'723C3 Legislative Document (1927)
A 7
A 12.<"

No. 85

/1 0 v
/? -

STATE OF NEW YORK
REPORT
OF THE
BOARD OF HOUSING

'T,,STATE

V

TO
GOVERNOR ALFRED E. SMITH
AND TO
THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

March 9, 1927

ALBANY
J. B. LYON COMPANY, PRINTERS
1987
-  <F.







Legislative Document (1927)

No. 89

Legislative Document (1927)No. 8~

STATE OF NEW YORK
REPORT
OF THE
BOARD OF HOUSING

SSTATE

TO
GOVERNOR ALFRED E. SMITH
AND TO
THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
March 9, 1927

ALBANY
J. B. LYON COMPANY, PRINTERS
1927




CN
Wo
sh   bd




YUCUM ET.1S
STATE BOARD OF HOUSING
NEW YORK CITY, March 9, 1927.
To the Honorable ALFRED E. SMITH, Governor, and the Legislature
of the State of New York:
Herewith is transmitted to you a report of the State Board of
Housing on the need of extending the rent laws which automatically expire on June 1, 1927. The findings of the Board are
based on the results of a special investigation begun January 3,
1927, which included a resurvey of those blocks in New York City
which have been made the subject of special study in previous
years, the examination of all available official data and the holding
of public hearings in New York City, Buffalo and Albany.
Yours truly,
DARWIN R. JAMES,
Chairman.
[31







REPORT OF THE STATE BOARD OF HOUSING TO
GOVERNOR ALFRED E. SMITH AND TO THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
MARCH 9, 1927
r[i5




STATE BOARD OF HOUSING
DARWIN R. JAMES, Chlairman
OLIVER. CABANA, JR., Vice- Chairmanw
JOHN HALKETT
Louis H. PINK
AARON RABINOWITZ
SULLIVAN W. JONES, State Architect
GEORGE GOVE, Secretary
WILLARD L. THIIORP, tatis-ticia
LESLIE KLUG, Assistant Secretary
CARL S. STERN, Counsel
[6]




TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Summary and Recommendations........................... 11
The Emergency in 1920.............................. 11
Evidence of Improvement............................ 12
Present Conditions................................... 12
Decontrol on Basis of Rent........................... 13
Decontrol on Basis of Tenure.......................... 14
Buffalo, Albany and Yonkers........................... 14
The Permanent Problem.............................. 15
Recommendations.................................... 15
New Construction in New York City....................... 16
Amount............................................ 16
Rents in New Tenements.............................. 18
The Permanent Problem.............................. 21
V~acancies in New York City................................ 23
Total Number of Vacancies........................... 23
The Geographical Distribution of Vacancies............... 25
Rents Asked for Vacant Apartments.................... 27
Block Survey........................................ 35
Other Surveys...................................... 38
Summary........................................... 39
Turnover in Eight Blocks in New York City................. 40
Overcrowding and Congestion in New York City...........43
Overcrowding....................................... 43
Average Number of Persons Per Room.................. 44
The Permanent Problem.............................. 45
Rents in New York City................................. 47
The General Level of Rents.........................  47
Level of Rents in New York City....................... 51
Market Rents...................................... 52
The Differential in Rents.............................. 56
Summary.......................................... 60
Buffalo................................................ 62
Rents............................................. 62
New Construction................................... 62
171]




LIST OF TABLES

Table
Number                                                  PAGE
1. Number of Suites in Various Types of Dwelling in New
York City, October 1, 1920 and 1926..............  16
2. Net Increase in the Number of Suites in Various Types of
Dwelling in New York City, October 1, 1920 to 1926.. 18
3. Distribution of Apartments in New Tenements According
to Monthly Room Rent in Manhattan, 1924-1926.... 19
4. Number of Suites in Various Types of Dwelling in New
York City, 1925-1926......................... 20
5. Number and Percentage of Vacancies in New York City,
1909-1927....................................  24
6. Number of Vacancies by Boroughs and Apartment Rent,
January,  1927.................................  28
7. Comparison of Vacant Apartments in New York City by
R ents.......................................  29
8. Vacancies in Old Law Tenements by Rent Asked Per Room. 30
9. Vacancies in New Law Tenements by Rent Asked Per Room  31
10. Percentage Distribution of Vacant Apartments in Manhattan and The Bronx According to Monthly Room
R ent.......................................  36
11. Number of Vacancies in Eight Selected Blocks in New York
City, 1909-1927...............................  38
12. Percentage of Families in Eight Blocks Who Have Occupied
Their Apartments for Less Than One Year.......... 40
13. Percentage of Families Entering Present Apartments in
1919 or Earlier................................. 41
14. Percentage of Apartments Overcrowded in Eight Blocks,
1919-1927...................................  43
15. Average Number of Persons Per Apartment in Eight
Blocks, 1923-1927............................. 45
16. Increase in Cost of Living in New York City............. 47
17. Movement of Rents in New York City, 1914-1926.......  48
18. Average Rents For All Occupied Apartments in Eight
Blocks, 1909-1927............................. 50
1). Relative Rents in Eight City Blocks, 1909-1927........ 50
20. Average Rent Increases in Nineteen Cities, 1914-1926 and
1920-1926....................................  51
21. Thirty-Two Cities Arranged According to the Date when
Rents Were Highest........................... 52
22. Ma1ket Rents in Seven Blocks By Size of Apartment,
19'22-1926......................................  53
23. \Weighted Average Market Rent In Seven Blocks, 1919 -1926........................................ 54
24. Relative Market Rents in Seven Blocks, 1914-1926..... 55
[8]




9
PAGE
25. Average Rents in Three Room Apartments According to
Length of Tenancy............................. 57
26. Average of Relatives of Average Rents in Eight Blocks
According to Length of Tenancy................... 58
27. Differential Between Rents Paid by Tenants Who Entered
in 1921-1923 and 1919 and Earlier, Three Room Apartments, 1923, 1925 and 1927........................ 59
28. Differential Between Rents Paid by Tenants Who Entered
in 1921-1923 and 1919 and Earlier, Four Room Apartments, 1923, 1925 and 1927........................ 60
29. Percentage of Tenants Who Entered Apartments in 1919
or Earlier and Differential in Rents................. 60
30. Rents in Buffalo..................................... 62
31. New Construction in Buffalo, 1924-1926............... 62




LIST OF CHARTS
Chart                                                Opposite
Number                                                  Page
1. Number of Suites in New York City by Types of Dwelling,
October 1, 1926............................... 17
2. Comparison of Vacant and Occupied Apartments, New
York C ty, January, 1927......................... 26
3. Old Law Vacancies in Manhattan..................... 32
4. Old Law Vacancies in The Bronx..................... 32
5. New Law Vacancies in Manhattan..................... 33
6. New Law Vacancies in The Bronx..................... 33
7. Total Vacancies in Manhattan......................... 34
8. Total Vacancies in The Bronx......................... 35
9. Level of Rents in New York City, 1914-1926............ 49
[10]




SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By delegation to the Board of Housing of the " duties and functions heretofore exercised by the Bureau of Housing and Regional
Planning, '" this Board is directed to advise the Governor and the
Legislature with respect to housing conditions, prevailing rents
and available dwelling space in relation to which the Legislatures
of 1920 and 1921 declared the existence of a public emergency;
to determine the status of such emergency and the need, if such
there be, of extending the emergency rent laws beyond the present
term of their application. These laws automatically expire June
1, 1927.
This Board began an investigation on January 3, 1927. The
inquiry included a survey of those blocks in New York City which
have been subjected to special study in previous years, collection
of all available data from official sources and the conduct of public
hearings in New York City, Buffalo and Albany. In this report
the Board presents its findings and recommendations.
The Emergency in 1920
In previous studies it has been recognized that no single factor
can be accepted as a measure of emergency conditions as defined
by the Legislature and as referred to in the decisions of the courts.
The housing emergency constituted a " serious menace to the
health, morality, comfort and even the peace of a large part of
the people of the State." 2 It was directly traceable to economic
maladjustment with respect to housing which grew     out of war
time conditions. It was first manifested by a mass housing shortage. An additional factor was the lack of adjustment between
the supply of rentals at different levels and family income. With
increasing rents and the consequent downward pressure toward
the lower rental apartments the emergency became progressively
acute for the families of lesser income.
There were practically no vacancies at any price.      From  a
normal vacancy percentage of 5.60 in 1916 the vacancy percentage
in February, 1921, had fallen to 0.12. Confronted with demands
of landlords for higher rentals tenants were without recourse
except for the protection afforded them by the rent laws.
But in spite of the relief which the rent laws were designed to
give, the average level of rents was moving continually upward.
Increasing rents were directly responsible for room overcrowding
and increasing congestion. Everywhere families were doubling
up and at all times there was great public stress and apprleension.
1 Chapter 823, Laws of 1926.
2 Levy vs. Siegel, 230 New York, on page 10.
[11]




12

The court rooms were packed daily with tenants who were compelled to assert their rights under the law. In 1920, 114,513 summary procedings were instituted in the Municipal Courts of New
York City.
Evidence of Improvement
The conditions as reported to the Legislature by the Commission of Housing and Regional Planning in December, 1923, were
not substantially different from those which prevailed in 1920.
It was not until January, 1925, that the first indications of
improvement became evident. But in the succeeding months there
was rapid improvement in all the physical factors relating to the
emergency.   Vacancies began to approach the pre-war normal.
Market rents, which by 1923 had increased to approximately 100
per cent above the level of 1914, were stabilized and there was
apparent a slight decline in the higher rental ranges. In the
report of the Commission of Housing and Regional Planning 1 it
was found that:
" Changing physical conditions as shown in this report,
demonstrate sufficient improvement in the general housing
situation to indicate that the height of the emergency has
passed. So far as future trends may be charted from present
data it is possible now to predict a gradual alleviation of
emergency conditions. Although the housing emergency will
require legislative intervention for at least two years more,
the Commission believes that the time has arrived when some
measure of decontrol may be safely considered."
On the facts presented in that report the Commission recommended that the emergency rent laws be continued until June 1,
1927, applying only to dwellings or apartments renting for less
than $20 per room per month in New York City and less than
$15 per room per month in Buffalo and Albany. The policy of
decontrol wisely begun in 1926 was designed to prevent any sudden and forced adjustment of the spread between rents paid by
protected tenants and the prevailing market rate. In half the
houses examined in 1925 this differential between pre-war and
prevailing market rent levels exceeded 30 per cent.     In one
quarter of the houses it was more than 65 per cent. The Commission ponted out that gradual equalization was taking place
under the rent laws as family after family was forced to make
its upward adjustment in rent expenditure. The Commission
predicted that if sudden adjustment were made necessary by the
lapse of all rent control the situation would differ in no respect
from that which called the rent laws into being.
Present Conditions
The investigation just completed by this Board demonstrates
conclusively the wisdom of the action taken by the Legislature in
1 Legislative Document, No. 40, 1926.




