Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: [v. 95, no. 2452: Articles]: March 13, 1915

Text version:

REAL ESTATE AND NEW YORK, MARCH 13, 1915 ■Pllilllill^ ■■■■■^^^^^ CONCESSIONS FOR SAKE OF UNITED ACTION! Important Modifications in the Lockwood Bill Agreed to—Tenement, Fire and Labor Laws Not to be Subject to Variation, and Mayor to Appoint Chief Board liiimiiiiiHiiiiii^ ■illlllH^^^^^^ T^HE Conference Committee of Real •^ Estate and Allied Organizations, which recently presented to the Legis¬ lature the Lockwood-Ellenbogen bill for simplifying building inspection i-n New York City, is prepared to defend the measure against criticisms which have during the past few days been aimed at it. The following statement, concern¬ ing the bill, is made by Richard O. Chit¬ tick, secretary of the conference: "(Considerable opposition has devel¬ oped during the past few days to the Lockwood-Ellenbogen bill for simplify¬ ing building inspection in New York City. It is significant that this opposi¬ tion has been most marked since the hearing at Albany on March 3. This is perhaps accounted for by the fact that on that occasion it was plain to all ob¬ servers, and doubtless was not lost upon the Joint Committee on City Affairs, that the advocates of the bill had all the best of the argument. The opposi¬ tion to the bill was led actively by the Secretary of the City Club, and rein¬ forced by charit^^ organization interests. With this in mind the recent evidences of a widespread propaganda against the bill is easy to understand. An Open Discussion. "Before taking up specific criticisms of the bill, it is only fair to those who have devoted months of time in the ef¬ fort to remedy a condition of which the whole city may well be ashamed, to say that all presumed to be interested, in¬ cluding the City Club, were invited to discuss the bill in the making. "It is also necessary to contradict a statement which has been given public¬ ity, to the effect that the Lockwood- Ellenbogen bill has been 'deserted' by many of its original advocates. While the advertising value of this to the op¬ ponents of the bill is quite obvious, the facts do not warrant the statement. The number of organizations favoring the bill has actually been increased. "It would, of course, be absurd and unfair to assume that all criticisms of the Lockwood-Ellenbogen measure are made in bad faith. Probably most crit¬ ics of the bill are sincere, though some of them are badly informed; and while this may be a sign of the times it is not necessarily evidence of bad faith. "Neither would it be the part of wis¬ dom to assume that the bill is perfect, or that it offers a panacea for all the ills of over inspection and waste. "The bill may have its faults; but if it had no other merits, those responsi¬ ble for it can at least pride themselves on having forced upon public and official notice a condition which ought to have been remedied long ago, but for which no remedy would have been provided if the so-called real estate interests had not, nearly a year ago, started a move¬ ment to correct an intolerable situation. Sifting the Criticisms. "Sifting the criticisms of the Lock¬ wood-Ellenbogen bill quite carefully, those which deserve serious attention seem to be: 1. That decentralization is threatened. 2. That thc functions of the Tene¬ ment House Department, Fire Depart¬ ment and the Labor Department will be interfered with, the safeguards to life growing out of the present equipment and administration of these departments endangered and the laws rendered inop¬ erative. 3. That the Superintendents of Build¬ ings will be given dangerous authority and placed under pressure of local sen¬ timent. 4. That the Board of Standards will have too great authority. 5. That the Board of Examiners will be a law unto itself; that it will be re¬ cruited from organizations that will act in self-interest; that this bill's existence is a legalized looting of the City Treas¬ ury. Borough Responsibility. "To take these up in their order: _ "First, as to the cry of decentraliza¬ tion. This is a fetich that seems to have obsessed quite a number of very ami¬ able and well-intentioned persons. The¬ oretically the Lockwood-Ellenbogen bill does mean a certain amount of decen¬ tralization, but in spite of affirmative academic opinion on this subject is there any particular virtue in retaining a centralized administrative function^ that of building inspection and super¬ vision—whicli has steadily been break¬ ing down for seven or eight years until at the present time it has collapsed hopelessly? That it has broken down no well-informed person will deny. "Is not the present system of borough jurisdiction, as it applies to building in¬ spection the direct result of the failure of a central building inspection system such as the opponents of the Lock¬ wood-Ellenbogen bill are now advocat¬ ing? "Second, the so-called raid upon the Tenement House Department, the Fire Department and the Labor Department. "Most of the critics of the Lockwood- Ellenbogen bill seem to have assumed that all the virtue in this controversy is on their side. What are the facts about that loudly decried stripping of these departments? Inflexible Laws. "The Lockwood-Ellenbogen bill says in effect: The Tenement House Act is a fixed and inflexible law. The Labor Law is in the same case. The authority of the Fire Commissioner is exceeding¬ ly wide, both under the Charter and un¬ der specific enactments of the Board of Aldermen; also under the police power of the State. But in the matter of con¬ struction, alteration and structural changes, there is no reason whatever why, with such fixed laws applicable in each case, a tenement house or factory cannot be built as well under the di¬ rection of a Superintendent of Buildings as under a functionary called by some other name; and so in the case of fire prevention requirements. To each of these departments is left the jurisdiction over maintenance and housekeeping. "Finally there is the Board of Exam¬ iners. "Mr. Binkerd characterizes this as an irresponsible body, apparently because it is not appointed by the Mayor. It is recruited (in the bill) practically from the same sources as at present. The language of the bill does not depart widely from that of the Charter, (bee section 409 of the Lockwood-Ellenbo¬ gen bill and section 411 of the Charter). But as proof that the bill is intended neither to contain jokers nor to be a 'ripper' measure, the Executive Commit¬ tee is willing to amend this section so as to vest with the Mayor absolute power to appoint the Board of Exam¬ iners. The Conference will probably recommend this change to the Legisla¬ ture. "Decisions of the Board of Examiners are given much wider publicity than at present. They are final. But so they are now under the Charter. The fram¬ ers of the present charter did not seem to share Mr. Binkerd's opinion that the persons who have spent millions to make New York City what it is, and will spend millions more, should have no voice at all in how this great building industry should be conducted. They seem ta have had some faith in human nature. "The provision for 'variations' by the Board of Examiners in the Lockwood- Ellenbogen bill, coincides with the pres¬ ent charter provisions. Another Modification. "It is fair both to the critics of the bill and to the Conference Committee to state here another important modifica¬ tion which it is proposed to make. "The transferring of jurisdiction of the Tenement House Department over construction, structural changes, etc., to the Superintendent of Buildings, Section 406. and the provision for variations from law or ordinance, etc., Section 410, does give power to modify the Tene¬ ment House Act. While here again the language of the existing Charter is used, it was not the intention to 'tamper' with the Tenement House Law as has been charged. This is recognized as a fair point for criticism. The Executive Committee is perfectly willing to rec¬ ommend an amendment that will pre¬ vent the application of the variation clause to the Tenement House Act. "If the Lockwood-Ellenbogen bill does not provide any way for getting rid of the Board of Examiners, as Mr. Binkerd complains, this is plainly be¬ cause it here again adopts the plan of the existing Charter (Section 411). "In many respects those who have labored to discover in the Lockwood- Ellenbogen bill a vicious measure are visiting upon it alleged viciousness in the present Charter, under which build¬ ing construction has been carried on in this city for many years. The bill is not a perfect measure. Where it reflects wide divergence of honest opinion, these differences must be fought out in the usual way. But it does represent hard work, honest effort, months of going over and many revisions. It deserves helpful and not destructive criticism. "The alleged 'jokers' will be elimi- mated, if they can be pointed out."