122 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS 



tion of New York City. We believe that the tentative restrictions that have 

 been imposed by the Commission are not nearly severe enough. In most 

 cases the restrictions are much more lenient than the type of building that 

 is now being erected in the various sections, with the exception of the " E " 

 district restrictions. The greater part of Brooklyn is covered by "C" 

 districts, and yet the " C " district restrictions are not effective below the 

 fifth story. From that point they are not so much greater than the restric- 

 tions now imposed by the tenement house law, as to check land overcrowding 

 to any extent. 



Our Committee has recently had. a study made of congestion in the 

 newer tenements in Brooklyn. We find they are building in certain sections 

 i if Williamsburg six-story " walk-ups," housing from 25 to 35 families. 

 Now, of course, we don't want to see that sort of construction repeated in 

 the undeveloped sections of the borough. Yet there is nothing in your 

 recommendations to prevent that sort of construction in sections now 

 devoted to one and two family houses and small tenements. We were sur- 

 prised in making a study of the " D " districts to note that even in these 

 districts a rather intensive type of construction would be allowed. In the 

 " D " district houses may occupy only 60 per cent of the lot, while the 

 tenement house law permits 70 per cent of the lot to be occupied. Yet on 

 60 per cent of the lot a four-story tenement, housing four or five families 

 on each floor, could profitably be built. That is to say, so far as your recom- 

 mendations are concerned, one could build 16 and 20- family tenements in 

 these sections which are now for the most part given only to one and two 

 family houses, and which, according to the report of the Commission, it is 

 your desire to retain for such use. On the other hand, your restrictions 

 would make it practically impossible to build a three-family tenement in a 

 " D " district. You would have to provide a court 15 by 15. On 20 and 25- 

 foot lots on which these three and six family houses are usually built, it 

 would be impossible to build a house with that size of court which would 

 he a paying investment. Your restrictions would make it impossible, there- 

 fore, to build the smaller type of tenement in a " D " district. At the same 

 time they would allow and would furnish an incentive for the larger type 

 with four and five families on a floor. This of course defeats the very 

 purpose of your Commission. We believe the restrictions should be so 

 framed as to discourage large tenements and encourage small ones in " D " 

 districts. 



We concur pretty generally with the report of the Brooklyn City Plan 

 Committee. We believe, generally speaking, that most of the districts 

 which are now designated by " D " ought to be made " E " or villa districts, 

 and most of the districts which are now " C " could very well be made " D " 

 districts. We have not vet worked out a definite plan, but we shall be 

 pleased to submit one within a few days. We want to save New York City 

 from the large tenement house and do not want to see these great tenement 

 houses appearing on land which is undeveloped and where land values, the 

 economic trend and the public interest do not warrant such a high rate of 

 congestion. 



Advantage of uniform area provisions for all buildings 



The erection of factories adjacent to tenements to a large extent nullifies 

 the advantages obtained from the Tenement House Law. This is especially 

 the case where the tenement house has been built with an inner court on the 

 lot line; a factory can come along and shut off the light that theoretically 

 should come from the neighboring building. There are a good many cases 



