Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: [v. 95, no. 2445: Articles]: January 23, 1915

Text version:

REAL ESTATE AND NEW YORK, JANUARY 23, 1915 lilillllillllillllllB ■iiiiiiiiiir STRONG SUPPORT FOR SKYSCRAPER LAW But Modifications Are Suggested By Advisory Board's Experts at the Hearing—No Opposition to the Principle of Limitation ■iillilM^ property. Few skyscrapers pay large net returns, for the cost per cubic foot of tall buildings is greater than for low buildings, while they seriously affect their neighbors by impairing the value of both improved and unimproved con¬ tiguous property. The real estate inter¬ ests in Boston, although originally op¬ posed to the height limit are today its strongest supporters. A New Principle. "A new principle affecting American real estate is slowly being evolved; namely, a provision for light and air as a benefit to adjoining property. This is known in England as 'right of light' and may lead in time to legal complica¬ tions unless buildings are properly regu¬ lated. Special consideration must fur¬ ther be given to the height of buildings where there is much vehicular traffic from manufacturing and mercantile buildings, because congestion from wagons and drays in this respect might he minimized by lower buildings. The Average Height. "Under this ordinance, the average height of tall buildings will be 120 feet or nine stories high, since most of the streets are 60 feet wide. Heretofore the average has been twelve stories high. The customary unoccupied space which wil! be effected by this ordinance will be increased by at least 100 per cent, for a nine-story building, and more for a taller one. Buildings facing the river or large open spaces will, as an average, be 120 feet or nine stories high, where¬ as buildings on avenues 100 to 150 feet wide may be 200 to 300 feet high. "The area of a building which may be erected on a given plot is restricted approximately to 87 per cent, for low buildings, and to 80 per cent, for a nine- story building, so that there may be yards, courts, areas, or open spaces from 13 per cent, in low buildings to 20 per cent, in nine-story buildings, which must be left open to the sky above the sec¬ ond story. For higher buildings the unoccupied area is more, being 1 per cent, of the area for each story. Except for buildings on corner lots or buildings extending through from street to street, the ordinance requires that there be a yard in the rear of all buildings. In this particular, exterior courts are said to be more satisfactory from the stand¬ point of light, not only for occupants of the building, but also for the street, while if all buildings were then built up to the rear line, under these condi¬ tions, there would be less fire hazard from rear yards. Warehouses, refriger¬ ators, and other special buildings that do not require light and ventilation and where no adjoining property interests are affected must also be provided with a yard." Committee's Recommendations. The recommendntions for certain chano-es in the ordinances, as made by tbe Building Code Committee of the Ad¬ visory Council, are: To allow parapets on roofs and balconies of tbree and one- half feet without making it necessary to reduce the height of the building; to allow of fill kinds of chimneys and of THE ordinance of the Board of Alder¬ men recently proposed, to regulate the height, size and arrangement of buildings, is of far-reaching effect, and, in conjunction with the possible dis¬ tricting or "zoning'* of the city, will mark an epoch in the building and real estate activities of the city. No real opposition was developed at the notable hearing at City Hall on Wed¬ nesday afternoon against the essential principle involved. A gentleman who appeared in a mul¬ tiple capacity, as the owner of a cer¬ tain skyscraper on lower Broadway, as a taxpaying citizen and as the head of a prominent civic association, favored the ordinance as an owner, opposed it as a taxpayer and had nothing to say as the president of the association, be¬ cause opinion in the association was divided. The gas companies would op¬ pose the bill if it limited the size of gas¬ holders, but intimation was given that an exception would be made in this case. Readers of the Record and Guide know that the proposal to limit the height of buildings hereafter to be erected has been the subject of discus¬ sion for many years. Tt has appeared in definite form at everv attempt in the past to revise the Building Code, and once again as a Building Code ordi¬ nance it comes from the Buildinn^ Com¬ mittee of the Board of Aldermen, and this time with the strongest backing it ever has had. The hearing was granted at a joint meeting of the Board of Esti¬ mate, the officers of the Board of Al¬ dermen and the Building Committee and was presided over hy the Mayor him¬ self. The official gentlemen constituted an imposing array around the mahogany table. The chairman of the late Heights of Buildinir Commission, which em¬ bodied in its report the recommenda¬ tions now contained in the pending or¬ dinance, was asked by Mayor Mitchel to first of all explain the nature of the provisions. Mr. Bassett, in complying, attempted no argument, but gave a very clear conception of what is proposed to be done. The principal restriction is as follows: The Skyscraper Limit. "Every'building shall be so constructed tiiat the street wall will not exceed in height the limits hereinafter prescribed * * * except that any part or parts of a building not exceeding in aggregate area 25 per cent, of the lot on which the buildinsr is situated may be erected to any height, provided that such part or parts shall be distant at least twenty-five feet, measured horizontally from all lot lines." Mayor Mitchel read a long list of names of representatives sent by socie¬ ties to appear in favor of the bill. Only a few of the proponents were heard, and then an adjournment was taken to Thursday afternoon. January 28. Wm. H. Chesebrough and Law^son Purdv made addresses which visibly impressed their hearers with the importance of the measure. Mr. Purdy supported his argument with letters from President E. M. BASSETT. rhairmaii of the commission which proposed the ordinance. Kelsey of the Title Guarantee aiid Trust Company, and President Bright of the Lawyers Title Insurance and Trust, institutions that had loaned millions of dollars upon real estate in this city and were not likely to favor legislation in¬ imical to real estate. Advisory Council's Conclusions. While the principle of the bill received general support, there are details which, in the opinion of some, are open to im¬ provement. Hon. Cyrus C. Miller, chair¬ man of the Advisory Council of Real Estate Interests, submitted, in writing, certain recommendations which will be developed at tlie next hearing. The gen¬ eral principle incorporated in this ordi¬ nance has been endorsed by the Advis¬ ory Council, with the belief that its application will tend to conserve real estate interests and simultaneously be for the best interests of the city as a whole. The members of the Building Code Committee of the council. Henry W. Hodge, chairman: Otto M. Eidlitz and Julius Franke. have made an ex¬ haustive analysis of the ordinance, and after conferences with both legal and technical authorities upon city plan¬ ning, have submitted a comprehensive report upon which the council has based its decision and conclusions. These conclusions state that tall build¬ ings are not necessarily unsafe, un¬ healthy, uncomfortable, nor inconveni¬ ent, as might be inferred from the re¬ port of the Committee on the Height of Buildings, submitted to the Board of Estimate and Apportionment on Decem¬ ber 23, 1913. and upon which the pro¬ posed ordinance is based. "On the other hand, experience has conclusively demonstrated that tall buildings have a depressing effect on taxablfl and income valweg of jidjoining