
to see how segregation of industries, with provision for people to live
relatively near to the places where they work, will tend to reduce the
opportunities for the spread of disease by contact. Districting will therefore
tend to prevent the spread of disease.
Data collected
With the assistance of Professor James Ford, of Harvard University,
I have collected a large number of references taken from well known
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 201
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
authorities which emphasize and confirm what has been said in regard to
the relation between housing and public health. These are so voluminous
that it has not seemed best to attempt to include them in this memorandum.
STATEMENT BY FRANK B. WILLIAMS, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON CITY
PLANNING, City Crus, Marci 4, 1916
Preservation of residential areas
In the districting of cities, the provisions with regard to residential
districts, closely related as they are to human comfort, health and life, are
especially important. Districting includes segregation and relation or con-
nection. Thus, residential districts should so far as possible be free from
buildings to be devoted to alien and disturbing activities; and there should
be such districts within easy reach of all of the business and industrial
activities of the city. The entire absence of regulation in this city heretofore
has made this problem extremely difficult. Industry and business have
“affected ” large areas that they have made only slight use of. The problem
for your commission therefore has often been to find and “ save” residential
areas, especially in Manhattan. That this has been your point of view your
statements and plans would seem to indicate. It is our belief that in one
connection you have not applied your principle as fully as is possible and
highly desirable ; and it is this matter, to which we have given special atten-
tion, that we desire to call to your attention at this time.
Need for protecting parks from business and industry
The preservation of residential areas requires not only that they be
made secure from invasion of business and industrial interests, so far as
possible; but also that in these residential areas now existing, recreation
parks, and elements of a similar nature, not to be replaced if lost, be main-
tained. This can be done only by restricting, so far as possible, to residential
uses the areas immediately surrounding these recreation parks. Thus, not
only are the parks saved; but residential areas, in parts of the city much
needing them, are kept suitable for residence and made permanent.
This does not mean necessarily that we shall prohibit a certain amount
of business occupancy, but it must be subordinated to such an extent that
it will not invade and change the character of the district.
There are very few recreation parks in Manhattan. Especially is this
true when we compare the number to the total residential area and also
to the areas given to such parks in other cities. It therefore seems all the
more important to preserve those which we now possess. Under the present
conditions the congested areas are not adequately provided for in this respect.
The original expense of providing these various recreation centres was
very great. They were created for a definite purpose and need, and experi-
ence has shown that their usefulness to the children in a residential district
does not extend much beyond one-half mile diameter. The destruction of
the residential areas about these parks means that we destroy the actual and
the social value of these centers which the city has created at considerable
expense.
Business not materially benefitted by parks
We believe that it is generally assumed that property used fer business
and industrial purposes has a greater value than property used for any but
“high grade” residential purposes, and that this thought has dominated
202 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
the classification of the areas immediately surrounding these recreation
parks. To a certain degree, business and industrial interests have crept in
to the very edges of these parks. This assumption that business and indus-
trial values are in these districts higher than residential, has led to the
classification of many of these areas adjacent to the parks as either business
or industrial. This assumption may well be questioned and it is our belief
that if the areas around these parks were intensively developed to the
maximum along residential and social lines, that values would be produced
which would greatly exceed the values which would come through the use
of such property for business or industrial purposes. The park is.a material
asset from the social standpoint which affects the value of property used
for that purpose. The parks do not materially add to the value of property
around parks when the same is used merely for business or industrial
purposes.
Value of parks harmed by business and industry
Increasing the number of factories and industrial buildings within these
neighborhoods decreases the value of these parks through augmenting
vehicular traffic m the parks and rendering the parks of very little value.
The introduction of these buildings decreases the number of families that
can live within a useful radius of the playground. The present state of the
tentative plan which classifies the majority of these areas adjacent to the
parks and playgrounds as “industrial” directs the development of these
areas along unnatural lines and tends to retard, if not prohibit, the full
development of these areas for appropriate use and therefore defeats the
end sought, namely, of providing for the development of property to a
maximum of value.
Parks as social centers
We recognize the limitations under which the Commission is working,
that they must not decrease or destroy values. The emphasis seems to have
been placed upon an assumed business or industrial value which might
eventually accrue in these various districts. It seems to us that the
tendency is in quite the opposite direction. Parks have been created for a
specific purpose and therefore the emphasis in the plan as a whole should be
placed upon conserving this value by conserving that element in the plan
for which the parks were created. The actual conditions regarding business
and industrial buildings surrounding these playgrounds in most cases is
such as to suggest to the Committee that too great a value has been placed
upon them and that these areas do not show any appreciable tendency toward
a business or industrial development. There is, however, a distinct tendency
toward the development around these parks of improved tenements, together
with social, religious and educational buildings.
It is this tendency which the Commission should recognize upon the
plans and in so doing provide foundations for the development of community
centers.
STATEMENT BY FRANK B. WiLLIAMs, CHAIRMAN, CoMMITTEE oN City
PLANNING, City Crus, Marcu 28, 1916
Districting in Germany
In 1913, as official representative of the City of New York, it was my
privilege to make an investigation in Germany and Austria of the methods
and results of the zone or district system of building regulation in those
,
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 203
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
countries. In that capacity every facility was given me by city and state
officials freely and fully to obtain the official facts and the official point of
view. My official mission and unofficial introductions made it easy for me
to make the acquaintance of those in private life interested and affected
by these governmental regulations and the methods of enforcing them. My
knowledge of German, acquired as a boy in Germany, made it possible for
me to obtain all available information. | devoted several months to the
task. Under the circumstances, I consider it my duty, as well as my priv-
ilege, to give this Commission the results of that investigation.
Districting was first introduced into Germany in 1884, and began to
come into common use at about 1894. It is now the prevailing system ot
building regulation throughout Germany and Austria. From these countries
the system has spread to Scandinavian countries, to both French and German
Switzerland, and to some extent to England, Canada and several of the
United States. It is, however, in Germany that this system has prevailed
more extensively and for a greater length of time than anywhere else and
can best be investigated.
The systems of districting employed in the different cities of Germany
and Austria differ in many particulars. In general, however, the principles
underlying that districting are the same throughout Germany and Austria.
The official opinion throughout Germany and Austria is universally in
favor of districting. This is also the popular opinion. In no city in which
it has ever been adopted has there been any attempt to abolish it. Every-
where it is regarded as a proved success.
There were in the cities of Germany and Austria in 1913 many indi-
vidual groups and organizations of individuals who were keenly alive to
their social and financial interests and the effect of the acts of city officials
on these interests ; and these individuals and organizations were at that time
expressing their opinions on these matters with freedom and vigor. It
was therefore perfectly possible to become acquainted with all shades and
varieties of opinion and all facts relating to this subject. I devoted several
months to the task of doing so.
There are many unofficial criticisms of districting methods made in
Germany and Austria. These crtiticisms are directed either to its admin-
istration, which in some particulars seems to be arbitrary and unjust, or to
the location and boundaries of particular districts, or- to particular height
and area limitations as applied to particular localities. On only one or
two occasions did | hear any criticism of the system itself, or of the prin-
ciples underlying it. These adverse criticisms were those of theoretical
students of the subject, and had no general support.
Effect of districting
In my judgment, the Heights of Buildings Commission and the Com-
mission 9n Burlding Districts and Restrictions are correct in their statements
made in their reports of the probable advantages to the City of New York
which will ‘result from the adoption of the districting system and are borne
out in them by its results in Germany and Austria. It does, in my opinion,
lessen congestion in overcrowded Germany; it does make city land more
useful and valuable ; it does tend to prevent the useless and costly changes in
the character of localities; it does stabilize values; it does make living
conditions more comfortable and convenient and business more economical
and efficient.
Conditions in Germany and Austria are no doubt different from con-
204 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
ditions in New York; but, after all, there is a general similarity in cities in
civilized western countries the world over; and the results of districting in
Germany and Austria cannot safely be ignored by us in our effort to decide
upon the wisdom of ourselves adopting it, but, on the contrary, these results
in these countries where it has had such a thorough trial should be given
our careful consideration.
Zone plan based on health and safety
One of the arguments for districting in German cities was the decrease
in fire hazard by segregating factories, but more emphasis was laid on
greater efficiency and decrease in risks to health. As buildings are much
more substantial in Germany than here, the argument for districting on
account of diminished risk of fire would apply with much greater force in
New York than in Germany. '
The districting ordinances in Germany have been passed upon by the
courts. In 1894 the question was brought up whether the building police
had the right to issue the zoning or districting ordinance for a part of
Greater Berlin passed in 1892, and the decision of the court was that the
building police had the right to issue that regulation, because it tended to
increase the public security and health. It has also been determined that
the zoning regulations as they affect the city as a whole must be considered
in the decision of the court; that it is not fair to pick out, for instance, the
district where the regulations are most severe and pass upon that by itself,
the entire plan must be regarded.
STATEMENT By FRANK B. WILLIAMS, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON City
PLANNING, City Cius, Aprit 11, 1916
Purpose of districting
The City Club has already expressed its hearty approval of the main
purposes and principles underlying the work of your Commission in its
districting of this city as expressed in your tentative report, and of the
application of those principles in the various boroughs as exhibited in your
tentative resolutions and the plans carrying them out. In a pioneer
endeavor of this magnitude and difficulty it would be most remarkable if
there were not mistakes which, if uncorrected, would most seriously mar
the finished work. It is because you fully realize this fact that in your
many public hearings and private conferences with regard to this huge task
you are devoting so much time and such patient attention to criticisms and
suggestions. It seems to be the universal feeling that never has there been
a commission more hard-working, more patient, more open-minded, or
more fair.
It is your hope and belief—indeed the object for which you are work-
ing—that the district regulations which you are drawing up and applying
shall produce in each of the individual districts of the city a type of devel-
opment which, when once it has occurred, will of itself render it difficult,
if not impossible, to erect types of buildings in these districts alien to that
typical development; and therefore make it equally difficult or impossible
to change the regulations underlying that development. For this reason
any but minor mistakes in these regulations at this time are likely to be
irreparable.
Criticism of tentative plan
We believe that there ave mistakes in your tentative resolutions and
plans ; but that, fortunately, these mistakes may be remedied, not by radical
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 205
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
changes, but partly by readjustments, partly by logical extensions of your
work along the lines already laid down by you. ‘The various detailed
criticisms of what you have, in general, so well done are, as we shall show,
related parts of a general criticism. That criticism, although applying in
different degrees to the districting in all parts of our city, relates specially
to its outlying portions, where districting, seemingly easier, is really quite
as difficult as in a section already developed, and much more effective and
important. Our suggestions, therefore, relate not so much to Manhattan
as to the other boroughs.
We wish to express our admiration of your tentative resolutions and
plans for districting this city according to use. Little as we have to suggest
im this part of your undertaking, we do feel that our criticisms may enable
you to carry out this branch of your work more in ACeORE with the general
principles you have stated in your report.
Exclusion of industry from business districts
To provide for industry in so far as it is mecessary as an incident to
business, you suggest that the employment for industrial purposes of (1)
twenty- five per cent., or (2) in any event two floors of any building in a
business district, be permitted. Unquestionably industry as such with its
trucking, its street and sidewalk congestion, its smoke and inevitable noises,
is destructive of the essential characteristics and advantages of business
districts. We agree with you, however, that, as an incident to business,
and to the extent to which it is incidental, industry must be admitted into
these districts. We feel that the percentage of permissible industry which
you have fixed as incidental is too large and would permit great congestion
in business districts. Be that, however, as it may, we think that to allow
two floors of industry, no matter how low the building, is a grave mistake.
In the central portions of the city where buildings are high, this provision
would doubtless have little effect on the type of buildings erected. In the
outlying sections, however, factories not perhaps exceeding two stories are
commercially possible, and there is no reason to suppose that they would
be temporary. [Even if they were temporary, they would hinder or lower
the character of permanent improvements; if they were permanent, they
would create a development totally different from that which your Com-
mission in your wisdom has decided is most advantageous in the district;
or else produce that confusion and disorder which it is one of the main
purposes of districting by use to prevent. In a word, instead of allowing
incidental industry in your business districts, you have allowed industry
there pure and simple to the exclusion of business. Nor is this the most
serious phase of the matter. Since the business districts are also districts
which will be used for residence by many of our citizens of limited means,
you have brought intensive industry with all its perils to health and life to
the doors of the class most needing protection, because least able to protect
itself.
In allowing in all cases two floors of buildings in business districts to
be used for industry, your Commission may have been influenced by the
calculation that as a rough average, the use of two floors for this purpose
in a low building of a given area ‘would produce the same amount of street
traffic and congestion as the use of twenty-five per cent in this way in a
high building. ‘In so far as the “two-floor ” provision would produce the
factory pure and simple, instead of permitting merely industry incidental
to business, it may be doubted whether this is altogether correct. In any
206 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
event traffic is not the chief, much less the only consideration, in districting.
If the amount of land that could be or has been tentatively devoted to
industry were insufficient for such use, there would be more reason for this
provision in spite of the confusion it introduces in business districts. It is,
however, the general opinion that your Commission has been unable to
confine industry within areas sufficiently limited to avoid those sudden
changes which in the past have done us such injury. We therefore ask you
to reconsider this provision.
Shops on ground floor of residential buildings
In a former communication to your Commission we have already adyo-
cated the creation of a fourth use class—that of shops on the ground floor,
with residences above. The employment of this use class, although it does
not remove all the objections to the “two-floor” provision, of which we
have just been treating, would remove many people from its evil effects.
We have also heretofore urged upon you the advisability of placing streets
near small parks in the residential use class. With this new classification
you will, in many cases where it would be difficult to apply the strictly resi-
dential classification, be able to accomplish much the same results. The
plans which we have filed with you, showing in detail the present use of
buildings near certain typical parks, and the printed information of like
nature with regard to many other parks in the several boroughs which we
have been glad to furnish you, not only tend strongly to prove the possibility
and wisdom of this method of saving and increasing the usefulness of our
small parks, but also the expediency of creating and employing this fourth
use class in many other parts of the city.
Criticism of tentative height and area provisions
Let us now turn to your tentative height and area limitations. Here
again we are in general in hearty accord with you. We feel, however, that
here also the failure to remedy certain defects—as may be done without
departure from the principles already laid down by yourselves and your
predecessors, the Heights of Buildings Commission—would entail grave
consequences to the city for all time to come.
Stated briefly, our criticism is that, with the possible exception of Man-
hattan, your districting in its allowance of height and area is so liberal as
to fail to accomplish the results which your report, your entire attitude
and the frame work of your plans themselves show that you wish to obtain.
Does not your treatment of Brooklyn clearly illustrate the truth of this
statement? For instance, over large areas of Brooklyn you have allowed
buildings to be constructed to a height equal to one and one-half times the
width of the streets on which they are to be erected. On a typical 60-foot
street this is the equivalent of eight or nine stories. But, with the probable
exception of the Heights, Park ‘Slope, and perhaps Eastern Parkway, and
of course the Borough Hall! district, the waterfront and a few other indus-
trial districts, the present development in Brooklyn—always excepting ter-
ribly congested Williamsburg, with its six stories—is three or four-story
tenements, or one and two-family houses.
It may be true—indeed we are inclined to think it is—that height other-
wise excessive may be allowed if in compensation area is sufficiently limited.
This, which it would seem that your Commission intended to do, you have
not in fact accomplished. For instance, but for Section 19 of your resolu-
tions, which brings in the existing tenement house area limitation of seventy
per cent, a five or six-story building in a C district on a 50 by 100 foot lot
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 207
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
might occupy over seventy per cent of the lot, and an eight-story 80-foot
building only the fraction of a per cent less than seventy. It is only,
therefore, in the case of the fireproof building above eight stories, that
your C provisions limit the total area of residential buildings, and in the
case of these buildings, the limitation is slight. It must also be remem-
bered that it is not so much the well-to-do tenant of the better class of
building with his many comparatively large rooms that needs protection as
the poorer man in his five, or perhaps six, story walk up.
Congestion in Brownsville
Again, in your tentative report you say that the D district “is intended
generally for one and two-family houses, either singly or in rows. Apart-
ments, however, are not excluded but are handicapped by the restrictions
as to percentage of lot that may be occupied and size of yards and courts.”
This handicap, as provided in your tentative resolutions, is altogether too
slight to accomplish the purpose intended. We have calculated that in a
D district a five-story tenement may be built covering sixty per cent of the
lot, accommodating with 600 square feet each twenty-five families. In
Brownsville and East New York, as you know, structures four stories in
height, covering seventy per cent. of the lot, housing with 583 square feet
of floor space twenty-three families, are being constructed in great numbers.
The differences between the proposed and the Brownsville type are dan-
gerously small. li, therefore, there is any efficacy in, or need of, districting
and the creation of types of buildings in different districts, and if your
Commission desires to accomplish what your tentative report states as your
purpose, you will be obliged greatly to change the D provisions.
What we have just stated with regard to C and D districts, and pre-
viously with relation to height limitations, was not intended to apply solely
in those connections, but to illustrate the amount and character of amend-
ment of your plans, which, after careful study of the wealth of material
which you have collected and charted, we so earnestly urge your Commission
to make.
Change of the sort we urge involves, however, as land becomes cheaper,
and its present use less and less intense, not only the strengthening of your
height and area provisions, all along the line and for all the outlying bor-
oughs, but some additions to and extensions of them. This may be done
simply by creating districts of the same type as those already suggested,
but with severer height and area limitations. A better method would be
to establish a somewhat different type of district suited to and made pos-
sible by the different conditions.
More stringent restrictions desirable
The types of district which so far you have provided for are, on the
whole, much better suited to Manhattan than anywhere else in the city.
After the medical and engineering testimony which you received at your
hearing Thursday, March 30th, you no doubt feel the urgent need of tighten-
ing the restrictions with regard also to Manhattan, if only you are able to
see how it may be done. Careful study will surely reveal differences in
development and land values sufficient to enable you to rescue parts of uppet
Manhattan from the B-1™% proyisions to which you are about for all time
to condemn it. In any event, it seems evident that your present regulations
are suited to a typical congested tenement house development such as will
no doubt prevail very extensively in Manhattan. We believe that whatever
208 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
may be true of Manhattan, such regulations are not necessary in the other
boroughs. In Brooklyn, for instance, the single house is holding its own,
more land being developed with this type of building each year than with
tenements. That the Heights of Buildings Commission believed in provid-
ing for rather than preventing types of building other than that of the con-
gested tenement is shown by their suggesting in their report a district in
which height should be limited to 50 feet, and another in which it should be
restricted to 36 feet, at the street line. These were, of course, mere hints
of districts and not fully developed districting provisions; but they at least
indicate the point of view that we believe should, and in reality, does, prevail
in your Commission. There is much cheap land in this great city; there
are enormous areas in it which, fortunately, are still undeveloped. There,
at least, we can still not only permit but aid our people to do pleasant things,
and do them in their own way. There, it is still possible to give people
more freedom in the use of. their land than seems to have been feasible in
the parts subjected to minute codes for areas congested with endless tene-
ments, all much alike. It has been done elsewhere under similar conditions.
In Forest Hills, Boston, for instance, are to be found three-story buildings,
covering not more than twenty-five per cent. of the lot, furnishing light,
air, view, gardens, tennis courts and recreation space of many kinds to all
the tenants at a moderate cost. Might not the giving to a land owner of
the option in these outlying districts to go up higher than some low limit
like 36 feet, if he covered a less proportion of his lot, be one of the many
ways which study will reveal of accomplishing a variety of results somewhat
like these, if your Commission desires them? In a later memorandum we
may be able ourselves to suggest other methods of limiting height and area
in most parts of the city which will allow the builder greater freedom with-
out endangering the public welfare. Here, however, as elsewhere it is in
the skill, industry and wisdom of your Commission that we are glad to
trust.
True principle of districting
To what we have urged in the districting of this city as to height and
area, your tentative report contained but one answer, and that is the impli-
cation to be found in many parts of it that land the same time distance by
the new dual transit system from City Hall should receive the same district-
ing provisions. With any such principle we most emphatically disagree.
No such principle, so far as we are aware, has even been suggested before
in the history of districting. The true principle, we believe, was stated by
the Heights of Buildings Commission in the chapter of its report entitled
“ Conclusions and Recommendations,” as follows:
“ Profiting by past experience, we can do much to safeguard the
future. We can prevent the repetition all over the city of conditions
and evils now confined to comparatively limited areas. Regulations,
however, must be carefully devised so as not to interfere unduly with
existing property values.
“The Commission believes that any complete system of height
and court restriction necessitates the application of different regula-
tions to different parts of the city. The city should be divided into
districts, and the restrictions for each district worked out with
reference to the peculiar needs and requirements of that particular
district. * * * The blanket restrictions which we have recom-
mended for immediate adoption have, as a matter of fact, been de-
vised with reference to the needs of the downtown office and financial
RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 209
NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN
district—the area of maximum congestion. They have been worked
out with a view to securing as much light, air, relief from congestion
and safety from fire as is consistent with a proper regard for business
requirements and existing land values in this area of maximum
congestion. * * * We believe that the needs of each district
should be studied in the same way that we have studied the central
office and financial district and restrictions worked out that will best
serve the peculiar needs of each district.”
It is this principle of height and area restriction so stated by the Heights
of Buildings Commission as the result of their investigation and delibera-
tion—the principle of the greatest protection against growing and spread-
ing congestion that is consistent with due regard for existing conditions
and values, the principle that you have more nearly followed in Manhattan
than elsewhere, which we urge you to follow in Brooklyn and the other
outlying boroughs. Instead, you are permitting eight and nine stories
where three or four now prevail; and the crowded Brownsville tenement
where the one and two-family house is now being built, or development has
hardly begun; thus allowing at the very outer limits of our great city the
typical central Bérlin tenement.
Vacant land in city
It may be said that Manhattan congestion is necessary within Man-
hattan distances from City Hall in order to provide housing within the
five-cent transit limit by the new dual subway and elevated system for
access to City Hall and its environs. To this there are many answers.
There is a vast area still available in Brooklyn, Queens and The Bronx.
Surface cars and transfers will provide transportation to these areas as
need for them gradually arises. Better still, decentralization of industries
essential for so many reasons will develop subsidiary centers. Much of
Jersey is still near; or, if local patriotism forbids such a suggestion, Staten
Island, almost unoccupied and large enough to hold all New York City,
can be brought by subway within twelve minutes of City Hall. Even the
land speculator should know by this time that the greedy do not always
become rich. If the skyscraper does not pay, why should the use of an
excessive proportion of the lot continue to do so in these days when we are
beginning to demand light, air, sun and space for outdoor life?
Suggested amendments to tentative plan
These are the principles which with earnestness and full conviction we
urge you to follow. For the putting of these principles into effect, we make
the following recommendations :
1. The establishment of a fourth use class, to consist of shops, with-
out industry, on the ground floor, with residences above.
2. The application of the residential classification, or the fourth use
classification, to streets in the neighborhood of parks, especially the smaller
ones. ;
3. The study of the needs of the small park as a neighborhood center.
For instance, the large theatre should be excluded, but not the neighborhood
theatre; all the minor public buildings, too, should be allowed.
4. The further study of the problem of the garage, so unpleasant
and dangerous near residences, and so destructive of business values on the
block front on which it is situated; with a view to excluding the garage so
far as possible from these neighborhoods.
210 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
’
5. The abolition of the “two floor” provision with regard to inci-
dental industry in business districts; and the change of the twenty-five per-
centage to a lesser proportion.
6. In outlying A districts surrounded by C or D districts (insofar as
such conditions are actually recommended by you) the provision that resi-
dences instead of being subject to B provisions should be governed by C or
D regulations; such fact being appropriately indicated by a double letter
designation of the district, such as AC or AD.
7. A restudy of upper Manhattan with a view to the establishment
there of C or D area districts, and * one time” height districts.
8. The elimination of C districts in Brooklyn, Queens, Richmond, and
perhaps The Bronx. The substitution of D districts for most of the B and
much of the C districts. The establishment and employment in the remain-
ing parts of these boroughs of districts more restricted than D, or of other
types of district, with options and generally greater freedom to the land
owner in the use of his land.
9. A change in the height regulation in all of the boroughs except
Manhattan, so that most of the territory in “ one and one-half times ” dis-
tricts shall be limited to a less height, either the “ one-times ” or a stricter
limitation. The stricter limitation of parts of the “ one-times”’ districts.
The establishment for application to outlying territory of other types of
district, with options and generally greater freedom to the land owner in the
use of his land.
APPENDIX V—SOME RESULTS OF HAPHAZARD DEVELOP-
MENT AS RECORDED BY THE CAMERA
The Commission secured for its record several hundred photographs
showing the results of unregulated, haphazard city building. A consider-
able number of these photographs are reproduced in the following pages.
The subjects were selected and the photographs taken by Benjamin Lorber
of the staff of the Committee on the City Plan. They have been edited for
this report by Francis P. Schiavone, also of the staff of the Committee.
The photographs are classified according to their chief features into
more than a score of divisions. Certain pictures show typical conditions
in residential streets, in business streets and in industrial districts; here
each is unmistakably of one class, an appropriate development free from
the unfortunate admixture that characterizes most of the other streets de-
picted.
A series of pictures show the invasion of private house streets by the
apartment house. Other pictures show the first or incipient stage of that
transformation which in its unregulated ravages has caused such great
loss to the city’s real estate value, the encroachment of business upon purely
residential blocks. Business, however, is not all, for a series of pictures
show garages in this stage, another factories, another junk shops. When
a business or industry gets a footing, its influence is shown by the conver-
sion of nearby residential buildings into a like use. This is usually done
not in line with a sane profitable development but as a desperate move by
the property owner to avoid total loss. Practical structural difficulties and
the lack of funds usually lead to unsightly and inefficient hybrids.
After such a beginning it is to be expected that one class of use will
often oust another entirely, that business will supplant residence and that
warehousing and industry will supplant business. This change is not ac-
complished easily or quickly because buildings often have a long term of
usefulness which, while constantly decreasing, may still be sufficient to dis-
courage their demolition. Consequently many streets show factories and
tenements side by side, noisy, ill-odorous, overtowering industrial piants
that deprive the homes of the poor of the quiet, fresh air, light and safety
they so much require. The photographs show factories in private districts
as well as among tenements and storage warehouses, lumber and building
material yards among both. Most of these photographs show that more
regrettable condition—the invasion of residence districts—but a few pictures
“tell an eloquent story, in crowding “loft-to-let” signs, of the loss that
follows when retail and other business has abandoned a district and industry
has not yet established itself.
That garages constitute a great problem is evidenced by the number
and character of the photographs showing these buildings in private house
districts, among apartment buildings and in the most congested tenement
streets. A series show also that stables and horseshoeing shops, while not
multiplying so rapidly as garages, are even a greater menace to the health
of the communities in which they are established.
The congestion of street and sidewalk was a condition that could not
escape even the most casual camera but often the very intensity of conges-
tion made a representative photograph impossible. The series show, how-
ever, street and sidewalk crowding and obstruction due to business use
where goods are stored on the walks -and the loading and unloading of
trucks hampers vehicles and pedestrians. Garages, stables and horseshoe-
212 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
ing establishments are shown to present a grave danger not only in the
storage of automobiles in the streets themselves, but especially in their
unrestricted use of the sidewalks as grade crossings. _ Push carts are shown
in hundreds upon streets on the lower east side of Manhattan and in The
Bronx. Another cause of sidewalk and even street congestion is shown
to be the multiplication of tall buildings, both manufacturing and office, in
which by the multiplication of floor space it is possible to house many more
than can crowd into the street at any one time.
The environment of schools, churches and hospitals is shown to have
suffered by the uncontrolled liberty of location that has been enjoyed by
business and industry and as a great indictment against this very freedom
are pictured the hundreds and thousands of children whose only playground
is the street.
Most of the photographs relate principally to the Use restrictions, but
one interesting series shows the old practice of opening windows upon the
lot lines. s
A study of the pictures will reveal the fact that although they have of
necessity been placed in certain classes, they each contain a comprehensive
indictment of the present lack of common sense regulation and a demand
for such a remedy as the use, height and area districting proposes to offer.
East 12th Street, Between Ave-
nues C and D—Gas tanks, stable
and purifying house in tenement
district.
West 66th Street and Amster-
dam Avenue—Gas tanks in
tenement house district.
East 14th Street, Between Avenues B and C—Gas
tanks next and opposite to tenements. Note tene-
ment children playing near them.
Fic. 62—THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE HOME.
The Commission believes that the environment of the home should be guarded
and protected in every possible way.
‘pavzey oY pasvarour JO uosvat Aq AjopRS oyqQnd OF sdvUaW B SI JUdUIUIA} B OF JxoU PABA JdquIn], Y
HINOH HHL HO LNHNNOUIANY AHL—E£9 YH
‘Juouiaua} wou pad syeiioyeul Surpyingq—) esnusay ¢oz
oy wand a osu AG
NOLS inoue TIAYND ONVS
‘sosnoy oayeAtid suowue piva
JOAQUIN ]T—S}92-4S YIGZT PUB YISZT VooMjod ‘onusAYy ANYIIV
=. all
*s}UOUL
-9Ud} Avou pared sjeliayBVU SUIp[INgG—jo0S Yip, sey
‘JUAWIAU] 0} }xXoU
piv Jaquiny—uozsurxeyT JO som ‘JooS WIZIT Sey
East 22nd Street—Milk
station near tenements.
Note wagon entering
station.
Waverly Avenue, Brooklyn—Milk wagons
waiting outside of bottling establishment.
Madison Street—Bottling establishment near tenements.
Fic. 64—NOISE AND THE HOME.
The noise and confusion always more or less in evidence in congested sections
are bad even under the best conditions, but when aggravated by heavy trucking in
the streets and by the machinery of nearby factories they become a serious menace.
When these noises continue throughout the night, as in the case of public garages,
ice plants and milk bottling and distributing stations, the evil is enormously increased.
Clermont Avenue, Brooklyn—Milk station
details.
Clermont Avenue,
Brooklyn — Front of
milk station.
Adelphi Street, Brooklyn—Rear of the milk station shown
above. Loading and unloading of trucks is done here.
The assessed value of land per front foot is $100 in
this block, while in the block immediately north the
assessed value is $175 per front foot.
Fic. 65—NOISE AND THE HOME.
These three photographs of the same milk station show it to be a large industrial
plant. This fact added to its stable character constitutes a strong argument for its
exclusion from a business or residence district.
\eabs\ Nace § SrA
525 East 11th Street—Stable near
tenements.
Ludlow Street, between Houston and Thompson Street, south from Bleecker
Stanton Streets—Stables near tene- Street—Stable near tenements.
ments.
Fic. 66—STABLES IN CONGESTED TENEMENT STREETS.
The congested tenement districts, noted for the number of children who must
play in the street, are the most inappropriate location for stables.
413 East 10th Street—Stables near tene-
ments. Note condition of sidewalk.
East 12th Street, between Avenue A
and First Avenue—Stable next to
tenements and opposite children’s
playground.
312 East 102nd Street—Stable near
tenements.
7—STABLES IN CONGESTED TENEMENT STREETS.
SHNOH ULVAINd DNOWV SHDVAVD—89 OA
“Aqivou
‘soumoy azyeAtid Jo 4sprur ‘SUIZIUBIINA ‘AIJSUPUL PeIpPULY dy} BION ‘saumoy oyearid
a4} UL ISvIVV—J991}G UPUIAYS TsuIOD ‘APMYIVG uvxdQ_Q, 0} }XoU 95vIvH—anUDAY Ysnqiepy Jesu ‘peoy uopuoseyy
‘JOLSIp dUIpIsol ouy ev uO dn yovq saseieyj—proy weysurong pure onudaa yoinu
LSB ! 8 + Pier: I
1191 Bedford Avenue—
Garage near private
homes.
eal
East 23rd Street, be-
tween Avenue D and
Clarendon Road—
Garage next to pri-
vate houses.
Fic.
69—GARAGES AMONG
Halsey Street, east
of Bedford Ave-
nue. Brooklyn — The
homes on the right
conceal a_ one-story
garage occupying §&
city lots in the in-
terior of the block.
PRIVATE HOMES.
65 West 118th Street—Garage in a East 2nd Street, between First and Sec-
tenement house street. ond Avenues—Five-story garage near
tenements and a church, and oppo-
site the LaSalle Academy.
West 90th Street, near Amsterdam
Avenue—Garage, storage ware-
house and stable in a block of tene-
ments.
Fic. 70—GARAGES IN CONGESTED TENEMENT STREETS.
The injustice of locating a garage in a tenement district where it is a nuisance
and a danger is he ghtened by the fact that the users of the garage are very seldom
residents of the tenements.
a e41@)
West 124th Street, opposite Mt. Morris
Park—Garage between high-class
C1 a) vam
Jug) 400)
ee)
apartment houses and private houses.
Note the public library nearby and
the pigeon coop atop the garage.
Park Avenue and 59th to 60th
Streets—Five-story garage next to
a million dollar apartment house
12 stories high.
Cathedral Parkway, near Seventh Avenue—Garage oppo-
site Central Park and in a high-class apartment house
district.
Fic. 7I—GARAGES IN APARTMENT HOUSE STREETS.
The City’s powerlessness against the garage and stable nuisance is nowhere better
illustrated than in the high-class apartment districts, where although values are
greatest, rents highest, and residents best able to protect themselves, no effective
defense has been found,
East Houston Street, corner
of Columbia Street—Motor
and horse drawn moving
vans lined up in the street.
East Houston Street, near Columbia Street—The
hitching up is not done inside the stable but on the
street.
East 9th Street, between Second and Third Avenues—
Autos lined up along the curb.
Fic. 72—ROADWAY OBSTRUCTION INCIDENT TO STABLE AND GARAGE
USE.
Streets in the neighborhood of stables and garages are seldom free from obstruc-
tion and congestion. In many cases the street becomes a hitching and storage yard
and a place for washing vehicles. Such conditions are intolerable in business and
residence districts.
Eldridge Street, near De-
lancey Street—Scrap iron
piled nearly as high as
the third story of an
adjacent tenement.
112th Street, west of Lexing-
ton Avenue—Junk shop in
an extension of residence.
svomse
at a
East 112th Street and Park Avenue—Wagon storage,
poultry market, junk shop and _ horseshoer.
Fic. 75—JUNK SHOPS IN CONGESTED TENEMENT STREETS.
No restrictions are placed upon the location of junk shops or junk yards, and
every vacant lot is a potential nuisance. Junk is one form of a city’s refuse and
should not be stored near residences while awaiting ultimate disposal.
‘Joos dy} UL SyonI} uO
APEMOPIS 9} OF UO MOYAIAO Jnq ‘sSurpyinq 10 syzoy dy} UIYYUA PouyuUod oq JouuRs ATSurusas sdoys yun(
osnjot ATIY} 9108 pue
SLOTILSIC LNAWANAL GALSADNOD NI SdOHS MNNA[—92 “914
“quesvetd ing SuryjAuE St e494}
peyoayjoo yunf syy JO 3eyy YIM Sut
|-XTUL Saanjonajs peuinqg 941 wou jjoms
;94} pue ‘petimoso Apjusced vay B Yyoryas
Ut SotjuBYsS JO Mod & UI st doys oy
490235 a4) JO BPIS 7euU] Uo Ssed 0} ppEazeE
|aae pooysoqyuSieu 944 jo uauIOm oY,
“5 “suryoid
“Suruuna a : : i talus
Uses Wosq BAY SBI BTART 9SBY] JO jNO sel puke yunf—sonusay pry
| Due Ul pus ‘H[eMepIs a4} JO eBpa ay}, uo PUR pUuodIg U9IMJoq ‘Joa14G YQ Iseq
usty paid vie seded jo sajeq saw, yy!
‘YOOTG B Z{CY ALOT 4994}S puve ypemapis ayy |
S10}}1, Coys yunl B sleyMm “Saay AjluUrAy,
|pue «aayseuoseAA JO Jausoo sanyynos
(8 ye souesinu 943 Sutpiedas 02 paryead |
| -de Qoaq Sey yIpBeay sO puvog au |
| pete
i
| @SUDSIN A], D Si anuszay
ABISAYIISA LA UO ald set be
‘QdeIOS SCI
0} pouopueqe Jdzr1enb
-9uo =4Nq_ = [eljuaprsar
ApatyQ— e215 PUTTY
(Surddy) 1sdedsman )
‘sjusuaud} 0} Jxou doys
YUN(—}99.13G AdjsoPY Iwou Jaan ayshiyy
477 Central Park West—
Tailor in high-class apart-
ment house.
No. 989 Bedford Ave-
nue, Brooklyn.
Central Park West and 98th Street—Loft building and
carpet cleaning works.
Fic. 77—STORES INVADING RESIDENCE STREETS.
Even the most valuable apartment sections where rentals are dependent upon the
maintenance of high-class residential conditions have been unable to prevent the
damaging inroads of business and industry.
Lee Avenue and Keap Street—
Conversion for business.
Lee Avenue, corner of
Keap Street—Stores
in residence district.
West 8th Street—Basement of private West 8th Street, between Fifth and
house converted into public laundry. Sixth Avenues—Conversion into stores.
Fic. 80—STORES INVADING RESIDENCE STREETS.
The English-basement or high-stoop type of residence is so easily converted into
stores that it is almost an invitation for business to invade residence streets.
Hillside Avenue, Jamaica
—Antique furniture
shop in private house
26 Herriman Avenue, Ja-
maica—Undertaking es-
tablishment in a private
house.
—) ES RAT
Pa
HN
meaaey
pneener
i}
Regent Place, between Flatbush Avenue and East 21st
Street, Flatbush—Photo studio in a private house
(This condition is aggravated by the building of a
one-story studio extension in the rear.)
Fic. 8I—STORES INVADING RESIDENCE STREETS.
Bathgate Avenue, Bronx—Private house
having a one-story store extension.
181st Street, corner of
Park Avenue, Bronx
—One-story extension
in residential block.
Bathgate Avenue, Bronx
—Private houses con-
verted into extremely
cheap stores.
Fic. 82—PARTIAL CONVERSION OF DWELLING TO BUSINESS USE.
Where business has once secured a foothold in a residence district, there is little
to prevent that wasteful condition in which buildings are half converted—undesirable
as homes and unprofitable as stores.
East 10th Street, west of Third Avenue—Converted pri-
vate houses
PRRRRRRRE EOE DOOCY
2
188 Suffolk Street—Upholsterer in hase- East 22nd Street, west of Fourth Avenue—
ment of private house. Private house district invaded by business
and industry.
Fic. 83—RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS INVADED BEYOND RECOVERY.
