RECORD OF TESTIMONY AND STATEMENTS IN RELATION TO 207 



NECESSITY FOR DISTRICTING PLAN 



might occupy over seventy per cent of the lot, and an eight-story 80-foot 

 building only the fraction of a per cent less than seventy. It is only, 

 therefore, in the case of the fireproof building above eight stories, that 

 your C provisions limit the total area of residential buildings, and in the 

 case of these buildings, the limitation is slight. It must also be remem- 

 bered that it is not so much the well-to-do tenant of the better class of 

 building with his many comparatively large rooms that needs protection as 

 the poorer man in his five, or perhaps six, story walk up. 



Congestion in Brownsville 



Again, in your tentative report you say that the D district " is intended 

 generally for one and two-family houses, either singly or in rows. Apart- 

 ments, however, are not excluded but are handicapped by the restrictions 

 as to percentage of lot that may be occupied and size of yards and courts." 

 This handicap, as provided in your tentative resolutions, is altogether too 

 slight to accomplish the purpose intended. We have calculated that in a 

 D district a five-story tenement may be built covering sixty per cent of the 

 lot, accommodating with 600 square feet each twenty-five families. In 

 Brownsville and. East New York, as you know, structures four stories in 

 height, covering seventy per cent, of the lot, housing with 583 square feet 

 of floor space twenty-three families, are being constructed in great numbers. 

 The differences between the proposed and the Brownsville type are dan- 

 gerously small. If, therefore, there is any efficacy in, or need of, districting 

 and the creation of types of buildings in different districts, and if your 

 Commission desires to accomplish what your tentative report states as your 

 purpose, you will be obliged greatly to change the D provisions. 



What we have just stated with regard to C and D districts, and pre- 

 viously with relation to height limitations, was not intended to apply solely 

 in those connections, but to illustrate the amount and character of amend- 

 ment of your plans, which, after careful study of the wealth of material 

 which you have collected and charted, we so earnestly urge your Commission 

 to make. 



Change of the sort we urge involves, however, as land becomes cheaper, 

 and its present use less and less intense, not only the strengthening of youi 

 height and area provisions, all along the line and for all the outlying bor- 

 oughs, but some additions to and extensions of them. This may be done 

 simply by creating districts of the same type as those already suggested, 

 but with severer height and area limitations. A better method would be- 

 to establish a somewhat different type of district suited to and made pos- 

 sible by the different conditions. 



More stringent restrictions desirable 



The types of district which so far you have provided for are, on the 

 whole, much better suited to Manhattan than anywhere else in the city. 

 After the medical and engineering testimony which you received at your 

 hearing Thursday, March 30th, you no doubt feel the urgent need of tighten- 

 ing the restrictions with regard also to Manhattan, if only you are able to 

 see how it may be done. Careful study will surely reveal differences in 

 development and land values sufficient to enable you to rescue parts of upper 

 Manhattan from the B-lJ/ proyisions to which you are about for all time 

 to condemn it. In any event, it seems evident that your present regulations 

 are suited to a typical congested tenement house development such as will 

 no doubt prevail very extensively in Manhattan. We believe that whatever 



