November 28, 1908





KECORD   AND   GUIDE





101-







ESTABUSHED-^ MAB^H 81^ 1868,

De/oteD to fm- Estate . Bui Ldit/g Ap,cj<rreci in^E .KouseUoid DEwejAiMt

Bl/Stl/ESSAffoiHEUESOFGE|lERAl Ir/TEt^lST.

PRICE   PER   YEAR   In' ADVANCE   EIGHT   DOLLARS

Communications should be addressed to

C. W. SWEET

Publisfied Every Saturday

By THE RECOKD AND GUIDE  CO.

President,  CLINTON W.  SWEET                         Treasurer. F. W. DODGB

Vice-Pres. & Genl. Mgr., H. W. DESMOND         Secretary, F. T. MILLER

Nos.  11  to  IC East  2./th  Street,  7ic^%■  York  City

(Telephone,   Madison   Square,  4430 to 4433,)

"Entered at tbe Post Office al New York, N.   1'., as sveond-etass matler."
Copyrighted.   IDOS,   by   The   Record   &   Guide   Co,





the limit is and to foi-mulate a rule which will permit build¬
ings to be erectecl as high as possible consistent with economy,
public safety and public health.

-----------•-----------





Vol. LXXXII.





NOVEMBER 28,  190S.





No.  2124





THE STATEMENT is frequently made by the opponents of
any limitation iu the height of buildiugs that the es¬
tablishment of au effectual law would inevitably have the
effect of increasing rents, but it seems to the Record aud
Guide that this consequeuce is frequently predicted without
sufflcient consideration. Whether or not a restriction in the
height of office buildiugs would he followed by a burdensome
increase in extent would depend wholly upon the nature of
the restriction. -Unanestionably any radical curtailment of
the existing freedom, such, for instance, as au absolute de¬
nial of the right to build a structure more than seven or
eight stories high, would have as its eventual consequence
an increase of rentals in the financial district and little by
little in other neighborhoods, which might well be burden¬
some to business. Allowance must be made in Manhattan,
for the fact that the amount of space available for improve¬
ment within a certain radius of one point is a rigidly flxed
quantity; and if the amount of possible rental space within
a given area is cut down too much the price of accommoda¬
tions within that area would have a tendency to become ex¬
cessive. But we do not believe that any limitation as yet
seriously proposed would be drastic enough to accomplish
such a result. The financial district could extend over a
much larger area than it does at present without seriously
incommoding business. If it occupied 'the whole neighbor¬
hood bounded, say, by Maiden Lane and the water front, the
distance between the two farthest points within these boun¬
daries would not be sufflcient to cause much inconvenience.
Such a large proportion of business, particularly in the flnan¬
cial district, is now transacted by telephone that a much
wider distribution of brokers and bankers and corporation
offices is possible than was formerly the case. Within the
given area some locations would, of course, be more desir¬
able than others, but the less desirable and cheaper locations
would remain satisfactory to many firms, and the competition
between the less and the more desirable locations would be
sufficient to prevent rents in the heart of the city from be¬
coming extortionate. Care must simply be taken to allow
buildings to be erected so high that the demand for rental
space will not tend to distribute financial business over au
area which would be inconveniently large; and there is no
reason to believe that a restriction cannot be established
which will do away with the manifest dangers and evils of
the existing unrestrained freedom, and at the same time avoid
the alterative error of carrying regulation to the point of
burdensome expense. It must also be remembered that the
unrestricted freedom allowed by the existing Code is iu one
respect extremely wasteful. It enables corners to be used to
the utmost advantage, but the construction of every addi¬
tional well-lighted office on a corner is usually paid for hy
the denial of light and air to other offices not so favorably
situated. These darkened offices command rauch lower rent¬
als, so that the space gained in one spot Is partly counter¬
balanced by the diminished earning power of other spaces
in the same neighborhood. No subterfuges can evade or dis¬
guise the fact that the amount of building which can be
economically erected within a certain area has its limit. That
limit will not be properly ascertained and fixed by allowing
property-owners to build as high as they please, because the
absence of all restriction merely enables some favorably
situated owners to obtain an enormous advantage over their
neighbors-    The task of the commission is to ascertain what