When one of a row of residences has been converted for business its neighbors
are usually forced to follow suit.
WNW &@ 0} paonpa.
SE UO IN.ASqO A[LMIpPIs OF JWIPIOUL ]IAD OY} ISVI oY} SL SIY} LYM PU SUOI}IIS dPRSaTOYM ATOAISHJOXO ay} UL pajyeSoisas AyIueUIpsO 91¥
SOSSOUISNG YING “UOHIasS ddUapIsot B UT pazutsod oq Jou pyhoys puv sueraysapod 0} 19Suep pue sdUaTUaAUODUL JwaIs JO ddINOS B SI SII,
‘a8e10}s Av1OdwW9} 10} pur Surpeoyun puv Surpeoy ur xyeMapis oy} ozv1adoadde 0} Aressooau yt puy ‘odd} SursnoyoieMm pure opesojoyM oy} Jo
Ayjeroodsa ‘ssoursnq Jo spun, Auvwr yey} JUNODIe OJUT soyR} SJOLAYSIP ddUpIsa.1 WOT ssEjD v se SsouIsnq Sutpnyoxe ur uejd ouoz oy,
‘ASN SSHNISNA OL LNYCIONI SNOILOONLSAO MIVMAGIS—+r8 OM
“DINFUANY [IVJOY—JoG pag awou “vy onuaay ‘roded jrejay—AvMprosg ysvqy 6Z]
TOANPIUANG = [PCJ
—SONUDAY YIXIG PUL YY UsaMjoq oasis pagz is9A\ ‘AIOIOAS [leJoY—anudaAy Uosipry Avou YooryS pach yseq
East Broadw ay—Express of-
fice.
East Broadway, near Market
Street—Wholesale drygoods.
East Broadway, near Essex Street— Attorney Street, between Houston and
Wholesale herring store. Stanton Streets— Wholesale fruit
dealers.
Fic. 85—SIDEWALK OBSTRUCTIONS INCIDENT TO BUSINESS USE.
‘ASN SSHNISNA OL LNACIONI SNOILONUYLSAO MIVMACIS—938 MH
‘sJUaWI9Ua} Ivau safqvjaSoa pur
‘souvIg—oanuesaVy YIXIS Ivou 4a0I1S IST WMAP opesapoy AA —anuday Jsatyy Ivsu 49917 Puzo, sey
‘
‘JoIt}G Puzo, Jesu onUdAY 4SAly
‘ASN SSHNISNA OL LNAGIONI SNOILONULSAO MIVMACGIS—Z8 ‘14
"SSRIS JNO oRSajOyUA\—Ioa11S psgz SIM “AvaMJapUN a[esajoyA\—AeMproirg qsey (ZI
‘NUDAY YNOY pue yoo4S YIZT $J2211S) PUd PUe 4sii¢ Wsemjeq: snusAy YA
~90 East Broadway—
Wholesale drygoods.
Attorney Street, between Stanton and
Houston Streets—Wholesale fruit dealers.
East 2nd Street, between
Avenues C and D—
Wholesale grocer.
Fic. 88—SIDEWALK OBSTRUCTIONS INCIDENT TO BUSINESS USE.
“SorypIoey Surpeoy 9Atsuajxa o1mba1 sa10js Juswjiedoq
‘ASN SSHNISNA OL LNAGIONI SNOILONUYLSAO MIVMACIS—68 ‘O17
0) ADV BETES “‘SIOYJOIG Jaquitry
‘Soyo joquiry
East 10th Street—Storage warehouse Carlton Avenue—Storage warehouse
t=) * 6 .
next to private houses.
South Portland Avenue—Storage warehouse and West 127th Street, looking east from
stables near private houses. Lenox Avenue—Stables and storage
warehouses in residential section.
Fic. 90—STORAGE WAREHOUSE IN RESIDENCE STREET.
The storage warehouse rears its bulk high above surrounding buildings and 1s
permitted to be built on the extreme lines of the lot, exempt from the laws that
require residential buildings to provide yards and courts. In addition to cutting off
their neighbor’s light, many storage warehouses have the nuisance features of a large
stable, and all are objectionable on a residence street on account of trucking and the
danger and noise incident thereto.
63rd Street, between
Fourth and Fifth Ave-
nues, Brooklyn.
Washington Square North.
i Te fags
a 4 ff — hsseee Chae
East 19th Street, near Third Avenue. 62nd Street, between Fourth and Fifth Ave-
nues, Brooklyn.
Fig. 9I—TYPES OF RESIDENCE STREETS.
Any of these streets may be ruined by a sporadic store or industry unless pro-
tected by a zone plan.
Lafayette Street, near Houston
Street.
Howard Street, near Broadway.
Mercer Street, near Grand
Street.
Fic. 92—LOFTS TO LET.
The “uptown” movement of factories has had tragic economic consequences not
only for the Fifth Avenue section but for the old loft district between Canal Street
and Washington Square.
‘QsN [LIJSNPUL 0} JWEploul asiou pue siaSuepP jaaI}s BY} WOIF 9dIJ 9q P[MOYS JOoYDs ay} JO JUaMUONAUD oY J
"IOOHOS AHL HO LNHNNOUIANY AHL—%6 9
[Ip ey Ur uerpyrys OoyIsS 0} pazwupe [WUN Joos UO Suriem udapyryo
Jooyss ayqug—joajG oye] wou “JaatyG = uO A] UdJIVSIOPULY[—Ja911G YICOT Jeus10d ‘anusaAy Uo}sUIXIT
B 490148 ‘Inoy Youn], sy} Sutinp jaaajs ayy uo Arjd
991}S JOANO pue Aruaypy skog—}oaS YISg JsaA\ ‘BdIOWIUIOD FO JOOYIS Ys]
East 104th Street, near Second
Avenue—Wholesale hardware
and woodenware house near
public school.
West 59th Street, near
Amsterdam Avenue—
Gas tanks next to
DeWitt Clinton High
School.
West 101st Street, between Columbus and
Amsterdam Avenues—Garage and
auto
repair shop next to public school.
West 58th Street, between Amsterdam and Eleventh
Avenues—Gas tanks next to and factories opposite
DeWitt Clinton High School.
Fic. 94—THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE SCHOOL.
Sheriff Street, near Broome Street— Broome Street, near Clarke Street—
Machine shop, stable and storage next 5-story stable, 5-story loft building
to public school. and 6-story machine shop near public
school. Note children passing the
stable.
Mangin Street, corner Stanton Street No. 33 East Broadway—Loft buildings
—Saw mill and loft building next next to public library.
to public school.
Fic. 95—THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE SCHOOL.
Washington Avenue, near Tremont Ave-
nue—Garage between a private house
and a church.
1001 Bedford Avenue—Garage between a syna-
gogue and a private house.
Se i i a tees
80th Street, corner West End Ave-
nue—Garage next to church parish
house.
East 77th Street, between Lexington
and Park Avenues—Garages and
stables opposite German Hospital.
Fic. 969—ENVIRONMENT OF CHURCH AND HOSPITAL.
Churches and hospitals have always been recognized as requiring a certain amount
of isolation from the noise,and bustle of business. There should be sections where
they could locate free from the public garage or other undesirable neighbors.
North 11th Street, Wil-
liamsburg—Barrels of
paint stored on the
sidewalk for the en-
tire length of block.
East 5th Street, near
Lewis Street—Lum-
ber yard and plan-
ing mill. Note
lumber stored on
sidewalk and road-
way.
Java Street, Greenpoint—Lumber yard.
Fic.
97—PERILS OF THE SIDEWALK.
Whether the usurpation of the sidewalk has some justification in necessity or
not, the fact that many kinds of industry are guilty should cause their exclusion from
business and residence sections,
essential to civic welfare.
in both of which the freedom of the sidewalk is
» usurpation is unavoidable, the exclusion is imperative.
East 2nd Street, be-
tween Avenues C and
D—Monument works
in tenement district.
Children and teachers
attending the two pub-
lic schools nearby are
forced to take to the
roadway.
East 2nd Street, be-
tween Avenues C and
D.
412 East 85th Street—
Stone cutter between
private houses and tene-
ments. The City was
held liable to the extent
of $1,400 for an injury
caused to a child by the
fall of one of these
monuments.
Fic. 988—PERILS OF THE SIDEWALK.
Monument works hold a grim menace for the pedestrian and for children who
play near the headstones.
West 24th Street, between Tenth and Eleventh Ave-
nues—Horses being shod on the sidewalk.
339 East 107th Street, near First Avenue—Wet wash
laundry next to tenement.
427 East 13th Street—Wet wash laundry.
Fic. 99—PERILS OF THE SIDEWALK.
In some cases industrial buildings are not satisfied with the sidewalk as a loading
platform, but add an aerial danger to the pedestrian’s perilous course by extending
chutes or slides across his path so that trucks may be loaded from the second story
windows
*S}UDWIIUD} OU}
JOJ pOOS PUL SaT1OJIVJ ay} OF POOS st uoNeSaiS9G “joors oy} ul SurArid udsapyrys Aq PosoustusAUOSUT Jou st Suryons, Aavay 10F 490.198
ay} JO 9sN Alay], “UONONAIsqO xPeMapis puv sowing ‘osrou 0} UONR[ot UT SJUIL{dWIOD [eNUTWUOD pUdfap O} Payjaduod jou a1e Ady, ‘“UoTWaS
dUApIsal & UL poyafqns oq JYStur Ady} YIYM OF SOoUdIUDAUOSUL PUL S]UILIJSI1 9Y} WOAF ddIF 91e AD} PoyeBo1Sas a1v sars0joV} as9y\\
SLOTALSIG TVIMLSNGNI TVWOIdAL—OOl PA
‘SYAOM SULLUd},J—JULOdUdIIFNV “OD [IQ Pavpurys
“S3]1OM [VOTLUat)
“ALOJILJ XO™—JuIodusda.15 ‘anu
—juodusa1y, ‘fanuaaAy yuroduasig ¢77
“OAV ISPIV| JO AaUIOD Yoa4G purpyeOQ
East 14th Street, near the East River. (Courtesy of
Frank B. Williams.)
Brooklyn Waterfront, opposite Houston Street, Manhattan.
Gowanus Canal.
Fic. 10I—TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.
The above are typical of sections that are included in the proposed Zone plan
as unrestricted districts.
Orchard Street, corner
of Rivington Street.
Avenue C, looking
north from East 5th
Street.
East Sth Street, near
Avenue C.
Fig. 1022—PUSH CARTS AND STREET CONGESTION.
Stores on the ground floor have brought these push carts with a consequent con-
gestion of sidewalk and street. Tenants are deprived of their legitimate use of the
street and children are robbed of the only “playground” they might have. Drivers
of fire apparatus dread these streets.
ama ae]
TTA = = a\
B "3 S - Cy
2a See ee ee ee ee ee er ee
ATERUAIBRARIES Awe |
teamHeE t
Lie
———— cioh
Fourth Avenue and 25th
Pt elle
LA
EB) Jaded (odd [ical Taf lea,
— by
at te eed Le
Street.
®
©
is >}
mr.
1
ft
at Rt wm
annem ns wmm |
1am Tm mo
(ia)
om om
1 i
n
Avenue and 21st Street.
Fic.
126 West 73rd Street.
105—WINDOWS ON LOT LINE.
NN
NN
ni
MARY
ba
Adams Express Company Building—
When the American Express Com-
pany’s building is completed nearly all
the windows in this side wall will be
blocked up.
Adams Express Company Building—
Windows being blocked up by the
new American Express Company
building.
Fic. 1066—WINDOWS ON LOT LINE.
Vanderbilt Avenue, Brooklyn—Brass_fac-
tory in rear of private homes.
West 165th Street—Beer bottling.
Prospect Avenue, between 181st and 182nd
Streets—This factory is built up to its
rear lot line. If a tenement it would
have had to leave a yard space.
Fic. 107—FACTORY BUILDINGS CUTTING OFF LIGHT AND AIR FROM
TENEMENTS.
East 6th Street, between Second and Third
Avenues—Marble cutting, fur picking and
sorting in rear of tenements.
Suffolk Street, near Houston Street—Granite cutting
works occupy the whole of this tenement yard.
Fic. 108—REAR YARDS OF TENEMENTS USED FOR INDUSTRIES.
Tenement yards are a development of the garden space which was a valuable
adjunct of the old private residence. Its importance as a playground free from the
dangers of the street is emphasized by its very inadequacy for the hundreds who live
in the tenement. Its usurpation then by business or industry is doubly reprehensible
and the location of dangerous and noisy trades in these breathing spaces should be
prohibited.
APPENDIX VI—REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OF
THE BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT ON
THE BUILDING ZONE PLAN
July 18, 1916.
To the Board of Estimate and Apportionment:
On June 2, 1916, the Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions,
appointed pursuant to Sections 242a and 242b of the Charter, presented its
final report recommending the boundaries of districts and appropriate regu-
lations to be enforced therein for the purpose of regulating the height of
buildings, the area of courts, yards and other open spaces, and the use of
buildings and premises throughout the city.
The general support that has been given the proposed plan by every
interest effected is proof both that it serves an urgent need and that it has
been worked out with care, discrimination and moderation. The real estate,
lending and building interests are united in their support of the plan; as are
also the commercial and civic associations. Not a single organization of any
kind has opposed the general plan. Two or three individuals have registered
their unalterable opposition to the principle involved. li the plan had been
presented only a few years ago the protestants would doubtless have been
legion. A great change has come about in the way that people look at this
question. Zoning instead of being regarded as confiscatory, unconstitu-
tional, arbitrary and impractical, is now generally regarded as reasonable,
obvious and absolutely necessary for the preservation of the city and of the
property interests affected.
The Board of Estimate and Apportionment has control of the develop-
ment of the physical plan of the city: the street and block layout, park and
recreation system, sewerage system, transit and transportation system, and
port and terminal facilities. As the Commission has pointed out: “ No plan
for the development of public facilities can be complete and effective unless |
there goes with it a comprehensive plan for the control of building develop-
ment on private property.” The Board also has under its financial control
the activities of the various departments that have to do with sanitation,
housing conditions, fire prevention, street traffic and the public health and
safety generally. Your Committee is impressed with the necessity, for the
more efficient functioning of these various public interests and activities,
of adopting a comprehensive plan of city building such as has been pre-
sented by the Commission.
To consider the proposed plan in its relation to other plans for the
physical development of the city, a subcommittee was appointed, consisting
of Nelson P. Lewis, Chief Engineer of the Board, the consulting engineer
of each of the five boroughs, the landscape architect of the Park Department
and the consultant and secretary of the Committee on the City Plan of the
Board. A copy of this subcommittee’s report is appended. The report states
that :
“ All of the members of the committee are convinced of the great
need of restrictive regulations governing the height of buildings, the
ues to which they may be put and the proportion of the plots which
may be occupied by them. All of them have had ample opportunity
to observe the manner in which the different boroughs and the city
as a whole have lately been developing, and they keenly appreciate
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
the unfortunate results of the lack in the past of such regulations as
as are proposed and the need of them to insure better control of
future growth. They believe that the results of such control will be:
“To prevent undue congestion of population.
“To insure better sanitary conditions.
“To simplify the problem of traffic regulation.
“To lessen the danger and delay of movement in the city streets
which is due to mixed traffic.
“To simplify the transit problems of the city.
“To prevent the over-intensive development of property contigu-
ous to the new transit lines now being constructed.
“To render possible a more economical development of city streets
through a decrease in the width of streets and roadways where
the size and consequently the number of buildings are re-
stricted.
“To insure the permanency of character of the districts when
once established, and,
“Finally, to make the city a more orderly and convenient place
in which to live and do business.
“The committee realizes the magnitude and difficulty of the
task imposed upon the Commission and is impressed by the results
which have been accomplished by it within the time which has
elapsed since it was created, by the thoroughness of its investigation
of existing conditions and by its obvious efforts to avoid anything
which would seriously affect present values. It has not attempted
to correct the mistakes of the past, but to avoid the repetition of
similar mistakes in the future, so that its efforts have been wholly
constructive.”
A subcommittee was also appointed to consider the administration and
technical features of the proposed plan as affecting building development.
This subcommittee was composed of Rudolph P. Miller, Chairman of the
Board of Standards and Appeals, the building superintendents of the five
boroughs, the Tenement House Commissioner, the Fire Commissioner, John
P. O’Brien, Assistant Corporation Counsel, and the Consultant and Sec-
retary of the Committee on the City Plan. A copy of this report is appended.
The subcommittee states:
“Your subcommittee is convinced that a well considered plan
of building development is essential to the health, safety and pros-
perity of the city. Such a plan involves both the creation cf resi-
dential, business and industrial districts and the regulation of the
height of buildings and the area of courts and yards differently in
different parts of the city. The plan presented by the Districting
Commission seems admirably adapted to secure this result. We
endorse generally the following principles which are fundamental in
the Commission’s proposed plan:
“1. Provision for light and air is a prime essential in building
regulation.
“2. Building regulations in each section of the city should be
adapted to the requirements of that section.
“3. It is desirable as a general rule to treat all buildings in a
given block according to a uniform rule. There should be a sub-
stantially uniform contribution from each owner to the light and air
of the block. Block ventilation is essential to well ordered develop-
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 215
ment. Rear yards should be required wherever buildings come
back to back.
“4 A building is usually appropriately located when it is sur-
rounded by buildings of similar type and use. Order in building
development is essential to the health, safety and comfort of the
public, and far from depressing values or working hardship to
property owners generally, will actually conserve and enhance values.
“5. The residence sections should be protected against un-
necessary invasion by commercial and industrial uses.
“6. The present congested condition in lower Manhattan con-
stitutes a serious danger to life and property. Street congestion may
interfere seriously with the movement of fire apparatus. The occu-
pants of high office and loft buildings may be endangered by fire
and panic.
“These and other considerations advanced in the Commission’s
report prove the urgent need for the adoption of a districting plan.
The official duties of the members of this subcommittee bring to their
notice the irreparable injury that, almost daily, is being brought about
by the erection of inappropriate buildings or the establishment of
business uses in residence sections. The remedy proposed is timely
and appears to have been most carefully worked out.”
The Districting Commission is composed of men eminently qualified for
the important problem given them to solve. They have brought to the
accomplishment of their task experience, expert knowledge and a willing-
ness to give of their time and energy to a degree seldom equaled in an
unpaid commission of this kind. The Commission’s membership includes
the very highest expert knowledge in real estate matters and building con-
struction as well as in general civic interests, including public sanitation and
safety. The plan that the Commission has presented is comprehensive and
thorough-going, while at the same time it is moderate and practical. The
Commission has adhered strictly to the only purposes for which the police
power may be properly exercised, 7. e., the public health, safety, convenience,
comfort and general welfare.
On June 19th, 21st, 27th and 29th the Board held hearings on the
final report and plans of the Commission. At these hearings everyone
who appeared and desired to be heard was heard. The hearing was con-
tinued until July 25th, so that at that time an opportunity might be given
to any one objecting to any changes in the final report of the Commission
which might be recommended in the report of this Committee.
Your Committee has carefully considered the final report of the Com-
mission and every protest and criticism in regard thereto which has been
presented to the Board. The moderation exercised by the Commission in
its plans is evidenced by the fact that a large proportion of the criticisms
made by property owners directly interested were that more restrictive
regulations should be applied than those proposed. A list of the more im-
portant changes in district boundaries approved by your Committee is
attached to this report (see Exhibit 1). New maps showing the districts
approved by your Committee have been prepared and have been opened to
public inspection in the office of the Committee on the City Plan.
The Districting Resolution submitted with the final report of the Com-
mission has also been carefully considered. Here there were numerous
criticisms of details particularly with reference to its relation to the pro-
visions of the Tenement House Law. Your Committee submits a Dis-
216 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
tricting Resolution for consideration which, while it does not differ in
principle from that submitted by the Commission, contains numerous changes
in detail and in form of expression.
JOHN PURROY MITCHEL, Mayor.
FRANK L. DOWLING, President, Board of Aldermen.
WM. A. PRENDERGAST, Comptroller.
RALPH FOLKS, Acting President, Borough of Manhattan.
LEWIS H. POUNDS, President, Borough of Brooklyn.
DOUGLAS MATHEWSON, President, Borough of The Bronx.
MAURICE E. CONNOLLY, President, Borough of Queens.
EXHIBIT I—PRINCIPAL CHANGES MADE IN USE, HEIGHT AND AREA
DISTRICT MAPS SUBMITTED BY DISTRICTING COMMISSION
1. Use District Map
(a) BorouGH or MANHATTAN
1. Indian Road from 100 feet west of Isham Street to Isham Park.
Changed from residence to business.
2. 158th Street from 430 feet west of Riverside Drive to the railroad.
Changed from residence to business.
3. 146th Street between Broadway and Amsterdam Avenue. Changed
from business to residence.
4. 131st Street between Lenox Avenue and Seventh Avenue, and
Fifth Avenue between 131st Street and 126th Street. Changed from busi-
ness to residence.
5. 57th Street between Madison Avenue and Lexington Avenue.
Changed from residence to business.
6. 57th, 56th and 55th Streets between Eighth Avenue and Ninth
Avenue. Changed from business to residence.
7. Sixth Avenue from 29th Street to within 100 feet of 31st Street.
Changed from business to unrestricted.
8. 23d Street between Ninth Avenue and Tenth Avenue. Changed
from business to residence.
9. 16th Street between Sixth Avenue and Seventh Avenue. Changed
from unrestricted to business.
10. West 8th Street from Fifth Avenue to within 100 feet east of
Macdougal Street and the west side of University Place between Waverley
Place and Eighth Street. Changed from business to residence.
11. 13th Street between Eighth Avenue and Hudson Street; Ganse-
voort Street between Hudson Street and 13th Street; Fourth Street be-
tween Gansevoort Street and Horatio Street, and Eighth Avenue between
Greenwich Street and Horatio Street. Changed from business to unre-
stricted.
12. Madison Avenue, west side, from 35th Street to 37th Street, and
from 38th Street to 39th Street. Changed from business to residence.
13. West 3d Street and Macdougal Street. Intersection and four
corners changed from business to unrestricted.
14. Patchin Place and Milligan Place. Changed from residence to
business.
15. 84th Street from Lexington Avenue to Third Avenue. Changed
from residence to business.
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 217
(b) BoroucH or THE Bronx
1. Van Cortlandt Park South from Broadway to Bailey Avenue.
Changed from business to residence. 4
2. Mosholu Parkway North between Jerome Avenue and Gun Hill
Road. Changed from business to residence.
3. Bailey Avenue between 230th Street and 233rd Street except at
the intersection of 23lst Street; Bailey Avenue between 238th Street and
Van Cortlandt Park South; Putnam Avenue East between 238th Street
and Van Cortlandt Park South; Putnam Avenue West between 238th
Street and Van Cortlandt Park South, 239th Street between Broadway and
Putnam Avenue West; and Review Place between West 238th Street and
Van Cortlandt Park South. Changed from business to residence.
4. 233d Street between Webster Avenue and Bronx Boulevard.
Changed from residence to business.
5. Bedford Park Boulevard from the Concourse to Decatur Avenue.
Changed from business to residence.
6. 184th Street between Aqueduct Avenue and Jerome Avenue.
Changed from business to residence.
7. 18st Street from Boston Road to within 100 feet of Bryant Ave-
nue. Changed from residence to business.
8. 183d Street between Grand Concourse and Webster Avenue.
Changed from business to residence.
9. 177th Street and 176th Street between Jerome Avenue and the
Concourse. Changed from business to residence.
10. Morris Avenue between 174th Street and Belmont Street.
Changed from business to residence.
11. 172d Street from Jesup Avenue to within 100 feet of Plimpton
Avenue. Changed from business to residence.
12. Cromwell Avenue from 169th Street to Macomb’s Road. Changed
from business to unrestricted.
13. Shore Drive between Layton Avenue and Lafayette Avenue.
Changed from business to residence.
14. Whittemore Avenue between Fort Schuyler Road and Balcom
Avenue. Changed from residence to business.
15. 153d Street between Mott Avenue and Gerard Avenue, and
Walton Avenue between 153d Street and the railroad. Changed from busi-
ness and unrestricted to residence.
16. 142d Street and 143d Street between Willis Avenue and Brook
Avenue. Changed from business to residence.
17. 145th Street and 146th Street from Brook Avenue to St. Anns
Avenue. Changed from business to residence.
18. Mott Avenue from 153d Street to 156th Street; 156th Street from
Sheridan Avenue to Mott Avenue. Changed from residence to unrestricted.
19. Mott Avenue and Walton Avenue between 144th Street on the
south and the railroad on the north; 146th Street, 150th Street and 151st
Street between Walton Avenue and Mott Avenue; 149th Street between
Gerard Avenue and Mott Avenue, and Cedar Lane, between 150th Street
and the railroad. Changed from unrestricted to business.
20. West 242d Street from Spuyten Duyvil Road to a point 450 feet
east. Changed from business to residence.
21. Pelham Parkway South. from Wilson Avenue to Neill Avenue.
Wilson Avenue, from Pelham Parkway South to Neill Avenue. Neill
Avenue, from Wilson Avenue to Pelham Parkway South. Changed from
business to residence.
218 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
22. East 205th Street, from Webster Avenue to the New York Cen-
tral R. R. Changed from residence to business.
23. Esplanade, along both sides of the New York, Westchester and
Boston Railway, from Laconia Avenue to Astor Avenue. Changed from’
residence to business.
(c) Borough or Brooklyn
1. Hicks Street, from 100 feet south of Cranberry Street to within
100 feet of Poplar Street. Changed from residence to business.
2. Clark Street, from 100 feet east of Henry Street to within 100
feet of Fulton Street. Changed from business to residence.
3. Grace Court Alley. Changed from residence to business.
4. Evergreen Avenue, between Himrod Street and Cedar Street.
Changed from unrestricted to business.
5. East 21st Street, from Lincoln Road to Parkside Avenue; Parkside
Avenue from Ocean Avenue to Flatbush Avenue; Ocean Avenue, from
Parkside Avenue to Woodruff Avenue, and Woodruff Avenue, from Ocean
Avenue to Flatbush Avenue. Changed from business to residence.
6. Albany Avenue, from Eastern Parkway to Union Street. Changed
from residence to business.
7. Jamaica Avenue, from east side of Schenck Avenue to west side
of Dresden Street. Changed from business to residence.
8. Arlington Avenue, from Linwood Street to Shepherd Street.
Changed from residence to business.
9. 66th Street, from Fifth Avenue to Ninth Avenue. Changed from
unrestricted to business.
10. 13th Avenue, from 79th Street to 86th Street. Changed from
residence to business.
11. 17th Avenue, from 53d: Street to 55th Street. Changed from
business to residence.
12. Avenue M, between East 91st Street and East 93d Street and
Avenue N, between East 92d Street and East 93d Street. Changed from
residence to business.
13. Emmons Avenue, easterly end, and streets between Emmons Ave-
nue and waterfront. Changed from residence to business.
14. 47th Street, between 18th Avenue and Washington Avenue;
Lawrence Avenue, between 47th Street and Gravesend Avenue. Changed
from business to residence.
15. Coney Island Avenue, from Johnson Street to Park Circle.
Changed from unrestricted to business.
16. Caton Place, from Coney Island Avenue to East 8th Street and
East 8th Street, from Caton Place to Henry Street. Changed from busi-
ness to unrestricted.
17. Nostrand Avenue, from Atlantic Avenue to Fulton Street.
Changed from residence to business.
(d) BoroucH oF QUEENS
1. Eighth Street, between Jackson Avenue and East Avenue.
Changed from business to unrestricted.
2. Laurel Hill section. Columbine and Cassel Avenues. Changed
from residence and business to unrestricted, including intervening cross
streets.
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 219
3. Babbage Street, between St. Ann’s Avenue and Richmond Street,
on the north side of the railroad and Bessemer Street on the south side of
the railroad. Changed from business to residence.
4. Ray Street, one block north of Jamaica Avenue, and Essex Place
(Charles Street), one block to the east of Ray Street. Changed from resi-
dence to business.
5. Beach 129th Street, in the block north of Newport Avenue.
Changed from unrestricted to business.
6. Beach 117th Street, from Channel Drive to Ocean Promenade.
Changed from business to residence.
7. Beach 116th Street, from Channel Drive to Rockaway Beach
Boulevard. Changed west side from unrestricted to business.
8. Area between bulkhead line and Channel Drive and between Beach
117th Street and Beach 124th Street. Changed from residence to business.
9. East of Calvary Cemetery—Congress Avenue and Townsend Ave-
nue, from Hobson Avenue to Montgomery Avenue; Waters Avenue and
Joy Avenue, from Laurel Hill Boulevard to Hobson Avenue. Changed
from residence to business.
(e) BoroucH or RicHMoND
1. North side of Richmond Terrace and Jay Street, from Westervelt
Avenue to South Street. Changed from unrestricted to business.
2. Central Avenue, from Hyatt Street to Richmond Turnpike (Wiener
Place). Changed from business to residence.
3. St. Marks Place and Carroll Place, from Westervelt Avenue to
Nicholas Street; Tompkins Avenue and St. Marks Place, from Nicholas
Street to Hyatt Street; Nicholas Street, from Carroll Place to St. Marks
Place; Wall Street and Hamilton Avenue, from Carroll Place to Tompkins
Avenue; Carroll Place, from Hamilton Avenue to Wall Street; Fort Place,
from Tempkins Avenue to Montgomery Avenue, and Montgomery Avenue,
from Fort Place to trolley right of way at head of Hyatt Street. Changed
from business to residence.
4. Richmond Avenue, from Castleton Avenue to Richmond Terrace
(Ann Street) ; Richmond Terrace (Ann Street), from Richmond Avenue
to Jewett Avenue, and Jewett Avenue, from Cary Avenue to Richmond
Terrace. Changed from unrestricted to business.
5. Bennett Street, Vreeland Street, Edison Street (Elizabeth Street),
Cedar Street (New Street), Bond Street, Rawson Street (Broadway),
Heberton Avenue, Cottage Place, Brunswick Street (Avenue B), Stafford
Street (Simonson Place), bounded by Richmond Avenue, Richmond Ter-
race (Ann Street), Jewett Avenue and Castleton Avenue. Changed from
unrestricted to residence.
6. Anderson Avenue, Albion Place, Rawson Street (Broadway),
Heberton Avenue, Degroot Place (Washington Place) and Stafford Street
(Simonson Place), north of Catherine Street, bounded by Richmond Ave-
nue, Castleton Avenue, Jewett Avenue and Cary Avenue. Changed from
business to residence.
7. College Avenue, Manor Road to Jewett Avenue. Changed from
business to residence.
8. Richmond Terrace, south side, 100 feet east of Clove Road to
Taylor Street. Changed from unrestricted to business.
9. Bodine Street and Dongan Street; Castleton Avenue to Richmond
Terrace; Cedar Street, Clove Road to Taylor Street; Taylor Street; Cas-
tleton Avenue to Trinity Place; Henderson Avenue; Taylor Street to Drake
220 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
Place; Dongan Street and Taylor Street, from Cary Avenue to Castleton
Avenue, and White Place. Changed from business to residence.
10. Taylor Street, from Trinity Place to Richmond Terrace, and
Trinity Place, from Vaylor Street to Barker Street. Changed from unre-
stricted to residence.
11. First Street, from Clinton Avenue to Franklin Avenue; Clinton
Avenue and Lafayette Avenue, from First Street to Richmond ‘Verrace, and
Franklin Avenue, from Second Street to Richmond Terrace. Changed from
unresiricted to business.
12. Second Street, from Clinton Avenue to Franklin Avenue; Clinton
Avenue from Second Street to Third Street; Lafayette Avenue, from First
Street to Third Street, and Franklin Avenue, from Second Street to Third
Street. Changed from unrestricted to residence.
13. Clinton Avenue, from First Street to Second Street. Changed
from unrestricted to business.
14. Rosebank Avenue (Center Street), east side, from Young Street
to Vanderbilt Avenue. Changed from unrestricted to business.
15. Rosebank Avenue (Center Street), west side, Vanderbilt Avenue
to Marathon Avenue (Simonson Avenue). Changed from business to
residence.
16. Rosebank Avenue (Center Street), east side Vanderbilt Avenue
to Marathon Avenue (Simonson Avenue), Talbot Street and Albemarle
Street (Cross Street), Farragut Avenue to Marathon Avenue (Simonson
Avenue), Vanderbilt Avenue, Norwood Avenue and Townsend Avenue,
Rosebank Avenue (Center Street) to Albemarle Street (Cross Street).
Changed from unrestricted to residence.
17. Indiana Avenue, from Jewett Avenue to Wooley Avenue. Changed
from business to residence.
18. Area bounded by Van Pelt Avenue, Orange Street, Morningstar
Road and Washington Avenue. Changed from residence to unrestricted.
19. Jewett Avenue, from Purvis Place (Maple Avenue) to Washing-
ton Place. Changed from business to residence.
‘
2. Height District Map
(a) BoroucH or MANHATTAN
1. Madison Avenue, between 34th Street and 40th Street. Changed
from two times height district to 1% times height district.
(b) BoroucH or BrookKLyN
1. Area on Brooklyn Heights, bounded by Furman Street, Middagh
Street, Hicks Street, Clark Street, Fulton Street, Clinton Street and
Joralemon Street. Changed from 1% times height district to two times
height district.
2. Area on Brooklyn waterfront between Atlantic Avenue and
Degraw Street, and between the bulkhead line and Columbia, Harrison and
Van Brunt Streets. Changed from two times height district to 21% times
height district.
(c) BorouGH oF QUEENS
1. Elmhurst section bounded by 18th Street, Broadway, Corona Ave-
nue, Parcell Street, Junction Avenue and Burnside Avenue. Changed from
1% times height district to 14 times height district.
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 221
2. Elmhurst section bounded by Broadway, Corona Avenue, Parcell
Street, Junction Avenue and Norton Street. Changed from 1% times height
district to one times height district.
3. Area District Map
(a) Boroucu or THE Bronx
1. New D District, Bedford Park, bounded as follows: Beginning
at the intersection of the east side of the Grand Boulevard and Concourse
with the west side of Mosholu Parkway South; thence south along the south
side of Mosholu Parkway South; south along the west side of Decatur
Avenue; east along the south side of EX. 201st Street; south parallel to
and 100 feet east of the east side of Decatur Avenue; west parallel to and
100 feet north of the north side of Bedford Park Boulevard; south along
the west side of Decatur Avenue; west parallel to and 100 feet south of
the south side of Bedford Park Boulevard; south parallel to and 100 feet
east of the east side of Marion Avenue; west parallel to and 100 feet north
of the north side of E. 198th Street; south along the west side of Marion
Avenue; west along the north side of E. 198th Street; north along the east
side of Bainbridge Avenue; west parallel to and 100 feet south of the south
side of Bedford Park Boulevard; north along the east side of the Grand
Boulevard and Concourse to the point of beginning.
2. New D District, University Heights, bounded as follows: Begin-
ning at the intersection of the south side of 183d Street with the west side
of the Old Croton Aqueduct; south along the west side of the aqueduct;
west along the north side of W. 180th Street and W. 180th Street pro-
longed; north along the easterly property line of the New York Central
Railroad to a point just north of the intersection of Cedar Avenue and
Harlem River Terrace; north parallel to and 100 feet west of the west
side of Cedar Avenue to the prolongation of the south side of W. 182d
. Street; east along said prolongation and the south side of W. 182d Street ;
north along the east side of Sedgwick Avenue; east along the south side of
E. 183d Street to the point of beginning.
3. New D District, Riverdale, bounded as follows: Beginning on the
west side of Riverdale Avenue 900 feet south of the south side of W. 246th
Street ; west 110 feet; south parallel to and 110 feet west of the west side of
Riverdale Avenue and Spuyten Duyvil Parkway; west parallel to and 100
feet north of the north side of W. 239th Street and its prolongation towards
Riverdale Avenue; south parallel to and 200 feet west of the west side of
Independence Avenue; east parallel to and 100 feet south of the south side
of W. 237th Street; north along the west side of Spuyten Duyvil Parkway
to the south side of W. 237th Street east across Spuyten Duyvil Parkway
in line with the south side of W. 237th Street; north parallel to and 100
feet east of Spuyten Duyvil Parkway to and across Johnson Avenue; east
along the north side of W. 238th Street to and across Riverdale Avenue;
north parallel to and 100 feet east of Riverdale Avenue to a point approxi-
mately opposite the place of beginning.
Changes in E District, Riverdale: The foregoing D District has been
taken out of the Riverdale E District and the boundaries of the E District
have been slightly altered so as to conform to the petition of the Park Dis-
trict Protective League and other owners. The revised boundary line is as
follows: Beginning at the shore line of the Hudson River 750 feet north
of the north bulkhead line of Harlem River; east perpendicular to the
shore line of the Hudson River; east along the north side of Spuyten Duyvil
222, BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
Road; east and south along the north side of Johnson Avenue; north along
the west side of Kappock Street; east parallel to and 100 feet south of the
south side of Netherland Avenue; east parallel to and 100 feet south of
the south side of W. 227th Street; north parallel to and 100 feet east of
the east side of Edgehill Avenue; north along the west side of Johnson
Avenue ; west along the south side of W. 232d Street; north along the west
side of Fairfield Avenue; north parallel to and 100 feet east of the east
side of Spuyten Duyvil Parkway; north along the east side of Netherland
Avenue; west across Spuyten Duyvil Parkway along the line of the south
side of W. 237th Street; south along the west side of Spuyten Duyvil Park-
‘way; west parallel to and 100 feet south of the south side of W. 237th
Street; north parallel to and 200 feet west of the west side of Independence
Avenue; east parallel to and 100 feet north of the north side of W. 239th
Street and the north side prolonged towards Spuyten Duyvil Parkway;
north parallel to and 110 feet west of Spuyten Duyvil Parkway and River-
dale Avenue; east to a point 900 feet south of the south side of W. 246th
Street and the west side of Riverdale Avenue; east across Spuyten Duyvil
Parkway ; east and south parallel to Spuyten Duyvil Parkway and 100 feet
south and west of the south and west sides; east across Fieldston Road
and along the north side of W. 242d Street; east along the line of the
public park out into Waldo Avenue; north along the center line of Tibbett
Avenue prolonged; east along the north side of W. 244th Street; north
along the west side of Cayuga Avenue; west along the south side of W.
