Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: v. 85, no. 2195: April 9, 1910

Text version:

April 9, 1910 RECORD AKD GUIDE 747 ESTABUSHED-^ MRRT'H SIV.^ 186 8, TOEATEDiorULE^Ajt.BmLoiKG^cj^rrEeTURE'.KcaisQfOLDDEGaF^jTiorf, BirsDfess Alto Themes of GEffeRfil IKter?sj .j PRICE PER YEAR IN ADVANCE EIGHT DOLLARS Communications should be addressed to C. W. SWEET Published Every Saturdap By THE RECORD AND GUIDE CO. president, CLINTON W. SWEET Treasurer, P. W, DODGE Vice-Pres. & Genl. Mgr., H. W. DESMOND Secretary, F. T. MILLER Nos. 11 to 15 Eaat 24tl> Street, Neir York City (Telephone, Madison Square, 4430 to 4433.) "Entered at the Post Office at Neto York, N. Y., as s'-ciind-chiss matter." Copyrigbted. 11110, by The Record S: Guide Co. Vol. LXXXV. APRIL 9, 1910. No. 2195. IN tlie excellent series of monographs on various aspects of social reform, issued by the Russell Sage Foundation, there has been published recently a volume on "Housing Re¬ form," hy Mr. Lawrence Veiller. Every New Yorker inter¬ ested in the subject wiil know that Mr. Veiller's experience makes him particulariy competent to write with authority on this important subject; and it is safe to say that tbis boolc contains about all there is to know in respect to housing reform just at present. Of course, it is not written particu¬ larly for New Yorkers. It is described as a "handbook for practical use in American cities," and its chief object is to summarize for the beneflt of other cities the costly experience of New York in relation to the tenement house problem. Tbe substance of Mr. Veiller's argument can best be boiled down by quoting some extracts from the chapter of "Don'ts" with which his book concludes. "Don't," he says, "buiid a model tenement until you have secured a model hous¬ ing law." "Don't attempt to legislate first and investi¬ gate afterwards." "Don't urge that ali new houses shall be fireproof." "Don't complain of the entorcing authori¬ ties until you are familiar with their methods of adminis¬ tration." "Don't neglect the landlord's side of the ques¬ tion," "Don't urge municipal ownership and operation of tenement houses." "Don't confuse fields of puhlic and pri¬ vate effort." Running through most of these bits of advice, one can detect a general idea. If tenement house reform is to be effective, its advocates must understand the conditions and the means of practical work. The one thoroughly prac¬ tical method of securing the best possible domestic sur¬ roundings for the inhabitants of a large city is a teuement house law adjusted to local conditions. Model or munici¬ pal tenements are merely examples or playthings. A city cannot depend upon either charitable people or on munici¬ pal credit for its dwellings. It must derive them from tbe speculative builders, and its whole object must be to se¬ cure the cooperation of the speculative builders in erecting a sufficient amount of the best available quality of hous¬ ing. THERE WILL ALWAYS BE DIFFERENCES OF OP¬ INION AS TO HOW HIGH A STANDARD OP PLAN AND CONSTRUCTION MAY BE EXACTED OF PRACTICAL BUILDERS BY THE LAW; but Mr. Veiller for the most part understands and teaches that no unnecessary burdens should be imposed upon him. MR. VEILLER'S GENERAL point of view toward "Hous¬ ing Reform" is then entirely commendable; but one cannot help suspecting from certain passages in his book that HE HAS NOT YET GRASPED THE REAL NATURE OP THE ECONOMIC CONDITIONS which underlie the housing problem in certain large cities. The following passage, for instance, indicates a curiously blind misconception of the fundamental cause of congestion. Mr, Veiller has been point¬ ing ont that in 1867 the first New York law provided that no tenement house should have a yard less than ten feet in depth, and that this was a foolish provision, because almost all tenements then had yards fifty feet in depth. He goes on to say: "If the law had then fixed the minimum depth of yards at 50 feet there would not have been through all those fifty years a gradual encroachment upon the yard space, and the building of the house flrst 60 feet deep, then 70 feet deep then SO feet deep and finally 90 feet deep. The builder, find¬ ing that the law prohibited any such depth and required that a yard of fifty feet be left, would have found no opportunity to change, and the consequent artificial stimulation of land values would never have arisen." From this passage, Mr. Veiller apparently believes that if tenement houses had never been allowed to occupy more than half the lots on which they stand