Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Please note: this text may be incomplete. For more information about this OCR, view About OCR text.

October 12, 1912. RECORD AND GUIDE 673 sessment. If in this instance the city could have condemned a strip of land at least 100 feet wide on each side of the line of the new avenue—includ¬ ing, of course, as much more as the survey of adjacent property rendered desirable—this improvement might well have paid for itself because the prop¬ erty would have the benefit not merely of the street improvement but of a new subway. In any event the deficit would have been comparatively small and the business development of the new thoroughfare would have been ac¬ celerated because the property con¬ demned in excess of actual needs could have been sold to builders in plots adapted to the actual business require¬ ments of the neighborhood. In the same way the city could begin imme¬ diately to lay out the proposed new street to connect 7th avenue and 34th street with Sth avenue and 40th street. New York traffic experts are agreed that this connecting street, which it is proposed to call "The Crossway," would do more to relieve the conges¬ tion of traffic in New York than would any improvement which could be car¬ ried out for any similar sum of money. Real estate experts are also agreed th-it it would furnish a considerable amount of street frontage to that district in Manhattan in which additional lots available for the retail trade are most needed. Yet, although the plan has not been abandoned, it is doubtful whether it will ever be undertaken under existing conditions. Neighbor¬ ing property owners oppose it because they dread the frequent unfairness of the method of assessment. The city officials hesitate to under¬ take it because they are afraid of adding to the burdens of an already overtaxed cit^. Yet, in this instance, the increase in value of adjoining prop¬ erty, provided it could be sold in prop¬ erly sized lots, would be enormous. At present there are very few expensive buildings which would have to be d'b- stroyed. The property on the side streets, which would have to be con¬ demned, is worth, roughly, $40 a square foot. Such property, when fronting on a street which would con¬ nect the Grand Central, the Pennsyl¬ vania Terminal and P'ifth and Seventh avenues, would be worth three or more times as much. The crossway would be a combination of Broadway and Fifth avenue and would have a unique value for purposes of retail trade. It would be thronged with traf¬ fic and people from the day it was opened, because it would cut all the most important longitudinal thorough¬ fares in Manhattan in the district of their greatest activity. The openiiitj of such a street, instead of being an expense to the city, might well be di¬ rectly as well as indirectly profitable. Yet it may have to be postponed until the present constitutional prohibitioa of excess condemnation is removed; and by that time the side streets on the line of the proposed "Crossway" may be occupied by so many new' buildings that all possibility of direct profit will be destroyed. ment in the real estate market. The property at 138 and 140 East Fifty-sev¬ enth street, just off Lexington avenue, was being offered from the stand of Jo¬ seph P. Day in foreclosure of a mort¬ gage. The plaintiff started the bidding at $48,000. A furious competition then set in between professional operators, who were eager to acquire so desirable a piece of realty adjacent to the new subway. The ninety-ninth bid taken by the auctioneer recorded an advance of only $9,500. Beyond this the profes¬ sional operators declined to adventure, and a firm of clothiers, Adelberg & Ber¬ man, got a handy warehouse on a plot 37.6x100.5 in a rising neighborhood for the low price of $57,500. The incident bears out the statement made by brokers generally, and reported in this column last week, that there is plenty of shopping around by operators in speculative .neighborhoods, but that it is difficult to close deals, partly be¬ cause there is as yet no consensus of opinion as to where the building activity of the near future will be. The pro¬ fessional element will not pay anything like market value for property in un¬ tried localities, no matter how promis¬ ing, because of the modern tendency of building enterprises to concentrate in small, well-defined neighborhoods. Real estate rtiovements, with their ac¬ companying building activity, are cre¬ ated nowadays by groups of big oper¬ ators working in concert, and such groups take action only after having studied the needs of given mercantile trades or classes of tenants, whether commercial or residential. On the first sign of a new move by the big oper¬ ating syndicates or groups of leaders, the rank and file of market followers rush in. As yet the leaders have given no sign, and the average operator is afraid to act on his own judgment; if he builds, he may find that the class of tenants he expected to recruit from has in the meantime been diverted to a new trade or residential center created by a strong group of operators acting in common. This hesitation on the part of the professional element explains in large measure the