13

1926 and confirms the predictions based on previous investigations.
The vacancy average has increased to almost the pre-war normal
standard. There has been a marked increase in turnover. Increasing mobility is satisfying evidence of a gradual return of
bargaining power to the tenant. In the blocks studied by the
Board less overcrowding is found, although, in spite of the reduction in the number of extreme cases, there is no apparent decrease
in average congestion. Market rents are no longer soaring upward
but have already begun to decline. However, because of the
spread between these market rents and the average rents paid by
protected tenants, average rents in New York City are still increasing. This increase is due entirely to that equalization process by
which the 'protected rent is being gradually adjusted upward
toward the market level. The differential is now 26 per cent.
The Board finds that, on the basis of the blocks studied, 41 per
cent of the tenants occupying apartments in New York City within
the protected range of rents below $20 per room per month have
maintained continuous occupancy of their apartments since 1919
or before. In September, 1925, the Commission of Housing and
Regional Planning found the number of tenants who had been in
occupancy since 1919 or before represented 49 per cent of the
total number of tenants in the City. The marked decrease in the
number of tenants for whom further protection of the rent laws
is vital bears out the prediction that a return to normal conditions
under a policy of decontrol is entirely practical. Equalization
is inevitable. It should be expedited within the limits of safety.
However, the Board believes that the salutary movement which is
now proceeding satisfactorily cannot be disturbed at this time
without danger of working irreparable damage to the health and
welfare of a large part of this 41 per cent of the population. The
program of decontrol initiated by the Legislature a year ago
should be carried through the two year term as recommended by
the previous Commission. Such procedure is justified by the facts
and accords with wise public policy. The Board believes that at
the expiration of another year, if present forces continue to operate
as they have in the past year, no further control will be needed.
Decontrol on Basis of Rent
The considerations determining the rental range for which protection is still needed are discussed in detail in the chapter devoted
to vacancies.1 The present shortage is most acute in apartments
renting at $15 per room per month and immediately below.
Throughout the lower rental range there is marked maladjustment
evidenced by insufficient housing at rents between $8 and $15
per room per month, and an apparent oversupply of sub-standard
housing at lower rentals. This oversupply is largely confined
to old law tenements which are being abandoned as rapidly as
families can find an alternative to living in the old, unsanitary
buildings outlawed twenty-six years ago. The movement is salu1Chapter II.




14

tary. If the high vacancy figure for buildings of this type were
corrected  by elimination of all those which should have been
declared unfit for occupancy years ago the vacancy average in
this class of property would be more in line with the vacancy figure for other types of building and the vacancy average
for the City as a whole would be materially reduced.      This,
together with the ineffective distribution of vacancies throughout
the City, justifies the conclusion that rentals in the entire range
at $15 per room per month and less require further protection.
Decointrol on Basis of Ten-ure
Within the past two years there has been increasing mobility
among the tenants of the City. So long as tenants remained in
occupancy of their apartments the rent laws protected them from
unjust increases in rent and from  dispossession on any ground
except that provided in the statute. When they moved they were
compelled to pay the current market rent, and as shown by the
testimony presented in the public hearings and confirmed by the
Board's studies, the market rents for similar accommodations were
found everywhere to be higher than the rents previously paid.
It has become increasingly evident that, more and more, tenants
have voluntarily relinquished that protection afforded by the rent
laws and in particular the enjoyment of that differential between
the preiviously protected and the current market rent.
However, tenants who thus voluntarily relinquished their protection have, in increasing numbers, sought to carry their protection with them by invoking the rent laws even after they have
agreed and, in many cases, entered into contracts to pay the higher
rent charged. In increasing numbers such tenants have refused
to pay their rent before the conclusion of the third month on the
ground that the rent charged was unreasonable, thus abrogating
the contract and invoking the rent laws in their defence.   In
many cases this has resulted in gross injustice to the landlord.
The Board holds that the abuse of this statutory right on the part
of a tenant is quite as indefensible as was the practice of some
landlords in exercising their statutory rights prior to the enactment of the rent laws. To prevent a continuation of this practice
the Board believes that the provisions of the so-called reasonable
rent laws should hereafter be limited in application to old tenancies.
Buffalo
With reference to housing conditions in Buffalo the Board finds
evidence of continued stress in the lower rent levels, from $7 per
room per month downwards. Above that level all evidence of
emergency has disappeared.
A lbany anld Yonklers
In Albany there remains no evidence of a housing emergency
nor any untoward condition with respect to the relations of landlord and tenant that cannot be adequately safeguarded by the




15

exercise of discretionary stay in dispossess proceedings under the
terms of Chapter 842, Laws of 1926, which continue in operation
for another year.
Requests for specific data from public officials and civic and
social agencies of Yonkers have produced no indications of existing emergency, and in response to invitations directed to the
Mayor and other public officials, the Chamber of Commerce, the
Charity Organization Society and similar organizations to attend
the public hearings held in New York City, only one representative
of Yonkers appeared to officially recommend the extension of the
rent laws. However no facts were presented in support of the
recommendation.
The Permanent Problem
The facts presented with respect to the present maladjustment
in New York City are especially significant in their bearing on
the constructive measures adopted by the Legislature in 1926 and
incorporated in the State Housing Law. These facts show that
the greatest pressure is exerted on apartments renting within the
range immediately below the level at which the building industry
ceases to function. The pressure in this range is both from above,
where average rents are still moving upward, and from     below,
from families who, often at the expense of doubling up, are deserting the worst houses. It is by offering permanent relief, especially
within this range, that operations under the State Housing Law
can most effectively contribute to the solution of the housing
problem in the larger cities.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Board recommends:
(1) That the emergency rent laws as applying to New York
City and Buffalo be continued until June 1, 1928, except that
(2) The provisions of such laws shall not apply to dwellings
or apartments in which the rent on December 31, 1926, was more
than $15 per room per month in New York City and more than
$7 per room per month in Buffalo.
(3) Chapter 136, Laws of 1920, entitled "An act in relation
to defenses in actions based upon unjust, unreasonable and
oppressive agreements for rent of premises occupied for dwelling
purposes in cities of the first class or in cities in a county adjoining a city of the first class," as amended by chapter 944, Laws of
1920, chapter 434, Laws of 1921, chapter 664, Laws of 1922, and
chapter 628, Laws of 1924, which statutes constitute the so-called
reasonable rent laws of today, be so amended that they shall
not apply to tenancies begun after the date of the enactment of
legislation embodying these recommendations but that they shall
apply as heretofore to all tenancies originating prior to that
date.




16

CHAPTER I
NEW CONSTRUCTION IN NEW YORK CITY
Amount
The housing emergency of 1920-1921 was, to a large extent, a
result of the lack of construction during the previous five years.
The following tables present the pertinent facts concerning the
new construction in New York City since the passage of the rent
laws. In 1920 there were 1,334,776 suites in tenements and in
one and two family houses in the five boroughs of New         York
City. By 1926, this number had grown to 1,694,861, an increase
of 27 per cent. In all types of property except old law tenements
there has been an increase, during the six years, of nearly one-half
of the amount standing in 1920.
TABLE 1
NUMBER OF SUITES IN VARIOUS TYPES OF DWELLING IN NEW YORK
CITY: OCTOBER 1, 1920 AND 1926
Reported by Tenement House Department and Department of
Taxes and Assessments
INCREASE,    PER CENT OF
Oct. 1   Oct.,     1920-1926       TOTAL
E O DWELLING    1920     1926
Amount Per cent 1920   1926
Old law tenements...... 582,690  560,525 *22,165  *3.8  43.7   33.1
New law tenements..... 399,694  598,242 198,548   49.7  29.9    35.3
Converted dwellings t...   54      541     487   901.9     t
One family houses...... 177,650  262,079  84,429  47.5   13.3   15.5
Two family houses...... 174,688  273,474  98,786  56.5   13.1   16.1
Total.............. 1,334,776  1,694,861  360,085  27.0  100.0  100.0

* Decrease.
t Officially reported. An estimate by the Board places
converted dwellings in excess of 12,000.
$ Less than 0.05 per cent.

the number of illegally

This construction has changed the relative importance of the
various types of dwelling. Most notablle is the fact that for the
first time the records of the Tenement House Department show




17

NUMBER OF

CHART I
SUITES IN NEW YORK CITY BY TYPES OF
DWELLING, OCTOBER 1, 1926
(Data given in Table IV)
tMArNHATTAt    I       I

0       o000ooo  Zo00ooo    300,000 2o0 OCO      oo 000
I  Old LL           e /YewL a 1w One and TSo
Tenern er-  ^   Textem cp tLi -fate'i HouS c
more new law    tenements 1 than old law tenements 2 in New York
City. During the six years the number of old law tenements
demolished has been 3.8 per cent of the total, but the number of
new law tenements has increased by 49.7 per cent. In 1920 old
law tenements accounted for 44 per cent of the suites in New York
City, but in 1926 the old law tenements, the new law tenements
1 An old law tenement is one built before the passage of the Tenement
House Law of 1901. Almost without exception such tenements are below
the minimum standard established for new construction. According to modern standards of tenement house construction, the fundamental design is so
faulty that most houses cannot be brought up to the standard set for new
buildings. The law forced certain changes with reference to lightless rooms,
toilets, fire-escapes, skylights and the lighting of halls.
2 A new law tenement is one which has been built since 1901. The provisions of the Tenement House Law for new buildings are minimum      requirements for such construction. There are no rooms without direct access
to the outer air. The dimensions of the court are an improvement over old
standards. Fire protection is improved. Toilets must have a window to
the outer air.