T.-IE REPLIES which Controller Metz and Mr. Lawson
Purdy have made to Mr. Edgar J. Levey's recent letter
upon the financial condition of New York have both con¬
tributed interesting light upou the siLuation, but they hardly
affect the pith of Mr. Levey's warning to the taxpayers of the
city. What Mr. Levey said in substance was that if the mu¬
uicipal budget increased during the next ten years as it has
increased during the past ten years, the burden imposed upon
the taxpayers would' be almost ruinous; and the Record and
Guide believes that this statement cannot be successfully
controverted, .Just where the responsibility for this condi¬
tion lies is, however, another and a wholly different ques¬
tion. Assuredly, it cannot be placed either upon Mayor Mc¬
Clellan or upou Controller Metz. Those gentlemen, through¬
out the whole of their terms of office, have done their best
to protect the interests of the taxpayers and to arrange for
the economical expenditure of the city's money. Both of
them have frequently incurred unpopularity and abuse by
resolutely and successfully opposing specific instances of
waste and extravagance. The Mayor, through the Commis¬
sioners of Accounts, has brought to light a large amount of
extravagance connected with borough administration, for
which he is in no way responsible, and whicii he is powerless
effectually to preveiit,_ The Controller has done more to in¬
troduce order into his own office, and to improve the methods
under which the city's money is disbursed than any Controller
in the history of New Yoi'k. If during their terms of office
expenditures have been increasing in a dangerous rate, the
responsibility for that deplorable fact cannot be placed on
their shoulders. The existing extravagance is grounded in
causes which are beyond the power of any one or two men
to remove, no matter how important the positions they oc¬
cupy. It is grounded in generations of wasteful financial
methods, in inefficient organizations, iu a defective and in¬
competent civil service, and in the dissipation during earlier
times of sources of revenue which should now be accruing to
the city. A thoroughgoing reform consequently demands
much more than a proper system of accounting and the
elimination of the many opportunities for actual graft. It
demands au organiication of the executive work of the city
which will do away with the existing division of responsibility
among the officials who spend and those who appropriate the
money. It demands a more effectual control over the mu¬
nicipal employees, and a higher standard of administration
work. It demands the sedulous exploitation of every pos¬
sible source of municipal revenue. The necessary reorganiza¬
tion is so drastic that it can be accomplished only little hy
little; but the value of such an appeal as, that of Mr. Levey
to the taxpayers of New York consists precisely in its ten¬
dency to create a body of public opinion, that wil! insist
upon the adoption of any measure necessary to secure econ¬
omical  administration.





■R, LAWSON PURDY'S answer to Mr, Levey is an ex¬
tremely able document. It .contains a collection of
facts and arguments which must always be kept in mind in
considering questions connected with municipal expediture
in general. An obvious weakness in Mr. Levey's argument
was his assertion that the expenditures of a city should not
increase any faster than its population—to which Mr. Purdy
was able to retort that there is a world-wide tendency for
municipal expenditures to increase at a larger ratio than the
population. It was entirely relevant, also, for Mr. Purdy to
point out that during a period of rising prices the wages of
civil servants should rise also, and that in general the in¬
crease in municipal expenditures must be traced to an in¬
crease in unavoidable municipal responsibilities. Considera¬
tions of this kind must always be kept in mind, because a
campaign on behalf of municipal economy may easily degen¬
erate into a campaign in favor of mere parsimony. Possibly
the most extravagance which a city like New York could pos¬
sibly commit would be to refuse to spend money that should
be spent for desirable public improvements. The question is
not so much the actual total of expenditure, however large, as
the business judgment with which the money Is appropriated,
and the honesty and efficiency with which it is expended.
There is no reason why New York should not spend $156^-
000,000 a year, provided the city gets 156,000,000 dollars'
worth for its money. The impression is general and well-
founded that such is not the casg at the present tinie, a;}d