246th Street; north along the west side of Tibbett Avenue; north along a
line drawn between the center of the north end of Tibbett Avenue and the
center of the south end of Valles Avenue to the south side of W. 253d
Street; west along the south side of W. 253d Street; north parallel to and
100 feet east of Iselin Avenue; west along the prolongation of the south
side of W. 256th Street and along the south side of the same street; north
along the west side of Mosholu Parkway; west along a line parallel to and
500 feet north of W. 256th Street; north along the west side of Netherland
Avenue; west along the south side of W. 261st Street and its prolongation
to the shore line of the Hudson River; south along the shore line of the
Hudson River to the point of beginning.
5. New D District, Edenwald, bounded as follows: Beginning at t»>
city line 100 feet south of Nereid Avenue; west parallel to and 100 fect
south of Nereid Avenue; south through the middle of the block between
Ely Avenue and Bruner Avenue; west parallel to and 100 feet south «*
Pitman Avenue; south through the middle of the block between Wickham
Avenue and Gunther Avenue: south parallel to and 100 feet east of Pauld-
ing Avenue; east through the middle of the block between E. 226th and
227th Streets; east parallel to and 100 feet north of Schieffelin Avenue;
north through the middle of the block between Edson Avenue and Baychester
Avenue; east parallel to and 100 feet north of E. 233d Street; north parallel
to and 100 feet west of Pratt Avenue; north along the city line to the point
of beginning.
6. New E District, around the Country Club, bounded as follows:
Beginning at the east end of the southern boundary of Pelham Bay Park
at the shore of Eastchester Bay; west along the southern boundary of Pel-
ham Bay Park; south parallel to and 100 feet east of Eastern Boulevard ;
east parallel to and 100 feet south of South Road; south parallel to and
100 feet west of East Road; east along the north side of Fairmount Avenue
and the same prolonged to Eastchester Bay; north along the shore of East-
chester Bay to the point of beginning.
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 223
(b) BoroucH or BRooKLYN
1. Bay Ridge E District. The northern boundary has been moved two
blocks south so as to lie in the center of the block between 75th Street
and 76th Street, extending from the bulkhead line west of the Shore Road
to the existing line 100 feet east of Ridge Boulevard; whence it continues
as at present east to a point 100 feet west of Third Avenue; south parallel
to and 100 feet west of Third Avenue; west in the middle of the block
between 77th and 78th Streets ; south parallel to and 100 feet east of Ridge
Boulevard; east in the center of the block between 79th and 80th Streets ;
south parallel to and 100 feet west of Third Avenue, and so on as before.
2. Dyker Heights E District. The easterly boundary of this district
has been moved from 100 feet east of 13th Avenue to 100 feet west of
13th Avenue, leaving both sides of this avenue wholly in D.
3. New E District, Ditmas Park West, bounded as follows: Beginning
on the south side of Dorchester Road at the western boundary of the Ditmas
Park E District; west along the south side of Dorchester Road; south
along the east side of Stratford Road; east parallel to and 100 feet south
of the south side of Ditmas Avenue; south parallel to and 100 feet west
of the west side of Westminster Road; east parallel to and 120 feet north
of the north side of Newkirk Avenue to the east property line of the
Brighton Beach line, from which point the southerly boundary of the Ditmas
Park E District has been moved north to a line 120 feet north of and
parallel to the north side of Newkirk Avenue to the east side of E. 17th
Street.
4. New D District, Highland Park South, bounded as follows: Begin-
ning at the intersection of the south side of Jamaica Avenue and the west
side of Dresden Street; south along the west side of Dresden Street; east
along the south side of Etna Street; south along the west side of Force
Tube Avenue; south along the west side of Hale Avenue; east along the
south side of Ridgewood Avenue; south parallel to and 100 feet east of
the east side of Hale Avenue; west parallel to and 100 feet north of the
north side of Arlington Avenue; south along the west side of Elton Street;
west parallel to and 100 feet north of the north side of Fulton Street ; north
parallel to and 100 feet west of the west side of Miller Avenue and Miller
Place; west parallel to and 100 feet south of the south side of Sunnyside
Avenue; north parallel to and 100 feet east of the east side of Vermont
Avenue; west along the north side of Sunnyside Avenue; north along the
east side of Vermont Avenue; south and east along the Borough line; south
along the west side of the National Cemetery; west along the north side
of Jamaica Avenue to the line of the west side of Dresden Street and the
point of beginning.
5. New A District, Coney Island, bounded as follows: Beginning at
the bulkhead line of the Atlantic Ocean on the east side of W. 37th Street,
north along the east side of W. 37th Street; east along the south side of
Surf Avenue to the west side of W. 5th Street; south along the west side
of W. Sth Street to the Atlantic Ocean, and west to the point of beginning.
Both sides of Surf Avenue are now A between the east side of Stillwell
Avenue and the west side of W. 5th Street.
(c) BoroucH oF QuEENS
1. Flushing E District. The northern boundary of this district has
been shifted from north of Jackson Avenue to a new line to the south,
making a C District along both sides of Jackson Avenue from Whitestone
Avenue and Bowne Avenue to Ziegler Avenue (Central Avenue). State
224 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
Street is now in D from a point 100 feet east of the east side of Whitestone
Avenue to a point 100 feet west of the west side of Ziegler Avenue (Centrai
Avenue), the boundary line between C and D being located 150 feet south
of and parallel to State Street. The northern boundary of the E District
now begins at a point 100 feet west of Bowne Avenue and 150 feet south
of Jackson Avenue, running east parallel to Jackson Avenue and 150 feet
south to the west side of Parsons Avenue; crossing Parsons Avenue, the
line is parallel to and 100 feet south of the south side of Jackson Avenue
until it meets a line extending north from and perpendicular to the north
side of Burcker Street (Washington Street), distant 415 feet from the west
side of Percy Street; east on the north side of Burcker Street (Washington
Street) ; crossing Percy Street, the line is parallel to and 150 feet south of
Jackson Avenue to the existing E boundary line 100 feet west of the west
side of Central Avenue.
2. Powell’s Cove Section. This has been changed from D to A by
extending the A District at College Point as follows: Beginning on the
south side of Fletcher Avenue at the west side of Scranton Street; east
along the south side of Fletcher Avenue; north along the east side of Vinton
Street; west along the north side of Draper Avenue; north along the east
side of Torrington Street; west along the north side of Brackenridge Ave-
nue; north along the east side of Scranton Street; west along the north
side of Audubon Avenue; north along the east side of Rockville Street to
the East River; east along the bulkhead line of the East River; south along
the west side of Chesterfield Boulevard ; west along the north side of Yancey
Street; south along the west side of Yancey Street; west along the north
side of Tolland Street to the existing A District line on the west side of
Torrington Street.
3. New C District, Rockaway, bounded as follows: On the west by
the easterly boundary of the E District, which has been moved one block
east, so as to be in the center of the block between Beach 116th Street and
Beach 117th Street, instead of between Beach 117th Street and Beach 118th
Street; on the east the line is in Beach 75th Street, making the boundary
line 100 feet east of and parallel to Beach 75th Street; on the south by the
shore line of the Atlantic Ocean; on the north by the existing boundary of
the A District, viz., east along the north side of Beach Drive from the center
of the block between Beach 116th Street and Beach 117th Street; south
along the east side of Beach 116th Street; east along the north side of St.
Mark’s Avenue; south along the east side of Beach 103d Street; east along
the north side of Rockaway Beach Boulevard; north along the west side
of Beach 87th Street; east along the south property line of the Long Island
Railroad; south along the east side of Beach Street; east along the north
side of Finnard Street; north along the west side of Beach 80th Street;
south along the south property line of the Long Island Railroad to the east-
erly boundary in Beach 75th Street.
4. Woodhaven. Owing to the discontinuance on the City map of
Ridgewood Avenue, between Herald Avenue and Cedar Avenue, the south-
ern boundary of the C district near Jamaica Avenue now leaves Ridgewood
Avenue at Oxford Avenue and is located in the center of the following
streets: Oxford Avenue, Fulton Street, Herald Avenue, Fulton Street, Bed-
ford Avenue, Fulton Street, Stoothoff Avenue to Ridgewood Avenue.
(d) Borovucu or RricHMOND
1. Clifton. The boundary of the A district has been changed from
Townsend Avenue and Rosebank Avenue and is now located on the east
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 225
side of Bay Street, from Townsend Avenue to Marathon Avenue, and on
the south side of Marathon Avenue, from Bay Street to Rosebank Avenue.
The western boundary of the B district is continued south in the center of
Rosebank Avenue, from Townsend Avenue, joining the A boundary at
Marathon Avenue.
4. General Changes
In order to define more clearly the boundaries of particular districts
a number of detailed changes have been made. On the use district map
many such changes have been made in the designation shown at street inter-
sections. A number of short blocks with a residence district designation in
the street between two business districts have been changed to business
districts. This was to conform to a change in the resolution. The resolu-
tion submitted by the Districting Commission gave the Building Superin-
tendent discretion to change a residence district that had a street frontage
of not more than 100 feet and was bounded on either side by business or
unrestricted districts. This discretionary power is omitted in the resolution
submitted by the Committee, but on the map submitted short residence blocks
that would be pocketed in this way have been changed to business districts.
SUPPLEMENTAL CHANGES
Map CHANGES APPROVED BY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE JuLy 25, 1916,
SUPPLEMENTING AND AMENDING CHANGES INCLUDED IN REPORT OF
Satp CoMMITTEE DATED Juty 18, 1916.
Use District Map
(a) BoroucH or ManuatTaNn
1. West 57th Street, from Ninth Avenue to Tenth Avenue. Changed
from business to residence.
2. West 57th Street, from Eighth Avenue to Ninth Avenue. Changed
from residence to business.
(b) BorouGH oF THE Bronx
1. West 172d Street, from Macomb’s Road to Jerome Avenue.
Changed from unrestricted to business.
(c) BoroucH or BrooKLyNn
1. East 21st Street, from Lincoln Road to Parkside Avenue; Chester
Court and Parkside Avenue, from East 21st Street to Flatbush Avenue.
Changed from residence to business.
2. East 85th Street, East 86th Street, East 87th Street, East 88th
Street and East 89th Street, from Avenue B to Ditmas Avenue, and East
84th Street, from Ralph Avenue to Ditmas Avenue. Changed from resi-
dence to unrestricted.
3. Avenue B, from Remsen Avenue to Ralph Avenue. Changed from
residence to business.
Area District Map
(a) BoroucH oF QuEENS
1. Changes in C district east of Flushing Creek and south of State
Street. This district has been extended to the south. The new boundary
line extends from the existing line in Rosedale Avenue, south in Rosedale
226 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
Avenue to 45th Avenue, west in 45th Avenue and Franconia Avenue to
Parsons Avenue, north of Parsons Avenue to California Avenue, and west
in California Avenue to Crommelin Avenue. The entire Flushing E district
has been changed to a C district.
2. Change in D district between Newtown and Flushing Creek. ‘The |
portion of this district west of Junction Avenue has been changed from
Ditore
3. Flushing River A district. This district has been extended to the
west between Jackson Avenue and Gunther Street, from the east side of
Gilroy Street, to the east side of Peartree Avenue, between Gunther Street
and Pell Street and to the east side of Pell Street between Peartree Avenue
and Jackson Avenue.
EXHIBIT II—REPORT OF SUBCOMMITTEE ON RELATION OF PRO-
POSED PLAN TO OTHER PLANS OF CITY DEVELOPMENT
June 15, 1916.
To the Committee on the City Plan:
Gentlemen—The Mayor, as the Chairman of the Committee on City
Plan, has appointed a special committee consisting of the Chief Engineer
of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, the five Borough Consulting
Engineers, the Landscape Architect of the Park Department, and the Con-
sultant and Secretary of the Committee on the City Plan to consider the
recommendations and plans of the Districting Commission and report to the
Committee on the City Plan.
This committee has given such consideration to the recommendations
and plans of the Districting Commission as the time at its disposal per-
mitted. While the report and plans had been in the hands of the members
of the committee for too short a time to enable them to make a thorough
study of them, all of the members of the committee were quite familiar
with the work of the Commission and most of them attended the public
hearings which have been given, particularly those at which consideration
was given to the boroughs represented by them. All of the members of the
committee are convinced of the great need of restrictive regulations govern-
ing the height of buildings, the use to which they may be put and the propor-
tion of the plots which may be occupied by them. All of them have had ample
opportunity to observe the manner in which the different boroughs and the
City as a whole have lately been developing and they keenly appreciate the
unfortunate results of the lack in the past of such regulations as are pro-
posed and the need of them to insure better control of future growth. They
believe that the results of such control will be:
To prevent undue congestion of population.
To insure better sanitary conditions.
To simplify the problem of traffic regulation.
To lessen the danger and delay of movement in the City streets
which is due to mixed traffic.
To simplify the transit problems of the City.
To prevent the over-intensive development of property contiguous to
the new transit lines now being constructed.
To render possible a more economical development of City streets
through a decrease in the width of streets and roadways where the
size and consequently the number of buildings are restricted.
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 227
To insure the permanency of the character of districts when once estab-
lished, and,
Finally, to make the City a more orderly and convenient place in which
to live and do business.
The Committee realizes the magnitude and difficulty of the task im-
posed upon the Commission and is impressed by the results which have been
accomplished by it within the time which has elapsed since it was created,
by the thoroughness of its investigation of existing conditions and by its
obvious efforts to avoid anything which would seriously affect present values.
It has not attempted to correct the mistakes of the past, but to avoid the
repetition of similar mistakes in the future, so that its efforts have been
wholly constructive.
In some cases it has seemed to us that the restrictions could well have
gone further, but in few, if any, cases does it appear to us that they have
gone too far. The following instances are typical of those we have in mind:
Along the easterly side of the unused part of Jerome Park Reservoir,
in the Borough of The Bronx, Jerome Avenue is unrestricted between Bed-
ford Park Boulevard and Van Cortlandt Avenue, and restricted to business
north of Van Cortlandt Avenue to its junction with Bainbridge Avenue,
while Mosholu Parkway South, forming the northeasterly boundary of the
reservoir, is restricted to residences. ‘This seems to be an entirely reason-
able plan, but we understand that it is proposed to establish a railroad ter-
minal yard in connction with the Jerome Avenue elevated line on the north-
erly portion of this unused easterly basin of the reservoir, so that the re-
striction against anything but residences along Mosholu Parkway South
could well be limited to a depth of 100 feet in order that such a railroad
terminal might be established on this unused property.
The Park Department has urged greater restrictions about Hudson Park,
in the Borough of Manhattan. The report of. the Commission contemplates,
a restriction to residences on the northerly and southerly boundaries of the
park, but leaves the easterly and westerly boundaries, which are Hudson
Street and the new Seventh Avenue extension, unrestricted. We understand
that the character of the two streets last named has been so firmly established
that a restriction to business only would be of little avail, in view of the
fact that it is not planned to interfere with the uses which now exist.
Along the northerly side of Bay Ridge Parkway, in the Borough of
Brooklyn, the four blocks between 5th and 9th Avenues are entirely un-
restricted, the reason for this, as explained by the Consultant and Secretary
of the Committee on the City Plan, being that a gas receiver is already
located on the most easterly of these blocks and the three others are so near
the New York Connecting Railroad that they would be within the influence
of the industrial development which will take place along the line of this
road. The majority of the committee feel that the streets bounding this
parkway, which is the main approach to the Shore Road, should be re-
served for residential use, a use which has always been contemplated in the
establishment of parks and parkways. Another instance in this same bor-
ough where it appears that the restrictions might have gone further is that
of Parkside Avenue, between Flatbush and Ocean Avenues, and East 21st
Street, extending from Parkside Avenue northwardly. These are both indi-
cated as business streets, and, while they are near a station of the Brighton
Beach Railroad, which might be expected to attract a small amount of
business, they are so near Flatbush Avenue, the main business street of this
section, that they could well be restricted to residences, as this neighborhood
promises to be almost entirely built up with apartment houses.
228 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
In the Borough of Queens eight short blocks at the westerly end of
Queens Boulevard were shown as entirely unrestricted, the remainder of
this great avenue being designated as a business street. It is true that there
is one building at the extreme westerly end of this street now devoted to
high class industrial use—that is, the assembling of parts of motor cars, and
we understand that it is proposed to erect another building devoted to this
same purpose on the next block to the east, and inasmuch as there are no
railroad or shipping facilities within several blocks of any part of this street,
such industrial development as may take place will be of an unobjectionable
character, and yet the City has established the exceptional width of 200 feet
for this boulevard and the elevated rapid transit line erected within its lines
is of an ornamental character, designed to be in keeping with a street of
this kind and it may be that the restriction of this part of the street to
business only would be desirable.
A further study of the plans would doubtless disclose other cases where
the restrictions might have gone further, but we believe that the important
thing is that the plan proposed by the Commission be put in force at the
earliest possible date, and, unless some slight changes, such as those which
have been noted, can be made, if upon further consideration they seem to be
wise, without delaying the adoption of the Commission’s report and putting
its recommendations into effect, we are not disposed to advise any modifica-
tion of the present plans particularly in view of the provisions in the
proposed ordinances which will render it possible to make such changes
affecting certain streets or districts as may at some future time appear to
be desirable.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the committee.
(Sgd.) NELSON P. LEWIS, Chief Engineer of the Board of Estimate
and Apportionment.
EXHIBIT III—REPORT OF SUBCOMMITTEE TO CONSIDER DIS-
TRICTING RESOLUTION
June 16, 1916.
Committee on the City Plan, Board of Estimate and Apportionment:
Gentlemen—Your subcommittee, appointed to consider the Districting
Resolution submitted to the Board by the Commission on Building Districts
and Restrictions in its final report of June 2d, begs to submit the following
report:
Your subcommittee is convinced that a well considered plan of building
development is essential to the health, safety and prosperity of the City.
Such a plan involves both the creation of residential, business and industrial
districts and the regulation of the height of buildings and the area of courts
and yards differently in different parts of the City. The plan presented by
the Districting Commission seems admirably adapted to secure this result.
We endorse generally the following principles. which are fundamental in
the Commission’s proposed plan:
1. Provision for light and air is a prime essential in building regulation.
2. Building regulations in each section of the City should be adapted to
the requirements of that section.
3. It is desirable as a general rule to treat all buildings in a given
block according to a uniform rule. There should be a substantially uniform
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 229
contribution from each owner to the light and air of the block. Block
ventilation is essential to well ordered development. Rear yards should be
required wherever buildings come back to back.
4. A building is usually appropriately located when it is surrounded by
buildings of similar type and use. Order in building development is essential
to the health, safety and comfort of the public and far from depressing
values or working hardship to property owners generally, will actually con-
serve and enhance values.
5. The residence sections should be protected against unnecessary in-
vasion by commercial and industrial uses.
6. The present congested condition in lower Manhattan constitutes a
serious danger to life and property. Street congestion may interfere seri-
ously with the movement of fire apparatus. The occupants of high office
and loft buildings may be endangered by fire and panic.
These and other considerations advanced in the Commission’s report
prove the urgent need for the adoption of a districting plan. The official
duties of the members of this subcommittee bring to their notice the irre-
parable injury that almost daily is being brought about by the erection of
inappropriate buildings or the establishment of business uses in residence
sections. The remedy proposed is timely and appears to have been most
carefully worked out.
Your subcommittee was directed to consider the resolution with special
reference to Article IV, containing the general and administrative pro-
visions. The Committee has not had an opportunity to take up in detail the
other articles of the resolution.
The subcommittee recommends the approval of Article IV with the
following changes:
New words and phrases added by the subcommittee are in italics. Words
and phrases recommended for omission are included in brackets.
Section 14. Existing Buildings and Uses: Nothing herein contained
shall require any change in the plans or construction of a building or in its
designated use for which a permit has been heretofore approved or plans for
which are on file im the office of the superintendent of buildings or of the
Tenement House Department [with the building superintendent] at the
time of the passage of this resolution and a permit therefor is issued within
three months of the passage of this resolution and the construction of which
is diligently prosecuted within a year of the date of [such] the permit issued
by the building superintendent and at least the whole ground story of which
shall have been completed within such year and the complete erection of the
building as planned shall have been effected within five years from the
date of passage of this resolution.
Except as otherwise provided in Section 3-a, if a structure or building
now existing shall hereafter be wholly or in part removed or destroyed
whatsoever may be the cause, purpose or manner of its removal or destruc-
tion, it shall not be rebuilt or restored unless it conforms with the pro-
visions herein prescribed; but nothing in this resolution shall prevent the
restoration of a building or industrial plant which is damaged less than 50
per cent of its structural parts or the restoration of a wall declared unsafe
by the superintendent of buildings or by a board of survey as provided in the
Bualding Code. No building now existing or hereafter erected shall be so
altered or enlarged as to bring it in violation of any of the provisions of
this resolution, nor shall any lot area be so reduced or diminished that the
unoccupied areas shall be less than required by this resolution. When addi-
tional stories for which plans have not been filed at the time of passage
230 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
of this resolution are added in the future to existing buildings, the require-
ments of this resolution as to setbacks shall start at the top of the existing
walls, if they are over the prescribed height limit, and the least dimensions
of yards and courts shall be computed from the top of the existing yard or
court walls as though they were of the prescribed sizes at such heights and
the carrying up of existing elevator and stair enclosures shall be exempted
from such provisions.
Section 15. Unlawful Use; Certificate of Occupancy: It shall be un-
lawful to use or permit the use of any building or premises hereafter cre-
ated, erected, altered, changed or converted wholly or partly in its use until
a certificate to the effect that said [structure] building or premises [or place]
and the use thereof conforms to all of the requirements of this resolution
shall have been issued by the superintendent of buildings of the bor-
ough in which said building or premises are located. It shall be the duty
of the superintendent of buildings to issue a certificate of use within [20]
10 days after a request for the same shall be filed in his bureau by any
owner of a [structure] building or premises affected by this resolution, pro-
vided said building or premises conforms with all the requirements herein
set forth. It is provided, however, that in the case of tenement houses such
certificate of occupancy shall be issued by the tenement house commissioner.
Section 16. Enforcement, Legal Procedure, Penalties: This resolution
shall be enforced by the tenement house commissioner, the fire commissioner
and by the superintendent of buildings in each borough under the rules and
regulations of the Board of Standards and Appeals. The superintendent of
buildings shall in each borough enforce the provisions herein contained in
so far as such enforcement can be effected through the issue of the building
permit and the certificate of occupancy. The fire commissioner shall en
force the provisions herein contained in so far as they relate to use of
buildings or premises. The tenement house commissioner shall [subject to
the rules and regulations of the Board of Standards and Appeals] have
[exclusive] jurisdiction to enforce the provisions herein contained in so far
as they affect or relate to tenement houses. Any and every violation of the
provisions of this resolution or of the rules and regulations adopted there-
under shall subject the owner, agent, contractor, lessee or tenant of a build-
ing or premises where such violation has been committed or shall exist, and
the agent, architect, builder, contractor, or any other person who has as-
sisted in the commission of such violation or who maintains any building
or premises in which such violation exists as to the same legal procedure
and the same penaltes as are prescribed in any law, statute, or ordinance for
the violations of the Building Code, and such violations shall be subject to
the same legal remedies and prosecuted in the same manner prescribed in any
law or ordinance for violations of said Building Code.
Section 17. No change.
Section 18. No change.
Section 19. Interpretation; Purpose: In interpreting and applying the
provisions of this resolution, they shall be held to be the minimum require-
ments adopted for the promotion of the public health, safety, comfort, con-
venience and general welfare. It is not intended by this resolution to
interfere with or abrogate or annul any rules, regulations or permits pre-
viously adopted or issued or which shall be adopted or issued pursuant to
law [by the fire department or health department] relating to the use of
buildings or premises; nor is it intended by this resolution to interfere with
or abrogate or annul any easements, covenants or other agreements between
REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 231
parties; provided, however, that where this resolution imposes a greater
restriction upon tle use of buildings or premises or upon the height of
buildings or requires larger open spaces than are imposed or required by
such rules, regulations or permits or by such easements, covenants or agree-
ments, the provisions of this resolution shall control.
Section 20. Omit as unnecessary.
Renumber Section 21 as Section 20.
On behalf of the subcommittee, respectfully submitted,
(Sgd.) RUDOLPH MILLER, Engineer, Committee on Buildings,
Chairman.
[Nore—The membership of the subcommittee consisted of Rudolph Miller, Chair-
man; the tenement house commissioner, the fire commissioner, the superintendent
of buildings of each borough, John P. OBrien, assistant corporation counsel, and the
consultant and secretary of the Committee on the City Plan of the Board.]
APPENDIX VII—BUILDING ZONE RESOLUTION
(Adopted July 25, 1916)
A ResoLuTiIon regulating and limiting the height and bulk of buildings here-
after erected and regulating and determining the area of yards, courts
and other open spaces, and regulating and restricting the location of
trades and industries and the location of buildings designed for specified
uses and establishing the boundaries of districts for the said purposes.
Be it resolved by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment of The
City of New York:
ARTICLE I—DEFINITIONS
§ 1. Definitions. Certain words in this resolution are defined for the
purposes thereof as follows:
(a) Words used in the present tense include the future; the singular
number includes the plural and the plural the singular; the word “lot”
includes the word “ plot ’”’; the word “ building ” includes the word “ struc-
ture.”
(b) The “ street line ” is the dividing line between the street and the lot.
(c) The “width of the street’ is the mean of the distances between
the sides thereof within a block. Where a street borders a public place,
public park or navigable body of water the width of the street is the mean
width of such street plus the width, measured at right angles to the street
line, of such public place, public park or body of water.
(d) The “curb level,” for the purpose of measuring the height of any
portion of a building, is the mean level of the curb in front of such portion
of the building. But where a building is on a corner lot the curb level is the
mean level of the curb on the street of greatest width. If such greatest
width occurs on more than one street the curb level is the mean level of
the curb on that street of greatest width which has the highest curb eleva-
tion. The “curb level” for the purpose of regulating and determining the
area of yards, courts and open spaces is the mean level of the curb at that
front of the building where there is the highest curb elevation. Where no
curb elevation has been established or the building does not adjoin the street
the average ground level of the lot shall be considered the curb level.
(e) A “street wall” of a building, at any level, is the wall or part of
the building nearest to the street line.
(f) The “height of a building ” is the vertical distance measured in the
case of flat roofs from the curb level to the level of the highest point of the
roof beams adjacent to the street wall, and in the case of pitched roofs
from the curb level to the mean height level of the gable. Where no roof
beams exist or there are structures wholly or partly above the roof the
height shall be measured from the curb level to the level of the highest point
of the building. Where a building is a tenement house as defined in the
Tenement House Law the height of the building on the street line shall be
measured as prescribed in said law for the measurement of the:height of a
tenement house and such measurement shall be from the curb level as that
term is used in said law. :
(g) The “depth of a lot’ is the mean distance from the street line of
the lot to its rear line measured in the general direction of the side lines
of the lot.
BUILDING ZONE RESOLUTION 233
(h) A “rear yard” is an open, unoccupied space on the same lot with a
building between the rear line of the building and the rear line of the lot.
(1) The “ depth of a rear yard” is the mean distance between the rear
line of the building and the rear line of the lot.
(j) Lots or portions of lots shall be deemed “ back to back” when they
are on opposite sides of the same part of a rear line common to both and the
opposite street lines on which the lots front are parallel wiht each other or
make an angle with each other of not over 45 degrees.
(k) A“ court” is an open, unoccupied space, other than a rear yard, on
the same lot with a building. A court not extending to the street or to a
rear yard is an “inner court.” A court extending to the street or a rear
yard is an “ outer court.” A court on the lot line extending through from
the street to a rear yard or another street is a “ side yard.”
(1) The “height of a yard or a court” at any given level shall be
measured from the lowest level of such yard or court as actually constructed
or from the curb level, if higher, to such level. The highest level of any
given wall bounding a court or yard shall be deemed to be the mean height
of such wall. Where a building is a tenement house, as defined in the Tene-
ment House Law, the height of a yard or a court shall be measured as
prescribed in such law.
(m) The “least dimension” of a yard or court at any level is the least
of the horizontal dimensions of such yard or court at such level. If two
opposite sides of a yard or court are not parallel the horizontal dimension
between them shall be deemed to be the mean distance between them.
(n) The “length of an outer court” at any given point shall be
measured in the general direction of the side lines of such court from the
end opposite the end opening on a street, or a rear yard, to such point.
ArticLte []—Use Districts
§2. Use Districts. For the purpose of regulating and restricting the
location of trades and industries and the location of buildings designed for
specified uses, the City of New York is hereby divided into three classes of
districts: (1) residence districts, (2) business districts, and (3) unre-
stricted districts; as shown on the use district map which accompanies this
resolution and is hereby declared to be part hereof. The use districts
designated on said map are hereby established. The use district map desig-
nations and map designation rules which accompany said use district map
are hereby declared to be part thereof. No building or premises shall be
erected or used for any purpose other than a purpose permitted in the use
district in which such building or premises is located.
§ 3. Residence Districts. In a residence district no building shall be
erected other than a building, with its usual accessories, arranged, intended
or designed exclusively for one or more of the following specified uses:
(1) Dwellings, which shall include dwellings for one or more families
and boarding houses and also hotels which have thirty or more sleeping
rooms.
(2) Clubs, excepting clubs the chief activity of which is a service cus-
tomarily carried on as a business.
(3) Churches.
(4) Schools, libraries or public museums.
(5) Philanthropic or eleemosynary uses or institutions, other than cor-
rectional institutions.
234 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
(6) Hospitals and sanitariums.
(7) Railroad passenger stations.
(8) Farming, truck gardening, nurseries or green houses.
In a residence district no building or premises shall be used for any use
other than a use above specified for which buildings may be erected and for
the accessory uses customarily incident thereto. The term accessory use
shall not include a business nor shall it include any building or use not
located on the same lot with the building or use to which it is accessory. A
private garage for more than five motor vehicles shall not be deemed an
accessory use.
$4. Business Districts. (a) In a business district no building or
premises shall be used, and no building shall be erected which is arranged,
intended or designed to be used, for any of the following specified trades,
industries or uses:
Ammonia, chlorine or bleaching powder manufacture.
Asphalt manufacture or refining.
Assaying (other than gold or silver).
Blacksmithing or horseshoeing.
Boiler making.
Brewing or distilling of liquors.
Carpet cleaning.
Celluloid manufacture.
Crematory.
Distillation of coal, wood or bones.
Dyeing or dry cleaning.
Electric central station power plant.
Fat rendering.
Fertilizer manufacture.
Garage for more than five motor vehicles, not including a ware-
house where motor vehicles are received for dead storage
only, and not including a salesroom where motor vehicles are
kept for sale or for demonstration purposes only.
Gas (illuminating or heating) manufacture or storage.
Glue, size and gelatine manufacture.
Incinerator or reduction of garbage, offal, dead animals or refuse.
Iron, steel, brass or copper works.
Junk, scrap paper or rag storage or baling.
Lamp black manufacture.
Lime, cement or plaster of Paris manufacture.
Milk bottling and distributing station.
Oil cloth or linoleum manufacture.
Paint, oil, varnish or turpentine manufacture.
Petroleum refining or storage.
Printing ink manufacture.
Raw hides or skins—storage, curing or tanning.
Repair shop for motor vehicles.
Rubber manufacture from the crude material.
Saw or planing mill.
Shoddy manufacture or wool scouring.
Slaughtering of animals.
Smelting.
Soap manufacture.
Stable for more than five horses.
BUILDING ZONE’ RESOLUTION 235
Starch, glucose or dextrine manufacture.
Stock yards.
Stone or monumental works.
Sugar refining.
Sulphurous, sulphuric, nitric or hydrochloric acid manufacture.
Tallow, grease or lard manufacturing or refining.
Tar distillation or manufacture.
Tar roofing or tar waterproofing manufacture.
(b) In a business district no building or premises shall be used, and no
building shall be erected, which is arranged, intended or designed to be used
for any trade, industry or use that is noxious or offensive by reason of the
emission of odor, dust, smoke, gas or noise ; but car barns or places of amuse-
ment shall not be excluded.
c) In a business district no building or premises shall be used, and
no building shall be erected, which is arranged, intended or designed to be
used for any kind of manufacturing, except that any kind of manufacturing
not included within the prohibitions of paragraphs a and b of this section
may be carried on provided not more than 25 per cent of the total floor
space of the building is so used, but space equal to the area of the lot may
be so used in any case, although in excess of said 25 per cent. The printing
of a newspaper shall not be deemed manufacturing. No use permitted in a
residence district by section 3 shall be excluded from a business district.
§5. Unrestricted Districts. The term “unrestricted district’ is used
to designate the districts for which no regulations or restrictions are pro-
vided by this article.
§ 6. Existing Buildings and Premises. In any building or premises
any lawful use existing therein at the time of the passage of this resolution
may be continued therein, although not conforming to the regulations of the
use district in which it is maintained, or such use may be changed or con-
verted or extended throughout the building, provided, in either case, that
no structural alterations, except as required by existing laws and ordinances,
are made therein and no new building is erected, and provided further that:
(1) In a residence district no building or premises unless now devoted
to a use that is by section 4 prohibited in a business district, shall be con-
verted to such use; and
(2) In a residence or business district no building or premises unless
now devoted to a use that is by paragraph a or b of section 4 prohibited
in a business district shall be converted to such use.
No existing building designed, arranged, intended or devoted to a use
not permitted by this article in the district in which such use is located
shall be enlarged, extended, reconstructed or structurally altered unless
such use is changed to a use permitted in the district in which such building
is located; except that such building may be reconstructed or structurally
altered to an extent not greater than 50 per cent of the value of the build-
ing, exclusive of foundations, for the purpose of continuing therein, without
any extension thereof, a lawful use existing therein at the time of the
passage of this resolution, and such use may be continued therein, although
not conforming to the regulations of the use district in which it is maintained.
§7. Use District Exceptions. The Board of Appeals, created by chap-
ter 503 of the laws of 1916, may, in appropriate cases, after public notice
and hearing, and subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards, determine
and vary the application of the use district regulations herein established in
harmony with their general purpose and intent as follows:
236 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
(a) Permit the extension of an existing building and the existing use
thereof upon the lot occupied by such building at the time of the passage
of this resolution or permit the erection of an additional building upon a lot
occupied at the time of the passage of this resolution by a commercial or
industrial establishment and which additional building is a part of such
establishment ;
(b) Where a use district boundary line divides a lot in a single owner-
ship at the time of the passage of this resolution, permit a use authorized
on either portion of such lot to extend to the entire lot, but not more
than 25 feet beyond the boundary line of the district in which such use is
authorized ;
(c) Permit the extension of a building into a more restricted district
under such conditions as will safeguard the character of the more restricted
district ; :
(d) Permit in a residence district a central telephone exchange or any
building or use in keeping with the uses expressly enumerated in section 3
as the purposes for which buildings or premises may be erected or used in a
residence district ;
(e) Permit in a business district the erection of a garage or stable in
any portion of a street between two intersecting streets in which portion or
block there exists a public garage or public stable at the time of the passage
of this resolution ;
(£) Grant in undeveloped sections of the city temporary and conditional
permits for not more than two years for structures and uses in contravention
of the requirements of this article.
ArticLe JJJ—Heicut Districts
$8. Height Districts. For the purpose of regulating and limiting the
height and bulk of buildings hereafter erected, the City of New York is
hereby divided into five classes of districts: (a) one times districts, (b) one
and one-quarter times districts, (c) one and one-half times districts, (d) two
times districts, (e) two and one-half times districts ; as shown on the height
district map which accompanies this resolution and is hereby declared to be
part hereof. The height districts designaed on said map are hereby estab-
lished. The height district map designations and map designation rules
which accompany said height district map are hereby declared to be part
thereof. No building or part of a building shall be erected except in con-
formity with the regulations herein prescribed for the height district in
~ in which such building is located.
(a) In a one times district no building shall be erected to a height in
excess of the width of the street, but for each one foot that the building
or a portion of it sets back from the street line two feet shall be added to
the height limit of such building or such portion thereof.
(b) Ina one and one-quarter times district no building shall be erected
to a height in excess of one and one-quarter times the width of the street,
but for each one foot that the building or a portion of it sets back from the
street line two and one-half feet shall be added to the height limit.of such
building or such portion thereof.
(c) Ina one and one-half times district no building shall be erected to
a height in excess of one and one-half times the width of the street, but for
each one foot that the building or a portion of its sets back from the street
line three feet shall be added to the height limit of such building or such
portion thereof.
BUILDING ZONE ‘RESOLUTION 237
(d) In a two times district no building shall be erected to a height in
‘excess of twice the width of the street, but for each one foot that the building
or a portion of it sets back from the street line four feet shall be added to
the height limit of such building or such portion thereof.
(e) In a two and one-half times district no building shall be erected to
a height in excess of two and one-half times the width of the street, but for
each one foot that the building or a portion of its sets back from the street
line five feet shall be added to the height limit of such building or such
portion thereof.
$9. Height District Exceptions. (a) On streets less than 50 feet in
width the same height regulations shall be applied as on streets 50 feet in
width and, except for the purposes of paragraph d of this section, on streets
more than 100 feet in width the same height regulations shall be applied as
on streets 100 feet in width.
(b) Along a narrower street near its intersection with a wider street,
any building or any part of any building fronting on the narrower street
within 100 feet, measured at right angles to the side of the wider street,
shall be governed by the height regulations provided for the wider street.
A corner building on such intersecting streets shall be governed by the
height regulations provided for the wider street for 150 feet from the side
of such wider street, measured along such narrower street.
(c) Above the height limit at any level for any part of a building a
dormer, elevator bulkhead or other structure may be erected, provided its
frontage length on any given street be not greater than 60 per cent of the
length of such street frontage of such part of the building. Such frontage
length of such structure at any given level shall be decreased by an amount
equal to one per cent. of such street frontage o1 such part of the building
for every foot such level 1s above such height limit. If there are more than
one such structures, their aggregate frontage shall not exceed the frontage
length above permitted at any given level.
(d) If the area of the building is reduced so that above a given level
it covers in the aggregate not more than 25 per cent of the area ‘of the lot,
the building above such level shall be excepted from the foregoing pro-
visions of this article. Such portion of the building may be erected to any
height, provided that the distance which it sets backs from the street line
on each street on which it faces, plus half of the width of the street, equals
at least 75 feet. But for each one per cent of the width of the lot on the
street line that such street wall is less in length than such width of the
lot, such wall may be erected four inches nearer to the street line.
(e) When at the time plans are filed for the erection of a building
there are buildings in excess of the height limits herein provided within
50 feet of either end of the street frontage of the proposed building or
directly opposite such building across the street, the height to which the
street wall of the proposed building may rise shall be increased by an amount
not greater than the average excess height of the walls on the street line
within 50 feet of either end of the street frontage of the proposed building
and at right angles to the street frontage of the proposed building on the
opposite side of the street. The average amount of such excess height shall
be computed by adding together the excess heights above the prescribed
height limit for the street frontage in question of all of the walls on the
street line of the buildings and parts of buildings within the above defined
_frontage and dividing the sum by the total number of puddings and vacant
plots within such frontage.