18

and the non-tenement 1 houses each represent approximately onethird of the total. The volume of this construction from year
to year is presented in Table II.
TABLE II
NET INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF SUITES IN VARIOUS TYPES OF
DWELLING IN     NEW   YORK    CITY
OCTOBER 1, 1920 TO 1926
Reported by Tenement House Department and Department of
Taxes and Assessments
-- ~
New       One       Two               Percent
YEAR ENDING SEPT. 30    law      family    family    Total   of 6-year
tenements  houses    houses              total
1921...................   4,199    3,616     5,928    13,743        3.6
1922...................  19,603    17,308   14,456    51,367       13.5
1923...................  29,060    14,241   22,042    65,343       17.1
1924...................  49,900    18,489   26,888    95,277       25.0
1925...................  43,825    12,926   13,470    70,221       18.4
1926...................  51,961    17,849   16,002    85,812       22.5
Total.............. 198,548    84,429    98,786  381,763      100.0
During the years immediately prior to 1920 there was very little
construction in New York City. The revival in residential construction came in 1922 and, since that time, building activity has
been maintained at a rapid rate. There is no sign of decline in
1926; in fact, more suites in new law tenements were declared
ready for occupancy in 1926 than in any previous year. Figures
which were presented to the Board by the Superintendents of
Buildings of the various boroughs, covering the new plans filed
in the first two months of 1927, indicate that the same rate of
construction will continue at least in the early months of 1927.
Rents in New Tenements
The Tenement House Department endeavors to inspect every
tenement house about six months after the certificate of completion
has been issued. In this survey the rents per room per month are
ascertained. These records for 1924, carefully analyzed by the
Commission of Housing and Regional Planning, were presented and
iA tenement (Article 1, ~ 2-1, Chap. 99, Laws of 1909) "is any house
Swhich is rented... to be occupied..    as the home
or residence of three families or more living independently of each other,
and doing their cooking upon the premises..."  Non-tenements include not only one and two family houses but also non-housekeeping apartments and hotels. In this report only one and two family houses are
considered.




19

described in detail in its report of December 23, 1925.1 Since
1924, the tenement house inspectors, in many cases have been
unable to keep up with the new construction so that, except for
Manhattan, similar data for 1925 and 1926 are not as yet recorded.
Table III gives the record of rents in new construction in Manhattan for 1924, 1925 and 1926.
TABLE III
DISTRIBUTION OF APARTMENTS IN NEW        TENEMENTS ACCORDING TO
MONTHLY ROOM RENTS: MANHATTAN,
1924-1926
Compiled from Records of the Tenement House Department
PER CENT OF APARTMENTS      TOTAL NUMBER*
ROOM RENT
1924    1925   1926    1924    1925    1926
Under $14.50.............  0.16  0.17......     18      17
$14.50-$15.49...........  0.34   0.66    0.76     38      66       78
$15.50-$16.49..........  0.17   0.75    4.06     19      75      415
$16.50-$17.49...........  1.00   1.62    2.34    111     161      239
$17.50-$18.49........... 2.34   6.04    5.34    259     602      546
$18.50-$19.49...........  2.41  7.59    3.77    267     756      385
$19.50-$24.49........... 32.08  25.09  25.57  3,549   2,499    2,614
$24.50-$29.49...........  18.92  8.34   17.18  2,093     831    1,756
Over $29.50.............  42.58  49.74  40.98  4,706   4,954    4,190
Total................  100.00  100.00  100.00  11,062  9,961  10,221
* Estimated by applying to the total number the distribution determined from all
available records: 1924- 6,402 apartments; 1925 - 7,783 apartments; 1926 -2,096 apartments.
It is evident that the amount of construction on Manhattan
providing new apartments to rent at $15 and less is negligible.
However, the table does indicate a definite tendency toward construction for lower rent groups. The average rent charged for new
apartments in 1926 was considerably below that charged in either
1924 or 1925, and over 16 per cent of the new apartments were
offered at rents under the $20 limit fixed by the rent laws.
For the other boroughs no such definite data are available.     In
the public hearings held by the Board in New York City, Patrick
J. Reville, Superintendent of Buildings, Bronx county, gave the
following testimony:
"Q. Mr. Superintendent, can you state the rentals in this new
construction?
A. I just indicated one landlord who has 450 apartments in
the market at $15 a room. The rentals are largely a matter of bargaining; in order to keep up the mortgaging
1 Legislative Document (1926) No. 40, p. 21.




20

value of the premises they ask for rentals averaging
around $20, but they offset it by giving one and two
months' concession."     (Testimony, page 3.)
Also, Albert E. Kleinert, Superintendent of Buildings of the
Borough of Brooklyn, testified as follows:
"Q. Have you any way of telling, Mr. Kleinert, the range of
rental of this new construction? Is it largely construction above $40 per room per month?
A. Oh, no! I wouldn't say that. Over in Brooklyn you can
get a very good apartment for less than $20 a month.
Q. Coming back to new construction, would you say any of
it was within the range of $15 per month or lower?
A. So far as tenement houses are concerned I should say yes.
The average is about $17 per month, but when you come
to the one and two family houses, that is another thing."
(Testimony, page 4.)
Much more definite information was compiled by the Bureau of
Housing and Regional Planning concerning the new rents in the
various boroughs in 1924. In that year, new construction in The
Bronx was offered chiefly at rents from     $17.50 to $25 per room;
in Brooklyn, from    $13.50 to $17.50 per room; and for Queens,
under $12.50.
TABLE IV
NUMBER OF SUITES IN VARIOUS TYPIES OF DWELLINGS
IN NEW YORK CITY
1925-1926
Reported   by Tenement House Department and Department of
Taxes and Assessments
TYPE OF DWELLING          Sept. 30,  Sept. 30,  Net    Per cent
1925      1926    increase  increase
MANHATTAN
Old law tenements................  370,931  365,718  -5,213    - 1.41
New law tenements................  185,018  192,882   7,864       4.25
Converted dwellings................   27        34         7      25.92
One family houses.................  20,961   19,939  -1,022     - 4.88
Two family houses.................  8,364    8,038     -326      -3.90
Total.......................  585,301   586,611    1,310       0.22
BRONX
Old law tenements.................  32,640  32,548      -92      -0.28
New law tenements................  160,217  180,343   20,126      12.56
Converted  dwellings.................  9         9.................
One family houses.................  19,667  21,210    1,543       7.85
Two family houses..................  27,190  29,136    1,946       7.16
Total....................     239,723   263,246   23,523       9.81




21

TABLE IV -      (Concluded)
TYPE OF DWELLING            Sept. 30,  Sept. 30,    Net      Per cent
1925       1926.    increase   increase

B
Old law tenements.................
New law tenements...............
Converted dwellings...............
One family houses.................
Two family houses................

EROOKLYN
154,019
167,184
444
89,802
142,946

153,635    -384
185,077    17,893
498        54
92,481     2,679
149,660     6,714

-0.25
10.70
12.16
2.98
4.70

I                                              I                                             I
Total.......................  554,395   581,3511

26,956

4.86

I

7,3571           -21

QUEENS
Old law tenements...................7,378
New law tenements................   33,396
Converted dwellings................
One family houses.................   87, 365
Two family houses.................  70,458

7,357     -21
39,419     6,023
101,688   14,323
77,672/    7,214

-0.28
18.04
16.39
10.24

I     I     I     I-- l C--- -

Total......................... 198,597  226,136

27,539

13.87

I                                                    - I       I

RICHMOND
Old law tenements..................   1,335
New law tenements................       466
Converted dwellings....................
One family houses..................   26,435
Two family houses.................    8,514
Total.........................   36,750

1,267
521
26,761
8,968

-68
55
326
454

-5.09
11.80
1.23
5.33

37,517

767       2.09

1-----~~1-------1---~---I -

NEW YORK CITY
Old law tenements.................  566,303
New law tenements................  546,281
Converted dwellings...............    480
One family houses.................  244,230
Two family houses..................  257,472

560,525
598,242
541
262,079
273,474

-5,778
51,961
61
17,849
16,002

-1.02
9.51
12.70
7.31
6.22

I I I I

Total.......................1,614,766

1,694,861

80,095

4.96

The bulk of the new law tenements were constructed in the
Bronx and in Brooklyn, and of non-tenement dwellings in Queens.
Table IV shows a greater increase in suites available in Queens,
the borough in which rents for new construction are lowest, than
in any other section. The rate of growth for the Bronx is nearly
10 per cent, for Brooklyn 5 per cent, and in Manhattan the number of suites has remained approximately stationary.
Permanent Problem
The amount of new construction within the past four years has
been without precedent. This new construction is significant only
as it reaches groups whose incomes permit them to pay the required




22
rent charge. Although extensive construction of high-priced apartments has a remote effect on the rents in the lower groups, it will
be many years before the depreciation is such as actually to bring
these apartments into the market at low levels. The immediate
relief provided by this new construction has probably not reached
much lower than $15 per room. Families whose rent must necessarily be less than this figure are compelled to live in old tenements.
The best of these old tenements are below modern standards. But
in the lower rental ranges large numbers of tenants are living in
apartments which ought to be abandoned. The facts given above
demonstrate the helplessness of private enterprise, unaided, to meet
this situation. Building costs, taxes, the high cost of financing and
maintenance costs all prohibit new construction which can be offered
to the low income classes. It is the hope of this Board that the
advantages offered by the State Housing Law will be promptly
utilized for in that way only can the problem be solved.




23

CHAPTER II
VACANCIES IN NEW        YORK CITY
Perhaps the most significant index of the extent of the housing
emergency is the number of vacant apartments. In 1925, the
Commission of Housing and Regional Planning was forced to rely
chiefly upon the results of surveys by taxpayers' associations and
its own block survey for data on this matter. However, the change
in the date of reporting on the state of the emergency from December to March, has made possible the utilization of the much more
complete vacancy survey of the Tenement House Department. The
current survey was made by the tenement house inspectors in January, 1927. Each inspector reported for every building in his
district, giving the total number of apartments, the number of
apartments vacant, if any, and the rent asked for the vacant apartments. The State Board of Housing wishes to take this opportunity to express its appreciation to the Tenement House Department for its cooperation, and     to  commend   the intelligent
preparation and presentation of this unwieldy material by the
Commissioner.
Total Number of Vacancies
The number and percentage of vacancies in New York City and
for each borough, as determined by the Tenement House Department in its various surveys since February, 1909, are given in
Table V.
For New York City as a whole the total number of vacant apartments reported as of January, 1927, was 61,252, an increase of
22,219 since January, 1926. This represents an increase in the
percentage of apartments vacant from 3.46 to 5.16 per cent.
No brief statement could more clearly picture the development
and gradual reduction of the housing emergency than these records.
In February, 1921, there were but 1,510 apartments vacant in all
New York City. This had come about gradually during the previous five years when first new law apartments and then old law
apartments had become scarce. The reduction of the emergency
since 1921 has likewise come about gradually.  The number of
vacancies in old law tenements increased less rapidly, at first, than
that of vacancies in new law tenements, because new construction
was solely affecting the latter group. It was not until the latter
part of 1923 that any considerable evidence of relief appeared,
and not until 1924 that vacancies developed in the old law tenements. The current survey shows that the percentage of vacancies
in old law tenements exceeds that of March, 1916, while that for
new law tenements is not quite as high.




