RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 203 



NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN 



countries. In that capacity every facility was given me by city and state 

 officials freely and fully to obtain the official facts and the official point of 

 view. My official mission and unofficial introductions made it easy for me 

 to make the acquaintance of those in private life interested and affected 

 by these governmental regulations and the methods of enforcing them. My 

 knowledge of German, acquired as a boy in Germany, made it possible for 

 me to obtain all available information. I devoted several months to the 

 task. Under the circumstances, I consider it my duty, as well as my priv- 

 ilege, to give this Commission the results of that investigation. 



Districting was first introduced into Germany in 1884, and began to 

 come into common use at about 1894. It is now the prevailing system of 

 building regulation throughout Germany and Austria. From these countries 

 the system has spread to Scandinavian countries, to both French and German 

 Switzerland, and to some extent to England, Canada and several of the 

 United States. It is, however, in Germany that this system has prevailed 

 more extensively and for a greater length of time than anywhere else and 

 can best be investigated. 



The systems of districting employed in the different cities of Germany 

 and Austria "differ in many particulars. In general, however, the principles 

 underlying that districting are the same throughout Germany and Austria. 



The official opinion throughout Germany and Austria is universally in 

 favor of districting. This is also the popular opinion. In no city in which 

 it has ever been adopted has there been any attempt to abolish it. Every- 

 where it is regarded as a proved success. 



There were in the cities of Germany and Austria in 1913 many indi- 

 vidual groups and organizations of individuals who were keenly alive to 

 their so'cial and financial interests and the effect of the acts of city officials 

 on these interests ; and these individuals and organizations were at that time 

 expressing their opinions on these matters with freedom and vigor. It 

 was therefore perfectly possible to become acquainted with all shades and 

 varieties of opinion and all facts relating to this subject. I devoted several 

 months to the task of doing so. 



There are many unofficial criticisms of districting methods made in 

 Germany and Austria. These crtiticisms are directed either to its admin- 

 istration, which in some particulars seems to be arbitrary and unjust, or to 

 the location and boundaries of particular districts, or- to particular height 

 and area limitations as applied to particular localities. On only one or 

 two occasions did I hear airy criticism of the system itself, or of the prin- 

 ciples underlying it. These adverse criticisms were those of theoretical 

 students of the subject, and had no general support. 



Effect of districting 



In my judgment, the Heights of Buildings Commission and the Com- 

 mission on Building Districts and Restrictions are correct in their statements 

 made in their reports of the probable advantages to the City of New York 

 which will 'result from the adoption of the districting system and are borne 

 out in them by its results in Germany and Austria. It does, in my opinion, 

 lessen congestion in overcrowded Germany ; it docs make city land more 

 useful and valuable ; it does tend to prevent the useless and costly changes in 

 the character of localities; it does stabilize values; it does make living 

 conditions more comfortable and convenient and business more economical 

 and efficient. 



Conditions in Germany and Austria are no doubt different from can- 



