110 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS 



The only anxiety is concerning the surest means to guarantee the per- 

 manence of these benefits while at the same time leaving open the necessary 

 field for improvement and development. 



Statement by Bruce M. Falconer, Attorney for the Fifth Avenue 



Association, May 18, 1916 

 Approval of regulations proposed by the Commission 



On June 19, 1913, the Fifth Avenue Association submitted to the 

 Heights of Buildings Commission of New York City, the predecessor of 

 the present Commission, a full statement of its arguments in favor of the 

 limitation of building heights, which was printed in the report of that Com- 

 mission at pages 211-223. 



With the exception of the height rules prescribed for one district, which 

 it regards as too liberal, the Fifth Avenue Association is in hearty accord 

 with the height limitations prescribed by the present Commission, and as 

 to this exception the association has already submitted to the Commission 

 in writing the restriction desired by the association. The recommendations 

 as to area are entirely in accord with the views of the association. The 

 necessity for some such reasonable rules as those prescribed by the Com- 

 mission and the desirability of providing to some extent for courts and 

 yards appear so obvious and the regulations in this respect have, to our 

 knowledge, been so entirely unopposed as to need no argument here for 

 their support. This statement will be confined, therefore, entirely to the 

 limitation of the use of buildings. 



History of the factory invasion of Fifth avenue 



Up to twenty years ago Fifth Avenue was exclusively a residential 

 thoroughfare, with the exception of a few retail stores located between 

 14th and 23d Streets. With the advent of these few retail stores specula- 

 tive builders conceived the idea of buying a few lots on Fifth Avenue and 

 erected a few office buildings. These buildings were rather flirnsily and 

 cheaply constructed. The building laws at that time were not stringent 

 enough to prevent the erection of flimsy buildings. The space in these 

 buildings was quickly rented. The residents in that part of Fifth Avenue 

 began to move further uptown and more speculative builders secured land 

 and proceeded to erect more office buildings. 



About 1900 the supply of office buildings had so far outstripped the 

 demand for space that the owners of a number of these buildings found 

 themselves without any income, because of their inability to rent the space 

 in the office buildings. They then looked around and decided that cloak 

 manufacturers would take the vacant space. To this end they proceeded. 

 These manufacturers were told that the Fifth Avenue address, in itself, 

 would be a great asset to their business. They were also told that the 

 nearer they were to the retail trade the better would be their business, and 

 by giving more similar promises the speculative builders induced a few of 

 the cloak manufacturers to move from the neighborhood of Broadway and 

 Spring Street to Fifth Avenue between 15th and 18th Streets. It so hap- 

 pened that the first three or four of the manufacturers who moved into 

 that region did increase their business. This was taken for proof that in 

 order to succeed in the manufacturing of cloaks and suits it was necessary 

 to be on Fifth Avenue. Very quickly after this practically 70 per cent of 

 the space in the office buildings on Fifth Avenue below 22d Street was 

 taken by cloak and suit manufacturers. 