24
TABLE V
NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF VACANCIES IN NEW YORK CITY
1909-1927
Tenement House Department
NUMBER OF APARTMENTS     VACANT APARTMENTS     PER CENT VACANT
DATE
New      Old    Total   New     Old    Total  New     Old   Total
law     law             law    law           law     law
MANHATTAN
Feb., 1009.....  97,452 408,985 506,437  7,271 31,454 38,725    7.46   7.69    7.65
Mar., 1916...... 142,639 392,485 535,124  4,856 29,120 33,976   3.40   7.42    6.35
Mar.,1917...... 149,299 390,171 539,470  2,816 22,123 24,939    1.89   5.67    4.62
Mar., 1919.....  153,331 388,117 541,448  1,555 16,552 18,107   1.01   4.26    3.34
April,1920...... 153,477 385,678 539,155   231   2,883  3,114.15.75.58
Feb., 1921.... 154,510 382,816 537,326     286     675    961.18.18.18
Mar., 1923...... 161,198 378,972 540,170   693     972  1,665.43.26.31
Jan., 1924...... 167,516 377,731 545,247  1,792  1,814  3,606   1.09.48.66
Jan., 1925...... 178,577 374,017 552,594  4,551  7,094 11,645   2.55   1.90    2.11
Jan., 1926.     188,432 369,360 557,792   8,047 17,187 25,234   4.27   4.65    4.52
Jan., 1927...... 198,490 364,666 563,156  7,447 26,027 33,474   3.75   7.14    5.94
THE BRONX
Feb., 1909......  26,921  39,529  66,450  3,127  4,071  7,198  11.60  10.20   10.80
Mar., 1916......  94,777  32,882 127,659  3,973  2,060  6,033   4.19   6.26   4.73
Mar., 1917...... 103,006  32,889 135,895  1,169  1,135  2,304   1.13   3.45    1.69
Mar., 1919.....  106,345  32,885 139,230   162     282    444.15.86.32
April, 1920...., 107,617  32,867 140,484    107     34    141.10.10.10
Feb., 1921...... 109,297  32,864 142,161   188      29    217.17.09.15
Mar., 1923...... 122,147  32,797 154,944   905      46    951.74.14.61
Jan., 1924...... 133,926  32,759 166,685  1,467     82  1,549   1.09.25.93
Jan., 1925...... 151,762  32,698 184,460  4,471    436  4,907   2.95   1.33    2.66
Jan., 1926...... 166,632  32,639 199,271  3,259  1,019  4,278   1.95   3.12    2.15
Jan., 1927...... 191,438  32,425 223,863  6,030  1,326  7,356   3.15   4.09    3.29
BROOKLYN
Feb., 1909.....  62,823 184,150 246,973   5,419 14,675 20,094   8.63   8.00    8.14
Mar., 1916...... 100,236 165,373 265,609  5,031  7,293 12,324   5.01   4.41    4.64
Mar., 1917....., 108,635 158,860 267,495  2,534  5,238  7,772   2.33   3.30   2.91
Mar., 1919..... 113,482 157,841 271,323    637   2,185  2,822.56   1.38    1.04
April, 1920..... 114,442 157,346 271,788   100     177    277.09.11.10
Feb., 1921..... 115,403 156,912 272,315    118     199    317.10.13.12
Mar., 1923......  126,033 155,933 281,966   707    330  1,037.56.21.37
Jan., 1924...... 138,270 155,311 293,581  2,124    921  3,045   1.54.59    1.04
Jan., 1925..... 158,961 154,983 313,944   4,459  2,745  7,204   2.80    1.77   2.29
Jan., 1926.....  172,782 154,384 327,166  4,441  4,208  8,649   2.57   2.73    2.64
Jan., 1927...... 194,399 154,004 348,403  9,717  9,085 18,802   5.00   5.90    5.40
QUEENS
Feb., 1909......  7,474  10,704  18,178    739     919  1,658   9.90   8.60    9.12
Mar., 1916......  18,437  8,135  26,572    505     558  1,063   2.73   6.85   4.01
Mar., 1917.....  20,703   7,604  28,30W    151     354    505.73   4.65    1.78
Mar., 1919.....  21,756   7,758  29,314     18      63     81.08.83.27
April, 1920......  21,818  7,575  29,393....................
Feb., 1921......  21,989  7,559  29,548      2......        2.01......01
Mar., 1923.....  24,306   7,465  31,761     13       1     14.05........04
Jan., 1924......  25,793  7,459   33,252     64     10     74.25.13.22
Jan., 1925.....  31,359   7,442  38,801     515     12    527   1. 64.16    1.35
Jan., 1926......  35,110  7,376  42,486     663     55    718   1.89.75    1.70
Jan., 1927...    41,919   7,333  49,252   1,297    155  1,452   3.09   2.11    2.95
RICHMOND
Feb., 1909....       28   2,035   2,063      1     171    172   3.60   8.40    8.30
Mar., 1916......    155   1,497   1,652     10     135    145   6.45   9.01    8.77
Mar., 1917...       161   1,482   1,643       1    114    115.62   7.69   7.00
Mar., 1919..        161   1,450   1,6411..          2  28.........  1.93    1.74
April,1920....      161   1,427    1,588......       9      9.......62.57
Feb., 1921......    161   1,419   1,580       1     12     13.62.85.82
Mar., 1923.....     213   1,373   1,586     14      17     31   6.57   1.24    1.95
Jan., 1924......    332   1,353   1,685     14      17     31   4.22    1.26   1.94
Jan., 1925-...      441   1,334   1,775     20      56     76   4.53   4.20    4.22
Jan., 1926...       509   1,294   1,803     68      86    154  13.36   6.64    8.54
Jan., 1927......    521   1,267   1,788     34     134    168   6.53   10.58   9.40




25

TABLE V -     (Concluded)
NUMBER OF APARTMENTS   VACANT APARTMENTS    PER CENT VACANT
DATE
New  Old                                I
aw  lw     Total  Nae    Ilw   Total  elaw   law   Total
New     Oldw         lNe     lw OllNw            Ol
SUMMARY-NEW YORK CITY
Feb., 1909...... 194,698 645,403 840,101 16,557 51,290 67,847  8.0O  7.95  8.08
Mar., 1916...... 356,244 600,372 956,616 14,375 39,166 53,541  4.03  6.52  5.60
Mar., 1917...... 381,804 591,006 972,810  6,691 28,964 35,635  1.75  4.90  3.66
Mar., 1919....  395,075 587,851 982,926  2,372 19,110 21,482.60  3.25  2.18
April, 1920..... 397,515 584,893 982,408  438  3,103  3,541.11.53.36
Feb., 1921...... 401,360 581,570 982,930  595  915  1,510.15.16.15
Mar.,1923...... 433,697 576,560 1010,457  2,332  1,366  3,698.54.24.37
Jan., 1924...... 465,837 574,613 1040,450  5,461  2,844  8,305  1.17.49.80
Jan., 1925..... 521,100 570,474 1091,574 14,016 10,343 24,359  2,69  1.81  2.23
Jan., 1926...  563,465 565,053 1128,518 16,478 22,555 39,033  2.92  3.99  3.46
Jan., 1927...... 626,767 559,695 1186,462 24,525 36,727 61,252  3.91  5.56  5.16
The standard set by the Commission of Housing and Regional
Planning in 1926 was as follows:
"The necessary margin of vacancies to insure bargaining
power to the tenant has been taken by the Commission as
5.6 per cent." 1
But the Commission oX Housing and Regional Planning added
the following caution:
"the readjustments, which would necessarily follow the sudden
expiration   of the rent laws, would       require more than       the
normal pre-war vacancies. If 5.6 per cent is necessary to
allow freedom of movement with normal turnover, it is inadequate to meet the chaotic flux which.... will result from
the sudden termination of the laws." 2
It becomes evident that these normal conditions have not yet been
reached, let alone the extra surplus required for the period of
readjustment.     The rapid     increase in   the number of vacancies
during the last year leads the Board to believe that the number
of vacancies at the end of one more year will be sufficient to protect the tenants during the critical period which will inevitably follow the termination of the law.
The Geographical Distribution of Vacancies
Further examination of Table V         brings out the fact that the
percentage of vacancies varies considerably among the five
boroughs. It is obvious that, if these vacancies are to act as a
stabilizing force in the market, there must be a relatively equal distribution throughout New York City.          Total percentage of vacan1 Legislative Document (1926) No. 40, page 24.
2 Legislative Document (1926) No. 40, page 32.




26

CHART II
COMPARISON OF VACANT AND OCCUPIED APARTMENTS:
NEW YORK CITrr, JANUARY, 1927
(Data given in Table V)
MANHATTAN

0         /00 000

34c0 00 0careOC 0 z 0

SVACANT    OccvPi a
TeN-mErIT4 r L ie




27

cies in March, 1916, and January, 1927, by boroughs, was as
follows:
March,  January,
1916    1927
Manhattan.............................       6.35      5.94
Bronx.................................      4.73       2.29
Brooklyn..............................       4.64       5.40
Queens................................       4.01       2.95
Richmond.............................        8.77       9.40
In Brooklyn and Richmond the percentage of vacancies at the
present time exceeds that of the 1916 survey, which has been taken
as normal, but in none of the other boroughs has the percentage of
vacancies reached that standard. In The Bronx and Queens, despite
the rapid new construction indicated in Chapter I, the percentage
of vacancies represents only about 3 per cent of the apartments.
These facts concerning the geographical distribution indicate
that the vacancies are not effectively distributed, and that in certain areas the percentage of vacancies is considerably below normal.
Rents Asked for Vacant Apartments
Figures giving the total number of vacancies have always been
subject to question because they disregard the quality of the apartments considered. The emergency unquestionably necessitated the
use of many old law tenements which were unfit for habitation, and
the fact that they are continued on the records must necessarily
pad the vacancy figures with obsolete and practically abandoned
tenements which have not yet been demolished. It was brought
to the attention of the Board time and time again in the public
hearings that the vacancies represented either extremely expensive apartments, or, as one tenant forcibly put it, "they are empty
because they are in such a deplorable condition they are not fit
for pigs." (Testimony, page 54.)
Fortunately for the Board, the Tenement House Department, in
making this survey and in compiling its results, gave much more
detailed information concerning rentals demanded for these vacant
apartments that ever before. It may be assumed that the rentals
asked reflect definitely the nature and the condition of the vacant
apartment. In Table VI is presented a distribution of the vacant
apartments according to rent asked by type of dwelling and
borough.
It at once becomes evident that by far the largest group of
vacancies, representing nearly one-third of the total, are old law
tenements on Manhattan, renting for less than $25 per month.
On the other hand, the vacant new law tenements appear to be
widely distributed among the rent ranges, the largest number
falling between $51 and $75 per month. The total summary indicates that some vacant apartments are available in all the rent
ranges, that for Manhattan and Brooklyn the largest number are
found in the group under $25, but that in The Bronx the vacancies
occur more often in apartments renting between $51 and $75.