the value of tenement house real estate would not have been "artificially" increased and the condition of the teue¬ ment resident would have been very much improved. But this is merely tantamount to the assertion tbat if by a legal pro¬ vision you diminish by almost one-half the real estate avail¬ able for tenements, you will diminish also the price of the remainder; and sucli an assertion is economically absurd. The effective demand for the remainder of the lot would have remained the same, because the residents of tenement houses are usually obliged to live in a certain district, and the price of the lot would probably have become larger rather than smaller. Such a provision would inevitably have intensified congestion, and it certainly would not have diminished prices. The object of any tenement house law should be to allow just as much housing room to be provided ou a lot as can be pro¬ vided in a safe and sanitary manner, because every restric¬ tion which increases the cost of a building or diminishes its area tends to add something to the rent and thus to intensify the economic motive which causes congestion. THE existing teneraent house law probably did not ou the whole go much farther than was necessitated by the conditions of safe aud sanitary housing, hut although it diminished the proportion of a lot which could be occupied by a tenement house it certainly did not counteract the "arti¬ ficial stimulation of land values." On the contrary, since the enactment of the law both land values and rents have mate¬ rially increased, and because of this increase and the cessa¬ tion of cheap tenement house construction in Manhattan the congestion has of late become very much worse. So far as the Record and Guide can see, there is ho practical method of doing away with this congestion except by some method of distributing the population and business on which it depends. The method whereby Mr. Veiller proposes to do away with the "lodger evil" is utterly impracticable. He proclaims that "in certain classes of tenements the taking in of lodgers or boarders, except with the written consent of the landlord, must be prohibited, and the iaadlord must be held respon¬ sible for any departure from this rule." Such a prohibition could not be enforced by a landlord unless he lived in a build¬ ing and inspected it continually. In case it were enacted it would either be a dead letter or, so far as enforced, would provide almost as wonderful an opportunity for petty graft as the excise law. THERE is a great deal of construction work going ahead, a very large amount of huilding materials coming to town, and there would he more work and more materials required but for a certain lack of confidence among build¬ ers and operators. There bas existed for several weeks a feeling of apprehension that has caused a distinct slowing up in new business undertakings. Ask for a reason, and it will be found that the THREAT OF WIDESPREAD LABOR TROUBLES AND THE IMMINENCE OF DECISIONS OF FAR-REACHING IMPORTANCE BY THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ARE THE BUGBEARS OP THE HOUR. Some cautious builders who have finished up speculative operations, even those who have "cleaned up," are putting off further activities until they can see farther ■ahead than they can at present; but the rest, having an abiding faith in the future, notwithstanding temporary set¬ backs, are goiug ahead with their new work. It is gen¬ erally supposed that, in regard to lahor matters, there will be a DECISION BY THE UNITED BOARD OP BUSINESS AGENTS IN A FEW HOURS. It Will then he apparent whether there is to he a general walkout, or merely a few desultory strikes of no consequence in their general effect, except as they may tend to arouse further friction and pro¬ voke the governors of the big employers' association to a counter demonstration. It is hoped that the words of Hon. Samuel B, Donnelly, now U. S. Public Printer, will not he forgotten by either party. The abolition of the Arbitra¬ tion Plan would BE A GRAVE ECONOMICAL MISTAKE, The fact that plans filed were less in number during the quarter just ended than the record for the corresponding quarter last year, is not particularly significant, in view of the extraordinary circumstances prevailing last year and the large amount of work already planned. Some reaction in architects' offices was to be expected, but the new work still coming out averages very high in quality, and there is enough planned out to make 1910 a big year for contractors if the labor troubles pass over.