238 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
(£) Nothing in this article shall prevent the projection of a cornice
beyond the street wall to an extent not exceeding five per cent of the width
of the street nor more than five feet in any case. Nothing in this article
shall prevent the erection above the height limit of a parapet wall or cornice
solely for ornament and without windows extending above such height limit
not more than five per cent of such height limit, but such parapet wall or
cornice may in any case be at least five and one-half feet high above such
height limit.
(g) The provisions of this article shall not apply to the erection of
church spires, belfries, chimneys, flues or gas holders.
(h) Where not more than 50 feet of a street frontage would otherwise
be subjected to a height limit lower than that allowed immediately beyond
both ends of such frontage, the height limit on such frontage shall be equal
to the lesser of such greater height limits.
(1) If an additional story or stories are added to a building existing at
the time of the passage of this resolution, the existing walls of which are in
excess of the height limits prescribed in this article, the height limits for
such additional story or stories shall be computed from the top of the exist-
ing walls as though the latter were not in excess of the prescribed height
limits and the carrying up of existing elevator and stair enclousures shall
be exempted from the provisions of this article.
ARTICLE [V—Area Districts
§ 10. Area Districts. For the purpose of regulating and determining
the area of yards, courts and other open spaces for buildings hereafter
erected, the City of New York is hereby divided into five classes of area
districts: A, B, C, D and E; as shown on the area district map which accom-
panies this resolution and is hereby declared to be part hereof. The area
districts designated on said map are hereby established. The area district
map designations and map designation rules which accompany said area
district map are hereby declared to be a part thereof. No building or part
of a building shall be erected except in conformity with the regulations
herein prescribed for the area district in which such building is located.
Unless otherwise expressly provided the term rear yard, side yard, outer
court or inner court when used in this article shall be deemed to refer only
to a rear yard, side yard, outer court or inner court required by this article.
No lot area shall be so reduced or diminished that the yards, courts or open
spaces shall be smaller than prescribed in this article.
$11. A Districts. In an A district a court at any given height shall
be at least one inch in least dimension for each one foot of such height.
§ 12. B Districts. Ina B district a rear yard at any given height shall
be at least two inches in least dimension for each one foot of such height.
The depth of a rear yard at its lowest level shall be at least 10 per cent. of
the depth of the lot, but need not exceed 10 feet at such level. An outer
court or a side yard at any given height shall be at least one inch in least
dimension for each one foot of such height. An outer court at any given
point shall be at least one and one-half inches in least dimension for each
one foot of length. But for each foot that an outer court at any given
height would, under the above rules, be wider in its least dimension for such
height than the minimum required by its length, one inch shall be deducted
from the required least dimension for such height for each 24 feet of such
height. A side yard for its length within 50 feet of the street may for the
purposes of the above rule be considered an outer court.
BUILDING ZONE: RESOLUTION 239
§ 13. ©€ Districts. In a C district a rear yard at any given height
shall be at least three inches in least dimension tor each one foot of such
height. The depth of a rear yard at its lowest level shall be at least 10 per
cent of the depth of the lot but need not exceed 10 feet at such level. An
outer court or a side yard at any given height shall be at least one and one-
half inches in least dimension for each one foot of such height. An outer
court at any given point shall be at least one and one-half inches in least
dimension for each one foot of length. On a lot not more than 30 feet in
mean width an outer court or a side yard at any given height shall be nov
less than one inch in least dimension for each one foot of such height, and
an inner court at any given height shall be either (1) not less than two
inches in least dimension for each one foot of such height or (2) it
shall be of an equivalent area as hereinafter specified in paragraph c of
section 17.
(b) If the owner or owners of any part of a C district set aside per-
petually for the joint recreational use of the residents of such part designated
by them, an area at least equal to 10 per cent. of the area of such part in
addition to all yard and court requirements for a B district, such part shall
be subject to the regulations-herein prescribed for a B district. Such joint
recreational space shall be composed of one or more tracts, each of which
shall be at least 40 feet in least dimension and 5,000 square feet in area
and shall be approved by the Board of Appeals as suitable for the joint
recreational use of such residents.
14. D Districts. (a) Ina D district a rear yard at any given height
shall be at least four inches in least dimension for each one foot of such
height. The depth of a rear yard at its lowest level shall be at least 10
per cent of the depth of the lot, but need not exceed 10 feet at such level.
If a building in a D district is located in a residence district as designated
on the use district map, the depth of a rear yard at its lowest level shall be
at least 20 per cent. of the depth of the lot, but need not exceed 20 feet at
such level. However, for each one foot in excess of 10 feet of the depth
of such rear yard at its lowest level, there may be substituted one foot of
depth of unoccupied space across the whole width of the front of the lot
at the curb level between the street line and the street wall of the building.
(b) Ina D district an outer court or a side yard at any given height
shall be at least two inches in least dimension for each one foot of such
height. An outer court at any given point shall be at least two inches in
least dimension for each one foot of length. On a lot not more than 30 feet
in mean width an outer court or a side yard at any given height shall be not
less than one and one-half inches in least dimension for each one foot of
such height. On such lot an outer court at any given point shall be not less
than one and one-half inches in least dimension for each one foot of length.
On such lot an inner court at any given height shall be either (1) not less
than three inches in least dimension for each one foot of such height or
(2) it shall be of an equivalent area as specified in paragraph c of section 17.
(c) In a D district no building located within a residence district as
designated on the use district map shall occupy at the curb level more than
60 per cent of the area of the lot, if an interior lot, or 80 per cent if a
corner lot. In computing such percentage any part of the area of any
corner lot in excess of 8,000 square feet shall be considered an interior lot.
(d) If the owner or owners of any part of a D district set aside per-
petually for the joint recreational use of the residents of such part desig
nated by them, an area at least equal to 10 per cent of the area of such
240 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
part in addition to all yard and court requirements for a C district, such
part shall be subject to the regulations herein prescribed for a C district.
Such joint recreational space shall be composed of one or more tracts, each
of which shall be at least 40 feet in least dimension and 5,0U0 square feet
in area and shall be approved by the Board of Appeals as suitable for the
joint recreational use of such residents.
$15. E Districts. (a) Inan E district a rear yard at any given height
shall be at least five inches in least dimension for each one foot of such
height. The depth of a rear yard at its lowest level shall be at least 15 per
cent of the depth of the lot, but need not exceed 15 feet at such level. If
a building in an E district is located in a residence district as designated on
the use district map, the depth of a rear yard at its lowest level shall be at
least 25 per cent of the depth of the lot, but need not exceed 25 feet at such
level. However, for each one foot in excess of 10 feet of the depth of such
rear yard at its lowest level there may be substituted one foot of depth
of unoccupied space across the whole width of the front of the lot at the
curb level between the street line and the street wall of the building. In
an E district on at least one side of every building located within a residence
district there shall be a side yard along the side lot line for the full depth
of the lot or back to the rear yard.
(b) In an E district an outer court or side yard at any given height
shall be at least two and one-half inches in least dimension for each one
foot of such height. On a lot not more than 50 feet in mean width an outer
court or a side yard at any given height shall be at least two inches in least
dimension for each one foot of such height. An outer court at any given
point shall be at least two and one-half inches in least dimension for each
one foot of length.
(c) In an E district no building located within a residence district as
designated on the use district map shall occupy at the curb level more than
50 per cent of the area of the lot, if an interior lot, or 70 per cent if a
corner lot, and above a level 18 feet above the curb no building shall occupy
more than 30 per cent of the area of the lot, if an interior lot, or 40 per
cent if a corner lot. In computing such percentage any part of the area
of any corner lot in excess of 8,000 square feet shall be considered an
interior lot.
§ 16. Rear Yards. (a) Except in A districts, for lots or portions of
lots that are back to back there shall be rear yards extending along the rear
lot lines of such lots or portions of lots wherever they are more than 55
feet back from the nearest street. Such rear yard shall be at least of the
area and dimensions herein prescribed for the area district in which it is
located at every point along such rear lot line. Within 55 feet of the nearest
street no rear yards shall be required. No rear yard shall be required on
any corner lot nor on the portion of any lot that is back to back with a
corner lot.
(b) Where a building is not within a residence district as designated
on the use district map, the lowest level of a rear yard shall not be above
the sill level of the second story windows, nor in any case more than 23 feet
above the curb level. Where a building is within a residence district the
lowest level of a rear yard shall not be above the curb level, except that not
more than 40 per cent of the area of the yard may be occupied by the build-
ing up to a level 18 feet above the curb level. In the case of a church,
whether within or without a residence district, such 40 per cent may be
occupied up to a level of 30 feet above the curb level.
BUILDING ZONE RESOLUTION 241
(c) Chimneys or flues may be erected within a rear yard, provided they
do not exceed five square feet in area in the aggregate and do not obstruct
ventilation.
(d) Except in A districts, where a building on an interior lot between
lots for which rear yards are required runs through the block from street
to street or to within 55 feet of another street, there shall be on each side
lot line above the sill level of the second story windows and in any case
above a level! 23 feet above the curb level a court of at least equivalent area
at any given height to that required for an inner court at such height and
having a least dimension not less than that required for an outer court at the
same height.
(e) ‘When a proposed building is on a lot which is back to back with
a lot or lots on which there is a building or buildings having rear yards less
in depth than would be required under this article, the depth of the rear yard
of the proposed building shall not be required to be greater at any given
level than the average depth of the rear yards directly back to back with it
at such level, but in no case shall the depth of such rear yard be less at any
height than the least dimension prescribed for an outer court at such height.
§ 17. Courts. (a) If a room in which persons live, sleep, work or
congregate receives its light and air in whole or in part directly from an
open space on the same lot with the building, there shall be at least one
inner court, outer court, side yard or rear yard upon which a window or
ventilating skylight opens from such room. Such inner court, outer court
or side yard shall be at least of the area and dimensions herein prescribed
for the area district in which it is located. Such rear yard shall be at least
of the area and dimensions herein prescribed for an inner court in the area
district in which it is located. In an A district, such inner court, outer court,
side yard or rear yard shall be at least of the area and dimensions herein
prescribed for a court in such district. The unoccupied space within the
lot in front of every part of such window shall be not less than three feet,
measured at right angles thereto. Courts, yards and other open spaces, if
provided in addition to those required by this section, need not be of the
area and dimensions herein prescribed. The provisions of this section shal!
not be deemed to apply to courts or shafts for bathrooms, toilet compart-
ments, hallways or stairways.
(b) The least dimension of an outer court, inner court or side yard at
its lowest level shall be not less than four feet, except that where the walls
bounding a side yard within the lot are not more than 25 feet in mean height
and not more than 40 feet in length, such least dimension, except in an E
district, may be not less than three feet. Where any outer court opens on
a street such street may be considered as part of such court.
(c) The least dimension of an inner court at any given height shall be
not less than that which would be required in inches for each one foot of
height for a rear yard of the same height, except that an inner court of
equivalent area may be substituted for said court, provided that for such
area its least dimension be not less than one-half of its greatest dimension.
Tf an inner court is connected with a street by a side yard for each one foot
that such side yard is less than 65 feet in depth from the street, one square
foot may be deducted from the required area of the inner court for each
15 feet of height of such court. If the lot is not required under this resolu-
tion to have a rear yard, an outer court, not opening on a street, shall open
at any level on an inner court on the rear line of the lot and such inner court
shall be deemed a rear yard in such case.
242 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
$18. Area District Exceptions. (a) The area required in a court or
yard at any given level shall be open from such level to the sky unobstructed,
except for the ordinary projections of skylights and parapets above the
bottom of such court or yard, and except for the ordinary projections of
window sills, belt courses, cornices and other ornamental features to the
extent of not more than four inches. However, where a side yard or an
outer court opens on a street a cornice may project not over five feet into
such side yard or outer court within five feet of the street wall of the
building.
(b) An open or lattice enclosed iron fire escape, fireproof outside stair-
way or solid-floored balcony to a fire tower may project not more than four
feet into a rear yard or an inner court, except that an open or lattice en-
closed iron fire escape may project not more than eight feet into a rear yard
or into an inner court when it does not occupy more than 20 per cent of the
area of such inner court.
(c) A corner of a court or yard may be cut off between walls of the
same building, provided that the length of the wall of such cut-off does not
exceed seven feet.
(d) An offset to a court or yard may be considered as a part of such
court or yard, provided that it is no deeper in any part than it is wide on the
open side and that such open side be in no case less than six feet wide.
(e) If a building is erected on the same lot with another building the
several buildings shall, for the purposes of this article, be considered as a
single building. Any structure, whether independent of or attached to a
building, shall for the purposes of this article be deemed a building or a part
of a building.
(f) If an additional story or stories are added to a building existing
at the time of the passage of this resolution, the courts and yards of which
do not conform to the requirements of this article, the least dimensions of
yards and courts shall be increased from the top of the existing yard or
court walls, as though they were of the prescribed dimensions at such heights
and the carrying up of existing elevator and stair enclosures shall be
exempted from the provisions of this article.
ARTICLE V—GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE
§ 19. Interpretation; Purpose. In interpreting and applying the pro-
visions of this resolution, they shall be held to be the minimum requirements
adopted for the promotion of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience
and general welfare. It is not intended by this resolution to repeal, abrogate,
annul or in any way to impair or interfere with any existing provision of law
or ordinance or any rules, regulations or permits previously adopted or
issued or which shall be adopted or issued pursuant to law relating to the
use of buildings or premises ; nor is it intended by this resolution to interfere
with or abrogate or annul any easements, covenants or other agreements
between parties; provided, however, that where this resolution imposes a
greater restriction upon the use of buildings or premises or upon height of
buildings or requires larger yards, courts or other open spaces than are im-
posed or required by such existing provision of law or ordinance or by
such rules, regulations or permits or by such easements, covenants or agree-
ments, the provisions of this resolution shall control.
§ 20. Rules and Regulations; Modifications of Provisions. The Board
of Standards and Appeals, created by chapter 503 of the Laws of 1916,
shall adopt from time to time such rules and regulations as they may deem
BUILDING ZONE RESOLUTION 243
necessary to carry into effect the provisions of this resolution. Where
there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in the way of carry-
ing out the strict letter of the provisions of this resolution the Board of
Appeals shall have power in a specific case to vary any such provision in
harmony with its general purpose and intent, so that the public health,
safety and general welfare mav be secured and substantial justice done.
Where the street layout actually on the ground varies from the street layout
as shown on the use, height or area district map, the designation shown on
the mapped street shall be applied by the Board of Appeals to the unmapped
streets in such a way as ‘to carry out the intent and purpose of the plan for
the particular section in question. Before taking any action authorized in
this section the Board of Appeals shall give public notice and hearing.
$21. Unlawful Use; Certificate of Occupancy. It shall be unlawful
to use or permit the use of any building or premises or part thereof here-
after created, erected, changed or converted wholly or partly in its use or
structure until a certificate fof occupancy to the effect that the building or
premises or the part thereof so created, erected, changed or converted and
the proposed use thereof conform to the provisions of this resolution shall
have been issued by the superintendent of buildings of the borough in which
such building or premises is located, or, in the case of a tenement house as
defined in the Tenement House Law, by the tenement house commissioner.
In the case of such buildings or premises it shall be the duty of the super-
intendent of buildings or the tenement house commissioner, as the case may
be, to issue a certificate of occupancy within ten days after a request for the
same shall be filed in his office by any owner of a building or premises
affected by this resolution, provided said building or premises, or the part
thereof so created, erected, changed or converted, and the proposed use
thereof, conforms with all the requirements herein set forth. Under rules
and regulations of the Board of Standards and Appeals a temporary cer-
tificate of occupancy for a part of a building may be issued by the super-
intendent of buildings or the tenement house commissioner, as the case may
be. Upon written request from the owner, the superintendent of buildings
or the tenement house commissioner, as the case may be, shall issue a cer-
tificate of occupancy for any building or premises existing at the time of the
passage of this resolution certifying after inspection the use of the building
or premises and whether such use conforms to the provisions of this
resolution.
§ 22. Enforcement, Legal Procedure, Penalties. This resolution shall
be enforced by the tenement house commissioner, the fire commissioner and
by the superintendent of buildings in each borough under the rules ond
regulations of the Board of Standards and Appeals. The tenement house
commissioner shall enforce the provisions herein contained in so far as they
affect or relate to tenement houses as defined by the Tenement House Law.
The superintendent of buildings shall in each borough enforce the provisions
herein contained in so far as they relate to buildings or premises other than
tenement houses. The fire commissioner shall enforce the provisions herein
contained, in so far as they relate to the use of completed buildings or
premises, or part thereof, other than tenement houses. For any and every
violation of the previsions of this resolution or of the rules and regulations
adopted thereunder. the owner, general agent or contractor of a building or
premises where such violation has been “Commniked or shall exist, and the
lessee or tenant of an entire building or entire premises where such violation
has been committed or shall exist, and the owner, general agent, contractor,
244 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
lessee or tenant of any part of a building or premises in which part such
violation has been committed or shall exist, and the general agent, architect,
builder, contractor or any other person who commits, takes part or assists
in such violation or who maintains any building or premises in which any
such violation shali exist, shall be liable to the same legal procedure and the
same penalties as are prescribed in any law, statute or ordinance for viola-
tions of the Building Code, and for such violations the same legal remedies
shall be had and they shall be prosecuted in the same manner as prescribed
in any law or ordinance in the case of violations of said Building Code.
§ 23. Amendments, Alterations and Changes in District Lines. The
Board of Estimate and Apportionment may from time to time on its own
motion or on petition, after public notice and hearing, amend, supplement or
change the regulations and districts herein established. Whenever the
owners of 50 per cent or more of the frontage in any district or part thereof
shall present a petition duly signed and acknowledged to the Board of
Estimate and Apportionment requesting an amendment, supplement, change
or repeal of the regulations prescribed for such district or part thereof, it
shall be the duty of the Board to vote upon said petition within 90 days
after the filing of the same by the petitioners with the secretary of the
Board. If, however, a protest against such amendment, supplement or
change be presented, duly signed and acknowledged by the owners of 20
per cent or more of any frontage proposed to be altered, or by the owners
of 20 per cent of the frontage immediately in the rear thereof, or by the
owners of 20 per cent of the frontage directly opposite the frontage pro-
posed to be altered, such amendment shall not be passed except by the
unanimous vote of the Board. If any area is hereafter transferred to
another district by a change in district boundaries by an amendment, as
above provided, the provisions of this resolution in regard to buildings
or premises existing at the time of the passage of this resolution shall apply
to buildings or premises existing at the time of passage of such amendment
in such transferred area.
§ 24. Completion and Restoration of Existing Buildings. (a) Nothing
herein contained shall require any change in the plans, construction or desig-
nated use of a building for which a building permit has been heretofore
issued, or plans for which are on file with the building superintendent or
with the tenement house department at the time of the passage of this
resolution, and a permit for the erection of which is issued within three
months of the passage of this resolution and the construction of which, in
either case shall have been diligently prosecuted within a year of the date
of such permit, and the ground story framework of which, including the
second tier of beams, shall have been completed within such year, and which
entire building shall be completed according to such plans as filed within
five years from the date of the passage of this resolution.
(b) Nothing in this resolution shall prevent the restoration of a build-
ing wholly or partly destroyed by fire, explosion, act of God or act of the
public enemy or prevent the continuance of the use of such building or part
thereof as such use existed at the time of such destruction of such building
or part thereof or prevent a change of such existing use under the limitations
provided in Section 6. Nothing in this resolution shall prevent the restora-
tion of a wall declared unsafe by the superintendent of buildings or a board
of survey.
§ 25. When Effective. This resolution shall take effect immediately.
. OR
eee 2 seake
UAC ee
as Oe 7
had aN LN
Je
USE DISTRICT MAP DESIGNATIONS
== = Resaence disirict veeeeeseecces
Wihin_street Not within street
Unresineted District
j i Al
Se 813/0055 0131/1! —
Winin sireet Und eler mn ed Aree
a, SNyIAets DISIter on side of sirect
On deol street
\ -
SS
CoRRERCESEROCE Unresiricied Distria
For explanation of the designations and of the rules regarding them
see Appendix VIII.
re = APL
mined FE erect
=
pio hI
be an
Le aoa
a a3
LTT TT |
Mate
Uf
ME
Ai
a Ny Phy
t
fo]
a anne
er se oe He Se
Fic. 123—USE DISTRICT MAP OF THE BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN, ADOPTED JULY 25, 1916.
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
USE DISTRICT MAP
OF THE
“i BOROUGH OF THE BRONX
1) ar Aportep Jury 25, 1916
vi, : “M3 p sae
=F My = ———
7 " zs va , USE DISTRICT MAP DESIGNATIONS
an ath = aT ae = Residence district COO Unrestricted Disiriet
AW ; PRT Business District — \ pee pa.
att " ween O5/N058 District On side of street
' On side of street
i ama cane XW arene em
Mol wiltin 0000 side of street Nol on side of street
is ee
SS We a ell arene of the designations and of
SN AWNANN —1 i t? y RK ._« the rules regarding them see
\ \\s Shi x TS Appendix VIII.
S) i
PIS \\
JOLT
it ee
= xy «Wy
Alta OUI ZANT TT
uate
Bt CT ia
{ pf; £y/ peo
I “fy 4 F I fa/ f { lA Y|
lla aflay (Thal /// 8 Sy
Pal 1) 97 ap Fe) SR. Ny |
hs: SOON ij. Te LO KOSS ay =—
Ge ol ae Ware at a ae : =|
Nie © : rig ey mes “A “. Se
s
os Cc
eg IT SEIT
2 ao ie
Lone
Ws
an
Lp. \,
Wee
\\ \¥\
ries:
4)
Tye 194
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT t
USE DISTRICT MAP : eet i +> Lao, :
OF THE pe ‘ ; . Wy
BOROUGH OF BROOKLYN See J = ‘ +
ADOPTED JULY 25, 1916
——
USE_DISTRICT MAP OF SIGNATIONS
——= = = Aemaence Oiris sesseecsevees owesinnes Gane
‘Not minis street
Business ovstnes AN ecrerained Are
scsseu oxo Sonar
sosaew one SSCS eermerews
OR Unrenirieled Quine
Wirt
For explanation of the designations wet 2 2 . erty ath! 2 ALN,
. S 5; = Eas RTE LL be |)
and of the rules regarding them : aE: < : ay Spy y,, ys yi iV sy)
see Appendix VIII. : Gy Oe gem : _ A
= = Al
Seri
aXe |
ti
<i
ais 4 i
a 2 i i
{ yy
| |
CCUNDETERMINED (
aoc Kawa
EA
AG RESTRICTED —
“CL AGAINST INDUSTRY
oe
SV NO Thusiness_pistaict) —
a \ = C2 re
ci
/( Waites — Jace
| 1 ts
sentseetel
tt bss ml
}
dy
QQ
Ve
NM
rN
m\\\ .
; \} NS ‘ '
Ge Yi
Y . ASS als
Or.
Ty
si)
f
tl
IN
TU
hi
I
1
ME:
|
Ell
ll
wi
AL
AN
—\
Ex
XK
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
USE DISTRICT MAP
= < OF THE
A\NN Es RRO : BOROUGH OF QUEENS
aH \\ \ ADOPTED JULY 25, 1916
—_——S ==
USE DISTRICT MAP DESIGNATIONS
Atvdence Oisirict seeseves
Besiness Oi 9
<a WT —~~
Or Sided srect
vesmens wane \\0\))\)\\)”)!" nent ane
Medea ner
earesiricted Oisinat
For explanation of the designations and of the rules regarding them see Appendix VIII
TACT)
(
WEST. AGAINST INDUSTRY =)
f jus ke
LEE
FTTH
f
Face
RESTRICTED
~< AGAINST
< \, [eae
RESTRICTED) AGAINST) INDUSTRY>
(BUSINESS DISTRICT) RUSINESS O/STRIGT)
INDUSTRY
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
USE DISTRICT MAP
OF THE
BOROUGH OF RICHMONI)
ADOPTED JULY 25, 1916
———S_—=.
USE DISTRICT MAP DESIGNATIONS
Residence Oisirict wee eases Unrestricted District
MN street
Suwaess distri
asiaess Oise On side st ureet
was one SSS mem
Warentricted District
For explanation of the designations and of the rules regarding them
see Appendix VIII.
I
RIDE
Ss
Ne
Sha
Fic, 128,
\ RE Mf) i . Hy yj
Zae® AML f 3 7
Micah aN : &
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
HEIGHT DISTRICT MAP
OF THE
BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN
ADOPTED JULY 25, 1916 Heicuy Destaier
UNDARY Lies
———=
For explanation of the designations and of the rules
regarding them see Appendix VIII.
«
AN
a Ay
TE
D LAUDS
OO) a
EST
l
Fic. 129—HEIGHT DISTRICT MAP OF THE BOROUGH OF THE BRONX.
Adopted July 25, 1916, by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment.
For explanation of the designations and of the rules regarding them see Appendix VIII.
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND
APPORTIONMENT
HEIGHT DISTRICT MAP
or THE
BOROUGHS OF BROOKLYN
AND QUEENS
Adopted July 25, 1916
For explanation of the designations
and the rules regarding them
see Appendix VIII
ie
tip
if strad,
ys aM
Geo ieh
Vy, big
SSC)
Diy, CH
vegan
I Sc
uf Sas
‘wars
ANS SUL
Ny AN
Me
sw it
Fic. 131—HEIGHT DISTRICT MAP OF THE BOROUGH OF RICHMOND.
Adopted July 25, 1916, by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment.
For explanation of the designations and of the rules regarding them see Appendix VIII.
a
|
i
Fic. 132—AREA DISTRICT MAP OF THE BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN.
Adopted July 25, 1916, by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment.
For explanation of the designations and of the rules regarding them see Appendix VIII.
Fic. 133—AREA DISTRICT MAP OF THE BOROUGH OF THE BRONX.
Adopted July 25, 1916, by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment.
For explanation of the designations and of the rules regarding them see Appéndix VIII.
-
sth pe cial ahs bah a
*.
mas Seep Veh cede een (Lip ria) ‘ » ae 4apes a, x
CITY OF NEW YORK
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND
APPORTIONMENT
AREA DISTRICT MAP
OF THE
BOROUGHS OF BROOKLYN AND QUEENS
Adopted July 25, 1916
For explanation of the designations and of the
rules regarding them see Appendix VIII.
eae tT ait
SAMUI
We WG,
TIS
ibs d
the
mit
MN i
» bent)
Tytitl
Ma
Ao (AL Nh or
ew eae
iS
Tre 134
RA KIT AN
Fig. 135—AREA DISTRICT MAP OF THE BOROUGH OF RICHMOND.
Adopted July 25, 1916, by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment.
For explanation of the designations and of the rules regarding them see Appendix VIII.
APPENDIX VIII—MAP DESIGNATIONS AND MAP DESIGNA-
TION RULES ACCOMPANYING BUILDING ZONE RESOLU-
THON, AIDOIPINSID) WIESE 25, ISH
Usr District MAp DeEsiGNaATIONS
="
—
== Residence Ourstrict
=
Within street
Ps Rg ess District
Within street ~
Business District
On side of street
2 BS GS Ge oe Ee Business District
Not within oron side of street
Feeoeeeeeoees 8 Unrestricted District
Within street
OO Oe Unrestricted District
Not within street
a0 Geeessecs 3 Co---- © u-—
\ AK Undetermined Area
On side of street
QQ cerermined Area
Not on side of street
Use District Mar DersiGNATION RULES.
(a) The use district designated within a street shall include the areas
adjoining the portion of the street so designated on each side of such street,
between such street and lines parallel to and 100 feet distant measured at
right angles from each side of such street and limited at either end by lines
Gprestricred Business
Unrestricted
Business
Use, rule a”
at right angles to such street at the termination of such designation ; except
that where there is a cross street on either side at such termination, such
limiting line shall follow the center line of such cross street.
246 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
(b) The use district designated on the side of a street shall include the
area on such side of the street adjoining the portion thereof so designated
between such side of such street and lines parallel thereto and 100 feet
distant therefrom, measured at right angles thereto, and limited at either
end by lines at right angles to such designated side of such street at the
termination of such designation ; except that where there is a cross street at
such termination the limiting line shall follow the center line of such cross
street.
STRELT
“pj
(c) The use district designated on the side of bulkhead lines, shore
lines, boundary lines of a state, city, county, borough, United States reserva-
tion, public park or cemetery, shall include the area on the side of such lines
so designated and adjoining the portion thereof so designated between such
lines and lines parallel thereto and 100 feet distant therefrom, measured at
right angles thereto, and limited at either end by lines at right angles to such
lines so designated at the termination of such designation ; except that where
there is a cross street at such termination the limiting line shall follow the
center line of such street.
Bulkhead ZB
(d) The use district designated on the side of a railroad shall include
the area on such side of the right of way of such railroad adjoining the
portion so designated between such side of such right of way and lines
parallel thereto and 100 feet distant therefrom, measured at right angles
passes a eos
UPTCSITIClED
Use rule d
thereto, and limited at either end by lines at right angles to such side of
such right of way at the termination of such designation ; except that where
there is a cross street at such termination the limiting line shall follow the
center line of such street.
MAP DESIGNATIONS AND MAP DESIGNATION RULES 247
(e) Where a single use district designation is shown within the inter-
section of two or more streets the district so designated shall include the
areas between the sides of such intersecting streets and lines parallel to and
100 feet distant from the sides of each of any two intersecting streets,
measured at right angles thereto.
WH eCSITICTER
STREET ee@800@
Use, rule &
(e) (Continued) When, however, none of the intersecting streets con-
tinue across the intersection-beyond one of said intersecting streets, the
district designated in the intersection shall include the area adjoining the
intersection on the uncrossed side of the latter street bounded by such side
of such latter street and a line parallel thereto and 100 feet distant there-
from, measured at right angles thereto and by lines at right angles to the
crossed side of such latter street at the corners farthest from the intersec-
tion of the areas at the street front on the crossed side which are governed
by the above rule. Rule (e) shall control regardless of any designation
within any of the intersecting streets; except that a designation on the side
of a street shall control as provided in rule (b).
BUSINESS
Use, rule ©
(£) Where one use district designation is shown in one part of a street
intersection and another designation is shown in another part, each designa-
Residence | BUSINESS \@
Use, rule F
tion in the intersection shall govern as provided in rule (e), but only within
those blocks actually touched by such designation in the intersection.
248 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
(g) Where two streets cross each other at different levels and the use
district designations within the two streets are different, the designation in
the lower street shall govern the use of the adjoining areas according to
rule (a), but if such use is less restrictive than that designated within the
street at the upper level, the designation in the latter street shall govern
exclusively above the curb level of the upper street, as provided in rule (a).
Guswess(less PestRicrive|ip ro Core
44VER OF Sewer SrREeI-
AIASIOENCE A8orE
VENER
os (Resiaence Desigrarre)
BUSINESS UP To
CAS 4484 oF
MbAER STREET
AESIDENCE AlBove
‘
9
N
ARESIOENCE ABOVE Cuvee LevEd,
OF MIEHER STREET Aro ween
100 * THEREOF
MIGHENP = STREET near aay
Business YP Fo Ceres LEE
of NISHER STREET
Lower STREET SEY CIDA. a a (Cue Leven)
FLELATION,
Use, rule Gg
(h) A single use district designation completely surrounding an area
shall govern the use of such area, except where such area or a part thereof
is otherwise specifically indicated.
‘
aot!
STREET .
Same as surrounding Pesigit?/!07
Jn Hus example residence.
ere
MAP DESIGNATIONS AND MAP DESIGNATION RULES 249
(i) An island not otherwise designated is an undetermined area.
(j) The use of any part of an area bounded by two or more district
designations, or any area or part thereof not governed by express provision
of these rules, shall be governed by the district designation nearest thereto,
except where otherwise specifically indicated.
((nrestricted) |
Cx x xX)
(
STREET
~~
Ss
Si
(business)
STREET (residence)
Use, rule 3
(k) Where under the preceding rules a use district of one class would
overlap a use district of another class, the area that would be common to
both districts under the above rules shall be included in the district having
the less restrictive regulations, but the area so included shall not extend
across a street within which a more restrictive district designation is shown.
Business
DENCE STRE.(
-»
f RESIDENCE _ S>
BUSINESS STREET
Use, rule “Kk ” Use, rule “k
(1) The residence district designation is used within street lines only.
A street shown by double, light, short, dash lines shall not be regarded as
containing a residence district designation. Street lines with blank space
within them do not constitute a residence district designation when located
within an undetermined area. A blank space occupying the whole or a part
of a street intersection shall be considered a residence district designation
only when it is a continuation of a residence district designation shown
250 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
within a street entering such intersection, and only when no unrestricted
district designation therein is a continuation of an unrestricted district desig-
nation shown within a street entering such intersection.
Hetcut District Map DESIGNATIONS
HEIGHT District
BOUNDARY LINES
ee 977577 Mittin @ streer
Boundary lire
Rilaae On the side Of a sree!
oundary Hie
—__StneeT 3 Agproximately 100 feet from the
SS * side of 2 siree/
Goundary ine
Llc J ag@ueagaag = & Withoul reference fo Streers
Boundary tine
Hereut Districr Map DrstGNaTION RULES
(a) An area surrounded by a district boundary line shall be in the
height district designated therein, except as otherwise provided by these
rules.
(b) Where a district boundary line between any two height districts is
shown within a street or streets, the district permitting the greater height
shall extend across such street or streets so as to include the area between
the further side of such street or streets and lines parallel thereto and 100
fe CS QUSITICT
(permitting the greater Aerght ))
]
15 HIMES
Sourndary L10e
S1MNCS QUST ICT
Height, rule b
feet distant therefrom, measured at right angles thereto. But such extended
area of such district shall be limited where such boundary line passes from
MAP DESIGNATIONS AND MAP DESIGNATION RULES 251
within a street to outside a street by the center line of the cross street when
such change takes place in a cross street, otherwise by a line at right angles
to the side of such street with boundary line therein at point of change.
(c) Where a district boundary line between any two height districts is
shown approximately 100 feet from the side of a street or streets and parallel
thereto, such boundary line separating the two districts shall be deemed to be
100 feet distant measured at right angles from such side of such street or
streets and parallel thereto.
district
C4, district
vy & times district extends
70 10079 from sve fires
Os s1reers 5)
Height, rule c
(d) Where a district boundary line between any two height districts is
shown along a railroad such boundary line shall be deemed to be the center
line of the right of way of such railroad.
(e) Any island not otherwise designated within the limits of the City
of New York shall be deemed to be in a 1¥4 times height district.
(£) Where under the preceding rules a height district of one class would
overlap a height district of another class, the area that would be common to
both districts under the above rules shall be included in the district per-
mitting the greater height.
S
&
wR
5
Je times astrict
2
STREET
2 times QSlt1cl
deight, rule ft
nN
on
bo
BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
AREA District Map DesiGNATIONS
AREA DISTRICT
BOUNDARY LINES
STRELT Hilbip 2 SiC
Ufoundary de
STREET Op the side of 3 stree/
Wounaary tre
STREET 3 Aeeroximately 100 feet from the
SE % Side of a steer
Zourdary sine
a eon ee ee Without reference fo sireers
Boundary ine
Area District Mar DesigNatTion RULES
(a) An area surrounded by a district boundary line shall be in the area
district designated therein, except as otherwise provided by these rules.
(b) Where a district boundary line between any two area districts is
shown within a street or streets, the district having the less restrictive regula-
tions shall extend across such street or streets so as to include the area
between the further side of such street or streets and lines parallel thereto
and 100 feet distant therefrom measured at right angles thereto. But such
extended area of such district shall be limited where such boundary line
passes from within a street to outside a street by the center line of the cross
street when such change takes place in a cross street, otherwise by a line at
right angles to the side of such street with boundary line therein at point of
change.
(ess restricfed. /)
D Ust1c/ BSI ICS
Area,rule b Area, rule c
(c) Where a district boundary line between any two area districts is
shown on the side of a street, such side of such street shall be deemed the
boundary line separating the two districts.
MAP DESIGNATIONS AND MAP DESIGNATION RULES
(d) Where a district boundary line between any two area districts is
shown approximately 100 feet from the side of a street or streets and parallel
thereto, such boundary line separating the two districts shall be deemed to be
100 feet distant measured at right angles from such side of such street or
streets and parallel thereto.
STREE K
ay, ie
&
bk
Cy
kK
5
mo on
19) E eres district extends fo so0feef
trom the side line of the street or stree/s.
Area, rule d-
(e) Where a district boundary line between any two area districts is
shown along the side of a railroad, such side of the right of way of such
railroad shall be deemed to be the boundary line separating the two districts.
STREET
C astrich
STPEET
Area, rule €
(£) Where a district boundary line between any two area districts is
shown and dimensions given locating it from recognized lines or points, the
area designations on either side shall govern up to the district boundary as
thus located.
LZ GUSITICT
OTPLLE 7
OTPLE |
C OUVSITICT
Area, rule €
254 BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND APPORTIONMENT
(g) Any island and any area on which buildings may be constructed in
navigable waters outside shore or bulkhead lines within the limits of the City
of New York which is not otherwise designated shall be deemed to be an A
district. Any other undesignated area shall be deemed to be in the district
nearest thereto.
(h) Where under the preceding rules an area district of one class would
overlap an area district of another class, the area that would be common to
both districts under the above rules shall be included in the district having
the less restrictive regulations.
D astrict
B QStICh
STREET
C district
Area, rule “h
APPENDIX IX.—DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS
These notes and accompanying diagrams were prepared to explain
or illustrate more fully the rules laid down in the resolution. They are not
a part of the resolution. They indicate in certain cases the need of supple-
mentary rules, which under the resolution may be adopted by the Board of
Standards and Appeals.
Sec. 1, Par. (b). The street line, as here defined, is virtually the
same as “ building line” as used in the Building Code, except that here
the street line is without exception the line dividing the public street or
open space from private property. Even where there is a setback by law
or by covenant in the deed, the street line remains as above defined.
Sec. 1, Par. (c). Throughout the resolution where the word “ mean ”
is used, it is intended that it should be taken in the sense of the arithmetical
mean or weighted average and not in the sense of half the sum of the ex-
tremes. The exact definition of “ mean” and the method of its determina-
tion may appropriately be covered by a ruling of the Board of Standards
and Appeals.. In determining the width of the street for the purpose of
regulating the height of a building, advantage may be taken of public parks
and other open spaces, but this advantage is strictly limited by Section 9,
' paragraph (a), which applies to streets of more than 100 feet in width
the same height regulations that are applied to streets 100 feet in width.