28
TABLE VI
NUMBER OF VACANCIES BY BOROUGHS AND APARTMENT RENT
JANUARY, 1927
Tenemient [House Departm ent
APARTMENT RENT          an     Bronx   Brook   Queens  Rich-    Total
hattan                            mond    Total
OLD LAW
$5.00-$25.00.......... 18,420     223   5,778       61     105   24,587
S26.00-$50.00........... 5,624    990   2,989       82      29    9,714
$51.00-875.00......   866     108     236       12            1,222
$76.00-.100.00........     467       5      55............      527
Over $100.00...........     650......     27............      677
Total..............  26,027    1,326   9,085     155     134   36,727
NEW LAW
$5.00-825.00..........    2,185     101   2,023       14......  4,323
$26.00-$50.00.........    1,352   1,344   3,783      495       5    6,979
$51.00-875.00.........    1,146   3,830   2,584      502      16    8,078
$76.00-3100.00.......      695     532     881      153      12    2,273
Over $100.00...........   2,069     223     446      133       1    2,872
Total...........      7,447   6,030    9,717   1,297      34   24,525

S5.00-$25.00.........
$26.00-$50.00........
$51.00-$75.00.......
$76.00-4100.00.....
Over $100.00.........

TOTAL
20,605     324   7,801      75     105   28,910
6,976   2,334   6,772     577      34   16,693
2,012   3,938   2,820     514      16    9,300
1,162     537     936     153      12    2,800
2,719     223     473     133       1    3,549

Total..............  33,474  7,356  18,802  1,452  168  61,252
This condition, in which the greatest number of vacancies appear
in the extremely low ranges, is a development of the last two years.
The change which has taken place during this period is shown by
Table VII. In January, 1925, the number of vacant apartments
offered at $50 and under were practically equal to the number
offered at over $50. By January, 1927, the cheaper group had increased to practically three times as many apartments as the more
expensive group. There has been some slight increase in vacancies
in the more expensive apartments, but it is indeed slight when compared with the increase, from 12,278 to 45,464, of vacant apartment offered at $50 per month and less. The Board finds this to be
an extremely encouraging change, indicating as it does, that the
low income families are now successful in their effort to improve
their living conditions, and that many of the worst apartments
are being abandoned. The pressure, which before this time has
always been downward, has now been augmented by a new pressure up from the bottom. These pressures appear to focus on the




29
TABLE VII
COMPARISON OF VACANT APART\MENTS IN NEW YORK CITY BY IRENTS
1925 AND 1927
Compiled by the Tenement House Department
VACANT         Per cent of
APARTMENTS       increase
MONTHLY RENTAL
January,  January,   1927 over
1925      1927       1925
MIIANHATTAN
$50 or under................................   6,757     27,581       308.1
Over $50..................................     4,888     5,893       20.6
Total...........................     11,645    33,474      187.4

BROOKLYN
$50 or under..........................
Over $50...............................
Total..............................
BRONX
$50 or under.............................
Over $50.................................
Total..................................
QUEENS

4,551   14,573      220.2
2,653    4,229      59.4
7,204    18.802     161.0
873     2,658     204.5
4,034    4,698      16.5

4,907

7,356

49.9

I I - I

$50 or under.....................................  97    652     572.2
Over $50.....................................  430     800       86.0
Total..................................   527     1,452      175.5
NEW YORK CITY (Richmond excluded)
$50 or under...............................  12,278  45,464     270.3
Over $50..................................  12,005   15,620      30.1
Total..............................    24,283    61,084      151.6
apartments offered in the neighborhood of $50, and it is in this
group that the Board finds the emergency to be most acute.
The summary of rentals compiled by tenement house inspectors
uses, as its basis, the rent asked for each apartment.     This siummary was subdivided into apartments according to the number
of rooms.    To sum   all apartments into a single table, without
regard for the number of rooms, is a questionable practice. The
Board has, therefore, reduced these data as far as possible to a
basis of rent per room. Detailed figures have been lirlepared 'or
Manhattan and The Bronx.        For Manhattan, the data are subdivided into five areas, and deserve rather careful study. Tables
VIII and IX present the vacancies for Manhattan and The Bronx




30

TABLE VIII
VACANCIES IN OLD LAW TENEMENTS, BY RENT ASKED PER ROOM
Co mputed from Data Collected by the Tenement House
Department, Januawry 1927
MANHATTAN*
RENT PER ROOM                                                    BRONX
No. 1   No. 2  No. 3   No. 4  No. 5  Total
Under  $2.00...........     9.............     9.....
2.00-  2.99...........   212      7       1      2      2     224......
3.00- 3.99...........  1,006    221       8     74      8   1,317       6
4.00- 4.99............  2,611   653      98    233     36   3,631       9
5.00- 5.99...........  3,741  1,390     252  1,111    171   6,665     144
6.00- 6.99...........  2,110  1,553     585  1,192    245   5,685     238
7.00- 7.99...........    704    913     328    807    236   2,988     486
8.00- 8.99...........    326    570     375    467    201   1,939     227
9.00- 9.99...........    100    212     178    144    166     800      92
10.00-10.99...........     75    204    224     152    173    828       72
11.00-11.99...........     25    103     117     41    100    386       23
12.00-12.99...........    11     37    117      19     51    235       10
13.00-13.99............   10     20     53      18     37    138       12
14.00-14.99...........      5     15     28       9     40     97        2
15.00-15.99...........    21     28     79      16     37    181        3
16.00-16.99...........      5     13     38      17     21     94        2
17.00-17.99............   2     15     61      10     11     99.....
18.00-18.99............    2      8     63      17      5     95.....
19.00-19.99................     3      9       1      3     16......
20.00 and over........     64    121     336     63     16    600......
Total............. 11,039  6,086   2,950  4,393  1,559 26,027    1,326
* The areas covered are as follows:
Unit No. 1-South of East Third St. and West 14th St. in Manhattan.
Unit No. 2-4th St. to 72nd St., East of 6th Ave.; 14th St. to 40th St. West of
6th Ave.
Unit No. 3-40th to 120th St., West of Fifth and Lenox Aves.
Unit No. 4-72nd St. to 120th St., East of Fifth and Lenox Aves.
Unit No. 5-All North of 120th St.
for old law   and new law tenements according to rent per room,
and the totals are presented graphically in Charts III to VIII. An
examination of the tables and charts gives a very definite picture
of the vacancy situation.      The apartments in old law      tenements
in general command rents centering about $4 to $8 per room            per
month.    The new    law  tenement may be divided into two groups,
those whose rents center about. $5 to $9, and those which command
rents above $15. It is probable that the division of new law teneIents into these two zones corresponds, in a large measure, to
whelter the tenement was constructed before or since the war.
In area No. 1, which includes the southern tip of Manhattan
south of East 3d street and West 14th street, are found one-sixth




31

TABLE IX
VACANCIES IN NEW LAW TENEMENTS, BY RENT ASKED PER ROOM
Computed from      Data Collected by the Tenement House
Department, January, 1927
MANHATTAN*
RENT PER ROOM                                                   BRONX
No. 1   No. 2  No. 3   No. 4  No. 5  Total
Under $2.00...........
$2.00-$2.99...........     7       2........      9......
3.00-  3.99...........    50     13.....     9.....     72
4.00- 4.99............  127     16      1     118      1    263
5.00- 5.99...........    247    110      7     357     32    753        9
6.00- 6.99...........    236    157     30    402      55    880       44
7.00- 7.99...........    129    103     10     222     43    507      154
8.00- 8.99...........    133     58      5     164     49    409      218
9.00- 9.99...........     26     47      9      48     32    162      156
10.00-10.99...........    30      49     21     57     101    258     260
11.00-11.99............  5      14     13     22      68    122     213
12.00-12.99...........     10      3     29      8     129    179     230
13.00-13.99............   4       3     21      7     160    195     208
14.00-14.99...........      1      3     22      2      66     94      108
15.00-15.99...........     1      11     36     10     178    236     367
16.00-16.99...........    1       4     13      7     185    210     510
17.00-17.99............    5       8      8      7     173    201      577
18.00-18.99...........     3       9     15      7     226    260     953
19.00-19.99..................   1      4.....     92     97     381
20.00- and over.......    99    163  1,067    474     739  2,540    1,642
Total..............  1,114  774  1,311   1,920  2,328  7,447    6,030
* The areas covered are as follows:
Unit No. I-South of East Third St., and West 14th St. in Manhattan.
Unit No. 2-4th St. to 72nd St., East of 6th Ave.; 14th St. to 40th St., West of
6th Ave.
Unit No. 3-40th to 120th St., West of Fifth and Lenox Aves.
Unit No. 4-72nd St. to 120th St., East of Fifth and Lenox Aves.
Unit No. 5-All north of 120th St.
of the vacant apartments in New York City. Of these, 90 per cent
are in old law    tenements with rentals from      $3 to $7.    The few
new law tenements in this area are offered at rentals slightly higher
-  from  $5 to $9 per room. There are very few vacant apartments
offered at rents above $10 per room per month.
In area No. 2, covering the East Side -    from 4th to 72d streetsand the West Side - from 14th to 40th streets - vacancies in old
law tenements also predominated at rentals chiefly from $5 to $8.
The new law tenements apparently command no higher rent than
old law tenements in this district.
In area No. 3, the West Side from 40th to 120th streets, the bulk




32

CHART III
OLD LAW VACANCIES IN MANHATTAN
Tenement House Department Survey - January, 1927
NumeeR                                          umVehg
of                                              or
VACArCS                                         VACAMfCIE
(a o,
4,oo
S 3  /  4  6   17  1  to  I  2  /J  /#  / / 16  7 I7 /1  IY  w
Mow"Ly -RC7 MT PR com
CHART IV
OLD LAW VACAN'DIES IN THE BRONX
Ternement House Departm)ent Survey - January, 1927
NUMB ER                                       N Nr t 5C
oF                                            OF
VACAriCAES                                    V^C A i C N CS
00oo                                           600,400                                            qo
12                    -- -#00

