May 23, 1914
RECORD AND GUIDE
913
partments each issue four items. When
a property owner wishes to comply and
,is represented by a proper architect, the
architect studies the "violations and after
consultation with the various depart¬
ments he is able to report to his client
in very accurate form just what is to
be done.
In many cases, however, owners are
reluctant to comply with violation or¬
ders because the orders represent an
"outlay of money for which no return
can be seen. From a real estate own¬
er's standpoint, I do not see any ne¬
cessity for consolidation or centraliza¬
tion of bureaus'.
From an architect's standpoint, my
opinion is that while it would be benefi¬
cial to do business with one department
to be known, perhaps, as the "Depart¬
ment of Buildings," it would not greatly
facilitate the work of the architect, for
it would still be necessary to have sep¬
arate and distinct divisions. A steel en¬
gineer is not properly equipped to ex¬
amine tenement plans as to the law, nor
is a tenement examiner qualified to pass
on plumbing, etc. At present, when one
files a plan for plumbing work in a
building, it is not necessary for him to
make out tenement or construction
blanks, but if all the departments were
consolidated there would be many
blanks to file, one in each separate di¬
vision. Instead of the work being re¬
duced, it would be multiplied.
From a financial standpoint and under
certain conditions I would favor a spe¬
cial consolidated bureau with special
divisions. The head of this bureau to
be the Borough President, and the heads
of the divisions to be known as "chiefs"
instead of commissioners; the blanks
accompanying plans to be simplified and
in loose-leaf form, so that one general
question page may be used for the gen¬
eral information describing the build¬
ing location, owner, etc., and the pages
to follow to be specification pages
pertaining to each division and describ¬
ing the particular kind of work to be
done and examined by the particular di¬
vision so that the same piece of work
shall not be examined by more than one
division. If this should be done, it
would (1) reduce printing bills, (2)
reduce labor for the architect, (3) re¬
duce unnecessary examinations.
The next item of expense and a source
of annoyance is the inspection depart¬
ment. A tenement house should not be
inspected as to construction until com¬
pleted. This may sound interesting if
not astounding. Why? you ask. My
answer is that it is not necessary. All
that a tenement house inspector should
look for in a tenement house that is be¬
ing erected under the proposed consoli-
.dated department plan would be to see
that the stories are the proper height,
that the rooms are as shown on plans
as to size and shape, that the windows
are as marked on plans as to size, that
the courts, yards, etc., are as marked on
plans, that the stairs are of the proper
width and a few other items of similar
nature.
Plans and specifications as approved
by the tenement division call for cer¬
tain definite figures and it should be up
to the owner to see that these figures
are carried out. If the builder is not
competent to follow the plans, he should
employ a competent superintendent or
the architect, or a surveyor to layout his
work, and not depend on the inspector
to point out the mistakes. For this work
a high grade special inspector shall be
employed, who upon making examina¬
tion, will issue violations which will not
be petty or technical, but real violations;
and when these have been issued the
work of such special inspector shall
cease and the following up as to com¬
pliance of the violations shall be done
..by a corps of less efficient inspectors,
who do not inspect to find violations,
but only to see that the violation is¬
sued by the special inspector have been
complied with.
The getting of the proper grade of
men should not be a matter of great
concern, because under the new plan the
city will be able to save hundreds of
thousands of dollars annually, even
though it may be required to pay more
for the better grade of help.
If there be any doubt that men thor¬
oughly familiar with building construc¬
tion can be obtained' to inspect and re¬
port intelligently with speed and pre¬
cision, let him ask a dozen architects
to act as volunteer inspectors of certain
buildings in definite sections apportion¬
ing a number of houses a day, and I am
sure that the result would be gratifying
to the city and its Borough President. I
for one am ready to do my share. Effi¬
ciency is the keynote of all business to¬
day, why not in the greatest city in the
country.
MAXIMILIAN ZIPKES.
220 Fifth Avenue.
Skyscrapers Depress Values.
Editor of the Record and Guide :
I have read the arguments advanced
by Messrs. Robert E. Dowling and
Jefferson DeMont Thompson against
height restrictions, zones and districts,
and consider their contentions wrong.
Notwithstanding their assertions to the
contrary, the fact remains that exces¬
sively tall buildings affect detrimentally
light and air about them, produce con¬
gestion of traffic, and depress values in
small real estate properties adjacent lo
them, besides which they have contribut-
_ ed to the disfigurement of the city gen-
' erally.
Instead „i frogressit.g by the con-
vnued erection of the so-called "sky-
Ec:aper,''we ire actually retrogressing
in permitting an already intolerable con¬
dition to become worse. By adopting
reasonable restrictions respecting h'"ig!it
limits for buildings, and by the estab¬
lishment of zones and districts, the~ci'c/
will eventually become a more desirable
place in which to work and live.
JOHN R. HINCHMAN.
437 Fifth avenue. May 18.
Brooklyn and Queens Should Help Pay.