Sec. 1, Par. (d). This defihition of curb level is very nearly the same
as the one in the Building Code and the one in the Tenement House Law.
It will be observed, however, that in the last clause of Section 1, paragraph
(4), the definition of curb in the Tenement House Law will govern wher-
ever the building comes under the Tenement House Law. If a corner
building faces on a 60-foot street and two 100-foot streets, the height of the
building may be determined from the higher of the two 100-foot streets.
A street or public open space wider than 100 feet will be considered to be
100 feet in width. Ifa building not on a corner runs through a block from
one street to another each street wall will take its height from the street
on which it faces, but the yards and courts will all be reckoned from the
curb level of the highest street whether on a corner or not.
Sec. 1, Par. (e). A street wall, as here defined, is not necessarily a
wall on the street line. Here the street line is the dividing line between the
public legal street and the private property regardless of whether there 1s
a set-back easement or not. If a street wall or a portion of a street wall
is set at an angle with the street line, it should be considered as set back
at its average distance from the street line. Of course, this will not pre-
vent the projection of ordinary dormers and bay windows beyond the street
line as allowed in the Building Code, nor will it prevent the projection of
wall signs, etc., provided that they keep within the height regulations. The
street wall is also intended to include the front walls of set backs as they
may occur above the height limit at the street line and will also include
the front walls of dormers, towers and headhouses. The street wall will
also include any other wall which is near enough to any street to be affected
by the height limits upon such street.
Sec. 1, Par. (f). The height of a building is virtually the same as
defined in the Building Code. A roof sign or other structure on the build-
ing would have to come within the height limit. Parapets, dormers, head-
256 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
houses, roof signs, etc., may be excepted from the above as set forth in the
exceptions to the height provisions in Section 9.
“HEIGHT OF A BUILDING
Non-tenement Tenement Non- tenement
SssssSssssss“Sssssssssg
V
Y .
]
ASSSSSSSSS
Sec. 1, Par. (g). The depth of a lot would be measured, where pos-
sible, parallel with the sides of the lot, but if they were not parallel it would
be measured in the direction of the bisectrix of the angle between them.
Where there would be more than one bisectrix the resultant bisectrix would
be used.
Sec. 1, Par. (h). This differs from the definition in the Tenement
House Law. There the rear yard is between the extreme rear line of the
building and the rear of the lot. Here it would be between any rear line
of the building and the corresponding rear line of the lot behind it. How-
ever, it has been the custom of the Tenement House Commissioner to
interpret that law in the manner here suggested.
Street
Inner‘court
Street
BiG. 1372
Sec. 1, Par. (i). This definition of the depth of a rear yard applies
only to determining the depth of a rear yard as a percentage of the depth
of the lot. It does not relate to the “least dimension” of a yard required
at any given height.
DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS Dy
Sec. 1, Par. (k). The definitions of courts are approximately the
same as those of the Tenement House Law. In the case of a building that
is not required to have a rear yard, a rear open space equal in size to an
inner court is required where 'an outer court or a side yard opens on it.
Sec. 1, Par. (1). The height of yards and courts will as a general rule
be measured as they are in the Light and Ventilation Article of the Build-
ing Code, that is, from the lowest level of the yard or court. In a business
district the lowest level might be the top of the ground story or it might
be 23 feet above the curb. To allow for stairway and elevator pent houses,
the highest level of a court or yard wall can be the mean of all of the
highest levels of such wall. As an exception to the above rule for all build-
ings that are subject to the provisions of the Tenement House Law, the
height of yards and courts will be measured from the curb level even though
the yard or court actually starts at or above the second floor level.
Sec. 1, Par. (m). If a court or yard is of irregular shape, say, for
example, a trapezoid, the mean clear horizontal dimensions in each direc-
tion will be calculated and the least of these would be the one taken for the
"HEIGHT OF AYARD OR A COURT.
Nop -LCPEIMLUS
Mean helgly Mean height Mean heght
Of well OF wel!
leigh} Of COUT ‘Or yall
Lotto of
Courtoryerd Lortor or
COU OLYHA — Cyrh Jeve/
Height of court or yard >
He Gf OF COUN U1 yaa
Curb feve/ Bottom oF
Court or yard
Curb seve.
The height of yards and courts provided for JER CTICMIS
unider fhe Tenemert House law tall Lesjegsured 2s
gpeciiied in that [eK
Fic. 138.
purposes of this resolution. The exact method of computing such dimen-
sions will presumably be covered by a rule of the Board of Standards and
Appeals.
Sec. 1, Par. (n). The length of an outer court should always be
measured from the closed end. This is done with a view to encouraging
the widening of courts near the open ends.
Sec. 8, Par. (b). Exactly the same principles apply in all five dis-
tricts. The accompanying diagram shows the five curves of limiting heights.
In a one and one-half times district the height of all buildings will be made
to conform approximately to that now provided for in the Tenement House
Law. However, on account of the difference in definition of curb level,
buildings other than tenement houses will take their height from the widest
street and not from the street of greatest grade. A setback means briefly
this: that if an owner wishes to carry a building to a greater height than
that allowed on the street line, as, for example, above 90 feet on a 60-foot
258 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Chert showing Height Linurs at the streer line ror fl
Steel widies 1 EM Hel gfel LSI ICT.
Payee
u/ eet
YW eee ie
110 PEEP ie ae
iooL | | | | VAY a7 |
Ta
ee VS af The. ST ee) 11e
50 sees ttftitte
nae FEE
H+
Witte orf sireer
Fic, 139.
DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 259
street in a one and one-half times district, he can add on an upper 30 feet
provided he sets the’ upper 30 feet back 10 feet from the street line. He
can make that setback right from the height limit in the form of a mansard
which would slope back in a ratio of one foot horizontally to three feet
vertically, or in a setback of three and one-third feet for each of three
stories, or in a setback of 10 feet for the whole height of 30 feet; then he
can set back again above the top of this set-back provided he keeps in the
same set-back plane. In general the set-backs might be determined by a line
drawn from the centre of the street up through the horizontal line iti the
street wall on the street line at the level of the height limit on the street
SETBACK PRINCIPLE.
Typical example in a 1% times district, for streets 5070 /00'wide.
\ The setback line always lL
\ runs up from the cen- 4
Ye ter of the street /
through the limit-
ing height at the 7
street line. iH
/
lo
ta)
/
20!
IZ
\ /
\ /
\ 1S
\ So]
S19 Ss =
oa \o SH 3
Oo roy iS)
wm NS Oly ee
oe a 3S
= ae & S$
S Zz
Ss 3 Z 5)
—
o \ / ro)
a es
ao \ / oO
oO
/
Street 100' wide
Fic. 140.
line for that district and street. In the street in question this horizontal
height limit line would be at a level of 90 feet. These two lines would
determine a plane which might be called a setback plane, and no portion
260 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
of the building erected above the height limit would project in front of this
set-back plane except as allowed in the case of dormers, towers and parapets.
Sec. 9, Par. (a). It is intended that a building should be permitted
to go just as high under this resolution on a 30 or 35-foot street as it could
HEIGHT LIMITS - I4 TIMES DISTRICTS
Same principles apply ip each of the other ast 1crs.
Sel backs may £6 af Cach story or several Sorses af
once Of Ie the fortran Of 8 (nEnsHa.
Typical buidieg 7
on Waertor lor ee
&
“Ce
5ulldng on inferior eg
Jol Wh SEL LBCKE. “s
Building on teferior
Jot rurting through Irom
street lo street Xe
“ex
& wi Pi =
3 Lypieal Building oe
SS on corner lot
Fic. 141.
on a 50-foot street, and, conversely, a building facing on a street or park
or open space more than 100 feet wide, including the bordering street can
go no higher than it could if it faced on a 100-foot street.
Sec. 9, Par. (b). Any building or any part of a building within 100
feet of a corner regardless of whether its front actually turns the corner or
DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 261
not, and regardless of whether the lot runs through to the wider street or
not, may take advantage of the height allowed on the widest of the inter-
secting streets. A single building on a corner may carry its height on the
wider street back for 150 feet along the narrower street.
CORNER BUILDINGS
One and One-half 117es Lisiric/
60 Street
gd aces
eee)
Typical example showing Influence of wider street at intersections.
Figures in buildings,as 150, show height limit at the street line, in a
/%2 Times Height District.
Fic. 143. ;
Sec. 9, Par. (c). This provision is intended to allow for dormers
in a mansard roof above the height limit on the street line. It will permit
one large dormer on each mansard or a number of small dormers on each
mansard, provided their aggregate frontage does not exceed the provisions
262 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
here stated. It will also permit elevator headhouses on or near the street
line and permit a tower or belfry or other such feature to be carried up
on the street line, a feature which would hardly be possible under Section
9, paragraph (d), except on a street over 100 feet wide. On a 100-foot
frontage this dormer provision will mean that the dormer on the street
line at the height limit can be 60 feet wide; by the time it has gone up 10
feet it can be only 50 feet wide; by the time it has gone up 30 feet it can
be only 30 feet wide, and by the time it has gone up 60 feet it will be
reduced to a point. This rule will créate at least three limiting planes which
intersect the setback plane, as shown on the accompanying diagram.
D2Y alr ShOWING
Miitiitag polaties For ore
Central Corer
Fic. 144.
Sec. 9, Par. (d). Ifa street, park or open space is 150 feet or more
in clear width in front of a building, a tower may be built directly across
the whole front of the building provided the tower does not cover more
than 25 per cent of the area of the lot. On a street 100 feet wide a tower
can be built across the whole front of the building provided that it sets back
25 feet from the street line and also that it does not occupy more than 25
per cent of the area of the lot. If the building has 200 feet frontage on
a 100-foot street, a tower with a 50-foot frontage may be built on the
street line to any height and then splay back on either side in a ratio of
DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 263
one foot in increased width parallel with the street line for every four
inches back from the street line, but in no case can a tower occupy more
1S Times District
Fic. 145.
than 25 per cent of the area of the lot. A tower on the corner of a park
and a 60-foot street can rise directly on the street wall on the park side, but
will have to set back 45 feet from the 60-foot street line. If, however, its
frontage on a 60-foot street were only a quarter of such street frontage, the
tower might approach within 20 feet of the street line. The increasing sizes
of yards and courts would be constantly operative and it would be desirable
so to place the tower that the yard and court provisions would not interfere
with it. (See Fig. 146.)
Sec. 9, Par. (e). Let us suppose it were proposed to erect a building
on an inside lot on a 50-foot street in a two and one-half times district and
a large building across the street was 525 feet high, an existing building on
one side 225 feet high and one on the other side 150 feet high. The height
limit on the street would be 125 feet normally. All three of these sur-
rounding buildings are well over that limit; one of them by 400 feet; one
by 100 feet and one by 25 feet, or a total of 525 feet. Dividing by three
would give an excess average height of 175 feet, therefore, according to
this provision, the proposed building might rise to a height of 125 plus 175
feet, or 300 feet. If at some future time the 225-foot building on one side
were to be torn down and a new building erected on this site, the new
building could use the 300 feet of the first new building in computing the
excess height to which it might rise. Existing buildings lower than the
height limit or vacant lots would be considered in this computation as
though they were at the height limit. If within 50 feet on either side and
directly across the street there were, for example, five buildings, only two
of which were higher than the height limit, the excess height of these two
buildings would be divided by five in determining the excess height to which
the proposed buildings might go. Buildings directly across either street from
corner buildings should be considered, but a building diagonally across the
corner could not be considered. The proposed building should not be
counted in arriving at the above divisor. (See Figs. 147 and 148.)
264 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Sec. 9, Par. (f). If a street is 100 feet wide a cornice nay project
five feet. If the street were 50 feet wide it might project two and one-half
=—TOWERS—
Fic. 146.
feet. The projection allowed on the wider street can not be carried back
on to the narrower street. It is obvious that a parapet on a setback portion
could be higher than on the street wall. A cornice could project its full
five per cent in front of the parapet wall even above the height limit, but
not above the height limit for the parapet. If on a 100-foot street a build-
ing or the upper stories of the building set back 20 feet from the street
line, a cornice might project six feet in front of such set-back wall at the
height limit, if it were not for the provision that no cornice shall project
more than five feet beyond the street wall. If it should be desired to have
DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 265
a projection of 10 feet to a cornice on a 100-foot street the whole wall
should set back five feet from the street or set-back plane.
Sec. 11. This agrees with the Light and Ventilation chapter of the
Building Code, which provides that a court for the lighting and ventilation
Existing Building 525° High © é
Excess=400'. 90 160"
No | | Bidg | Bldg
35° Street in 2% Times District influence No excess| Excess «40°
Normal Height Limit: 125
60' Street in a 2 times district=120' limit.
50°
Existing
Bid’g :
Proposed ann 60° 180° o)
150° High. : Proposed Id; 40°
Building 9 300’ | Street Building Bldg pa
Excess= 25. Bldg Excess = 60’ 0!
{80° 80°
Ee 100’ Bldg 180°
; 50 No excess 6) 360
Proposed Building may go to 300. Excess. 00s 200 Bldg Extra Height= 60
» 100° Excess:80°
3)525° ; :
Extra Height= 175° Proposed Building may go to 180.
Fic. 147. Fic. 148.
of any room shall have a width at any point of not less than one inch for
every foot of height. Of course any tenement house in an A district would
CORNICES AND PARAPETS
ina 2times district.
| = Height limit H
: on street line a)
~=x-
S Height limit
S Height limit
1 on street line
1 i)
i) i)
. 1
se? ! 1
1
f 1
! \
1 1
i H
\
=)
| ‘5 o
\ Ss 1 < 1
! a
— | 1
3 3 |
v1 y o
21
==) 2 el 2 el =
ae = sat = ey a
Gel = =
sl a SI o ‘ ‘Si B
Ll oO 1 ram) o. 1 al o
eel ay 1 oO! = ! oO! =
=a o +1 Oo i +} (O)
H _ ! cj a 1 et
oy Up) y Oo; 1 o!
, I SI I oO 1
| 1 | 1 I i
! ' \ 1 1 i
1
1 1 1 H H 1
peo EY smal i i if
|
=the SSS ee sa ES —
! \
! '
i
Fic. 149.
have to conform to the Tenement House Law as to required yards and
courts.
Sec. 12. Where a building is back to back with another building a
required rear yard at 150 feet in height will be 25 feet in least dimension ;
at 90 feet in height it will be 15 feet in least dimension, all heights being
2066 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
taken from the curb level where they relate to buildings in a residence dis-
trict. If the building is not in a residence district, 3 feet 10 inches may be
One Durding,
Fic. 150.
subtracted from each of these least dimensions as the yard may start 23
feet above the curb.
An outer court at 150 feet in height at the top will be 12% feet in
least dimension, but if its length is more than eight times its width, it will
have to be widened out somewhat at the open end. At 90 feet in height,
such outer court will have to be 7% feet in width. If in a building 150
feet high, where an outer court would normally have to be 12% feet wide,
the court, instead of being eight times, is not over four times as long as it
would have to be wide—that is, not over 50 feet long—then it could be 6
inches narrower for every 24 feet of height or 3 feet narrower for a
building between 144 and 168 feet high. This would bring down such
width to what 1s required under the Tenement House Law. By the same
rule the side yard required under the Tenement House Law may be reduced
from 12% feet to the 10 feet required in that law provided such yard is not
more than 50 feet in depth from the street. (See Figure 151.) ©
Inner courts, whether on the lot line or not, will be about half way be-
tween the required yard and the outer court in dimensions. For example,
in a building 150 feet high, an inner court at the top could be 25 feet square
or a little less than 18 by 36 feet; at 90 feet in height at the top it would
have to be 15 feet square or contain 225 square feet, provided that it were
not more than twice as long as it were wide for that area. In the case of
a building which was not back to back with another building, an outer court
could use the minimum provisions here stated for outer courts only in case
the rear yard on which it opened was of the dimensions here given for an
inner court; that is to say, at 150 feet in height, 25 square feet or 18 by
36 feet, or with dimensions somewhere between, giving an area of 625 feet
(see Figure 152). However, a special exception is made to the above espe-
cially for corner buildings on narrow lots according to which the size of
such an inner court may be reduced if connected with the street by a side
yard.
DISPRICLTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 267
Sec. 13, Par. (a). Ina building five stories, or approximately 56 feet
in height, a rear yard under these provisions will have to be 14 feet wide
AREA B DISTRICTS INTERIOR LOTS
KJRS a>
CS SS fear yard for “>
Kear yaa ror buisaia ROSA ues 4 z
piece Wait oer PULLAT RULE ATTEN
. SIT ICT
Yards eh course may Le WeCreased
in 3636 nearer the bottom key
keep wiltina Me pr OvVislong LS:
& any given (evel.
Ourer COUrT. s So)
I>
Court width for height of 20ft=l0ft — *ag® Sass
See §\2 ror deduction
Fie. 151
at the top or 2 feet wider than required under the Tenement House Law.
An outer court will have to be 7 feet or 1 foot wider than required
under the Tenement House Law. An inner court will have to be 14 feet
square or a little less than 10 by 20 feet, while under the Tenement House
Law an inner court on the lot line would have to be 12 by 24 feet. How-
ever, the 70 per cent area clause in the Tenement House Law is very apt to
require increases from the minimum widths and depths of courts and yards
268 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
greater than the difference between this resolution and the Tenement House
Law. An outer court 7 feet wide can be 56 feet long before it will have
to be widened out at its extreme end.
A special exception for outer and inner court provisions was made in
lots 30 feet or less in width on account of the extra difficulties of planning
Building 120 high
ing Bd istrict
20'x20'= 400 3g. Tt.
‘| /4'2°x 28'4°= 400 Sg.TT.
Inner court of
wised equivalent area.
H
Fic. 152.
practicable buildings for such lots. On a lot 30 feet or less in width an
outer court in a building five stories or 56 feet need not be more than 4
feet 8 inches wide under this resolution, although under the Tenement
House Law it would have to be at least 5 feet wide. For a width of 5
feet it could be 40 feet long, but if it were desired to make the outer court
60 feet long, the 20 feet of length nearest the open end would have to gradu-
ally widen out to 7% feet. The side yard of such building need not be
over 4 feet 8 inches wide through from street to prescribed rear
yard. An inner court in such a building under this resolution might be
about 61% by 13 feet, although under the Tenement House Law it would
have to be at least 8 by 14 feet, if on the lot line. These narrow lots are
virtually put in the B districts except for rear yards. (See Figure 153.)
Sec. 13, Par. (b). The recreational problem is so important in resi-
dential districts that a concession in the yard and court provisions is made
in order to obtain additional space for playground use. An individual
developer or a group of property owners may, by giving up 10 per cent
additional of their space, be relieved from the yard and court requirements
of the district in which they are located and follow the yard and court
requirements of the next less restricted district instead. The 10 per cent
given up for recreational use might be provided in the center of the block
in addition to the required yard space or it might be in any lot or lots run-
ning through to any bounding street, or it might be on an adjoining lot.
Of course, this 10 per cent would have to be in addition to any yard and
court provisions required in this resolution and also in addition to the
requirements of the Tenement House Law if they were greater than those
in this resolution.
Sec. 14, Pars. (a) and (b). Ona residence street, a tenement or apart-
ment house on an interior lot in a D district covering 60 per cent of its
lot and four stories or 44 feet in height on a lot 100 feet deep would have
a rear yard 20 feet deep: an outer court would have to be at least 7
feet 4 inches wide and not over 44 feet long for such width. If the
outer court were longer the open end would have to be wider; an inner
DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 269
court of such a building could be 14 feet 8 inches square or about 10%
by 21 feet. Where a required depth of a rear yard at the curb level would
AREA C DISTRICTS INTERIOR LOTS
Least horzolia! dinensions of yeas ail COWS where
reguired #€ Shown below
On lors 30 feel or less tn width le COUT PL OVIEIOS
Tor B MsrricTs (ray be Tolowed:
Bires 153"
be over 10 feet and the building sets back from the street line across the
whole front of the lot at the curb level, the rear yard may be decreased in
depth by one foot for every foot of setback in front but the rear yard must
not be reduced to less than 10 feet.
In the case of a building on a plot 30 feet or less in width, the sizes
of outer courts and side yards and inner courts would be the same as
required for buildings on plots over 30 feet wide in the C districts. In the
case of a one or two family house, three stories or approximately 34 feet
270 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
in height, the rear yard would be 20 feet deep if on a residence street; an
outer court would be 4 feet 3 inches wide and a little less than 34 feet long
without being wider at its open end. An inner court would be 8 feet 6
inches square or about 6 by 12 feet.
Sec. 14, Par. (c). No building within a residence district and within
a D district can occupy more than 60 per cent of any interior lot. In a
AREA D DISTRICTS INTERIOR LOTS
Least horlzolte UneNs1008 OF Yaas ahd Cours where
reguired ae SOW? LElOW
On lols 30 feet or /ess te Width Ihe COUT pl ISOS
Yor C astricrs fray Le Followed
eave
= QS ese O SSNESH
: 5 <a Fare 7 SS
e 4Svilding on Qasr Se Bulag 07 Ca
erertor /of PS foter tor lor =
Length of ower COUT I C70
case 1s Ihe Maxiinui? possible
(OF 120 1PMAIUT prescrwed
Width S5
© SS oe
wep 2 Build Soe
Building on ‘ Gs UiAMeg O1? SNS
Beets os
tcrerior /ot Tee Mnterior lof Berg
Fie. 154.
D district on a corner lot 100 by 100 feet a building could occupy 80 per
cent of the 8,000 feet on the corner, and 60 per cent of the remaining
2,000 square feet or an average of 76 per cent of the whole plot. If the
actual lot on the corner contains less than 8,000 square feet the adjoining
DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 271
lots if not corner lots themselves would be considered as strictly interior
lots in computing area to be covered.
Sec. 15, Pars. (a) and (b). Im a residence district a rear yard for
lots 100 feet deep would be 25 feet deep at the ground story, except that
garages and other out buildings might occupy 40 per cent of such rear yard
area. In an ordinary 214-story house, approximately 25 feet high, an outer
court or side yard would be at least 5 feet 214 inches wide. Such a side yard
would be required only on one side of a house. However, if a lot is 50 feet
or less in width, a side yard of this sort for a 2%4-story house could be re-
duced to 4 feet 2 inches. The 50 per cent allowance on the ground story
would allow for one-story wings, bay windows, porches, etc. In the case
of a building not within a residence district on a 100-foot deep lot the rear
yard would have to be only 15 feet deep and no limitation is placed on the
percentage of the lot which the building may cover. It would be possible
AREA E DISTRICTS
The exarmples SLOW? LEW He. posse Typical. Luldnags.
In 2 residence astrich every Luang Shell have O1€ He Yara:
buildings atfached In rows are thereby proltbired.
' Building on ar trrerior lof Bullding one corner lor lr 2
Wa feSIAERCE USITICT. resldence QUsIT ic?
Ground story Op of lof Ges Ground story 70fp of lof
Yoper sorses Ope Yooer + 4p *
Guldng on an Wier {or lof Building 07 2 corner lor ror
T0t I 2 FestAeliCe USITICL, ina reslaence Astrich
Fie, 155.
to build an apartment house in an E district provided it conformed with
these percentage and yard and court requirements. Where a required depth
of a rear yard at the curb level would be over 10 feet and the building
272 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
sets back from the street line across the whole front of the lot at the curb
level, the rear yard might be decreased in depth by one foot for every foot
of setback in front but the rear yard should not be reduced to less than
10 feet.
See. 15, Par. (c). In most cases an E district house would be on a lot
not less than 40 by 100 feet. On such a lot 30 per cent of the lot area
above the ground story would equal 1,200 square feet, giving a house 30
by 40 feet in size. On a lot 50 by 100 feet this would allow 1,500 square
REAR YARDS.
42” Street
AEOLIAN
STERN'S
A: a.
o YARDS
> Yords| YARD No: REQUIRED
<6
Sixth Avenue
Corner
NW4
—GG7
Y) AA
yarns AMG Fe
REQUIRED | 4
| comn Z
A3"! Street
Street
Avenue
YARDS NoT
REQUIRED
Street
Street
KR
MB. GG
Street
CUUUUU
//0'
less thon
Avenue
Avenue
WUE
ae Street
Fic. 156.
lesst A 45°
feet, giving a house 30 by 50 feet in size. The percentages specified in this
section include all garages and other out buildings as well as porches, sheds,
bay windows, balconies, etc. The occupancy of 40 per cent of the rear
BISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 273
yard is intended to allow flexibility in placing accessory buildings without
increasing these percentages.
Sec. 16, Par. (a). Im this rule it is assumed that within 55 feet of a
street a building can usually be lighted directly from the street. If a block
is 110 feet.deep through irom street to street it is hardly appropriate to de-
mand rear yards but when blocks become deeper than that rear yards become
_ more and more necessary (see Figure 156). On a lot 60 feet deep a rear
yard would be 5 feet deep; on a lot 65 feet deep in a B or C district a
rear yard would be 6 ieet 6 inches deep; on a lot 80 feet deep under
similar conditions a rear yard would be 8 ieet deep and so on. lia
block were 200 feet through from street to street and two lots were back
to back with one another, one of them 50 feet deep and the other 150 feet
deep, no rear yards wouid be required for either building except that the
building on the lot 150 feet deep would have to conform to Paragraph (d)
of this same section. No rear yard is required on a comer lot.
Sec. 16, Par. (b). The statement that the rear yard need not exceed
10 feet at the base means that the depth of 10 feet at the base required
on a lot 100 feet in depth need not be exceeded in lots of greater depth.
In any building which occurs_in a residence district, evén though it be a
club or a school, a required rear yard would have to rim down to the ground
except that garages and other out buildings may occupy 40 per cent oi the
required rear yard space but they must not be over one story high. How-
ever, an exception would be allowed for the apse or choir of a church which
would allow it to occupy 40 per cent of the rear yard up to a height of 30
feet above the curb level.
Sec. 16, Par. (d). Under the Tenement House Law a building over
70 ieet deep which runs through the block or from street to street not on a
comer has to be built around a rear yard and thus the building is divided
into two entirely separate units. In many non-residential buildings this is
impracticable and thereiore it is provided that if a building runs through
the block from street to street it must contribute to the light and air of the
common rear yard spaces in the center of the block by giving up on each
side an unoccupied space above the ground story equal at least to an inner
court in area but differing from an inner court in that the least dimension
need be no greater than that required for an outer court (see Figure 157).
Ti, however, this court is necessary ior light and air under Sec. 17, para-
graph (a) it should be at least of the dimensions required for inner courts.
Sec. 16, Par. (e). In various instances, particularly in Manhattan,
existing loft, warehouse and even office buildings, have been erected, some-
times to 12 stories or more in height, with rear yards considerably less in
depth than would be required under this resolution. In fairness to a person
who would erect a new building back to back with such buildings this section
will permit him to make his rear yard about the same as the average oi his
back to back neighbor’s yards. In determining such an average of back to
back yards, a rear yard as large or greater than that required under this
resolution, would be reckoned as though it were of the size here required.
Above the top of an existing building its rear yard would be reckoned as
though it were of the required size. A rule to compute the average width
of existing yards could appropriately be adopted by the Board of Stand-
ards and Appeals. In a building 150 feet high in a B district the minimum
size of such a rear vard must be in any case at least 12 feet 6 inches in
least dimension at the top, which is the minimum width of an outer court
at such level (see Figure 158).
274 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
LOTS RUNNING THROUGH FROM STREET TO STREET.
Street
All buildings 150 high
B District.
i
=
2
>
a
ze)
o
o
&
ro)
©
oO
Street
Buildings marked A’are interior buildings, each back to back
with another building, and therefore require rear yards 25 wide.
The inner courts in the building running through from street
7o street are each the area of an inner court (25% 25= 625 sgTr)
and the width of an outer court (150 inches or /2'6)
Same courts are required for a-similar building running
through from one street to within 55 feet of another street.
Fic. 157.
Sec. 17, Par. (a). A room which receives its necessary light and venti-
lation from the street and also from a court or yard would have to have
one of its windows open on a court or yard of the size prescribed in this
resolution. Any room which was lighted or ventilated entirely from yards
and courts would have to open on at least one yard or court of the pre-
scribed size.
Sec. 17, Par. (b). An outer court opening on a street might include
part of the street within its required dimensions (see Figure 173).
Sec. 17, Par. (c). In general the area of inner courts should be equal
to the square of the least dimension of a required rear yard at the same
distance above its lowest level. It would be the square of the least dimen-
sion in inches per foot of height above the bottom of the court and not
INFLUENCE OF EXISTING YARDS.
100 Street
B and /4% Times District
40 x 10 = 400 SQ.FT.
40 x 20 = 800 SQ.FT.
20x 15 = 300 SQFT.
100 )1500
15 FEET:
=Final depth of rear
yard, although other-
wise, for a 150 hui/d-
ing, it would he 25 deep.
60’ Street
Fig. 158.
Alea B Dsiricl
Least horlZ0/e7al QNnenslOS
OL Yards al COUTE
s
Helgi in feel
Helght in reel
|
iia Tj
i |
1
1
E
i
f
170 t
1
!
}_
0 5 10 15 20 2530354045 5055
Hiith meer Bi ath in feet
Fie. 159,
Ar ea C Listtict Area C Listtict
Lors Over 30 feel wide
least horiZolla OMeCPslOns y Le aot OEE.
Of yards afi Courrs of yards and COUITS.
SS
un S
. tat
= Spree aly
x ye
oo
ym a,
Ha
avi
yA
Ae
Hi
haa
Ml
a
0 5 10 15 20 25303540 0 15 20 253035
Hid ip reek Midth ir feet
Fic. 160. Fic. 161.
Area D istrict Area D Lisitict
Lots over 30 feet wide. Lors not over 3OTT Wide.
Least horizoftal QUMENSVONS Least horizontal UUMERHONS
Of Yards ated COUrTS. L Sa08 ANT COTE.
Height in feet
Heigl 1reer
we
My
0 5 10 15 20 25 303540 45 5055 © 5 10 15 20 25303540 45 50
Hath infeet VLU
Fic. 162. Fic. 163.
Aree E LUSITICS » Area E Lisiich
Lore over 50 feet wide lors notover 50/7 wae.
Least horlZ0nal QUNCPONE Least horiZ0i1al QUINENS1ONE
OF Yards aed COUrTS, YALE BT COULTE.
150 150 f |
140 Hd 140 i|
{ é “|:
130 a : 130 ooo ri
120 f izo,-| 1 Ts fi
: é,
110 AE 110 ei
f
100 1 Ty 100 ae
30 ©; E 90} te :
Ss Tas
& 80 3 - | g 80 4
& | 70 1 N 70 r
&
SS
S| 60 LH | S | 60 ‘
g 8
50 50 i
L t ot
40 G 40 /
30 Ll | “30 A
20 Mager eae horlzayie/
Taneinb OR Ter B/\ COUN aia
10 US FEOUITAd, OL VACOWS.
|
0 Lt)
0 5 10 15 202530354045 505560 65 0 5 10 15 20 25 30.35 40 45 50 55.60 65
With in reer Hit i reer
Fic. 164. Fic. 165.
Area LB LSI
Areal Lsiric/
ACE D LISI Reed Area FE DIstrict
Loks rot fore hah WO7ee/ Wide Area D Lysiricl Least horizontal MINENS/ORE
Least horlZ0le7eal QUNESHONS Least horlzonial QU7CL7S1O/ag OF OU/Ef COUTTS.
OF OUlEF COUTTS: of OUIEL COUTTS. -
ia] Sarna
150 150 x 150 | =
140 {40 140 |
J i
130 oh 130 Bo al 130 |
zo} t St 120} Sf 120
110 Wo} 110
100 100 j 100
90 ~ |
oS | 90 90
w&
S | 80 ‘S| 80 | > | 80
X& EN | G |
& 70 |_| SS 70} | | S 70
< S <
S 60 6 SI gp H LL S| 60 |
Ss | v eT
50 50 Y 50|4
{Le
40 | 40 : 40
a0 30 Go 30
} |
20 20 | 20-4
l04—— 10 10 =
0 ol oL LT
0 5 1015 2025 0 5 1015 202530 0 5 10 15 20 253035.
Width pret Hid meer Path infeet
Fic. 166. rel G7 Fic. 168.
Area B List ich
Areal Listtich
Area 2 Listtict Area D Listticl
(Won-residence district Residence Listricl
LE28/ (OT1Z011 2 QURERHONS Least horizontal HiNENSIONS
Of yaras of yards.
k
iS
AM
Bj
a
|
|
|
Death of lol
a
SESSEEEEETET
AEE eee cee ce
Deoth of lor in eer
0 5 10 15 2025
0 5 10 15 202530
4idth fees Wit mre
Fic. 169. Fic. 170.
Area E Sitch Area £ Listricr
Non-restaence Leitich Residence LUSHIC).
Least por/Zoleal MURENHONE least horizoral MMERHONE
Of yards. Of yar OS.
an
3 o [oj] Ses
& & Bn
s S | 8
S :
SS s | 7 z=
Ss Sn
: S |
50, | Poa
4 +
40
30|_|_|
20
———
JIE)
0
0 5 10 15 2025 0 5 10 15 20 253035
Hide in reef Hidth mfeet
Fic. 171. Fic. 172.
DISTRICTING RESOLUTION ANNOTATIONS 279
the square of the minimum depth of the rear yard as specified in terms of
its ratio to the depth of the lot. This would mean that in B districts with
a building 150 feet high, the depth of a rear yard would be 25 feet and the
area of an inner court would be 25 by 25 feet, or 625 square feet, but such
Street
| create etre |
Cour? A, opening
on stree?, would
often be too narrow
POI anes unless
Ye] stfeet area,
gE shown by, dotted’
/ines, Is included.
Building
Fic. 173.
an inner court would not have to be square. It might be any shape pro-
vided that it were not more than twice as long as it were wide for such 625
square feet. After the first 625 square feet were satisfied, however, any
additions might be made to the court as seemed desirable provided such
additions conformed to the rules for outer courts or side yards or offsets
as the case might be. A possible equivalent of a court 25 feet square would
be one a little over 18 by 36 feet. In a corner apartment house 150 feet
high, a rear inner court connecting with the street by a 10-foot side yard 50
feet long, would have to be 625 square feet but as the side yard is here 15
feet less than 65 feet long, 15 square feet for every 15 feet of height might
be deducted therefrom. This, for a 150-foot building, would equal 15 by
10 feet or 150 square feet, which deducted from 625 would leave 475 square
feet as the required area of the inner court, on the lot line. That would
bring it down to 15% by 31 as compared with 16 by 32 as required at the
same height for inner courts on the lot line under the Tenement House Law.
Sec. 18, Par. (a). The provisions for skylights and projections beyond
the walls of yards and courts follow the Building Code. A special excep-
tion within 5 feet back from a street wall is made so as to allow cornices
or eaves to return their full width for architectural fitness.
Sec. 18, Par. (b). The provisions with regard to fire-escapes, fire-
proof ouside stairways and solid-floored balconies to fire towers follow in
general the rulings of the Tenement House Department. As it is not desir-
able that fire-escapes, etc., should project 4 feet into an outer court no
allowance for the same is made. Ina rear yard, however, the requirements
of other laws as to lattice enclosed fire-escapes demand a projection of at
least 7 feet 8 inches. Therefore, 8 feet were allowed.
Sec. 18, Par. (c). A court corner might be cut off at an angle of 45
degrees, for example, and the length of the cut off might be as long as 7
feet, in conformity with the practice under the Tenement House Law. This
would not affect the size of yards and courts but would affect the percentage
of the lot that might be occupied.
Sec. 18, Par. (d). The requirement for offsets in yards or courts is
intended to be virtually the same as it is in the Tenement House Law. Off-
sets could be shallower than they are wide but not deeper. It is not in-
tended, however, that this clause shall be used to increase the length of outer
courts.
280 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS
Sec. 18, Par. (e). Where additions are made to an existing plan, even
though they may be on separate lots adjacent on either side or to the rear,
it is highly desirable that the whole plot should be considered as a unit in
reckoning the distribution and sizes of yard and court spaces.
Sec. 18, Par. ({). If in a B district an existing building 150 feet high
had a rear yard only 15 feet wide instead of 25 feet as herein required, the
first additional 12-foot story would not have to set back 27 feet from the
rear line, but only 17 feet and in the case of a stair or elevator, the rear
wall could go up straight on the existing rear wall.
INDEX
“A” AREA DISTRICT PAGE
(Chemise ssbuboouopcosooeudocad coo nodoocUoDdooUbNoddeDUoaDUroUsdpU cd 39
(CORE ACBISTMEMES scogacoccucdooosacdocucdnondsccgcoUKodoDEDDeObaODeDE 39, 238
Coimrts meaginal .oscoonscaconobsoonscoooaddsodoosodouse Codd oUndauEUaD 240
IRGare wards moe meapiiedl. cococccccocooccugduccocoocououscooDSODoDSODDONC 38, 240
Accessory USEs
OW? m@RGleMeeGy sa nbeae bol apeod 6 boouon Gomda ce moIno ape a rin hn Seema 15, 233, 234
ACCIDENTS, ELEVATOR
IDevieint, lehaemel ooscoosoccvggan0vcacc0sa0c00Ke Si Seer Deere OS aE Ra 101-102
Maxedmoccupancyarcm cle lit ote benill dita osperrietete el -tel-festor-iitclerterellieeaiedens rel 101-102
ACCIDENTS, STREET
CaAxo INDIES 28 bceosore concn ceccdn CU eine neC antennae Srismierrtaae 98-99
Duane, Jackin! je csotcos cme onidclono amcor ap peat eens. henna ores 12, 101-102
Goodktich, Ienestayyatecaagobaosees Baun bond nema r obec oaaho mo soe dros ote 12
Increase due to mixed OCCUPANCY. eevee sete eee e eee 98-99, 101— 102
IM@rEESS WHT TATE .coosconoanebossaaaoooacns SSC OC OSE CH RS EIS OOD 21- ze
Niapelocabionmotertatalmstnectmaccid entsmmmeeeiatsiceiticiiareicercteiee tere follow p. 2
PolicesD epantmentestatisticsener reer eeeiee teeta crieiireci errr 98-99
WAT joe mecloeecl lox Ghiswricisiner, 510066000 ebbooS Deo SS oo0ba05GecDbCCDCOCDOD Wil, WA, al
ACKERMAN, FREDERICK L.
