17(1 COMMISSION ON BUILDING DISTRICTS 



miserable conditions of human habitation exist. Any sixty-foot street that 

 may fully be developed with nine-story apartments ninety feet high, is in 

 my opinion unfit for human habitation, and exercises a like influence upon 

 the adjoining parallel street. On the other hand, a street sixty feet wide, 

 developed with six-story apartments, is a reasonably fair street. Personally, 

 I think the height is too great, and that were it now possible, it would be 

 infinitely better to restrict the height to once the width of the street. An 

 angle of forty-five degrees produced by the rule o* once the width of the 

 street is insufficient to give direct sunlight on short winter days to the lower 

 stories. Surely, that should be the limit. 



Districting a benefit to real estate 



Not only will the plans as tentatively submitted by this Commission not 

 work any general hardship upon owners of real estate, but I shall be greatly 

 surprised if there is any hardship anywhere of any consequence, and I am 

 profoundly convinced that the future welfare — financially — of the owners 

 of real estate is dependent upon the speedy enactment of restrictions as to 

 height, area and use, at least as restrictive as those now presented by the 

 Commission. 



In my opinion the isolated cases wherein an individual owner may 

 suffer some hardship because of the peculiar location of his property will 

 be very few. Some such possibilities have been presented to the Commis- 

 sion, and it seems possible that in some few localities a certain relaxation 

 of the rules will be made. Such relaxations, if any, should be made solely 

 to meet the improper conditions that have been produced by the failure to 

 impose proper restrictions in the past. 



The failure to impose proper restrictions upon uses to which buildings 

 may be put has caused enormous loss to the owners of real property, and 

 has' in many cases rendered buildings of good character hardly suitable for 

 human habitation by reason of the deprivation of adequate light, air and 

 access, as well as the objectionable noises and other like incidents of a 

 manufacturing industry. 



There are many instances where the owners of adjacent properties have 

 erected artificial structures to shut off the light from the windows of build- 

 ings erected adjacent to their property. In other words, individual owners 

 have conducted schemes of retaliation in defense of their property. Some- 

 times such structures have not been erected as schemes of retaliation, but 

 solely to shield tenement houses from obnoxious sights and odors. 



In practically every case where there are tenement houses or single 

 family dwelling houses,' and a stable or a garage is erected in proximity to 

 them.' there follows a request for a reduction of assessed value of the 

 property near by, which is almost always injuriously affected in its value 

 by the proximity of such a building so used. 



Lack of regulation harmful to city owned property 



The shifts and changes of populated centres which come about from 

 the reasons already described, that is, intrusion of factories into residential 

 territory, cause direct loss to the city through rendering unsuitable for the 

 location, schools erected at large expense and also court houses. Little 

 parks that have been acquired for breathing spaces, or playgrounds, become 

 useless for the purposes for which they were designed when the residents 

 of the neighborhood move away in consequence of the destruction of the 

 tenement houses and their replacement by factories. This sort of change 

 usually comes because of the intrusion (if one factory which -tarts the pro- 