M9rlTL.Y RrrT PFr Rown




33

CHART V
NEW LAW VACANCIES IN \MANHATTAN
Tenement House Department Survey - January, 1927
NUM1EA                                          NUMBER
op oo
1000o                                            I 000
toon I,oco
l t  3  '  5  6  7  /  1 o l i  13 /4 5 Is  16  7  11 /9  o
fvoMonT L --RT Pert -Týor
CHART VI
NEW LAW VACANCIES IN THE BRONX
Tenement House Department Survey - January, 1927
Nu-aEl                                      tN uv  M ER
OM'F o-K
VACA N C I ES                                 VA CAMCI
1,000                                      -   oo0
2oo
8oo                                        - -oo
600

MorlTMLY FW-MT PprR Room




34

CHART VII
TOTAL VACANCIES IN MANHATTAN
Tencmn~cntl House Department' Swrvey - January, 1927

Numer-f
or
VACArICIE5

NVMSeR
OF
VACANC-le5

000                                                             700

4:ooo
Mooo------
Aoo0
77

X1000
*;000.SIoo0
0000
Xooo
oloo" 'A IJT,

M3 15   r L Y 9'RE NTI   I7
MOITHIX Rrrir PSR  Ro

4-4

of" hlhe vacant apartments are in old law tenements between $5 and
$12 per room per month. The vacancies in new law tenements are
chiefly in rentals of $20 per room per month and over.
In area No. 4, the East Side from   72d to 120th streets, the
Vacancies in old law tenements are offered at from $5 to $8 per
room per month, anrd the new law tenements are in much the same
rent zone. In this district there are extremely few vacant apartients offered at more than $11 per room per month.
In area No. 5, which includes all Manhattan north of 1.20th
street, the rents in old law tenements range widely from $5 to $12
per room per month, while the new law tenements are chiefly above
$12.per room per month.
Summarizinog the data for all M)anhattan (see Charts III, V and
I'll) it is evident that the vcaucies are chiefly in old law tenements
reniting i t lass than $9 per room per month. Some vacancies in new
law- teneents are fouind ini thliese lower price ranges hut more than
on01W-th-ird of thie vaeaiieies in new law a partments (see Table X)
o)eUr amiojing alaartmnents offered at $20 per rooni per month and
iii o ile.




35

CHART VIII
TOTAL VACANCIES IN THE BRONX
Tenement House Department Survey - January, 1927

NuMsel
OIc
VA,^ OA ic$s

VMrA~f.R
VAcA5I c.,s

OO1,000                                                                   I,o0

MOMTcHL.Y RENT PER Root
In the Bronx the vacancies in old law tenements constitute only
about one-fifth of the total. They are found chiefly in rents ranging
from $5 to $9. Vacancies in new law tenements are chiefly in the
ranges above $15 per room per month.
A proper distribution of vacancies would be one corresponding
to the distribution of incomes. Concerning this, we know that the
higher the income group, the fewer its members. The present distribution of vacancies by no means corresponds to this law. There
are two peaks instead of one, the first in old law tenements, at some
point under $8; and the second in the post-war new law tenements,
at some point above $15. The result is a marked shortage of vacant
tenements between these two peaks.
Block Survey
The State Board of Housing felt that it was desirable to continue
the practice, established by the Bureau of Housing and Regional
Planning, of investigating in detail housing conditions of eight
New York City blocks. This investigation was conducted in January, 1927, by paid investigators. As far as possible these investigators were selected from individuals especially qualified through
social work in the immediate vicinity of the blocks to be studied.




36

In certain cases the survey was made by the same workers as in
previous years. All editing, tabulation and analysis of the returns
was done by the Board.
The choice of the blocks was determined by earlier surveys. In
1919, the Governor's Reconstruction Commission surveyed 26 blocks.
In 1923, the Commission of Housing and Regional Planning was
forced, by lack of funds, to limit its investigation to eight blocks.
TABLE X
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF VACANT APARTMENTS IN \MANHATTAN
AND THE BRONx ACCORDING TO MONTHLY RooM             RENT
BASED ON TABLES VIII AND IX
1MANHATTAN               BRONX
Old    New             Old    New
law     law    Total   law     law    Total
Under $2.00...............03.......03
$2.00-$2.99.............86.12.70
3.00-  3.99.............  5.06.97   4.15.45.......08
4.00-  4.99.............  13.95  3.53  11.63.68.......12
5.00- 5.99.............. 25.61  10.11  22.16   10.86.15    2.08
6.00- 6.99............. 21.84  11.82  19.61   17.95.73    3.83
7.00- 7.99............. 11.48  6.81   10.44   36.65   2.55     8.70
8.00- 8.99..............  7.45  5.49    7.01   17.12   3.62     6.05
9.00- 9.99.............  3.07   2.18    2.87    6.94   2.59     3.37
10.00-10.99.............  3.18   3.46    3.24    5.43   4.31     4.51
11.00-11.99.............  1.48  1.64    1.52    1.73   3.53     3.19
12.00-12.99..............90   2.40    1.24.75   3.81     3.26
13.00-13.99..............53   2.62.99.90   3.45     2.99
14.00-14.99..............37   1.26.57.15   1.79     1.50
15.00-15.99..............70   3.17    1.25.22   6.09     5.03
16.00-16.99...............36   2.82.91.15   8.46     6.96
17.00-17.99...............38   2.70.90......   9.57     7.84
18.00-18.99..............37   3.49    1.06......  15.80    12.96
19.00-19.99...-.........06    1.30.34......   6.32     5.18
20.00 and over............  2.31  34.10  9.38......   27.23   22.32
Total............... 100.00  100.00  100.00  100.00  100.00  100.00
In 1925, seven of these eight blocks were retained, and one of the
other Brooklyn blocks surveyed in 1919 was substituted for the
eighth block surveyed in 1923, on account of structural changes
in the latter block. These same eight blocks were surveyed by the
State Housing Board in January, 1927. That these blocks afford a
representative sample has been tested in certain few cases where
more elaborate surveys have been made.        In these respects, the
behavior of the eight blocks has corresponded closely to that of




37

the larger sample. The Board believes that these blocks are typical of large areas of the city, and that the composite is an adequate
picture of what is happening in apartments occupied by persons
within the lower income classes. A brief description of each block
follows:
Block 1 is bounded by Cherry, Pike, Monroe and Rutgers streets.
It is divided by Pelham street. The houses are almost entirely of
old law types. They are in a poor state of repair. The rents are
low. The block is a somewhat extreme example of the lower East
Side.  Conditions are possible just a little worse here than in
neighboring blocks.
Block 2 is bounded by 28th and 29th streets and 9th and 10th
avenues. It is in the Chelsea district. One side faces Chelsea Park.
The houses are, for the most part, old law types. So far as can be
observed, the block is like any other of a dozen blocks in the
vicinity. The decision of the Federal Government to, enlarge the
post office by constructing a supplementary building in a block
immediately to the north has influenced the behavior of real estate
in this section during the last year.
Block 3 isi bounded by 48th and 49th streets and 9th and 10th
avenues in the section commonly known as Hell's Kitchen. The
block is so much like others in the neighborhood that an outsider
sees nothing more distinctive than the street numbers. There are
no new law houses in the block. There are three rear tenements.
Block 4 is bounded by 66th and 67th streets and 2d and 3d
avenues. All of the tenements are new law six-story brick structures. As contrasted with conditions in other blocks, it should be
noted that many of the apartments have private baths. This block
is fairly typical of the better conditions that are afforded by commercial enterprise. It is within an area which has been subject to
a rapid real estate boom during the last year.
Block 5 is bounded by 61st and 62d streets and 1st and 2nd
avenues. There are no new law houses in the block. Many of the
houses are of the oldest type found in the city, with no side court,
though not as undesirable as those in Block 1. As a single block,
it is undoubtedly below the general standard of the city, but it is
typical of many other blocks in the upper East Side.
Block 6 is bounded by 103d and 104th streets and 2d and 3d
avenues. It lies on the boundary between the Italian and Jewish
areas and contains many Porto Rican families. The housing is,
much of it, of a poor quality. The block, however, is only one of
many other identical blocks in the section.
Block 7 is bounded by 133d and 134th streets and Lenox and
5th avenues. The block is not typical of other districts, but it is
fairly representative of the poorer conditions under which the
negroes of Harlem live. It was one of the first blocks occupied
exclusively by colored people.
Block 8 bounded by Franklin avenue, Java street, Manhattan
avenue and India street, is in the Greenpoint section of Brooklyn.
On Franklin street there is a large tenement. Most of the other




houses are converted three-story brick dwellings. This block is
not typical of all of Brooklyn.
Although the Block Survey was made chiefly for the purpose of
determining the movement of rents, congestion and turnover, it
also may be used to confirm the record of increasing vacancies. In
October, 1923, these blocks recorded but 36 vacant apartments. In
September, 1925, the figure had been increased to 229, and by
January, 1927, 364. In two of the blocks there were slight decreases in the number of vacancies. Block No. 4 is in a locality
which has been subject to a definite real estate boom. Despite the
fact that rents have gone up more rapidly in this block than in
most of the others studied, the number of vacancies has declined.
Block No. 8, in Brooklyn, can no longer be considered as representative of Brooklyn as a whole, and although its vacancies have
considerably decreased during the last year, nevertheless the percentage of all apartments which they represent is 6.56. Detailed
figures are given in Table XI.
TABLE XI

NUMBER OF VACANCIES IN EIGHT SELECTED BLOCKS
CITY, 1909-1927

IN NEW YORK

Per cent
Jan.,   Sept.,   Oct.,   April,  Feb., of vacanBLOCK NUMBER          1927    1925    1923    1919     1909    cies,
1927
1. Cherry-Monroe streets,
Pike-Rutgers streets..  155     111       13      70      34     28.4
2. 28th-29th streets, 9th10th avenues........     66      19       4        9      18     15.9
3. 48th-49th streets, 9th10th avenues........     18      18    None        8      17      2.7
4. 66th-67th streets, 2nd3rd avenues.........     14      25    None        3      43      1.8
5. 61st-62nd  streets, 1st2nd avenues.........     28      18       18      12      40      5.7
6. 103rd-104th streets, 2nd3rd avenues.........    62      27        1      18     109      10.1
7. 133rd-134th streets,
Lenox-5th avenues...     21      11    None        3      45      3.2
8. Franklin-Java streets,
India-Manhattan sts.
(Brooklyn)..........     16      29......       1      17      6.6
Total, blocks 1-7, incl.  364    229      36      123     306      8.8
Other Surveys
The State Board of Housing has also received several excellent
surveys of vacancies from        interested  parties, particularly    the
Greater New York Taxpayers' Association and the Bronx Tax