SOMEMOMIE? ON! GUGURICHING GoopanccoopoageanodmuscemedoodsssenauenougaseouD 58-59
ADAMS, THOMAS
Disknicsme tia, Camack, ooosecocosactoeopoocdnnngmencdbeusooopuooonadaaDD 79
DiStCMS WACHM BEFEAS scoccvoovscoanoccpdoodaHnaancoroNdooguaDooBOuUDE 77
Lasiglaiion tm Camacek,,.ccccppogdcc00900bG000096 Eee NNR EL ORLA Sfae GAS TTS ah 79-80
New Worlk’s Gxarmpll® coococscocccc000000 Pee SHUR tet 5 ot Re: Cea een 77
Towm IPlarrmime tia CevmaGlsccocovcocoagcdcagbooaccsoob0cc abso UD coCDDEDG 77-79
AESTHETICS
Baral, vAilyart S,, Mitwonieipall Avie S@CHa7so0c00ccad0q00a005090000000000000 81-82
Air. See Waaitleion
AMENDMENT OF DistRIcTING PLAN
Atuthornizedebyachanten erry eee crecre tier ROS eee unica cee 46
Bye boandioneestimaterandeApportionimnentaa pe eeecr cee eere aca 42, 43, 244
APARTMENT. See Tenement
APPEALS, BOARD OF
IDiGereiiom tingler ZONE TEs .coccou0cco0ccacdscccucuccogccud 15, 16, 235, 236, 242, 243
AREA DISTRICTS
Comirtis einel SereGIS 265 Gap aere ates o's 6 cate Sha eee eee cee ee re eee 38, 39, 241
FESTUTITILO Tea C Cla ee MM eet sts aicic oes oe SERCH ROTO es Teh aco irene tne cctaks a cee etanst anaes 38, 238
INGEN? ‘SHENRGIG 16:6 gir eee RRO EO oOo: DIG ROTEL FET OOO eee ete can ey ee ee 38, 240
ZW IDIGUTREE! So wioickecs 6-OiS arc ERREENTO b.0ln DCI OD C1 OE ae eer oe eT tere 39, 238 265
13} IDIGIHIEEN S393 co's Sido og OID OL C.-b 0 On ISIE e Renee ree ee 39, 40, 238, 265, 266
CuDIGEBIEE Go.0 0050 do 0.0 SEMA EUG iu.0-5 UL8lG OHO EEO Oe eon RIE GR Sige Ins 40, 239, 267
1D) IDNSiHEE ococooocoo ao scaepss0000D 000 DDD NSOOGODODDOSEOAEHD 40, 41, 239, 240, 270, 271
AEPIB) TS feted Cees terre PP RCo Ten eae c chet ote ere oct ete bs vats alate) Stacalaiallan loess Davgreimvece 41, 240, 271-273
Mapmshowinewpercentares ons lonmcovercdher ne ermerrricnecer tenancies follow p. 50
Maj) OF, Iomomein Or IWleyolentiEN,.ocoso0ccaccanecHobodanco Fig. 132 follow p. 244
Wel dobh ose cop apo AHOUoD OOo ASHORE EDR RemeE noo ce Fig. 133 follow p. 244
Broolkikvn gingl OWES sooascocsocdocugcodbscooucuecede Fig. 134 follow p. 244
IGS ova VOh Kel CAa Ae aomneN ER Moto aob ead Racer aceon Fig. 135 follow p. 244
AREA, PERCENTAGE RESTRICTIONS
1D) JOG STC Ba ay mrchisia picra cist ab Ge nidlcd o:c. 0.5.4 Scie Rea NG Cn S/ ctor scre ee eR eee eer ee me 40, 239
1B, IDIGiale oagercisieero Hi.o 5 Se claiciaide.c od pha cc IA aE ROIE TOR Co eS eRe Ree meee eee 41, 240
ARTIFICIAL LIGHT
Diagrevan, New Su; aimal edna Ilo cssccotsncsoccceccddcccusaaddn follow p. 10
Effect Oneal thivay awe ear REM ee erat ee ey sas, seit nn se ek 28
aehactonyabaildine swe eee eee Cr iC nN miter Tn fst onus tn suet bets 164, 165
Tn offices in midday, TURES nS cole tothe ym DEG OCA OLS ea rear follow p. 10
(Wiseaimmoficeyputldinesaeeeemrer eter rier este tal seats er srsvors aes 105, 150, 151
282 INDEX
AUTOMOBILE PAGE
Eifecton! Street: trates ecclesia eis rere stviarcicte siaretcts teretotel aininte fecha tel eLekete Nets 144
Map of main routes) with trafhic (Countse om etree eleler oieleleteteia lel venel- al follow p. 48
BALL, AINGEDT: Eliciacecpteietr ieee SEE OHS nEE Ln Dominance BHarapesoGpmosdnacos 80-81
BALTIMORE
Gonstitttionalitiy = ctatetaretereie sistate ici terete eater reeatetateraelete ctecee etree tektites 61
Height districts 2a ac emoc che aici mictoiato crcielereter labial oie token steerer iene 61
USE \AISELICES so sk afonticce teeta > SS est Si oan a oa ate ccroke aye el le te orc azar ees 66
Barp, ALBERT S. :
Aesthetic. comSid€rations: ss s:ars.s ivierstacare eerie iate ofetataaforetoles on eraversislorerete a eee EE 82
Districting necessary for orderly development...................00005:- 81-82
Safeguarding ‘oF parks 5.052226) cuu: cto cis Sateen te sestevere ats sa eiele ae Ree ee 82
“B” AREA DIstRIcT
Compared with Denement) House awe... so--ee snes eee eee 39
Outer ‘court and! side yard) requicementsj.4-4 205 oo ee eee eee 39, 238
Rear yards: ‘required... sisivecnes cei terse poe eoee er nee 38, 238, en
Rear yard requirements! 4sfcm0. saaenice cae ener en eno eee eee
Resolutionannotations 2s -macceeee eee eee ore 265, 267, 275, 277, a8
Bassett, Epwarp M.
iBexploitationvot Mareass privately srestrictedee see ee eee eee eee 83, 84
Municipal v. private restrictions
Private restrictions ineffective
Mbvatisateta(siorats, anvepuaied Seieietee ictaiae baer 30, 31, 82-84
BAUMANN: (Bia iiscins sissies sels doeainleamil eae oae eailenea sce eebn Eee ete 85, 86
BERNSTEIN, Ji cto. s1sis svare siaco ays nte)ststs)s cuopere atorsiscarsleie nerare el ele us eso oT 86-93
BINKERD;, ROBERT. |S ai5\s/2:-te\ss:d:0iste scale siarolevelete aissaveve ccais lee cisterns ehatelere etal ster ereeee te 93-94
Boarp oF APPEALS, JURISDICTION UNDER DISTRICTING PLAN........00j0eese000 43
Boarp or Estimate AND APPORTIONMENT
Brilding: zone resolution ror ceste aces oer or ere. orererate Lasts ale ols erates oe te Te 232-234
@harter- provisions eh se se soaqace to aloniele coe cet ender Cee EE on nets 45, 46
Gommittee: on: Gitye Plane. 2775 corcreloro ais ore a oiats alate cao alotevoteVersiels «1= oe OATS ee 6
Committee ob they W holes reporter c.acc ceo eee ceieneee cece ees ete 213 alg
Hearings on Dentative (Reportys 5 <1 cc. cinccrn coin shears oysieeyse ees ee ere
May samend ‘districting (pleir oryarere retetete ateteieielatlelelatelele aint ek lolelelee)- erste tetera 42, 43, 46
Resolution creating Commission on Building Districts...............-..--
Resolution creating Heights of Buildings Committee.................... 3
BoEHME, Dr. Gustav F., Jr.
Carzsickness'<2,5..c3aattitadew cetiges eal vie Dae chsine se etek oe eee ae 96
Gourteapartments inhealthysoeemneeee cme siiceeeciee en teree eee ena 95
Effect of ‘high ‘buildings onl! nervous system): .. .-.1..6 + e1- e1cl <1eleielo eles 10, 94, 95
Effectof noise On nervous SY¥SteMis) «ciclo eee eaio sem occa
Oi aera EAR eS ei ee omen nae Mees athe Sa GanosompoUeeOsae nos o> 95,96
Boston
Gonstititionality: © ..5542.3c Secoseerer suis eich ametele eee eae eee 59-61
Vere ht SGistricts: 2, s.scra-acsierstrersos eevee alae ciecors's e nietey er otalterieletereia et eee eee 59-61
Map showings GiStrictS: ink cla amscieciier «sis Seite. lei aie eloisterjete te aie eee follow p. 60
Bronx, BorouGH or THE ;
Area. (Districts) map) OLS = c-erteleteiecleivie: = o/- sraleist sere erersiale siete Fig. 133 follow p. 244
Height SDistrictss) imaprot «2 .ciae aecieteaere =< «clam ertheless Fig. 129 follow p. 244
Wse Districts map -Obtaace ase ceeriionins aislatnetanetae etre Fig. 124 follow p. 244
BrookLyNn, BorouGH OF
Aveay Districts) map! Of: ce cceeatmccise ses eae merrier Fig. 134 follow p. 244
Heizht Districts smap) Otece-becrere ene c eeieeeemcerre ee Fig. 130 follow p. 244
Wise Districts: smap “Os. caer pecteieetias ss sis seis me siseelete crs Fig. 125 follow p. 244
Brooklyn Bureau oF CHARITIES
Gongestion of population sc ecemione seisce= rs lerecien eletereieel oleic iter eee eee 123
(operas etotal eneakp yee id 5 550 goon sceotanouganceoredencocemecaconacaco:: 123
Districting plan: too leniemta. qcyeciinsis sek ee iielsetarss severeistc tats ikea 121, 122
Tenement House Committee
Gebhardty okie Gye rescte sere e etecote eneleccinle te eiet ke peter e net checked token 121-123
BrookLyN CoMMITTEE ON City PLAN ;
Brooklyn’s inadequate park system.........2-.2eeeee esse e eee s sees eecee 160
General approval of Commission’s report...........-+eeeceeeeeeeeceees 160
Stricter restrictions: SUpeeSteds. <i oe crete clei store (elele'«islsielera sbelolnet-teisielete ele leleteaiats 160-162
Pratt: Prederics Beets ce dase cece elas nieicicie eke olnastevercian saerate eset ete 160-162
INDEX 283
Buitpinc DEVELOPMENT PAGE
Comirol Of ORCEDPRNGY MESESEAR( conconscussgcounobenscosansounosbounaec 6,7
Controlforentensityenecessanyaeeree eee eee eee Leen ee cen: 25, 26
val’ Sotwlia p halzair clerapaicyaressfcccee shel steree seer tenes cies ol sitioiareioial a seake viel Seeuieieaniores 158, 159
lntensinymadaptedmtomoccupancysPrenereneeeicee eee eeenenne 26
FEMOCOSTAD NICH SiLAV. yal teaekesceoust-volecelterseeielorerene kel Sse eros erie eter sie eke lov ciesaiealemeveeune 211, 212
IRvivatemnestn chonsmineimectiverereeeereee ee Oe Reece renee eee enn 30-31
Realyestaterdepreciation under, haphazardemsass- cessed ces e oan eee acne 166-170
Stabilityassunedmundermzonesplankeeeeeee eee ener oer e eee renee 30
Stringency of regulation may vary with distance from center of city..... 27
Typical block- diagram LrormMatla shew etree aetee Reve oevesetersiovsee si qacteneten follow p.48
Zoning survey
Buitpine DistrrBution
Agsorching tO Inala: ainal BREA Corl, occacooccaconoepouoocueuuosvecduc 50
According to use or occupancy.................. ThDe PORTO EOEE DOGO ROSIE 49, 50
Mapeherchtsmonmexistinom buildin gceeeee reer rt oenern etree follow p. 50
Map, DETESMarS @t toe COVETEG oocccscudsosscassudbuscescceponougcoe follow p. 50
Wapswebuildinesandmtransitedevelopmentssase meaner eee eee enee follow p. 48
Simineney Or westleinonsoorcooudscoodasonbavcauucddnbonseesnaueeoneode 27
Burtpine LINE
Draianic @, Chay @t IRiSamoml ococaococodvgcdocguobcueddoonadsenaéacacne 63
Richmondexegulationsmeeerereeeeeecreteer eer PSCC CUE uC LOR TOA 62-64
Buritprnc Zone RESOLUTION
ANGE), GHGUBICES, Hod dane poduonedbores DU Ooo OtpoC meee nee sh AR ae crn aaa ie ae 238-242
AGINOTETTOING Mido bcd tone one Coe Han Doe NORE TOTES EM CREE ee 255-280
JOXOIRTATRBTOING): lo aicle 6 thorn Boia oto OaeO. CG CIC RHE IR Cae cic sO ORE ne etn Moe Rene 232, 233
GeneralleandeNdiministrativercnreree ecco eer oee ent enn 242-244
ler alta Gistrictsumaary riety acn cic eccie er acre nar nas era ch Te RM 2362288
IREDORE Ox SubscormaMMMteS Oloscoooccococcgcccduanosoedoeesounonnoouuuue 228-231
TUG IDRGERIGIS: eS yarns aero meera Ciotoie Dai eRe eee RET Ser CIP ee aa ere 233-236
BORON, lor Taba Gap erecta bis laterals Saige ot core oe Ie eee eae ees eee ne mieten 96, 97
Business Districts
iDyaltingal, jabeecococe caticuic Soc enter Oo Ue oo oem CI sia tesa ere Oe micron a ia 15, 234, 235
Rercemiage or inakiginy AllOWalNe ilo ocooscoonaopooccocbouvaacobecesacune 205, 206
Provided in residential neighborhoods.................................- 19, 20
Size proportioned to needs of neighborhood....................+.++2+2+- 20
(GER ATT ON AD VATE TALACI VID ara svar als pals ape ilo sv so avers eve orSvajel\eseyedei oye clavateebeseyebe alsuers 97
CALIFORNIA SUPREME Court :
Ins, PAG: IEIEGCR ne eo ceamo ne ooo ote Door Coco er waaioe cone mor edonee cons 69, 70
NMP AT LeMINLOMtS OMe Try / te 85 crave suateysseietevaiconee ciaieteletsiclee tania beta Race eeilets 69
Jase IETS ONTOS WW Osc onaeeonoD ode coast acop an enaBe ee noo oaone toon oS 68, 69
CANADA
A@etine VIROTIAG. so doobertrd od Gn oc caer RoE mH anon c ron Homa cece 77-80
IDNRUAIGITEE ino. coo pO oe AOR ERoto cio DOC OCRUetE eo BOC ab oon cen ie ea ere 79
LAR Eion, na cos coos semonennt atc o Shab cob en ao amrcep an ta datced Saeco e a tenet 79, 80
Ontario MunicipaleActauthonizesmdistnictingees ss seeee eater es 70
TRown: WETS 5 onosedoamnenon as oc Donon ame OUT oOo mOM EAA Ge DOS one et 77-19
“C” Area DIstrict
ConnmuEnisy Oneal SeeGesencvocebocsscocconpodaunuocamednebaucmbotodoAdDr 41, 239
Comparediwathwshenement welousemlawereen se ceceeee eee isis 40
LOIS MOE OvOr: GO Waa TARE sooo noes no coeded mono coe oo eos ona Eon te 40, 239
Ontetmcounandesidemyanderequinementseenaeeerertereaeeece rarer 40, 239
IRAP WAGE: MACHA. cancoanodacocQo oo po GOOOUDEU BOND anoSOS UDR DO OODUSROO 38, 239, 240
Rear yaural MAGiCSMGONS. coooscococosgscevacs900dDDeCCOGOUNSCOOUDNDNOEOD 40, 239
IRESOLEMON DOMOUMONS “socanvcccvoagcccnboavecbo cc onan acve spans cA), 263
Cagis, IMLS Roctdcoocsccsnceseb6coos00 soso onsnpoeS eoosadooDconaoebonE ou aoa 98-99
CEMETERIES
Ihaoay Come iy Caeivicall VACHOTIES. oo0cco0ccc050000000c00co000D0uG00DDue 176
CHARTER IPROVARIONE cGenomoocomonboodcnsooubbaneadanognos oop Sb omceoudomdan nee 45-46
CHILDREN
Collier: JRREGE Wiss cantoucdacc0ccoopecononeeoducgbdecopNouchdanoooucG 22, 99, 100
Evil influence of proximity of business...............00.....se eee sees 22, 99, 100
Many mama DIES? Ii) SURFACES 000 o000000000000000 0000 c00b0000050RgcagaQ0a00 22, 99, 100
Photographs, environment of school................ Figs. 93,94,95 follow p. au
Statir CME Sooooccoscs0cunoooesoeonH coneoodoudsBoaoaGOSoUUEGODODOU 108, 1
284 INDEX
PAGE
CHuRCH AND HOospPITaL, ENVIRONMENT OF......:2.0:2000.-000-- Fig. 96 follow p. 214
Citizens’ UNION
Approves . districting sreport.<..;c,.\ic.0e seh eieeleleistoertsiseh elie ine eerie 174-175
Recommends. greater stringencysre rc. -rcece ee eee cen eee eee 175
Ciry Burtpinc, NECEssiIty FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN oF,
Precemeal planning: nota dequate rete lcreieetsiclet eielelete siete iets eee reas 12
Recommended by Heights of Buildings Commission..................... 3,4
Wiall:assistfires figlting--)0)-1.1.itcatsstsistersarsicieteierejohereetonsiehetesotertcterel eee 10, 11
Willsbenefit public thealthi2 2. .5i.c.ccr «= same oct sere mere ace en cretcite tien 8-10
Will\conserve: property ‘valtesic id 5 :e:ccc:s <creics x ws i)oieje) ace a. css fo o, clole eevee erateene 14
Will reduce’ street accidents’... 5 ..<<c.n cms cielac coils 41 eyo) ooh neice ee Beene 12
Wall relieve rapid. transit congestion’. «ye .ajcrmicie sate clei eiclelelaleieisiele cierto 8
Will strengthen natural tendency towards segregation.................-. 13
City Crus
Binkerd, Robert: Simic oc shercinsdce cine aveaienn ss rete ee sic siouae es eee
Gity Planning: ‘Comimittee ss so. < sc\sjeicrereo cjeists lores ste = clea sa srvoreisjareransitee teen
Importancesxon! districting ..cnc.orctisieins em ciccic ete reste eloeetieicieacisiaietieeets d
Protection of small parks
Protection Zot sSubugbs sete ccicens cece crorcia cloiccretetc nici oie eter ieeretarelectal eee ere
Storessin xesidence butldingsoyiacmcsec ci es ee clo ieee tide sere cleanin 93
Walliams: s Birank Bie icccrctsiretecictieteteioteeckeiereicleroletciclorcorstcroreretetal=tnieiars eit aeaaiaes 201-210
City PLan
Committee ons Gity Blame of. -ickrtetie sscievs « stsioieietatele oielerslelore eters ee eee eae 6
Gontrol of building development. ==).<7 10.0 ciicmianecie sec eects HZ
DAP? ovs\sceje are e/oi5 a a'sinilaralatelerascvele, olajeta ela’ a taluteletete ete Hele Sia ee lets PEG e ee CEE 7
Prime ‘need in iNew: York City: cn. ac secre cosine enema cseeioc eee teen 6
Public Healthwty ac. cicte eyejcster sists tare mlalasetersia tote stoiers ete ee ts tee Ie eee 8,9
Rapid Transit. .).25 nts siseelslscew ease oasineieie sees gel det eer cee eee 8
Relation of districting plan tok ciiisaisteis oalerersis ee aii tereleteleiste sole eter eee 226-228
Sewer SyStetiie ic .ncnainenenbaceniece che ectieeh heen EOL O Re Cea 7,8
Street..and block layoutsnsssoc.seoci sissies erceee ole cee penis ee ae eee 6,7
CLusB ;
Allowed: in’ residence (district sjerercrerctleters'sateretersls esinriaicteia miatels reels eee 15
ComMIssIon ON Buitptnc Districts AND RESTRICTIONS
Anthorized by; Charter.) <tastetsrent cen ieicivion areca nee cieenteiceies eaeeeane 46
Created! by resolutiom of Board of Estimates. --.c- 0-2 dee enone eee nee 1
Hearings betore: S62 a4 thats Seer ai wrere sic loaie a lente sleet Geen ee eee 73
POESOMIIEL i aia wis on isiees & eters evetere alee mic ioteisie eke RISER ine TE ORE ens 44
Preparatory investigations and maps. rice. sareletmievs lernreratolee sae lvoe tele eee 4
Tentative Report. ic\i2c fe siste s jniele iis wieele ole cenlejesssetersie lots & Rls oat aie ees 4,5
CoMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Report of Sub-committee on relation to other plans.............-2000000- 226-228
Report of Sub-committee on districting resolution...............2002000- 228-231
Reporton ‘building zone plane 2 2)..55. ¢u)s eines sia stone weet ite eee eee 213-216
Principaltmapichanges sw. aye creyonera cies este Bee of atormtereeieiceracla interacts teeta 216-226
CoM MITTEE ON THE City PLAN
Amendment: of; districting: plans ..2.0 02 «asa © sector cles ielele am eer eine 43
Comprehensive districting plan mecessary....-.....<+-++-+0ssce + soosmeee 6
CoNGESTION
Bernstéing In. sig Ss & cet ne Mecano davis sree eee CTs eo EE eae 86-93
BMlevatore- cinco he 2. Senne Se eee 88, 92, 112, 156
Eftectronopportunities for stveet playa. oeecee eee een eee eee eee 222i 2a eewlos
Leb tino dca (he PAA eR ATA A VA OHOGOTERO TS Ho aGadte aeecanie tees 29, 30, 109, 200,
Pactory Saree ns sos okies ab eee os Jai wee Eee oe 88, 89, 112, 156
Forces-tending tO wards: 5 /e:/scelsererietss «sic e elelererovewe clotale veto rotator aie en 26, 27, 157
Necessitates. districting. - :inascsanines'ios sasicnotion eb eeaeee en tetera 57, 157
New York Congestion’ Gommiutteece nn: a= -sleloeanieiiseain steed rer eee 153-156
Photographs of lunch-hour crowds of factory workers................+. 117
Rapid transit congestion and public health.................2200-0002 8, 9, 106, 107
Relation. toi fire danger irs, ove sceclemactestsmes seein Lee eee eee 10
14 (-) 11) 400) | a einer Sere i as ba arn taco fyeitine Siicsicoe cn co 90
School. syets/s.c.- 22 «sacrevatalaterave ssi arestisialel oar ole Sate ale a etait asl alec tee c eee ee 123
Sidewalk 5... 55 S20 te Feces scare eat eg Dae on lae e eee ER EEE Ieee 125, 126
Sidewalk congestion on lower Fifth Avenue..............--..- 18, 19, 90, 111, 112
Stores‘in residence buildings: 3. 55. case ecco etee meee eee ee ene 99-100
INDEX 285
ConGESTION—Continued PAGE
Siac ComBconon ImiaGlers ied isle, 5 ooocoonsonoboneccagabucncusuaee 11, 35, 138
IS ERE CURCA Taner ee EO TCR STREP ra TPN c ts oar cae aut ete ck! Bea 88, 106, 107
SDWEN? ochinagueoecagSo COO CO CSR. ODa OF a Herd RNIGE CE TOI ICI tr Sree mene eae mean Nn 190-194
Atwmmes, IDemrel Ie cscc0cc00 gosoondcs0o0uepadsag0qoceDHHoOGeHoODeRORRR 190-194
CoNSTITUTIONALITY OF DISTRICTING
TROLS TTB KOL Reha RNS ere banc c-loleiig eet I CeO IELTS US/US 61
BOSTON ous nnoes 6b HOG DES CAS D OO OB Re BORE DOERR DCC TE ie tat nane aera 59, 61
California Supreme Court
JBve 1Bevaye JRIPVGleeloyaeles slag ouiac6.08. 6.0158 crore RICO OTe AEG Ee eae 69, 70
ix erate Vlontcomenyer eer eee cence Bud Sune Gee 69
iEexe Par tem @ von cao very ctor previ erst aces eet o sispar ais (arava alan aaletacsaieerere 68, 69
C. B. & Q. Railway v. Drainage Commissioners....................-.005- 5
Cos eis po sosueceacakue see soucueanvaaneecocuecuor ba codaseds 61
Bubankic. Citymouskichimondeseeeeeeeeareeeeeci. year Maire n At ele soreneteyaveteiay eye 52
Bremmal; Poles 1 Powierascuouwnd soos che ob ORDO Emo on aor aon cane eenee 54, 55
IB Gay nS: a), TSHR ord AG oH Bene moe DOTS ot oc Bae ne eerie cole oo enone ao En 52
REasonablemes cums sestevsta Aer oteoreree oa ereree ctare Sis ee wie wlaiec eis misteus alninveye sieeve wierd 53-56
IRATE GE INGO S53 widow coloman on OG a OAD COC NOD CER UMA CE Re arn n come aeae 55
Wen a, Sweserisdaosebanhue Guo U mae oe rted Aaeia Rete creas hacia me 52, 59, 60
Witscomemn IME, 62 12) IR, 18 Co, i, JACKSON bcoaascadancescosobcccudaduuease 55
ConTouRS AND STREET GRADES, Parr or MapP....... Wha ensyMovarcisiayaiaisys ce este follow p. 46
CONVERSION, OLD BUILDINGS INTO PAGBORIES SOIC ae CE CN COE oR Oia 103, 104
Corner Lots
IMTS CH WAGE GURAASS aooooesbn osama peodes canndasonaceNEnees 33, 237, 260, 261
Reannyand SaewiAlem metre ds avaraaststaic craps cvexcieveeys) alerctelac eye ersieleiereicrslepeveieiaveyele= 38, 272, 273
CorniIcE REGULATION i
lg, JD IWENe oggoccoopagusundoeHoDDGoCouDDoobonHsoboOnDPDOODUODD 105
(CO WDE R MORIN TES Tle Key eereereper are ae Sia Se Ne wep one arch cadens na veVeiieye ateqeiater sia neoasis scp siiedelics oye 22, 99, 100
(Cou ©» AuneANS, INN? MOMS 5 odo0555800000c 0500 5050000c0G0 U5 snRDaaOG008RG 32
Courts 4,
Common sioels @r ibedone eine! Biro ocoocnccncodocacadbedoosHoDaDODDDAODDDDS 25
ID Strat OTG:, 6 had coon cece ee RD HORS RO TD ocr BRITE eS canon on nOrkas 233
larder, mins cocoscessencuodousdoosUwos oonoD OboRnS NON Heobo00eoO ION. 128
Mitton SOS coongcucgadacongodgdoouoceangs econo AGoDDDODDODDSBGAGS 128, 139, 159
Walloes on Ghiiigaene Usinelsooccoaccoonacgse ono sanoonsesaccvon0UddooDDD000S 12
Vie river eC IG ed Meter ests sist ycbescisrstapecte tckane musics Sn At eo o cu ono ort 38, 39, 241
Courts, INNER z
IDSNOMS: 1.4 boo cecdecoMeesaderso oud ge od bod coaec oats porien ap nmccrucs mn 233
Dimensionalenequinements sere Ee eeer ee re-reree teeter 39, 274-277, 279
ica Kora inh EL eho OO RRA b OA cha occ oe adn ROO O emGa MORE Ar AO DR Om Ec spite 184
ESC TITT Cl Ogee pte oped ae eM TL au iok ls etse SPC RSTSPaeMCTE Reto sy anor arcnctane saccsre event aeteUare ase sressievauede Gl ake 241, 274
Courts, OUTER
A, IDISENSES 3s on tc eNO eR GSR Ece 5 cote. fo DAO SCM aot REL ioc rere tetera 39, 238
183. TDIGUIBIGES 2-0 6 Ub a osha GE cH ReierE Deo 6.d-a Bice ORR ee oe cere eo ere ores 39, 238, 265-267
(GH IDNSGSICIS: a duieola Oa OEE SEDI cc UlG Croin AeRa a eI oe EOE IeRete 40, 239, 267-269
ID) IDSC: Soe audoc sno mongpeEeac IoDU OOS Soon eon nem nC rea enca ae 40, 239, 240, 268-270
18, IDMSEAENS. Gio. ac docs CR EEO A DOE Rano DUT Ee eR Eco rere 41, 240, 271, 272
ID SritEtOINS: Sanaa ope oti 6a Teo C60 Coote RR TRra eer eras emir ieee 233
FRG tiie clic creep reer meer aay is, 5: 7 Beene RN Ponsa a. cad ay a nares ay sveveseevamvensvs 241, 274
CameEmon,, VOEn Ihooscoonsg bomen da cuepddsohoasnennon ences soe endnote ators .. 100-101
“D” Area District
(CHENAVSRAR 8s SrchoGs 5 ade BORARO AS 1GO.6 SAGA RAE Re iG Caries Aenean 40
Community eopentSpaceseern wee alee eee /ane eine eve nictaerans 41, 239, 240
Onier coum: anal gicle wail me NISMS. .5556ccs0s000ccesccenvsanadauuce 40, 239
PERSONAS Oi ARE FESEMCHOM, oococooccandocudcooongcvas0c0OdHGUGGOnOON 40
IReaie: selnGl Tecoma as adccoo coDCOnAae EOE mem ome oo cee OCR ene cme 40, 239
eaivey ards erequine deme muta cisee ree Rett teins einer eee T Sara Moieiataie oases 38, 239, 240
DayLicHt
IGE Tipo HIS IncAItM, GiCocconcoonacnvoocsnaooscoancounaes 28, 105, 106, 197, 198
Ji,” TEVCROIOG " Wan etesaolinor cod voce Sno Toners cer a Ge Oe OER Ee ee ae 4,165
DELINQUENCY, JUVENILE k
(Comliors dmiesene a coesseos055 8005 CCOUCR AHA ae OC eon CRI eR rae 22
eancelyaducmtomackrOrenlaycnouncdseeeeee ee Peter rrierice onic nee 22
286 INDEX
DistRiBUTION OF PopuLation. See Congestion
DISTRICTING PAGE
Baltimore. «ys sescasedeFbveots bob sayane ial aloe oneyenec ease Scaler bea eva Sener an Ton Le ar vate ene 61, 66
Boston) 6c 53252606 ces SRE Se RPS ea aaa tee See are a nee oe eae oe Oe eae 59-61
General typesheliwoseaune reer eer ce te aaeee cenit rece ee ttt ttre eee 51
German. ClELES» 3:3 ;s.<'ejejarerassiotosesialeyss sicie ie oko cine el eteieeerctee einrere betaine toes 71, 72, 202-204
Tridiamapolisy iv vats nove eeoxeransioteneterersnsvonatadataetmerceeteverte kee ele ee Per eeee oie CR CIS 62
Los Ane eles: a5, okcrecanse on ebm Ori ROC ee ee PRA eee OEE Ee EEE nee 67-70
Map) “of "BoStorieis.ss <a crete ine sreicieve win sjatel Glesetessie eve s}oveue elcheyer ckeistete aie eater ane follow p. 60
Map) of UPranksfort icc chic mw wrevsterntieroieriens erinib ors ate etl etereten eller Tae eee follow p. 72
Map of Los: Angelesinccicites cilere mre jerete< eraate eo rere ate lores meee TTOe cee aS follow p. 68
Miarp'~\@ fase Mit watt eee. ro 4h cre veyote vs cre) ove rose Castors roo vee eererete cre rere oe ae follow p. 66
Map) ofe« Mine apoliss ras 2/<y5c 6 wiejelevsrsiaisvastels/aisiersieveisisielatsteiearerchele tie eh ees follow p. 64
Mialp <ioihy) OW alslatm tome re:s;0.020;0.ovsisro re teresa rage le ro -cicveustays) ols love eves oie ote eee follow p. 62
Miassachusetts 2.5325 6 00 0e. 54 sv ctor oyareceeibio car Ue aie ope polka Hye ers eters ce) hee eee 64
Mit wate ee oo. ojash ace. ciase lol wnaveneictaeate tere layarnievetels erate oi eoptalnle ope toe) olay oe Lenent eet ore ete eee 65, 66
MUNMEAPOLIS) «4.2541 212 fidsiase ies nerniaPeee eal Sroere rave esha erase NOTE COT ETTORE ae ee 65
MiinmeES0 tal snc fhe cecjere 3. cis, Lav © or drerevess Sesokrstc cpeierere eteravete ete se-stenetons eit eee 64, 65
Necessity: |fOR Vs Jace cuievces fesse ee naitte sen Se ecloe Olona tei e? Utena 56-59
New Morkscitiesvot SecOmd iclassy cece orto rsivele erator sistcvetare ola (alehey versie hehe eteeenea 64
New-York Gourt/of “Appeals. foc Sacsrars dal cine auscsssislsis,- hs oe ee eee a2
Police power fic creda aise <dmatrneieereye = nreene ie nceelee Sens hice OC eee 51
Raich mond Sika sciscaielecareiaveie- cla acs Syoretale als wravarelvy eave pstegejecs 7s aveleerorerse eect eer 62-64
Seattler co face che Sobies.ske eles egies Oe ee Te TUS Cue Io ete ne ore ee 67
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
‘Wnitedi States) Supreme: Courts... 5 cscs ene aeeiiee ae einer 5152: 49 60
Washington \isccicddciercic dared ccidsiagae syne doa ce see nie eee See 62
WWASGOMSIN ss.c/5. <a: siavetaveyetave creases eyeieietarsicie wiausiecs Sieiaisios Vieeelt estate he OR eee 65
Disrrictinc PLAN
Nd ministration. afescosccic oo assessors wpopecececare ssaroyenctaere eyerSelaces fate iets nee 43
Board ot Hstimate may amend: c-m-ee.- eee eee hee eens 42, 43, 244
Building: zone resolutiomir- cysts aici cit aielelefor-t= «ele tave/-)eriela aietsTs ise ele ee 228-244
Charter! provisions, athorizin gay. «n+ -toe esteem cites eee 45-46
Binanciall institutions: endorsine oe eer ee enna ee eee eens 75-76
Elearingsi, On sigrcrses conta cite ea aki aee le Cleese eieiner a eines SGC ROE are eee 4,73
Organizations. endorsing, ciesistinsidsincsiens crests 9 Jolaet ea tea eee eee 73-75
Relation’ to. icity (plan. carck ic cwictow ars sietoyer inicio tue tetornie Site eles ee eee nT eee 226-228
Mentativie® REpOrte cnc; ve-aicvaes custersievelscers sre ayerstesanel wleuetckele easier ehetevers ee eee eRe ea d
Testimony ;and :statements ees cri csc-oise ave < aleve: a cle'erece cl ciatarel aleve ereveral svelte nena 73-210
Districtinc Resoturion. See Building Zone Resolution
Districtinc Reso.tution ANNOTATIONS
Areas GIStricts!: ....<:inarns dare coeleie,s snare ae ematern ts Loisiare aie cles SieeG Tale eee ea 265-273
GOUTtS oh fan's Se acieb cw che clas ee ole Sie casas eel ae aE eee ee eee 274-280
Definitions! <..sijon cas cables ate cine aie hoi ioe rete em ore erect ee eae 255-257
Leight sdistricts: 1s: \2eersteieteesaees nuleictens tors) ovo olese iste tel okt eleeisams Shee oie ae aoe 257-265
MREAG GV ALGS seb sere acc whee wpe ecaelnyoreie ye ere epee e a em enc re pears te Teneks ie ee yet ere ee 272-280
Docks AND TERMINALS IN NEw York City, MAP.............0.00..eeee4 follow p. 16
TDORMERS Sects ushatea cea. is cee ied OA eto eretes Ode alee He GROREE Re CO ne ea 33, 34, 237
Dust anp Opors
Affectinigy healthy (vo sets bier a sreteve soles etelete s enerb ane laiers bts ateRlCicrere ee Ree 109
ATechingyentilationy eeaiceeeeeee lscbvaia 8 bre iced GiSahes. sone RO RS eee 29
Emerson, (Dry Hlavet sac g.ccmerervsies isis aioe sesrsioietedele > Sree store leteie oe eee 109
Drgare:- "parks: a2 sess aS ote eere eat n le ninhe oie ents oe Cen ee 160
Wihip ple; (GeorgenGin nit commen acters oe eet merece elo oleier eer nt neeh enaennae 29
DwicuHt, EpMUND
Elevator sa CGid ents? cies snyaielareratece crave vies ete ae obeete eretereveterel chee rere. = Stee eee 101-102
Street) congestion! and! streetaccidents. .- aeercleiete cle ctelettele nets ieee 101-102
“E” Area District
Character. (<i Scions ci cises arses areca cies ale ais eee See NR NeTels ee ee 41
Lots not ‘over’ 50 ‘feet widen cence cx01. clei mole cag sle/eiceisloeiete eee 41, 240
Quter, court and ‘side yard requirements... .m- --si eee ieee eee 41, 240
Percentage of area, restriction ems es so. eoe ce isiees aeeee mine 41,
Rear: yards: required. \)cdssca.ccomoece clas viele oe ecient CE eee nee 38, 240
Rear yard! Tequinemientss .c.0-.. cre ce cyatelors sic) evelotererehaveraiieleler terse eae 41, 240
Side) yards: réquired(.) c.0.05 aie «create selon ele is si ekevelesaieie re imi nTekeaeTe Aiea eee ee 41, 240
INDEX 287
PAGE
Binnanae NGemsninS co desodeeene ren ocatacsou ous cGudsbeddboodcoumoauomadand 101, 102
ELEVATOR CONGESTION ............: gooooossacoonsananne0G0905Ne0050000 88, 92, 112, 156
Erxus, Apram I.