character of the current real estate market. Feeling is optimistic, and brokerage trading is on the increase, compared with the corresponding season of last year; but no well-defined, impor¬ tant seats of activity have developed. Some notable building enterprises are be¬ ing undertaken, but they are inconsider¬ able in number and are mostly belated operations in neighborhoods recently built up. The general expectation is that the big operators will presently lead the way into fresh territory. Meanwhile, the support of the market, as is to be ex¬ pected after a period of industrial de pression, comes mainly from professional buyers, investment purchasers being rel¬ atively few. THE WEEK IN REAL ESTATE. A performance that took place in the auction room this week may be cited as an amusing but entirely faithful illus¬ tration of the present temper of a con¬ siderable seQtign of the prof^ssignal ik-- Building Materials Go Higher. Continued upward movement of build¬ ing materials was a feature of the week. Hardware and metal ceilings were the active factors, although in the case of metal ceilings the activity is due pri¬ marily to an impending increase rather than to actual lift now. It is rather re¬ markable that the buying movement in building materials is not more active than it is. in view of the general in¬ crease in prices in practically every de¬ partment. The apparent reason for this is hesitancy due to the timidity of money covering building construction in the immediate future. Consumers lean to the position that they would rather pay a little more for building materials next year than to hazard cash in build¬ ing operations that might prove disas¬ trous if there is any reaction following the election. This may account for the very heavy inquiry in all lines of build¬ ing materials and a corresponding in¬ activity as far as actual buying is con¬ cerned. All lines outside of brick and Port¬ land cement have felt this change. At present Portland cement is very inac¬ tive, sales being taken at prices below $1.58, the asking price. Dealers are buying in stock, anticipating a possible further advance. In the case of com¬ mon brick, Brooklyn and Newark in¬ terests are fairly well stacked, while Manhattan is just beginning. This ac¬ counts for the heavy buying movement of last week at the brickyards, which, therefore, did not have the earmark of permanency to it sufficiently pronounced to warrant an interpretation of real stability. Building managers are in the peculiar position of actually being forced to pay higher prices for coal when there is a large quantity available. This shows the effect of car shortage upon the av¬ erage consumer of coal, because it re¬ flects the inability of the carrying roads to move vast quantities stored at the mines as rapidly as consumers can take it. The average consumer of building materials or building supplies is ad¬ vised to take advantage of whatever concessions that can obtain at this time, because prices are bound to move up between now and the first of January in almost every line and will continue to hold a stiff level until a break occurs in the iron market. In view of the fact that steel deliveries are now being con¬ tracted for well into the first quarter of 1913, thus insuring a heavy demand for pig iron well into next spring, it is not considered that any weakness will de¬ velop in that department. However, the stiffness of the general building market may be expected to continue through the winter at least. Overburdened Taxpayers. Kditor of the Record and Guide : In calling attention editorially to the burden of the increasing tax rate in the City of New York, you point out that "people who own real estate in specu¬ lative districts where property would or¬ dinarily advance in price can stand the strain, but all those property owners whose holdings are stationary or retro¬ gressive in value are having their prop¬ erty taken away froin them without any redress." One reason why the increasing tax rate is so severely felt by many prop¬ erty owners is that the tax fails alike upon land and buildings. We all know that a building does not increase in value after it is erected but, on the con¬ trary, depreciates both from ordinary usage and from the competition of new¬ er types of buildings subsequently erected. Unless therefore there is an increase in the value of the land on which the building stands, sufficient to take care of this depreciation, it is evident that an increase in the tax rate will decrease the total earnings from the land and building. Several suggestions have been ad¬ vanced to relieve improved property of this burden. One is that in the assess¬ ment a greater allowance should be made for depreciation, but this involves an arbitrary use of judgment that might lead to much discrimination. ."Vnother suggestion has been for a gen¬ eral reduction in the tax rate on build¬ ings. Still another suggestion, which I made about a year ago. was for a fixed rate upon buildings which would not in¬ crease or fluctuate as does the ordinary lax rate. None of these suggestions for tlie positive relief of buildings have as yet received much general support. There¬ fore, it may be advisable to attack the