39

payers' Association. These surveys have been carefully checked
against the Tenement House Department's figures. There seems
to be no significant difference between the results obtained by these
associations and the Tenement House Department, and, consequently, the State Board of Housing does not feel that it is necessary to publish in detail any data other than the official records
of the Tenement House Department and its own survey.
Su.mmary
There has been a large increase in the number of vacancies, particularly in the cheaper apartments. The number of vacancies,
however, has not yet reached normal. Furthermore, these vacancies are not so    distributed  geographically  as  to  be   most
effective. A study of the rents asked for the vacant apartments
indicates that the old law vacancies are chiefly in the range under
$9, and in new law apartments at rents above $15, but that between
these two there is a shortage. On the basis of these data the Board
believes that the removal of protection for apartments renting at
more than $15 per room per month is now justified. However,
protection is still needed, especially in the range immediately
below that level, in apartments renting from $9 to. $15 per room
per month, inclusive. On the apartments in this range great
pressure is now exerted both from above, where average rents are
still increasing, and from below, because of the progressive abandonment of the worst old law houses. This present maladjustment
will disappear as distribution with relation to rents tends to become more uniform. For the present its greatest significance lies
in the fact that it is the range immediately below the level at
which the building industry ceases to function. It confirms the
previous findings of the Board that the greatest housing need is
for sanitary dwellings of modern construction, offering the facilities for decent family life at rents within the means of the majority
of families. These rents lie between $9 and $15 per room per
month. It is in this range that housing operations under the State
Housing Law will serve most effectively.




40

CHAPTER III
TURNOVER IN EIGHT BLOCKS IN NEW YORK CITY
From its detailed block survey the State Board of Housing has
been able to derive certain facts concerning tenant turnover. By
comparing these data with the records of previous years, it is possible to determine the extent to which tenants are moving, and the
number of persons whose protection is significant. Since tenants
can avail themselves of the utmost protection of the rent laws only
by remaining in the same apartment, such information concerning
the movement of tenants is extremely significant.
The figures for the number of families who have lived within
each block for a period of less than one year indicate a gradual
increase in moving since 1923, the year of the first survey after
the rent laws went into effect. Table XII presents the percentage
of families which have come into each block during the year
immediately prior to each survey.
TABLE XII
PERCENTAGE OF FAMILIES IN EIGHT BLOCKS WHO HAVE OCCUPIED
THEIR APARTMENTS FOR LESS THAN ONE YEAR
Survey by the State Board of Housing
January, September, October,  April,
BLOCK NUMBER             1927     1925      1923     1919
1................................  19.4  22.1     12.7      23.2
2................................  17.9      24.4     17.0      21.9
3...............................  20.2     16.4      9.9      16.7
4...............................  20.7    19.4     13.5      22.5
5...............................  14.6     17.1     13.3      23.9
6................................  27.8      21.2     13.3      28.5
7................................  20.5    13.1      6.1      30.6
8............................... 28.9    12.5........     16.0
This table indicates that the movement is less than that of a
year ago in three blocks and more in five blocks. It is evident that
the rate of moving has become relatively stabilized, the slight
increase this year over last year being due, presumably, to the fact
that each year the number of "old" tenants whose protection is
significant is decreasing. In connection with this matter it is worthy
of note that the records of the Consolidated Gas Company, the New
York Telephone Company and the Van Owners' Association, for
whose cooperation the State Board of Housing wishes to express its
appreciation, all indicate that the fall moving season of 1926 exceeded that of the previous year by at least 10 per cent.




41

In the second place, it is extremely important to note the percentage of families whose protection under the rent laws is significant. The most rapid increase in rents came late in 1919 and
1920. The rent laws were put into effect in 1920 and 1921. Consequently, it can be roughly assumed that the tenants who have
occupied their apartment since 1919 and earlier are the group
whose protection is largest and most vital. Table XIII indicates
the numerical importance of this group. In order to make possible a comparison between the earlier surveys and that of January,
1927, the average was computed for the first seven blocks as well
as for all eight.
TABLE XIII
PERCENTAGE OF FAMILIES ENTERING PRESENT APARTMENTS IN 1919
OR EARLIER
Survey by the State Board of Housing
January, September, October,
BLOCK NUMBER                    1927      1925      1923
1...........................................  37.6    50.2      63.2
2...........................................  45.7     47.6       61.4
3...........................................  48.8   61.3      72.2
4..........................................  46.8      52.8       63.6
5...........................................  44.3    46.4       60.4
6..........................................  41.5      55.2       68.1
7..........................................  48.0     55.8       77.2
Average  (blocks 1-7).....................  44.7    52.8       66.6
B lock  8....................................  21.1....
Average (blocks 1-8)....................  41.7
It is obvious that, of the total number of families, the percentage
which entered their apartments in 1919 and earlier will decrease
as time passes. During the period from        October, 1923, to September, 1925, this decrease, excluding Block 8, was from          66.6
per cent to 52.8 per cent of the total families. By January, 1927,
the percentage had been reduced to 44.7 per cent.        Because the
periods between the three surveys are not uniform, one being 24
months and the other 16 months in length, the rate at which these
protected tenants are leaving their apartments has been computed
on an annual basis. The rate of departure from this group, for
the period between October, 1923, and September, 1925, is 10.3
per cent of the total number in the group per year. The rate from
September, 1925, to January 1927, is 11.5 per cent per. year, In
other words, these pre-emergency tenants are not prizing their protection quite so highly as they did two years ago, as evidenced by the
fact that they are leaving this protection at a somewhat more




42

rapid rate. Furthermore, this increase occurs in the face of the
fact that after a tenure of six years in one apartment, a resistance
to moving, based on inertia and habit, is created which should
naturally tend to reduce the rate of departure.
The fact that 41.7 per cent of the tenants on the eight blocks
have remained in their apartments for seven years or more cannot
be attributed entirely to the rent laws. In 1919, before the emergency legislation went into effect, about 20 per cent of the tenants
on these blocks were individuals who had kept their apartments
for seven years or more. If 20 per cent can be taken as representative of the percentage of tenants, of the type on the blocks surveyed, who prefer by nature to remain in the same apartment for
many years, it is evident that about 22 per cent of all the tenants
have continued tenure in the same apartment because of the protection of the rent laws.
Summarizing the facts given in this section, it may be said that
although there is considerable freedom in moving among the
families who have occupied their apartments for short periods of
time and who are, therefore, not subject to any considerable protection from the rent laws, nevertheless there is an extremely stable
group, approximately 41 per cent of the total, who have held their
apartments since before the Emergency Rent Laws went into effect.




48

CHAPTER IV
OVERCROWDING AND CONGESTION IN NEW YORK CITY
Overcrowding
One important evidence of the housing emergency was the
marked increase in overcrowding necessitated by the shortage of
available apartments and the inability of single families to meet
the rapidly rising rents. The Governor's Reconstruction Commission in 1920 established a measure of overcrowding that has
since been used by the Commission of Housing and Regional
Planning, and which has been adopted by the State Board of Housing. The standard permits one room to serve for kitchen, dining
room and living room, and not more than two people to each remaining room. This standard allows two persons to live in a
2-room apartment, four persons in a 3-room apartment, six persons
in a 4-room   apartment, and eight persons in five rooms.      The
standard is certainly not too generous. Furthermore, as pointed
out by the Reconstruction Commission, no perfect standard can be
set up that considers only the number of persons and rooms and
that neglects the age, sex and relationship of the people.
Table XIV gives the record of overcrowding since 1919 in eight
blocks surveyed by the State Board of Housing.
TABLE XIV
PERCENTAGE OF APARTMENTS OVERCROWDED IN EIGHT BLOCKS
1919-1927
Survey by the State Board of Housing
January, September, October,  April,
BLOCK NUMBER            1927     1925     1923      1919
1...............................  16.4   20.8      30.7      35.8
2................................  9.6      9.3       8.3      10.8
3................................  3.1      2.8       3.6       3.4
4...............................  4.4    5.2       8.1       5.3
5................................  12.8  15.2     17.7      18.1
6...................................  12.7  15.6     19.4      19.4
7................................   5.0    3.7      4.5       3.9
8................................  N one.............
On the basis of these figures it is evident that the last year has
seen a marked improvement in the blocks in which overcrowding
has been most severe. The cases of overcrowding are less numerout today than at any time since these surveys were first undertaken in 1919. Certain of the blocks which the Board surveyed
were never subject to any considerable degree of overcrowding,




'44

and the change in these blocks is not significant. The reduction
has been most marked in Block No. 1, representing the Lower
East Side, and in Blocks 5 and 6 in the Middle East Side. These
are the areas in which vacancies are most numerous. It is significant to note that in Block No. 1, the block in which overcrowding
is highest, the percentage of vacancies is also highest, and rents
are lowest. These conditions would indicate that in this case, at
least, the overcrowding is not due either to shortage of apartments
or to extraordinary rents. No instance of overcrowding was found
in the Brooklyn block, but, unfortunately, the present survey cannot be compared with that of the previous year for this one block,
because of discrepancies in the records of last year's survey with
regard to the number of rooms in certain tenement houses in the
block. The only important increase in overcrowding was found
in Block No. 7 in the colored district of Harlem. This expresses
the well known fact that the pressure on the colored tenant has
been growing continually more severe and the recourse to augmenting income by doubling up or taking lodgers has become more
general.
Average Number of Persons Per Roon
The standard of overcrowding is a measure of the number of
extreme cases found in the community. The data given in Table
XIV indicated that 90 per cent of the families in New York City
do not live under conditions of overcrowding but fall within the
standards set by the Reconstruction Commission. Families of eight
persons, for example, are relatively not numerous, and yet, by the
definition, only more than eight persons are capable of overcrowding a 5-room apartment. Families of three or four persons are far
more typical. More than 52 per cent of the cases of overcrowding
recorded in Table XIV are found in 3-room apartments, although
the survey showed that 3-room apartments represent only 34 per
cent of the total number of apartments surveyed. It is, therefore,
important to make use of a measure which will represent the
density of the mass of the tenants. For this purpose the Board has
made. use of the records of the average number of persons per
apartment in the eight blocks which it surveyed. The results are
summarized in Table XV.