Conversion of old buildings into factories............--+6eeeeee eee ees 103, 104
(Greatemsatetyaohlowabuildingsreeeripleeietie ele cll ielelsietelhsltteleersieieelsletl erie 104
Manufacturing in tenements.) ........ 2.2.00 seen e cece eee eee eee eee 104
INecessityaromedistrictingeere eer eerie sere reir Sotetart aveveravecba sisi 102-104
Stake WAaciony COmTMSOMs.soooncacooonnccoudadooo0dsdCoO0F ODO DOdOURCD 102
ES NEERSO NPD) RN IED ANE: Nira) sacs nieve iss eysisterel eines seu slonssavsieia) slaceiersus:Woisysievotepsn eutereceisitiele 8, 9, 105-109
EENAENRS O NiSpn VV EIETABAUN I meray ve sctincciar scatevc Cv clenaterere revevateterere svey stecctslensmsr sueneusreystdmraka si@iere oan s/s 109, 110
BBA Us. Clay, OFM RICHMOND: aes scceie scion ass cacisc SA Aes pes aceiieys 52, 63
Factory
ID HTGU oo ar dora e OR OGRAO GR oD DUR rato OSCR ERE en er aes chan AEE 15
ENS GEMS, Heranigika tour oct Ge ao a CDR Etaoin SORE RG SEA ea en EA tE one 156
IRopalkision, ZAayrtine: Soin, cbmonun qoeecuEd SoMa onh o pbeHn ee Cone eee or ante 49
Saretyasinel owabuildine sweeter esveiteis eerste else icikeiereeeton ee eee 104
Statewiactony.« Commissions 7) seis sevelsinls clsurolenic nie esasieie ernie loa ionerels 102
Factory EMPLOYEES
ERC IAIS LE LID oMn | epee Nae Sea Derr a8 nd PWS Fh sche Roh Meath yeh eV ARRAS 86-93
Character of those crowding Fifth Avenue.................. bandos nee 115, 116
Crowd sidewalks of Fifth IS SRP OIG RRO SOE MoS DI Ta Peo aG 18, 19, 111, 112
IDISVENO COMES. doting osodo UPD OR CASA pana OR eee SNS o Ree EO omnes 88, 92, 156
El evatorpeick nessa Met rene SE ME et NT ay na 163
acto nyaCOmeestiony muah mei enae ts yeveycteten eneie ere ena ne teed ee anime 88, 89, 156
INKS. GAMNIG S So poche meta ooo tev de Cla OS Oe eid Cha ER Hn TER IR rhe ne ne em 163, 164
inglichteindustriespepmrrcetc cies ciscite om cirnea ik ae aarti eeeee 17, 18, 156
Jone oaral or Sprtiamy Commals so ocnosoccnononnccsonsoncuonnoacnegen 162-166
uncheoniphacilitiesru Meee coh ctiriuoo aoe see oneal ease 89, 90, 156, 157, 164
Mapmshowinegiplacesotmwork wy -emericceer cece ccknk cnisciene eee follow p. 16
INIGTIONSGTGIS.. bee Bo 68 CODE EOS EU OS Oo ote COE Hick oe cman Om Ene ROTO ete 162, 166
Photographs of congested side streets in Fifth Avenue districts........ 119
ihotosraphsmonmlunchWhournicrow dsm eerie yell 1riaeirecieeeieeioas 117
EATIGE GE OTe rlMen serra ainywreiteyayerievapesaeiavele ccvate lets etelelie Gieisiee be vege cituckataparenesenis cil 162-166
IRGEn InOGie: Conve oo dash Son Uah GO Sah cco SORE On oor ARE cIo cme E ore oee
Shouldilivemneanawoukey my secrin- cr smisen mach yneisa sie cistecyaeayaus are oko atses 126, 127
Sidewalksconeestionier ascetic raoseleCel srve tee rely ines 90
Stree ea Ca Ti COMGESEIO MM Pari ae tates rate tee ie core esbad Noa ange ae laerapeicvee 88
“Neenah ie) Eka asco old eaerogdecd cadaedoomohoudoucuouuedaoucdod didecdects 89
Williaa: Suid eo Eecodonu ence sucude okaumeororeaate Dor maet cannot abiecc 90, 92, 162-166
PAO TNT) OS UTGV.C Vemen rover aT sner chai a toe uate aTeUo Reel a la tavarc snake clay Say ousiat wsounkelelaveveleer= sbaakeaieh 49
IM NUGONDR TBI ON DA ola Hig aie ineneOlatc Oo or hone Gioia Conte orieinia Pcie a Geer erecta 110-119
FETHERSTON, JOHN T.
Wocationlotiwarbacesmlamtsc.:sjahcrvvhersewtore ne tevere aueueve ereise wicieteayeinelshelee el oeram ere 120-121
Mixed occupancy makes street cleaning difficult......................--- 120
Zone plan will facilitate work of street cleaning....................... 20, 21, 120
Firra AVENUE
HB ae Ati c el SRR Percteetreray esses Sot See ye arava avn su enGeh cust osien coscavog Seetehp soak eon elaheaeecatonS 80, 81
Character of factory employees ercnwaling IESUTEM, ENPEIMBCs os ooccebooces goes 115, 116
Crowals Of Vachon SmMlOVEES.ootnascccopdb0GanbodoDDGDDDUUGOBbONS 18, 19, 111, 112
Bictony of fimyastom thy faakbeiny.ooccoccsocooncnoawscoson bus scounnocser 110, 111
Photographs) of “congested! ‘sidel streetss seas e nce e oases cee follow p. 18, 119
Retail/business needs (protection. ..........-.---..-..--2+-++s0-s-- 80, 81, 96, 97, 116
SavierNews Vonks Committeeciatreitrch eter veloorideiictes) 4 sieht oe steveccymie einer: 96, 97
“TNTEYTR ONTO Has CAG o OSCE Hebe OOn FSU Con Oo aE CCCs Creo nina sree ricer 86-88
Firrn AVENUE ASSOCIATION
IBM JAN UT Ee eerie eee Sree cero oie GOI CCE ERNE RE Ee a RCRRC oro ene ee 80, 81
TRYST, cl [Gee cicero eR Ua.G ota Bole oi taco tl Cie ter Re eRe PC IIC Ree Tee Rare nits et sy ia 86-93
Birretmorsruce: Mes Halconenaearaascmcre oss acreciecnte socio cra ee retina 110-119
(CharactenmoteiactonyemplOy.ecseeeeeeeeeeeee ree ee eee een. 115, 116
IDESrEASS ih TEEN] CHALS WEMES. oocacoosndgnd000dn0000000000b0G00cuN00NEO i, sii}
Desirabilitiveonestabilitiysineusendistuictseeereer rere eeiereeciiiiere ercrrnre 113, 114
INOWaliOne” CoOMneea TO hGdGoene bbc ose pour ites dao races soto boa aaa 88, 92, 112
HEAGLO GY ACOM CeStIO Mey tack La CieT RCL Taleo ere Kleiiel Niche tarerceone ee Na eeRePoe tenuate ied 88, 89, 112
looraneasised sOnimnanttractiisn CAME ee teeencieeniiiiericicninciiciiae: 92, 93
IRNSIOM? OX TAA Of IAIN ANEMIC. 560000dcc0ccd00coo0buaedenocEGubONE 110, 111
Lirm@naon timelines Ox GiDlOw@eS.orcdccnncccsdoduocousccsogucugbodauoDD 89, 90
288 INDEX
Firth AVENUE ASSocIATION—C ontinued
PAGE
Protection ‘of /Pittht#Avente- 4... ee ccuriee eee ee eee 80, 81, 111, 116, 118
Rush ‘hour (\congestionincc..ctaais onan vision vieniniet mee Geoleeis coins Ce eee 90
Sidewalk icongestion 22.20 ccc tic iee og ieiecleeinae eens See Let eee 90, 111, 112
Street \car \cONEStiOM a. a4 sha\orsese cis ste eo eye mre eo eee ee ole eee OG Toee 88
Trafic counts 2 2o.c.s{e)rciese lS sins hice hase ole croraie store tet eieve ecole slates ele eae eater eets 86, 88
Travel of factory employeess. occ aciscnsteciseace teenie easter een ic ae ee 89, 114
Transportation of @oods). «ccat aac d coarse cvccmmcess anor cee eee een 114, 115
Welfare. workin) factories). ccasacos ss ciaceek name ricebeet eee eet ere 90-92
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Approve districting resolution Goccccu- ese cnieeoees cena one eee eee 75, 76
FirE COMMISSIONER :
Jurisdiction: under districting iplatieyj.-.qq1erer ire rei elelaeretolelelovelettteeetet ote ete 43
FirE DANGER
Mardy, ‘Edward 2). ..0:sasiacettie cision cero is oe on meee EEE 11, 24, 128-131
Phigh"ipuildings 00 ao secant w cela cncleeee ooo ee eee ean 35, 156, 165
Increased’ by ‘street ‘congestion’. ...0. 2. nose cee es oo re ee eee eee 10, 11
Increased iby; businessyand! industny,- cee. cece cceen olen nee eee 24, 128, 129
Kenlon; John ns5.2 ssieacins cttuan nerve aaaronc meen oon Eee 11, 24, 138, 139
Photographs, ion nonies <exposedutonaseeere secrete eee Fig. 74 follow p. 214
Statistics; .iaccsralecasccose stared v mys presario starev totes leatoeas inc he tee ee Eee 129, 130, 131
Fire DEPARTMENT
Hire -hghting aim high buildings... -asccqe sec eer eee eee eee 138, 139
Kenlon, Jobin. 2.2:feisieac.ccele ho teeth cseceease meee ee eee Oe een nee ee 11, 138, 139
Segregation’ will lessen fire: dangers. <cc1s cise ciise cle cleieiniee siete eeereere 139
ibraftiic congestion hampers firevapparatus.....05.2-)-ee eee eee 138
Wider courts willl prevent spread of fires... sce -teeeeeneie eee eee 139
FIREPROOFING
Ini buildings over 150)teet Inighis 5. <i creryes ceive reierale elevate letoterete alee) aera ee 35
Fiske TERRACE ASSOCIATION
Preservation of private house) districts... ceo. ce ee oie iene eee 100-101
BRANKFORT, MAP SHOWING JDISTRICTS) INi. .[4-%10e- o/s eee eel eee eee follow p. 72
FREUND
Police: power dics. é.svscsa.s-5pe mceaiays beavecd a travera te aya alana aqeierein ore Orsis oe eae aie ee 51-55
GARAGES
Discretion of Board ot Appealsicc.cccsceciceccies cee eerie eae 15, 16
Milwaukee 2c.5.sbcc Sod o.ccrateqc ne iotoaisidls Sele oe een eer: Cee 65, 66
Over? five.cass: excluded aie fciovear Oc ioienig crore (sy costar islete eis oiees orate ee ee 15, 16
Photographs
Among private: homessan-ccee-m chica cee eee reece Figs. 68,69 follow p. 214
Among! LeNeMents: | Fo says sies vies als © ol -rere ote Mateo alee Fig. 70 follow p. 214
Amone japartment whouseseriryeriecr titel teeter eee Fig.71 follow p. 214
Roadway, (obstruction) due tO... osteo eeeieciee Fig. 72 follow p. 214
Stablecandcarage, blockssec.tce-e cere eae en ere Fig. 73 follow p. 214
Privates wo hssche wuss sc brs eSeetelerete et oeroein eee eo IO EON et ee 15, 234
12U le) | (Chee epee cio m Reo mma c OSE IOUS ONO Osocboccss 15, 16, 234
Schrag Ucouts: (..225 sera a cieiere toss Se eee aes eee ee OO eee 176
(GEBEPARDTS WORN Go... succes Susveseseveimtevscessus ie) tsoyerevetecade’= tensyeee ete lasek stare eee eee 121-123
GERMAN CITIES
DIstrictin go sre2t SS) dsovasaze cualepavataiatere sais. Ginvste aie lot cedeteeieton sn is eee eo pia he
IMME) Gavenininee Chistiatcy cool Tirekal irdeon ea oonaasosesecardaonecavsecneoe follow p. 72
GoopricH, Ernest P.
eal thy 21. i tpiacacc a's a ave ate. oye ove esis © a\s leis rem omarskosTebee ee siete aa eee 123, 124
Height limit will) stabilize values. <..:...:./< eles)» «1sijet> cle oii vial re tele eee 123
PAING sian rates oa a ao SOIT SInTE aise olisfalete ic ators eC oTere Cee To CE eer ea 124
Population of Manhattan! <7. ctoccercte.ocnsiearicinc seniors crete eee 126, 127
Sidewalk CongesttOmn’ asec. isi scis ophereteinetarsiern! Aeiesereiereyelatetel lols oe ieee eee 125, 126
Street’ ACGidentts) s.2-sS0yesu7 sce seywyaveraserovnie’eievetevord eialeleiefoleteereseeie eters ye ee Tere ee ene 12, 124
Ta fE res bays), ee cre. axeicidin,claiataie.c calm ayes ceeeetaleloiovae ie etoveta tele iotecs migteiegs sisi sone ete eee eee 123, 125
GRANT) “MADISON! 55 r-'o See lorclo ayes are orn arate etelere lieve Lote e\'s 1s fersVore eye ete RISIGT sen ROS a ene 127
GREENPOINT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION é
Parks imrelation ‘to! districting ici. cert ec ecient see el eerie 85
Streets \asi-play” SpaceSiss cs cae om cute © be wrote cusieeitieis a Siesta ee eee 85, 86
GREENPOINT TAXPAYERS’ AND Citizens’ ASSOCIATION
Need! of protectine parks) from factomiesi tae) jartesiel stele elelatetetede ie eiaietet ena 134
INDEX 289
Harper, JULIUS : PAGE
Heo andeblockwsizeshaqwmics ence never eso is ciel esis aan gael eee emai ae 127
Mitarintian CHAGASHONG O% COWS, .c00000000000cbb000bonodubancacodaGabOND 128
WaliesrotaditherentakindSotmcountseee seer nieeree eee eee 128
TELAT: JB Nanel Rega op estan eso OR Te eoS OOo OCG Mad Ue eee ee tee ee een 11, 128-131
TRLAWINIDG, JRORMEAGSIN saeg bulb. 6g.coddd ed a6.6.0.0'n Bo Sania ole COE aire einen een ete GH IS eI SY2
HeEaLtH DEPARTMENT
Attincialelluminationsineonmicesbuldingsmaaereeeeee cece sae cen 151
Wormicennegulation rm ecrvrersetiee tien aris eisbonel sveteisieaceisenh eaeeecs 105
IDE eauide A OSnrte Clo. ue a.bIG ok ala Ic HOS SIO S Der CE LOTR Cee eae 109
iEitectiot transit scongestion| on) public) healthe. 44. .4.006205-+5s5s000l. 8, 9, 106, 107
IRynaesecfoynl 1D hrs ale leh ake a cles cai6 OAs CGE reas Ore ele CU Ree ee 8-10, 105-109
loomspacespermoticeremployecesseeee eee eee eee ene ene 152
IEiain aor oGbiny TAS thn OWHCEIacaccocoscccovccg 90d an DDUGHOORDODHEHONDHONS 152
Inheromehiny sin Ooince numbing. co5ce00gcccdoungcdccvon cu ObUESHeHoaOnEnOOOS 152, 153
IMT DOHANES OF WEABAWIONs cocacavccdacdaconso00and00c000008 Peearton ec ees 108
MGM Gilling: ID ye IM Eile! dBactartcct oe Pag CON ene mo Coc moEd cro Dee ai one ean or 150-153
INGadl {ole Ghent Gon una ae oe Ono EO Oran arb a Ge canoer nce ern one 106, 152
INecdstomadequatematuralulichtiandtainseeeeeeeeeeri eerie ree: 9, 150, 151
Ropilationgecon gestions meme cere eee ea iatickicmteciee: 109
INGEIsOM Or Sieve Cites WO lveEVNNS 6506000000 c0cc0ss000cG0c00005G000000 108, 109
Samitanye conditions mingofhices binildingspeeeresecieeer cheese at ere 105, 150
Sunlight in relation EOMGUS CASE sciarcier arene cate Siar ea te SoU Aa Sasa eee aentier ne 9, 10, 107, 108
Muberculosisminetenem cnitshactrccrveterncie ottctehe ea rei Castano cs TSE 105, 106
Wentilationsoiothicesb iildincseeesse re reeeerieeeritetceenri ree ieeer 152
HEALTH, Pusiic
AS eiieciecl by Gimeae Clearing. 55 5ccccn9005ed0000000bcc0eD Dn oOSDONOBUOOE 20
Rod min, Die, (Groh yw lied eosoepoodedede somuosous padbe be asisaceeaoredn 10, 94-96
IDERVihealote Ti OAM (hos pooccb5cbo0coDdoDOCOUIaDdNdEbobDOOE 28, 150, 151, 164, 197, 198
irector depreciation of realestate waluessee sae eaecer eens escola: 14, 24
Effect of heavy traffic in residential streets................2000e0eeeceees 20
DIESE OL TEMS GOMESSIHONs osncoccovegoccacdsogucuoouDbObEDS 8, 9, 96, 106, 107, 124
Emerson, IDie, Islbieneperoneb peso dos s pon ORO Doe cee aan arosion 8-10, 105-109
IMIGIMiilleey IDES IMENHOM Bs > colo copeuounsodoeoRduudoeoocsemueocaescoedone 150-153
INIGCOSSINT IOP manETAll ele ermal ies o cooossaccongc00 oD decacDG0GDDGDO 9, 142, 164, 165
RO DMEIKOM GONERATHOM sooacoocad900000000000 FO Ee ere eee Reno comitna moc 109, 200
HRELATIOMCORZOME MPL Arlerctapercsecsie caceaener eas cierovesets olenev eae’ = eusnsiet ro icneie Svea nevessnele Mhetevetere 8, 9, 158
ST1O EMTS tN TTOLS Cb yoperces ate sey esc cnctensis =/extaus caps) szeraeevsceae)lahus) staeisual steve aloeustardisetaiaievele 96, 199
Stair climbing USS DH OotORetS SET ROUUCCOe Tu cE oOne nce ae aenininn amen 108, 109
Sunlight in polation 1 GIGEEIGE. oodoccenuecs 9, 10, 27, 28, 95, 96, 107, 108, 142, 196, a
Waluctofaprivatepresidencess vaccines trelenrenetstctects
WSS ebalti Oriemey eyed sree ro ors is tesors cetiowe Geetede take eedesevarere aie sone yepeite sessile jevevia) spekre ial sualle"ovecelegeusie 3 198, 65)
Wentilationgingrelatronmtoneeacoeereeccrncr creole crcinciiicici tert 105, 152, 198
Wiittinpila.' Geos (Goa aaereierranian oe oe sald seminine semanas Gor OS EHS 10, 27-29, 195-201
HEARINGS oN DistrictiInG PLAN
BoardsonLstimatresandeANpportionmenteuereeer erect sereateeree reer 4
Conmmicson om Ikantlcliner IDNGEMCISs 5500050000000 0G0000Gu0500bansDEnGdE 73
HercHtr Districtinc
BENUTIOTS 4co4000000 cna BEbee bo bioou ou do CO DIa ao tne oeuad cose tee aneGr ee 61
TROON. 6.5 ake ota b6.b.6 bo 6 DOERR eS ONE On Chai Ne epeieial oie oe Eis ries Gate sine renner 59-61
(Genmanieiti sie epee ee esa a ne eee or niaa late ioe pS net sina weeds TAs GZ
Thivehiarne yao Spo boo plo a ueLn aoe bid Od eal aEOTe gle BIO COMI ER ROMaEe Gite neat aerane 62
\VEig aiteventoy ak saairin.ns coun 6 See dete D oD ODO C.O0 COO COMETS ate ete Set Rear 62
Herent Districts
(Cornerslotssintuencesomawidermistieeeereeereeceeererenececiee ree 33, 237, 260, 261
IDrsumeirs IResoliniion AMMCTNROMS. 50500 ;000950000000000000000D000R0008 257-265
IDYayeiaN SPE ae tesa aha ere Gaasieco 8 6 OS ca Dloro bE Ie NERC ee ern een nS 33, 34, 261-263
IprovbbaavSipeMtetel | alae cisecyog aie ooo Gordo 010 6.4 GR Sn Gib oD MCE en ere oicnae emitter eee Ootr 32, 236
Height limits based on street widths......................---. 32, 236, 237, 256-260
ICO CENSTGNT GUS Ae or ata as Amie ctio'o: 010 ba. 0 OO RE REae OEE ce ERC ane eS 34, 35, 263
iMapedesienationsrandmni!|esheneerereeeer te err Ci acetic 250-252
Map of Borough of
IMraniharttalniy sees cre essere een Te re oes raie ct ierawee as Fig. 128 follow p. 244
Mp ew R RO lexses niyte MN SoC Ie eee eM ne ha oalar eae Fig. 129 follow p. 244
Brooklynmandm © veenseeeeeeeeereeerterniieeioncniere Fig. 130 follow p. 244
IRS ovaRovaral Toop oslo bie s.6-000.0 0.6/0 0 cine A Bibio GS St ice ee rere Fig. 131 follow p. 244
290 INDEX
Hetcur Districts-—Continued
Pocketed buildings; sf fete csci-peteieyal« store ethers eee RO tee OTe 263, 265
Proportioned to character of developmentss2.5..-0-4¢+5--02 eee eee ee 37
Setbacks rules 0%. Set eee Ce ee ae eee 32, 33, 236, 237, 257, 259, 260
POWERS srt aAt as tee es 4 ine le EATEN gaat UR ee oe 34, 237, 262-264
Heicuts or Burpincs ComMMITTEE AND COMMISSION
Greated by resolution of Boardiot Estimates cceeasseaeci eeeeeiae is)
Report of - GommiSssio mary syersece.csvierece sicsele ewe tere. Mice ene ete eect eee 3,4
Reprint’ from) report ‘of Commiissionie.s.44--ee nce eee ee eee 51-72
HicH BuiILpincs
(Gatisemstreet Concestiolherer reer e eee eae erae 18, 19, 25, 35, 36, 143, 188, 189
Depreciate) valuevor adjomune) propertyere- ae elie eleretettatereie eee 166-1 9
efiect ‘on nervous csystem=chine come meretinc: herent creer errs 94, 95, 162, 163
Efhect- on) ventilation: ass.cssts eee Sooo eon oO eee eee eee Fe
Eslevator ‘SiCKveSsi 4 ic:cin.cvaioiere Serena ce ceeacloteus fesetetehele tacts Sain ere eee eae eee ee aa
iter hazandsieshccpridemtcinaee cn CCE oe eee eee 35, 104, 138, 139, 143, 163- 19
Bireproohne 2a sa cacleec een tee doit ele cgee crete bacend die tebe eet eee eee
Inereasevelevator’ accidemts..cts voces aera se saree aerate tie ae eee ea 2
OWVViertax SE WEES. c.coe isicyssarsis Decne tele re loretaternie evelensssietstereastints otcte tees clay ahebete ate 174
Photograph, lower Manhattan from Hudson River.............-...-+--- opp. 1
Photographs of congested side streets and high lofts................- follow p. 18
Photographs—Tall buildings overtax streetS...............-...----0> follow p. 38
Relation tovsumlight as atercuetseseelo secs ate coe ei everev sa evens enous eters eee rte eee 141, 142
Statisticss aower iMamhattant cancers erie ceere ities lel ieisil ale ieee een 35, 36
Swan Henbert) Siac. sien cncssae delete serene aoa Oot ete eet eee 188, 189
FT ORWELL J OSEDIR- 6) lay. 'cta:s cyevs orsreteveceteve ai arerere sieeve che Taco ctCh eceneee rare tenes a eee ea 134
HoRSESHOEING IN CONGESTED TENEMENT STREETS..............-- Fig.77 follow p. 24
Hotets
‘Allowed! in residence ‘distnicts 2. 12s eos cuciisietese eetnieieiete tr eee ee 15
INDIANAPOLIS
lietohit: GiStrictsS: cic...4 screeds price eee tec ce seste ese. = illo dedntopap atte as RST Koko el chet ket eet ean 62
INDUSMRTATE (OISTRICES, | UhMiPIGAL: ce mneererencn mianieriae keer Figs. 100,101 follow p. 214
INDUSTRIES Y
Benefited by ‘segregation. omc. sccuon soe tot keen eee ee 17
Employees umeliohtyindustriesa.n eile sence einen ene 17, 18
Excluded from business and residence districts........................-. 15
Bloor area dimited ampbusiness distnicts 7m. sessile eee 15, 92, 93, a ae
Fistony of imyasiom ob Munthe Avientice +a. cenit ce sereeeiie eee 0,
imma done iby, chemicalletactonies; eee tere a eee einer cia ee eee ul, 176
Tat enemients: 6 = -chy cen cerca ieee eee ere nein tee eee 104, 157, 165, 66
Location of light industries in Manhattan: 2 circa tars ntepe sieaen cries reine
Photograph of factories in residence streetS...................+++es: follow p. i:
Residence sections tor employeesen-.- a. = shee nee to eee
Sporadic types harmful to business and residence sections............-.-- 13
Wathouwt tendency, to segregate ry. -rs = cts ele ete reietetetete tetas ate encase ere ete ete 13, 17, 18
INSURANCE EXCHANGE, NEw York FIRE
Distrchne: willereducestine qwaste-r..-eeeereeeetere eee eaet neers 11, 128, 129
Hitech onunixed occupancy on insurance rates emi: ec sielestressleieettelteetee 129
IBIr@ *StatiStiGS: 2 srcsyssisevave sae eeevaiete oe 410s wis ls Cha ere ARG LA he ee ee ee eae 129-131
Hardy, Bidward AR .i:sa-jciscccia svajessgereeie wre ns; atari teterenntetraye cnet terete eee 11, 128-131
INSURANCE, FIRE
Mandy vEdwandeR asc sac. coterie tate eee eee eee eee 24, 128-131
Increased rates for mixed occupancies: =e haere ee seee eee eeenen eee 24, 129
INTENSITY OF BuILpInG DEVELOPMENT
Proportionedste character of occupancye eee eenee ee eee eee 26
INVASION
Causes decrease in real estate values—Fifth Avenue District............. 112, 113
Fitth, Aventie— History. o.<ncntesstacierin ese oiersy~ toe siete Mtns erat ea 110, 111
@f business and residence Sections by industry). 7/4.) = 11) elie ee 13, 18, 19
Of private house sections by apartment houses,..............-.s+s++eur 169, 170
Photographs of factories in residence streets..............--.+-+eess follow p. 18
Photographs of junk shops in tenement streets...................--- follow p. 24
Photographs of horseshoeing in tenement streets...................0- follow p. 24
Photographs of stores in residence streets.............. Figs. 79-81 follow p. 212
INDEX 291
Invaston—C ontinued PAGE
Photographs of apartments in detached house streets................ follow p. 42
Photographs of stores in residence buildings............... Fig. 82 follow p. 214
Photographs of storage warehouses in residence street...... Fig.90 follow p. 214
Jotnt Boarp oF SANITARY CONTROL
IDE belale tn: eVeWolOsas shsadee pdb Donde oh OCOD Gene Dane aE oe one” comeonaa 164
(Beye (wore Site SNES gan dos aio sae ba 6 nde doen deus Gd acer oat CIS tear teee rs 163
IS6@ ROU CO oosaoduo cacumenaee poe oo emubloioe Sooo EInE eee cre eee em rere 164, 165
Jae. GANG. Captadoes Bae SES OES F CH Ob OSE ep Rob DOO o Ore Can eae ser teemeys 163, 164
Rireshazandeunmloktibulldingseseeeeeeree eee reccne cere cece sls sales) sek 165
iuncheonmracilitiesmimipiactonyal oltrGISthiGheeerrerteeaeiteeieieielsieicieialer lel 164
IN eRVOlisnesssamoncecaLrmentmwOlkersneereee erect eciciciictitrele crcl 162, 163
eri Cen G COLE CimlVapm erie Nee ester ie eneii a stalaycaevoreaees siete lenusasie wiovey Mtascrsyieseveieyens 162-166
fenementshousenmantitactininopeeee Eee errr eeeciicrtrnc rier 165, 166
Junk SHops IN CoNGESTED TENEMENT STREETS, PHoToGRAPHS.Figs.75,76 follow p. 24
ISG SD, CLARINES, elo ococsocuacosacnoondsnoncopoooDoenconguoDGgoouaRGdoDOS 137, 138
IXDRMON, VOIR ig poceon Aaa oetmon bao te atic Gal RECe CCC ae rea mne msm ered 11, 24, 138, 139
jirkus, ALFRED R.
Noman Ohi pyre INOS GAGHOMS, scacaodccocgdsso565000000000000G00 140, 141
Ne@eeessiliy tor GHEWAGHING 55 doccaccs0ondasncnauesadadan0 ces Hb 0oDUsD0000NN6 139, 140
Knorr, S. AporpHus, M. D.
IDEAHINS TRROMN TEISMCTIIOENS occ noacodgvnopDsuDGGdDODGOHC OOOH OOGDONOOUECRON 142
TENA ASUS peigodeooe cased db mcod Aude co aelocuie doe Oo en acto mre cimcaicna ied 142, 143
Samllisine coonneooaanodenandodvoanspoomation sbeDonMoUsooGueOUU ODD poOsmodE 142
Teall Tela socoonoqucccoccv0vndpcocdbodggDcoond gos ooNDOD RD OGUONDOO0N 141, 142
MiubenculosissamongecanmentsswOnkerS aspect tletlele ste alstslieleleter litte tele= 142
LAnp VALUES
ENfectmoigdistrictinowonrece:mumtectias amen ceiices Gi scenes asmeemeasee 147
MIE) SIGNER? Boone crpobecns ca cn Oratnce Sone te tei te Hea areas follow p. 50
ZATNUS CUAURT molgdaa coco sae DOU MO nee ORAM nO NOE Aa noe Mn Ta nrocrematen 50
LEGISLATION
(CRIMES «odo clenercie Oe See tre arte GSI OLED CUAL CrIE iC OSA CHPERER Re Err eRe en cr 79, 80
Chanter WOMGIOUS: {eassesuooeedsc bes obonaocoasednomeeccesanmoGnhomong 45-46
Lewis, NEtson P.
Wevelopmentmotmslumpaneasenerer eee ciccierecinectircie ote 145, 146
Districting a protection against fire......... eon BO oUCHG Red OD oAroe Non aoe 147
IDicuimeiine alll GSRAAZEMO WEBITCS 5 oso oavocpoDcco0cdc0undooCOGDDGOUORODOA 143, 144
IIGEE Oi AUOTACIMIS OM WVIIC. o6500090000000000500900000000n00n000K006 144
IDiieee Ox Ghowsieiine om leinal WEN. ooconqdb0000onDcacmDDDGDOODONDOGDONDD 147
erhtelimuiteshouldsbemmonresdrasticneeeEenaetreceaeneriicinetceccee 146, 147
LaGk Of GiGimICiiNgs iNETEASSS GORE Oi SHREEISS cao0acopd0ben0000000G005Rn0000 145
iLamd sulbalivision aimal CIOEMCINE. 65 osccoscpo00c00009000b0050000b000Ne00C 7, 146
Micamiineg OF CAmGlsn CGihy MNOVSMEMEs ssocccsoscccocuccceccucecuobsonoeoas 145
INC GMO re (AIS ELC ELI Soper) < ttre ele aleve eeraetere ce leis alsieven seine occ piesa te cle aisle eels as 144, 145
Ranicndanceqamoneahiohwbuldinossaeereeanecsekcrr reenter ac ONo 2) 145
SETAE! od oo Gonis 6s die oe CI MpOI ENS oo eas 90a ee BIatG Co a oan tee acne See 147
Stonessonmnesidentialustneets undesicablesmeneene ence ieee aiecinn cae 146
LewisoHn, Sam A.
INGedieehonardistricti mow yue Mic. 2 apes taeyerete sel aterctaisyaycis caahatartnesreleadacasiciecncie bre ese 148
RES triGh ONS mOOmMiberalley. aay ee parte ysrin ani sxsloeityevae crea lenve neelsebe cee 148, 149
Licht anp Arr, see also SuNLIGHT; DAyLiGHT; VENTILATION; ARTIFICIAL
LicHt.
Couns anal wards, wien maceitiredl..cosccccovonecansonovenccosssauouedcer 38, 39
Initensinvgmonmbuildincsdevelopmentaeeemereee eer reer nec erence enon 6, 7,25
Nec tine datos cal thier casmerncree pa cpr ie ras chcesstecc aunt anos lacevesccstaeclistarele 29
INGIMS OF aAchomabays PRO DSTN~>ooogoconoccaconGGboso0DDbuobUOUDGO BH OnEOUS 27
Standardsirenectedsinezoneslawerereererer tierce neeorcnneece eee 29
Wiltim plese Georo enn Gecrer terrae remit sores Grivel Naat aticrsan de ansiaiaactnie 27
Wand owsmonlotellime scr yers rn prcncrereercttecieis ie oitie me cela exis /e sielenelovekevelicvsieve 25
Werle" anal Gommtiondoaracctocs odbc. cotemb phon abe Aa Oe eee oe ee eben tae ear 25-27
ICON, TRAIT soocotuacbsoneo dato 05000 CaCO MEE SURED ERO EC OURO Rhone ma Rmam ait 149-150
Los ANGELES
IDIGIS ESHA? 456 hen ple b ma..n GAG Cd WO. OO LG 2 Lot ONCE Ee Cree oe Ree eee eee ee 67-70
Miapmeshowan cum oistiictsouiti errr err cere cerita ciercers cia iat oe eiaeels follow p. 68
292 INDEX
Lor Liner, WINDows on
2 : PAGE
An, ‘economic mistakerj-ces ceicela cere cere tee teen ee eee
Photographs’ yiccudnn tare eee ee eee Figs. 105,106 follow p. 214
MeMirnan; Dr MARION, (Bvtiasap eer at - athe cer meee ie em eee nee Tinee ee eee 150-153
MANHATTAN
High: busldingsi is. sadiisietieayceteior enelsiorinees eek Ree ee Oar ae aL ERE Eee 35, 36
Eocationvot Might industriesminkn: ene -eeerrnerieie entre eer eee renee 18
IMieias (Git NES, IDNSUS sc oncusdssuacssnecscascanccasasood Fig. 132 follow p. 244
Mapvotsileiehte Districts sneer eset et neet ener setter Fig. 128 follow p. 244
Manor UsemDistrictsssnca-sosceree eee ee ree ee eee Fig. 123 follow p. 244
MANuFAcTuRING. See Factory; Industry.
Maps, ZONE
Aiea Gesicnatiousmatd sc ules eels eee eee eee 252-254
Height designations danderulesme-mececmeceieie erie eee ee ania ee ee 250-252
Use designations andertiles=..2.;-20) ci -i ence oe en ee eee Eee 245-250
MARSH: (BENJAMIN \Goaisicni2 cs aceieaye sien cee te everane Cte CsIo ae eae Pe To Cae 153-156
MASSACHUSETTS AUMEORIZES) DISTRIGIIUNG sate arse lalereretelstelsist ete een eteettere 64
MILWAUKEE
lO odlan hee eee aE RO ROR Tad GU.AauiocaoG EA OOmteOC OOOO OSdaUSnoo 704 « 65, 66
Map showings sGistrichsi imine recertete mere ort errs teicher ee follow p. 66
MINNEAPOLIS
DDISERIGEIME. SS sreerars Saewrnc sre he aie Bore ore Teo aT e rene SOO Te eee eee 65
Mian eshoiwdn em districtsy stir. terest oti sete e tne iia tener arene wei gqsscerehe follow p. 64
MINNESOTA
SEES (SHS ChSwsCHeGooooanagoansaosne cos ooo ga DOaGOn SOOO oN 64
Minneapolis. 2% baerncerenteeteele stom cera whiarese sateee tocel seer era ate eee ee 65
Moskowitz, HENRY .
Congestion om thesleowen last S10 eer ceriecr ee cet nicie testa 157
Exits in factory loft buildings...........2.20.+-+0+eeee esse eens seen en ee 156
Wnncheowm facilities) imelonte bri) dinos ae see eiteertre ieee teint tte eee 156, 157
APSaaalasns IMCS Ab oUII Ole Somos on ong aouduooDGOdOdDSDoDe Smo S TSS 157
Mounicrpat Art Society
Mio iacne Oi Uscemar ko con toods Gos ho oonnocHodSoDaoKoDoSdcocdenasDousoocK. ls 157-159
Mio Nie egodwocrdccsacsbo sdb aude pesuuaddosoUacas CodocOMOODSGEOGO GCS: 160
NaturaL Licht AND AIR ’
INgGxacHell toy pybllhte WMI, osooeodonacnonosdacogusnosE cons vans noaesSTer 9
Mssential tol persomal health pve sere e tere cieterasiop-telarernetatstatake tele ter tear 9,10
New_York Borantcar GARDEN
Bactonies anjune vewetatlomec.--rea-e eae ct voles ae ieee eee 160
New York CONGESTION COMMITTEE
Recommends Stricter mcestriChiamSeeyeercrerere crareieletotseteteretsetate re elena eet tate tea 153-156
New Yor Court oF AppEALs ?
POMS Gigk INGINIES gape oooo bone cocooDoOgHOoIGnGdGc 002 SousaGKmanUSaSonESOS6 32
New York Zoo.ocican Society
(Sere Mile ab Sop Ree enn ar ns oes O UMS EaG Eo nance chGaRGOORSnoEaHES coos 1%
Protech om otepanks ete erie celta ieee eee eee ee 12
NoIsE
Business.inl reSidence «StreetSicavers cc cusses severe casshsyetatier esa siete onehsuner sists eee 137
Eifiect om nervous; SY Stems cece sister ole cterers selieriotersinvcicke eee rete eee 96
Photographs, Noise and the Home.................... Figs. 64,65 follow p. 214
Occupancy, M1xep
Hampers street cleaning................ eee seen cette eee ee eens 120
THGREASES:.TOISE® epee lars <ahe Roatea een & era SUR Uat as fate nte eae niet cr eee toe 137
TMGreaSeS: drreat Cam Seta cescve sre ssreretegeetentece ase) oi otevralolel oeveraieiever= ete te ea eters 128, 129
Increases street accidemtse sccm ite cis © cu ciisstre iss byeretsrmite esisitsttonets 98, 99, 101, 102
En tenemilentse OMentaxcest @xatS ret ttetesrrstenersieeteteeleierereteiete tetekeete teks aetna 158
Orrice BurLpincs
Axtificials alluiminiation® antes ss .c)eatecmutaceis sic ctcis oetasyeiee oo a eee eens 151
Floor space per employ FY s eRe Se ont aG Galoote nc coo c-0 152
High morbidity rate LPs ssc 5:0 ciouateaeter sa Siereia te dts Sefer oe ee 152
Humidity Et: oscheug a are ehsc ois areola aoa OT katte e a ee Slag ee eR Cr ee eee 152, 153
Needitor adequate lichtrand) atten tet ee eae eee lente eee eee 9, 150, 151
INDEX 293
Orrick Buitpincs—Continued PAGE
Saimitanyaconditionsmnermee reece ccc tericiieeciiccerreieceerts 105, 150
WGeanl iieinl, OF Ab osu conn dancome bed co botOn Us GUARDS O OS aoe orrdscood ccs 152
Open Spaces. See also, Rear Yard; Side Yard; Court, Outer; Court, Inner.