Editor of the Record and Guide :
The Civic Center plan now purposes
creating a d-agonal parkway ending at
Williamsburgh Bridge plaza. In the dis¬
cussion on this matter at City Hall on
Tuesday it developed that the charge
for this would be levied on a separate
area of assessment, as it is not included
in the proceedings for the Court House
site. Now, it behooves one to ask why
should not Brooklyn and Queens pay
the major portion of the cost' of this
diagonal parkway, as it is certainly in¬
tended to facilitate travel between the
bridges to Brooklyn, rather than to be
of any direct value to people residing in
New York proper.
LEWIS PHILLIPS.
158 Broadway, May 20.
--------------♦--------------
Will the Courts Uphold the Heights of
Buildings Plan?
Editor of tlie Rbcokd and Guide :
It would seem futile to add anything
to that which the weighty supporters of
the plan of /'building districts and re¬
strictions" said at Tuesday's meeting at
City Hall. It all was good, and
should certainly meet the approval
of every one who has the welfare
of the city at heart and takes pride
not only in its appearance, but also in
the general well-being and prosperity of
its inhabitants, property owners and
business people. But, while heartily in
favor of this and any forward move¬
ment, it strikes me as of doubtful prac¬
ticability, in view of the' loose attitude
taken by our courts on the subject of
restrictions. Granting, for the sake of
argument, that restrictions imposed by
or under the guidance of the Board of
Estimate and Apportionment are feas¬
ible and legal, the question presents it¬
self as to how long the courts would
uphold them.
All covenant restrictions have the full
power, authority and solemnity of con¬
tractual obligations, and any imposed by
the city could not possibly be more
binding; yet what have the courts done
with them here among us? The courts
delilDerately destroy, despite restrictions
delightful private house neighborhoods
by allowing apartment houses to be
built on West 72d street and West 145th
street. They call an apartment house
a "family residence" in West 78th street
They deny that an undertaking estab¬
lishment is an objectionable neighbor to
a high-class private residence on Madi¬
son avenue. They permit a loft building
in a restricted part of West 26th street,
and do not allow a business building on
the south side of 40th street, between
Fifth and Sixth avenues.
Will these same courts have any re¬
gard for these contemplated new re¬
strictions, or will they in a longer or
shorter time invent and use some change
in the character of the neighborhood,
or other argument which in their ex¬
alted opinion will make it inequitable to
enforce such restrictions?
If so, what is the use? Shall we have
our restriction troubles all over again
and then, again, will the banks, trust
companies and title companies refuse
otherwise good loans because no one
will be able to say what the restriction's
effect may be? The courts, thanks to
their weak and strangelv inconsistent
attitude, have caused enough havoc with
values now. Do let us be extremely
careful of giving them any new oppor¬
tunities to do more damage.
A. T. SIEKER.
32 Liberty street. May 20th, 1914.
--------------♦--------------
Heights of Buildings Not a New Theme.
For a generation off and on New York
City has been talking about limiting the
heights of buildings. The discussion
antedated the era of steel construction
for buildings and was directed at first
against such great piles of solid masonry
as the Tribune building and the Western
Union building. Until 1879 these two
stood alone as examples of modern tall
buildings, not because of financial ill
success, but because of hard times. In
that year under more prosperous con¬
ditions, the era of high buildings com¬
menced in earnest. The Morse building,
at the northeast corner of Nassau and
Beekman, the London, Liverpool and
Globe, the Smith building in Cort¬
landt street, the Mills building in Broad
street, the United Bank building at
Broadway and Wall, Temple Court on
the site once occupied by Clinton Hall,
at Beekman and Nassau, were among
the first of a large number of tall
buildings whose construction preceded
the introduction of steel framed build¬
ings. They shut out the light and
drained tenants frora lesS attractive
neighbors for a time, arousing many
protests, among which there appeared
the following in the Record and Guide
of January 20, 1883, thirty-four years
ago, from Messrs. James C. and Robert
Lynd:
"We think the time has come when
some legal limit should be fixed
upon the height to which buildings
may be erected in the city of New
York. In the first place, the rapid¬
ity with which ten-story structures
are thrown up is appalling, the cost
of the ground on which they are
erected being so great'that no time
is wasted in getting them in condi¬
tion for tenants.
"Then, again, we consider it next
to impossible to construct buildings
of this character so as to render
them absolutely fireproof. In the
bill drawn up by Mr. Esterbrook, in
relation to the erection of buildings
in this city and which willcome be¬
fore the Legislature now in session
for action, there is no limit fixed to
the height to which anyone may
build."
A generation of experience with sky¬
scrapers has finally convinced the city
authorities that "some legal limit"
should indeed be fixed. The modern
reasons therefore are succinctly set
forth in the report of the Heights of
Buildings Commission.
-----------•-----------
—The weekly payrolls of industries
in New York State are on the increase
according to the report of the secretary
of the Manufacturers' Association of
New 'York State. This healthful sign is
to be shown in every other State soon,
in the belief of Colonel George Pope,
president of the national association.