Commnunitv eee eee eee Gea SiG EloOR Coe Ra aE OCC ae 41, 239, 240, 268
RIchmoncdmnecmationsmerreer acceler eri rleiiiicie erie Teter rere 62-64
ORGANIZATIONS
Eadorsme Glisumcnme MAM, 5.05cccqc0pcccoscccccccobonDo ONCE OKDUDOOEEDE 73-75
Panic
Carsaal, Ixy GanelsSnconccoongoetnonbooenp noo oudoopUeD yHoUSmUDaDOAS DOCKING 24, 158
Danger increased by street congestion........---.--ce se eens essere es 10
Dancenamenichebuildingsmreer reac cece cic icieieiae 35-37
ILORAG) ANG Bottle oncom tuned 5 aso ot on oUDICOn eG ete ROR arnen ter eictede cai icac inet 36, 37
Park DerpartMENT, BrookLtyn
IDiStelytOm OF DODCIEWIOM. ooocccccp9ppoaooo9dooOUDEDUDDDOGCEODDGOUGOdS 136, 137
EMRE CERO tar CIS til G EIN Oe calc ye scey lo ere ire Be tetea ei eee Teta oo usts le tates aveevaie diciovareesycravenerels 135
lincersollAmRay morn di Viesdsterriseitcle tier orlasisisieieicnsis cieta cena eakereraeicte lense eave 135-137
Proicenom OF sumill makes. ooocopesc0n00edooddeuoo0Ddccgn0cdGOdDoGCOODNS 135, 136
Streetsmasiplaye SPACES hac l- wrens. clcavelcusisters nrevehersiese(ereuveyelelnesaiavelel evayeiefe ia cleseloce tate 136
Stores on residential streets objectionable..................0ccceeeeeeeee 137
Parks
AS gocitell GSMS. ooapccoocns gnooonogousoapedunpbopbadadobsoEsondoD0OOND 85, 202
Counts anal wardls tmewagl ORoocosoccocs 0 p00 cu0D DDO ODDO UDEDOO DD OOOONDDO 123, 160
Elanmedmbya business andmindusthynrciddricieel i cieireteielieeleir-le 93, 160, 201, 202
IPROWASHON, Woh ARwCNeseNo nos codpooepeusd bos oobUEebbubadcaqenocedocusods 134-136
Relat ommtoz omemp lamps cpr yet erste crctsicteteroneter stale cas(cneisie cotoleceneis tevedersteyayy aneiseacs 7, 82, 85, 127
PERCENTAGE OF AREA RESTRICTIONS
IDF DAG OTC Besar etna aia O Oe COTES eee IEEE Oey Se Me Scr enc cer 40, 239
Te, DIS USC No ccc ip disiccan cosine etiorE or Gace STS CHa CRI Sore RET ET Res oe REET Cr Re icine eS 41, 240
PERILS OF THE SIDEWALK, PHOTOGRAPHS................++-0-- Fig. 97-99 follow p. 214
PLAYGROUNDS
CommitteeonseRecreationee eer eee eee eee eco omlS2 34
Corsa, IBM MK yb 58 oes OS Bee DOs NOOR OO Be ROO CRG EE Ser Son ene ats 22, 99, 100
Islegnnes, IRonwkimGl Eoooscasbocuessngece Oona eee db Ooretoe cos erbaoads 22, 23, 132-134
Inadequate in tenement districts............ EPR ae erate ema 22, 23, 132, 133
Pinguograpng, Ine Sueer as A Ilkenygeroptals, soscocccocsveq00n00ca00c00 follow p. 22
aay aeSDACC Stati Glan. Sumeee ts csiewe seers ee Sarva ava aoe eles cerns eiars 133, 134
Wisesousstrectseasmplaycroundsee meer nearer 21, 23, 85, 86, 99, 100, 133
Zone plan will help solve playground problem......................-..5 22, 23, 132
PoticeE DEPARTMENT
StatisticsMmolmmstnecteaccid entseereE eee erence een eee eee Ener 98, 99
PottceE PowEr
ID istrerkeistinres' Mrrexal eke Waves cle crane eigane b cw ictn G Cie RR Cea AR RA oR See ran es ae 51-53
IDEN JASONS, ANOS CIs Ohara raise GooBs oC On Oe CO GBH TAG od hones Boerne SOD 118
JENS ETIGL endo. dao dudiogin'd Comet ed DO OS Oo ETE COOTER Ce Le aCe 51-55
INewavorks CountoteAp peal Siscoeemer i ertrece wei con rehoeies ec hore epee ee 52
Pablicuhealthhsatetyaonders seneraliaweltareser meen ecineecc cree ccs 51, 118
We SaaS upremen Cotter eies oct recom ators ari iam es cmere Panik ei ave eietnlawa ss 51, 52
Poruration. See also Congestion.
ZL aNKaKe? ALTA YCN TY Glan. bo DO DOSER On os Daa OER OCG Oe Oe eRe 48, 49
SoOeswe, TENE Ole onacscanbeoocmuboo DNC o COME AEE o oa Ane ORTr eee creer follow p. 30
NWapmshowincaspopulationlcenterseee eee e Eee errr nee creer ree ecrcee follow p. 48
ERAT REDERT CHR pea ey vPro is cacc kere anne acer ate raual arial aicee roheaveceuc te ropeienesune 160-162
PART CENA GEORG Ee Meyers eeeeverete eins. o psie aerate ncte RPE To ene 1S ici ST epsia oS ESVEISN OSs Neo ds/ age Senne sav ats 162-166
PRIVATE PROPERTY
Rushttombuildsuponwlimitedaarsaceeeeeeece cerca ice eietaiee 27
PRIVATE RESIDENCE 3
Ttealthwan ducivichvalite nares cricicrtertterrelenete tec iucreestetevelciistetaootaidl oc aoe seashore 31
NCO RTAMAS Ol SAAISS ANNO. oocc0cconcc9¢s00oncudods Figs. 68-69 follow p. 214
PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS
Ragoce lachyerradl IM naproodoussods cabo ooata Denese BOS e GS emo ae Enaemos 30, 31, 82-85
GNSS ENKS: Gen onco nid Deo Un orcecno CURIOS CORE ToDo ce meee Cnerte 30, 31, 82-85
Igatarior Ro mummbtcell agagacconcncen good ondos Uo Os oo bed doonaoms cotammorts s 85
294 INDEX
PAGE
PURDY, “LAWSON | 2.2-cui cen natatek ein aso vialson DMR CEE COe eee Ee ee 166-171
Push Carts AND STREET CONGESTION; PHOTOGRAPHS....... Figs. 102-104 follow p. 214
QuEENS, BorouGH OF
Maps ott Area! "Districts. 4-..¢¢ eietecere pene erence Fig. 134 follow p. 244
Mapsot shleichts Distnictone meri inceneteneemeeleee i ernnee Fig. 130 follow p. 244
-| \Maps* of USeU Districts y1-c.a-- cctte ces ae ene Mere ee Fig. 126 follow p. 244
QUIET’
Essential! tosresidentialénershborhoods=- scree eee eee tee eeeeee 20
Photographs,, Noise and) the Elomess scnneeea en cecese eee neneee follow p. 20
Rapip TRANSIT
Cougestionh endangers public healthmaseeeee criterions Peoobe 8,9
Map showing stations; Lower Manhattan...............-+...ss-s008 follow p. 46
Relation sto zone pla’: Asjos,< aoiteqeet seis wid cla erarstoereiae ove olereties eee
‘Time® zone? map: oe si0 6 ois aisis aslo ain oe Sv eBook follow p. 48
ZONING SULVEY » aisiccc dis adore cee w araie tavern 6 Geass eee sero erate erate ener ore eee 48
Rear Estate, DEPRECIATION
City owned <prop erty iiss wana telaveiete ave wrois aioe oti ere diesen rete nee ee 170, 171
iitecti of sEquitables Building assesses cee eee 168
Kyilvefrecton general welfareascsccercecsereons acmene «6 one tenn eee 14, 169, 170
iMaphazards developments hyra-caa1s creas ole eee eae c ee teenie 13, 14. 166-171
In? downtown office sSeCtOn ac vs.cc¢ ae spe oie civiwleale creteieve cxeloisle crete Rate ere eae 167, 168
DlOLE Section) c2.5c co scx ae reas Gee cn wor sreie GO die ees Se Re One ee 166, 167
Invasion of private house Sectionsesces. cacekieee sei aceite 169
Ptindy, a wSOnk 2) 5cctex wre cctare svete arora avearera} Ayaistorere etal color o OTE eID eee era 166-171
Wall) be prevented> by: districting). -/<:.11 «2c <ct= = <lale clots cise orele eielel leet eee 170
RECREATION, COMMITTEE ON
Additional *playcrounds needed! <hea. sesiecr se csieioeeenree een eee 132
Districting ‘and’ ithe playground’ problem:....5.......++...-0+-2 2 seeeeeeneo moe
Districting willl reduce: trahies «ele smerel= + sel eirersis/s wierel sean eee 132, 133
Haynes;, Rowland) a. ses 5. Gem baila ne ee & a gRtaee aie LR Mee eee eee QO OS: 132-134
Play space: standards 41....00 enemas er ais sacha on ren nieces emcee ine eterna 133, 134
Streets, the sonly playgrounds. o-eac niin cin cicieie) sels sieie sleeraieiel= eee eee 133
Tenement yards not, desirablesa cei.) vieniseree ephedra 133
RESIDENCE Districts
Defined > sjeccjaeyvis's deaiate state ce a reig woe a. tetera lo oye bl otele ie arent veyeter sy oroete tee eee 15, 233, 234
Existing residential areas should be preserved.....5...........-cceeseus 201
Eirethazard increased by, busimess tel -cia-scaciser eterertertietiee aieleteraetc ieee 24
Bhotorraphs: (of) factoniesymi-5).\4)-,5 seuss us elec ete tee Minera follow p. 20
Photographs showing the environment of the home.................. follow p. 20
Bhorographs) showinewsstOLes ane eivact nthe serenein erates Figs. 78-81 follow p. 214
Photopraphsmote caracesmineer ernment ieiaeiiere Figs. 68,69 follow p. 214
Photographs of types of residence streets.................. Fig. 91 follow p. 214
Preservation ob private Mouse GISELIGtSee: «. scleieeenieteriemtese lie eines eee 100, 101
Ouletia prime requisites, £2 jarre ctv cnt saa slereaysisieyrseeeioe rere stereee ee 20
Require more sanitary streets than other districts....................0- 21, 120
Require small business districts’ for local stores...) .)....... ssn nee 20
Stores! inj xeSidence: streets... o.<c.c 5 cci0.<-5 «2 crus c:dieyeterelare ase: sya/steetelsie he eee 99, 100
Shouldibesprovided near factories... = coe cele cle +1 biiereeee ee eee 126, 127
RESTRICTIONS, PRIVATE
Bassattwidward. Mis vee ca ttetothcnis or Sore ae eee ee 30, 31, 82. 85
Ikea iacclih{ Om ee nD tne er REECE mica cbabanuboisboccwc boo: 30, 31, 82-84
Inflerior-to, mimnicipals 2 As ose seen. oo cetera eerie cee arrose eens 85
RicH MOND
ReptilationmotmOpensSDAGES eet et tet tetets etel fetta tetas [ete fetter eee 62-64
RicHMoNnD, BorouGH oF
Area WD ISEIGtS ie aco cicsncck erie LO Sete reson eee emeIene Fig. 135 follow p. 244
El elah ts WD 1Strictsic aic.5 Ane nrearecee acon sev eve rete ces anche eteaeneter totes Fig. 131 follow p. 244
LOG SMID iets, Beadle pagteEoob<donobumoDROndDsoObbn Aoo0on S Fig. 127 follow p. 244
ROURKE: MUARTIN Si shecincine crorerarae iatetecelteks heres nt slenatatay Ato. veletele nates ete 171
Save New York CoMMITTEE
NEY ib 0) 9 (el all ss Ue eer eee, RE oP. CG PRIORI CKO DIN GIA a NO moratyat Foo 96, 97
Elimination of factories from Fifth Avenue....................00e0000: 96, 97
SCHAEFFER, AMOS .......- Pe Te SA) TES Cots bare Stio welbcre o's 172-174
SCHIEFFELIN, WM. JAY.... 200-0 00ce eres cnet cence eee eee een tere ne nees 174-175
INDEX 295
PAGE
SCHOOL, ENVIRONMENT oF, PHOTOGRAPHS..................0% Figs. 93-95 follow p. 214
SICHRUNG, NEMONS” Ghoapago sou Gosanecnocd cess He HEREC SRR nae Onno OCe aan tone 175-176
SEATDE Petre rcp ete ane Pua e ater erga Sp SCN Coun nets Wcities rajire tare ald Slereval/sjeseueiero 66, 67
SEGREGATION
According to intensity of building development..................:.0.-05: 25
Cerfambpichtandustriesino tepLonemtonper rere rareieccrbiicco cece cenee 13, 17
Industryaaloncmwatertront eee eee eerie ener erl cen cnon ren 16, 17
Natural tendency SirenguneMedl iy BOME NEM >occcoggn0casu0boo0000000000 13, 19
Will benefit factory employers and employees....................2.-0: 19
Wall Stacihitateteth crentwstrectacleaninowmeeesaeecieiine ce ociceeecieoe ene 21
WWaliilesSenthinesdancenseMrbrsnnecrreree mre ates ecto ai oie to terrae 139
Wiallgrelievespopulationmcongestioneepeeeerer cee eee ener eee eee 17
Will relieve street and transit congestion....... Poa OMAee ae me aeonte 19, 143, 144
SETBACKS
Ojar (Giireae GIGS SoS aeco ono eos RCs be REECE Oe rere 32, 33, 236, 237
irateyatid Syteaty CC OMA ES iene erveneeee sen Regevenon cacusveYoveye.tsegevs yeni sacie eoapste.nieisiee mioitversieisherautielsy 38
SEWER SYSTEM
Conalition im Ney Wonks ooeebeusbeeonosee sco nuaseucod ep panes pon ode boas 172, 173
Development ormtheusanitary usystemiencerceciccinictereretcrncrccenice cs 172
ieee OF Inekalnt: Ow lvevtlabyes Os ocooocnocebb0aaq60000000000cc0000000006 174
Rollutionvofuthephar bork eeva cree hte) sererers ctckors avd etere tssaval store ate sere aeeiensavarereans 173
Rupiicationsotthersewaces eee ceseseeetee reece oer tener erence 173, 174
IRedesigonwmotadnainagenaneasey. scemicisv sieteclac icine sakes cieleieteris ctniseieeuiaeteele 173
RelatiOnmtom ZOMeMp latin ier ee ric tal dette nieree tsar acyonai dts loensleone ere 7, 8, 147, 172-174
Sdinoiar: INOS) Sel esecnaenoo nanos DC On nec Soins CUonO nT Eno ote CHne Sete 172-174
“TRVBEG * adeld edd tid duct onet accede on ORC rune Gem enin Hem ca heer creer 172
SIDEWALK CONGESTION
(GoackGns Base les papadaasoodaton cue Croce mua does ato colrm em aceSeeae 125, 126
TNPMINC: COUMUG VS bh eEOD 6 COG AT OU ODOM OOOO SE OOC On aa Gna Emr rnEe One eames 86, 87, 90
Photographs showing obstruction due to business........ Figs. 84-89 follow p. 214
Photographs showing perils of the sidewalks............ Figs. 97-99 follow p. 214
SMOKE
Danceneimmmixed Occupancy anerrreet er ecrcraciichicciniciceiniiiciiccncaae 24, 129
Death sminmtemenne mtmtine sey tee ticyeticrysiye ve ieceSretapavsiaie vsusiai ns Varese iteersievanis 159
IAHERES WEIS cocoandgaconosscobodsonodde nO acats es Heese cameo aa Scraper oe 160
Relationmtompublyemlreall thie meray eerste: icra sie vepstevepeyeietor tere etaieieietetaie te acres 199
Sraptes. See also Garages
Photographs, in congested tenement districts........... Figs. 66,67 follow p. 214
Photographs, stable and garage blocks..................... Fig. 73 follow p. 214
Photographs, roadway obstruction due to stables........... Fig. 72 follow p. 214
IS DE VVZATR DAMES Vim WAV EMTS iM rtetcn sci ore case evra eTeten veel oysoevioye Veiaie’ a sla) arse suse clapotereievatsravie stare 176
SroraAGE WAREHOUSE IN RESIDENCE STREET.........---0-+ee0 ees Fig.90 follow p. 214
Stores In RESIDENCE BUILDINGS
IMGREASCMCONREStI OMe iiss rverwe ieee Reet yertc Sain Use aeie ara e/ocelcbeieistavenalencie eres 99, 100
Imeraase time ame eanolza GAMEEP. oo go00c0cppD D0 DDD OOD ODDEHODOSFOEOOGuORS 129. 146
photos raphismpe ere ietic. iter ety eter ier oles aeidiaxvsvelsisia yan: Fig. 82 follow p. 214
Street Accipents. Sce Accidents, Street
STREET AND Brock SysTEM
IL@t armel lode GHB osccocbdoscanesosbanneas eoseoue nue aus bEOMeaSuden ee 127, 146
RelatronatomZOnemplanrycy eee Cet erence Paiyociete wei Oa rerate ineseeeeaeees 6, 7, 146
Risidityecondemned by, NelsonMbPeewisea- sss) - sees dace sce aece se 7, 146
STREET CLEANING .
IBGdncrano! | Ola IPs swatbetso.ce-cloruicis ono Hire echo per ee oa ERG pee CHRO TS SIE 20, 21, 120, 121
With ine facihtiatcal jy Zone WEIN. oo onosovdcvndoovvccdnvcbo0gscueouncuDS 20, 21, 120
Street CoNGESTION
Cameeal byy lvein lorie lopilebreves. o nao poacodevasacdboonDDGDadboDOUODGROA4UD 18, 19
Caneadl try Inrain @ffitee Iatilabings. oo.cccocsvsenosovocedaecngv0ccondanEROnS 35, 36
RAGIOAY GODIVA ooocagcccnsosccngeovangooaAunseodpooURnDObamoouD 89, 90, 111, 112
Photographs of lunch-hour crowds of factory workers................... 117
PCOS Ok MECN CPS. cccccosngdseacnbogesoacand Figs. 102-104 follow p. 214
Photographs of side streets in Fifth Avenue district........... povgoowans 119
Photographs’ of street obstruction.................-.------- Fig. 72 follow p. 214
Bhotosraphs) tall buildingssovertass streetss eee se follow p. 38
296 INDEX
STREET CoNGESTION—C ontinued PAGE
Relation ‘to fire fighting::;.,.sci.ssecseids see ae eeieioceiee ee Ree ne Ree one 10, 11, 35
Relation. to;street accidents: .1c stasa 2<.01s. nis sainteeaienee aemeh ecient rane 12,21
Trafkic: counts! <5 2/40 jec3 sinrescrere creroieie’s tie bioleloleee cee ee teen ee Cee eee
Street Trarric. See Traffic, Street
STREET WIDTH
Basis ot height ‘nestrictionS yi eee oociicecee eee eee eee eee 32, 236, 237
Intersection of wide withinarnow: streets. a4.cea. cere coca cece oe aeeeee 33, 237
STREETS
Gontours and*erades; imap' (Of sic. nic, sisi Seine heise eee Cee Morac eees follow p. 46
Wse-as- playgrounds: :c..ocecccce emcees serene eee ee ee 85, 86, 133, 136
Photographs the street assa’ playground... -s-msc- eecie eo ncee eee follow p. 22
SUBWAY
Car: sickness®. 0.73250 .eet sacs occ ad pod cbldon Reece epee eee eee eee 96
GON PESHON fe is.. Satedisiw cord wis Sisters res Sere Savaere Ore lO eie an Se eee eee OEE 147, 190-194
SUNLIGHT
Boehme, Dr. Gustav EF. Jie osc e2 iin wga mcmbewe wee eo mae eee eee SACRE 95, 96
Diagram of maximum possible in New. York..2....~.0cc.s-e0s eos essen 163
Diagram of volume admitted by window.............++seseesscesscccees 180
Emerson, Dr. ‘Haven ic occ ceca scars ais sles asinsisina ss es eva sie nesses eee 107, 108
Effect: upon’ ‘ventilations Xe. =-sie ars vie scarce ce oisieoreie ele teieel ele ele eretoleieeneeeeeteiees 27
Influence of neighboring: buildings=< <2 sco<- 2. cee elite selene 27, 28, 141, 142
Relation to disease and personal health.............. 9, 10, 27, 28, 95, 96, 107, 108, 142
Relation of height and area regulations to..../.......2..00+0000eerseses 176-182
Swan, HerbertiS.c:esse scone ok sce eee esta eee Oe nec eee eens 176-182
Tuttle, ‘(Georee (Wises estas on consi een hig mere ee OOo OO nee eens
Wihipple: (George Gee. 2ecn koe scenes cinncie, sii sa eines otdl htoteretan teers
SUPERINTENDENT OF BUILDINGS
Miscretion’ in residence “GistrictS., cer <ricteisi cic lee cleieis/s seis ele slave’ sialeieterr terete
Discretion proposed in Tentative Report..
Jurisdiction under ‘districting: planes s.-ee necmieeeislolo ello re etree ete
SUPREME Court. See United States Supreme Court.
Swan, Hersert S. anpD GrorGe W. TUTTLE
Relation of height and area regulations to sunshine............-...--++- 176-182
Relation of height and area regulations to daylight..............--.+--+- 182-188
TENEMENT House CoMMISSIONER
Juxisdiction\ under, districtine: plant. oc( ic. eleloreiein rel-ietate = aloe eiais cloister 42, 245
TENEMENT House Law
Beneficialresults Of. 2.1m eieveloernc oie eiaie cloacae elsiareie alereteleretaleteteietel- tats 157, 158
Gourt requirements too: lententacc cree cs © ciniessiers efor cvaisie stelpelelalerelolerelatatetetat 159
Compared with “ B” District requirements 39
Compared with “C” District requirements 40
Has stabilized tenement design and values 25, 26
Principle jor sbeight. Jimitationeen ae: seis. leemeeienie ae ajar 32, 37
TENEMENTS
Appropriate in icenter Of (Clty .- ses 0 <= = «/clsis1s 2 ore eretelelelatn o/o1<raistsvararetetolertette 27
Bl betaciitiestee pone sone ae ot cite cnino cee eccrine ebiior es fone eens 158
Ratalefires meinicrti.ts sccica vere ct cteleresteloteciers = nie sereletelepereversieteteiele (cle eietels tere ements 159
Intl) (si ean naaoondeanoneaccnpocennooddooasnancscéapeadccsodeesosaaos 158
Industry im ......---1- 2s eee cece see e eee tenet neers cect eesessceee 104, 157, 165, 166
Parasites in private residence SectionS.....--...-..cesceens cence rs cece ele 30, 31
Photographs of junk shops among...............-..... Figs. 75,76 follow p. 214
Photographs of horseshoeing shops among................+ Fig. 77 follow p. 214 ~
Photographs, yards used for industries..............-+---+ Fig. 108 follow p.214
Photographs, istablesw amlOd pee erteetterelstei-i-t-tetterchaieieteteree Figs. 66,67 follow p. 214
Photographs; | earages) amMOu ge wecieteic ce lelatislenleletsteteieie Figs. 70,71 follow p. 214
Photographs, factories cutting off light and air from...... Fig. 107 follow p. 214
Storesiin® ancreasesiire Mazanden sate ciscletelaeieteretelstelersretec = isaraie rs ieietareienae 24
‘Ruberculosis: in-new and old lawson. .-2 - = iciie meres tee eee 105, 106
TENTATIVE REPorT OF COMMISSION
Authorized! by, ‘Ghartets neces sce olaaeietstiais ae leloteteleletsterateis a iotetaie ie terete 46
Discretion of building superintendent...................- Bot eva Gas See 15
Generally approved: 334.1 cre coe Oe otereloioeiee ele initolete stance ere inet eee AaSs
earings betore Board of Estimatercc 1 cleoe cies eee ieciace © tatters 4
Location! of earagesvandstablesiy.icrtettace ciacie's 0 o stcvelerstetsintstersiet ieee eres 16
INDEX 297
PAGE
TiO: Ann) Said imaccupe so0000s counedesanddoopededeanodeeaoonne er 73-210
ARINGENZAONEMVUAPKOR NEW VOR Ks CIDYe hrc cieiciie ss sievelcieeiciee las ceils cic elelenciels follow p. 48
aE GUARAN TER SAND) SORTS TOs: syejsteieverctoveyeleyoisieksievei «rie aieliel aie ayeisieis) «;evsisvelevaveisters 137-138
TOPOGRAPHY
ZASRONS SURI tacoonadnosoasoobe CULE O DESO CCSD URC OU ROO ODA pUErtara roars 47, 48
BOR ONTONM ON TARTON cers asia octets eperereley sere eisie sone nveeraiel Savas otievaisterele aleui ares 70
BLOWERS L>XCEELED EPROM HI hIGH Te TNLCADTONSmaseieiaciciieierciiascceiicese ce 34, 237
Town-PLANNING
(Catiadky ooé'Sen coemenoouooreoode cacti ceo OL aE Ga DOSE deers Ocoee uer enn na 77-79
TRAFFIC, STREET
Accidents due to.......... ‘50 0000009000000000004 Teno SECO ne ae pearine ets 2AEZ2:
Counts, Fifth Avenue district................ Son COI Oe GROIN TER CR a rOC ite 86-88, 112
Effect of the automobile......... D GOOD CA OEO COTO CADE ress Donec 144
NACE OR Gato ooconacn colon en COUR CE ae Hee.cm.cd cme aanseOaoa aon 143, 144
Epdamcears Ives @F Caitilkrem aie MeN coscocosonccoccooDcenapDUG000000dGR00" 22, 85, 86
reac Wiel TO SSSA O8 CltAyococooscogdacoqscqougsuagccoGD40c0KN0eD 19
Gooden, JBC! 1? odcosece soponds carbaun que Roos Gao AGT OnE Onan anos 123
HiTMMRESI AEM Gem CISERIGES a syareiasy cis ay iersi) alte ronseaPetel ayia retevarats ays) alan’ sete rs lavays reyals aleve 20, 23, 132, =
TiGriores TaN Sere GAMING. cooonpacndaocdbbSoooDDOOdSaOnDDDGDONbODNE
MapmonemainmtnuckinesOutesseeeeeeneneeoeereere ee eeneeeaecee cence follow p. a
PICiOSrADIS Or Comeesiad GS SeHeESs5occovo ones oosescooobnecaoonse follow p. 18
ZESSNENE UE VEN <5 6 8 6 PHN OO AISA BO CO Oo DE CU MR OE a NOC ccc came ear ore 48
Transit. See Rapid Transit
TUBERCULOSIS
inl ONSMOATIMENntanWOLKELS meee rrcioemersveiccrrveiel creer ieacheieacteiisiersetorereiers 142
ID ERIS Anne Goh neocon ae PH eSmon ooo RUd EO OA OO ee Coe Te Te cc enE ere eerees 142
lin mevy ame Olel JEwy TeTeMEMID. oo45o000b0090090000 0000 Db00UG000000000000 105, 106
iki. ‘Sy, AGolinoS; IMEID Ess ooucaacopdeadouUoUboE edn soso cu oCeOr oOo ReD .. 141-143
Relationietom lic litera Claim ers ctererer feelers ce crsivar ee iehaie oicviovigin a ous ei tetas ones 142
Turner, Dante L.
Recommends control of building development.........-.......-.....-0- 8, 193, 194
Suilpwen? Gomayeqnan” poossonceoas soca an Oue OAR TED anno Dao UTiC Oe eee nan 190-194
Tuttle, GrorcE W., AND Hergert S. Swan
Relation of height and area regulations to sunshine...................... 176-182
Relation of height and area regulations to daylight...................... 182-188
Types oF Bumprnc Occupation anp CoNnstTRUCTION
Natturalilitendencymtowandsmsesrerationnaee sere eerererceerinentee reese 12, 13, 19
Naturalltendency wallihe strencthenedaeeseere ce. eee eeemeee ceeceneeee 13
Sialiliay assumed tmaler zome Mlains oooccccossoncd0soboConcauapacuanuobbous 30
UNDETERMINED Districts
IDXSHID@GL 5 esters aro Geng alate ERE RE IOI Clens chore eres ERECT Gee 16
UNIMPROVED PROPERTY IN BROOKLYN
MA) ‘O8 loge. eb no Wd cape DAA OO old GLa EES PRO Ces cere et ene follow p. 14
Unitep States SUPREME CourT
CRB RCO MRailwayaum Drainage srry tree oe reer ernee on cae 52
yells Caay Ox Ricans. ooocoucoodduccooob onoendunadouguoaunnbonue 52
HLearyeiriyal) 11S tI ery ai euel ey raseve tate re Ate Totoro RePSTe LS oe estinse sree fie gle teenie leariemn es 51, $2
McKenna; Justice! -2.-..-5---- IOAN CBU RUNG OO NOOO OSU MRD C Ce c oe MORE Ar 52
eckarn hy tisticemse rts tie cisco tere Cine Seater eee eRe esac ees 52, 60
Wald a Swwesaimocareucsnedandcoducod ce canon taco c en eee note 52, 59, 60
Unrestrictep Districts
IDS TSG! “seucoo spor oMUede sennGO ree au Oboe Aan Oars Ine OO Se eee 16, 235
Waterman temerrs crc cveretalsie soar e mertees moto rahcens oxen aioisis wlcteub ne ebileveiens » W/
Photographs of typical industrial districts............ Figs. 100,101 follow p. 214
Use Districts
IRAGHTCSE, GTEC cogee Sooseds DOSdE oe CORO IO AO ae a Ee eC R eats 15, 234, 235
Residences, Caine! sse5 coud beens nO MG On ian EOC oa ean aT 15, 233, 234
(Wnrestrictedmdenined ware ener mercer tiace ee tarie einen senna 16. 235
Wrndeterminedycdefinedmpeean rere arto nnectiericnien acinomae meen sens
16
Map Gesignaiions amal mUEScocoonnsoonssovcgonocc on eeudodonbonneobencas 245-250
298 INDEX
Use Disrricts—Continued
Map, Borough of Tae
WIE TIEN ETI SS coms pocbo cob esoguaonoEnEs Sob nbosaunbetur oC Fig. 123 follow p. 244
Mhey Bronk? Fae tuckeanetergsie oc Mee eee Fig. 124 follow p. 244
Brooklyn Sace-seee ees A ERR TION tonto a doch ine Ae ae Fig. 125 follow p. 244
Queens secrets. oer eee rar inte ce eee eee Fig. 126 follow p. 244
RIGHMONG tye cere cee CORRE ee R EERE nee Fig. 127 follow p. 244
Vacant AREAS
Importance of restricting hccets see cece sat heen Eee 77
VEGETATION
Destroyed bynearby andustriesseesasce eee en eee eee eee ene 160, 171, 176
Relation itoypublic healtheinc.acemene cree teen eer eee eee nne _. . 108, 198, 199
VENTILATION
Courts audi yards; when! reqaireds..c. s+ ee acces ceenier ee ener een 38, 39
actorsaitectingy a: sajna cs che Oe eine ene eee ee eee 28
Inskofkice: buildings: <n: cncncmsativaciewins octets etic ee ete Cre eae 105, 152
Promoted by” sunlight....00c.ta.memateoee ce meen Oe ee Ce EEEE 7
Smokes. Gusts Od OLS% pcr cdeyne Aol ae ee oe eee ee 29, 198, 199
Whipple; 'GeorgeuG ssi 2c Sicctehere. cnienitocisiotorte aaa eee alata Rito Rice 27, 28, 198
WASHINGTON
Flights district? x.F. caste. e Mises seca Mee eee ee err tereteas Rea. 62
Mapy showing districts: sa vsssie a ccoorscoe artis eas elie eres eee eee follow p. 62
W ATERFRONT
Generally unrestricted: Aemccnnie cane score eictea ried |alatels terete tatrersaeeiae 16
WELCH (Sh SIWASEY 0 .c0< oe ie scindis ciretsiete oH ators lal Terenas orok CIS tae RE Cee 52, 59, 60
WHIPPLE, GEORGE C.
GOnSESHION! | 2s WA, avctense cerns ayes stein oxn.caia aia efeieie aie usps okie sheila oe enero Teen eR ee ae 200
Daylight: 35.c.¢.os sane deena Rotts wit save arte cle Onis Gattis Sra eerNe setae EEE 28, 197, 198
Meat ec. o2 airs we wn tee caravan ne Faye Pojes Sins ucvevenocche a ave rarest stare CIO Oe OCIS Telos CRIS re EEE 10, 195, 196
Necessity? for districtimpe - ccc scm cles cele wicis crsieiole eo cniatele eiotersisteetareiel= teers 199, 200
Property. rights, limited!) .. cassie sos secede stn mnietoe tetera ites 27
SMOKE; dust, NOISES = « mcwmiteokeloeters waalsvoec Oarer auton onein were sa egsioteteishene eta eee 198, 199
Sirinl [3 are Ronen oe notiic tomate end Grierton Goagna0h dowec On oduasaodc 27, 196, 197
Meretation: Satttcah gic setae cee ors eo aieleterola.e 51S onaLara eee tle tareTee Toe Cre nse 198, 199
Wiertilation: (iis 2 slssielecte a cake japetessteraleis iotetesaveisvatand ssetgre eis eisveseloicheretcvetoleisteveteneFensteters 28, 198
Waorrrreny (ROBERT El; «Quoted: tecrser aioe ois tacyerolelete eee ici cael 6.42
WirwiaMs, Frank B.
Distmctingwsiny German y-eacitee ilar cir eerie elie cette te ee 202-204
Parkssaini relation: to) -districtimgey-jeicciers toy fecise 4 sie eicielorre aera eieete teers 201, 202
Statementvon\ tentativesdistricting: play scri-tieteieiecisialsielevteisisieielstsleteteraeisiee 204-210
WINbows
Daylights entering: 5 =. cee notre asce Sone oeinern altars tiem ieallcetaterteeans 185
Dideram op sunshine admittedubyarmaccce eect icici ena 180
Diagram of cross section of bundle of rays admitted by................. 180
Diagramiuotdaylicht, entenin prvi celts cise sleeve eit eteler tek eit 187
Percents receiving SUNSHINE Ny. . eile ales acisele cee eines eet iee eae 177-179
Photographs showing windows on lot lines............ Figs. 105,106 follow p. 214
Swathi # ELEG DOLE AS ie crssz.ch ccycie cate torneo ote ero vars: ator braked aa Rone cece tele eretnel aes 7
Mattile; Georges Whacccrh tassrdertari ace werstors ne Sr eG AG
Volume of sunlight entering
WISCONSIN
DD ISEmIGhU RY ceesess steers ress ole caver csetepovete hate cueve, sts ole/ore CVCCMare ieee Tnerec tcl eTteea tote eee
Milwaukee (5). 6 255 Se cickiote< etaqepeteetet suece ic e206 ele ave cetera aiatvore ras os lepsterayadevetede pote
Yarps, REAR
NB ACKy COD AG Kes isha search syle conssmiates eeavatereterecets. ere ohersfer aeay Siete [elntel eet tate eteiel eee tate 31, 240, 241
Gonimonstocksote li lity ane ett sper teioteere ia lett tene siete rate ele attest eee 25
Corner lots) vc Sac carsetens 2 cisesuis pteeeerete eiclons ale crroteveta crs rele erevatieteve ree: 38, 240, 272. 273
Dimensional requirements
RP ADIStHIiCt hie ce ceke scien ete octets ons Siete Mr orarare ere creer 38, 39, 238, 275, 278
GMD ISERICEO ES Re. aera ud eiceat onan cmon oper erepe tor slis os chcsahaiescreParciae reactant 38, 40, 239, 276, 278
DY District: 0.8 once ae ee eee oe a eee EEL Eee 38, 40, 240, 276, 278
[D981 Dhan ol een ee ee ernG 550 SO Aae Oe oro oon Obeoodn om bac 41, 240, 277, 278
Tr) Wetr Of Parkes’. .\< sisglezecacsusvs ase ane) cieiels fapetede covets (cys ste relstetovasteys onthe Eke eee te eee 123
38, 240, 272, 273
Not required! within S5ifeet ofistreetcenis- oe lteieelee eee
INDEX 299
Yarps, REAar—Continued PAGE
Photographs of rear yard used for industries............. Fig. 108 follow p. 214
Widthibascdronmotidepth ere ern rete elon ceiicciian a miniecemeien 38, 41, 273
Wilt er Rec LITE rete tree ote ears ence acted ete revecor ere eve hessveteisrersuctele ovis vobeveveterscecee 38, 240, 241
YarpS, SIDE
Jory, IDG Tele leet eran oRotchsl Gata Cas a. OBIE NG OC CIS ICI AER I a ER eee een a Canin 39, 238
1B) IDOSHISE isa Gotlob or ar o.ctamNs ofectn bare oa ene oa TEE ME En ISIC ae iene ees 39, 238, 275
(CMIDIG Bee! Shan aan Gooddidaonds CHAR CHOBE Deo eitOe nn Oe acti ta al ata: 40, 239, 276
ID) Dt ote Ear eae wa clcitatiGicied ca. cie ico Bice ci Sei cS ee le citar eee Rte tare 40, 239, 276
1B; IDNA Sides oc og Aba Atc oat Clon A Bin onk BRO RCE EPS SISA RER Te 41, 240, 271, 277
Vinal ire ehtreal) Gog toiodiot blo bingo Gib Sod AMI GO Siaice tet aci aoe eaetenaiena acre ear 41, 240, 241
ZONING SURVEY
Disthibutionsohepopilationeepeeeee Eee re easter cece eerie ae nee 48, 49°
Distribution of buildings according to use.............eec eee eee eee eee 49, 50
Distribution of buildings, height and area occupied................--.-.. 50
Baastinogputldinesdevyelopmentaasesecrtieseierscereceecriincnieeciccn: 49
Warrcdliavllise Simeytnct a ores ee evcieryiter eyes ects ie atavacnis ciated ic wcstelaie aan cieees al enaveue, Cae 50
RapicMmeransitmsy Sternmeryvevsitve cede orsicteereie ovsieletn store eee ale cl asiaiel aerate laces 48
GRO PO CAD Int eon py step recta eat eeateaese cet etae ae ecesove Aaaiiste lay eleee ausiends bits sharsiousrectc uate ere ae 47, 48
Wenner tireitien sae gaab omloncoateodan Gd onmencoecom ab ee Hatem nee nas 48
M. B.
BROWN
PRINTING
BINDINO
$31-16-1400
To
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