45

TABLE XV
AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERSONS PER APARTMENT IN EIGHT BLOOKS
1923-1927
Survey by the State Board of Housing
THREE ROOM         FOUR ROOM          FIVE ROOM
APARTMENTS         APARTMENTS         APARTMENTS
BLOCK NUMBER
Jan.,  Sept.,  Oct.,  Jan.,  Sept.,  Oct.,  Jan.,  Sept.,  Oct.,
1927  1925  1923   1927  1925  1923  1927   1925  1923
1.................  3.08  2.70  4.00  4.61  4.46  4.78
2...............  2.83  3.27  2.74  3.63  3.73  3.63  4.71  3.75  4.40
3.................  2.42  2.59  2.38  3.51  3.40  2.60  3.73  4.73  3.38
4.................  2.61  2.43  2.40  3.29  3.15  3.32  4.06.....  4.67
5................  3.08  2.86  2.74  4.27  3.00  3.92  5.00........
6.................  3.17  3.00  3.29  4.32  3.94  4.16  5.28  4.69  4.80
7.................  2.81  2.71  3.00  3.46  3.33  3.00  4.00  4.11  4.00
8.................  2.46..........  3.48...........  3.51......
Average,Fblocks 1-7 2.86  2.85  2.80  3.82  3.68  3.75  *4.12  *4.43  *4.10
* Average of four blocks.
The general averages of these results show that there has been
practically no change in     congestion in   3-room   apartments, increased congestion in 4-room apartments and decreased congestion
in 5-room  apartments. When specific blocks are examined it will
be seen that for the eighteen variations of blocks and apartment
sizes included in the table, in thirteen cases there was an increase in
the average number of persons per apartment and in only five
a decrease. The tendency, although not completely dominant, is,
therefore, toward increased congestion.
In its report of December 23, 1925, the Commission of Housing
and Regional Planning was able to establish the principle that the
changes in congestion reflected directly changes in market rents.
This condition no longer holds, for the increases in congestion during the last year have, to a large extent, been coincident with
decreases in market rents.
The decrease in overcrowding noted in the previous section is
probably a development which can trace its origin definitely to
extraordinary cases, caused by the emergency of 1920-1921. The
present irregular tendency towards an increasing average number
of persons per apartment does not seem to be related to the emergency but is rather a function of the desire for better apartments
on the part of the poorest class of tenants, which is now finding
definite expression.
Permanent Problem
The State Board of Housing has been impressed by the amount
of overcrowding and congestion which appears to be a part of the
permanent living conditions of New York City. The temporary
congestion due to the emergency of 1920-1921 has unquestionably
passed, but there still remains a condition which is extremely




46

dangerous from the physical and the moral point of view. Many
individual cases were called to the attention of the Board in its
public hearings.
Dr. Louis I. Harris, Commissioner of Health for New York City,
presented to the Board the results of surveys of two sections
within the city made by nurses of the Department of Health in
September and October, 1926. His testimony, in part, follows:
"We made a study of occupancy of bedrooms, which is very
important, because if bedrooms be overcrowded, communicable
diseases are bound to spread in normal times. Should an
epidemic occur, we would have a situation that might be disastrous. It is wise in talking of housing not to think of normal
times, but that there may be an emergency situation; they
must have a margin of reserve. We found that there were
1,059 bedrooms in which two children slept, exclusive of adults
that used the same bedroom. I am thinking only in terms
of children, who are the inflammable material, susceptible to
disease, aside from adults who share these rooms. There were,
in addition, two children sleeping in one bedroom in 1,059
out of a total of 2,342 bedrooms. There were 67 bedrooms in
which, aside from adult occupancy, a single child was housed
for sleeping purposes. There were 458 bedrooms where there
were three children in addition to adults in one bedroom.
There were 157 bedrooms where four children were housed in
addition to adults; 17 bedrooms where five children were
housed in addition to adults; five bedrooms where six children
were housed; one bedroom housing seven children, one bedroom housing eight.
"............ These conditions in housing are directly related to two types of diseases, diseases due to lowered resistance on the one hand-tuberculosis and other diseases,-and the
diseases that are the result of too intimate contact through
the transmission of infection.............." (Testimony,
pages 113 and 114).
The State Board of Housing cannot help but feel that the solution for the problem of congestion can lie only in the provision of
new and improved housing at rents which families can pay without recourse to doubling up or taking boarders.




47

CHAPTER V
RE1NTS IN NEW YORK CITY
The General Level of Rents
The general advance in the level of prices which began in 1914,
reached its peak in 1920, and then settled at a. level considerably
above pre-war prices, was by no means uniform among individual
prices within the whole. Furthermore, prices for various commodities and services have not returned to their pre-war relationship.
The most authoritative source for this change in the cost of living
and its constituent parts is the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Table XVI gives the results of its investigation of the cost of
living in New York City in December, 1926.
TABLE XVI
INCREASE IN COST OF LIVING IN NEW YORK CITY FROM DECEMBER,
1914, To DECEMBER, 1926, BY GROUPS OF ITEMS
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Per cent
F ood............................................................  59.1
HO  USI NG.....................................................  70.2
Clothing......................................................  93,.7
Fuel and light.....................................................  96.1
House  furnishing  goods............................................ 106.0
Miscellaneous.....................................................  117.5
All items....................................................  80.0
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the cost of living
has risen 80 per cent since December, 1914. It notes that this increase has been by no means uniform - that the cost of food has
risen 60 per cent, of housing, 70 per cent, and all other items by
more than 90 per cent. The figure for housing is an average for
the cost of housing to working men, and includes tenants with all
degrees of protection under the rent laws.
The process through which the cost of housing has reached this
figure of 70.2 per cent above the pre-war level is presented in
Table XVII and Chart VII.




48
TABLE XTII
MOVEMENT OF RENTS IN          NEW   YORK    CITY
1914-1926
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
DECEMBER, 1914 =      100.00
Index
Date                                                             number
1914, December.................................................     100.0
1915, D ecem ber...................................................    99.9
1916, December....................................................   99.9
1917, December.......................................................  102.6
1918, December........................................................106.5
1919, June..........................................................  113.4
1919, December.....................................................  123.4
1920, June.....................................................       132.4
1920, Decem ber...................................................   138.1
1921, May.....................................................     142.2
1921, December....................................................... 153.7
1922, June.......................................................  155.7
1922, December.................................................       156.7
1923, June........................................................    159.4
1923,  Decem ber...................................................  162.4
1924, June........................................................    164.5
1924, December........................................................167.1
1925, June.....................................................     167.8
1925, December.................................................      169.5
1926, June...................................................  169.5
1926, December.................................................       170.2
Rents showed very little increase until the war was over but
then rose rapidly until December, 1921. From December, 1921,
until the present the increase has been slow and steady. During
the last year it has been a little less than one-half of 1 per cent.
Further evidence concerning the movement of average rents can
be obtained from    the Block Survey made in January, 1927, by the
State Board of Housing, covering eight blocks. It is obvious that
the general average gives undue importance to the larger apartments in the block, and can be used only on the assumption that
no considerable changes have taken place in the make-up of the
block. In a wordcl, these figures represent the average paid by all
the tenants on the block at the date of each of the five surveys.
The figures are given in Table XVIII.




49

CHART IX
LEVEL OF RENTS IN NEW YORK CITY
1914-1926
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
(Data in Table XVII)
CHARQT XX.
P.ELATIVE RENTS IN NEW YORKP CITY:1914-1925.
U. S.BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS.
WInt             DEC. 1914=100
tteumbe                                   i
ibo.o  - -      --
140.0 -  -      -
120.0 -  -      ---  -
100.0
80.0
MONTH ImOICAT-D IS DeCFeEs-p
Although in 1923 two of the blocks reported a slight decrease in
the average rent, no such phenomenon is evident during the last
year. In all eight of the blocks average rents have arisen. There are
at least two explanations for this rise. In the first place, on every
block there has been a decrease in the number of tenants of long
tenure. Such tenants are usually paying rents kept considerably
below the market level by the emergency rent laws. When their
apartments are vacated, the landlord is able to bring the rent up
to the market level, thus increasing the average rents on the block.
A second factor which must be noticed is that the vacancies which
appear are usually among the poorer grade of apartments on the
block. The Board found that, on the blocks which it surveyed, the
asking price for vacant apartments averaged slightly below the
market rent.




50

TABLE XVIII
AVERAGE RENTS FOR ALL OCCUPIED APARTMENTS IN EIGHT BLOCKS
1909-1927
Survey by State Board of Housing
January, September, October,  April,  February,
BLOCK NUMBER        1927      1925      1923     1919      1909
1......................  $18.81  $18.69   $19.06    $13.63    $13.87
2.....................  24.62    24.47-   22.81     15.70     15.01
3.....................  26.41     25.64    24.24     17.12     16.61
4....................  32.75     31.13    28.63     19.35     16.40
5................   21.13     20.31    18.93     12.66     12.38
6..............       24.75     23.89    21.41     15.09     12.80
7......................  34.28    31.64    37.70     21.97     20.51
8......................  30.43     27.79........    16.25     14.96
In order to obtain a picture of average rent increases in New
York City, as based upon the block survey, Table XIX        was prepared. In this table, the rent for each block is computed as a relative with 1909 as a base, and the results are averaged.
The similarity between the level of these rents (169.9) and the
index published by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (170.2)
is remarkable, considering the fact that the base year for the
Board's average is 1909 and that for the other is 1914. This closeness would tend to indicate that the blocks covered by the Block
Survey are a fairly good sample of the city as a whole. It should,
however, be noted that the increase in average rents during the
sixteen months -from      September, 1925, to January, 1927-as
recorded by the Index of the State Board of Housing is 3.5
per cent.

TABLE XIX
RELATIVE RENTS IN EIGHT CITY

BLOCKS 1909-1927

1909 - 100
January, September, October,   April,   February,
BLOCK NUMBER         1927      1925      1923      1919      1909
1......................  135.6     134.8     137.4      98.3      100.0
2....................    164.0     163.0     152.0     104.6      100.0
3.....................    159.0     154.4     145.9     103.1      100.0
4....................  199.7    189.8     174.6     118.0      100.0
5...................   170.7     164.1     152.9     102.3      100.0
6.....................   193.4     186.6     167.3     117.9      100.0
7....................  167.1      154.3     183.8    107.1      100.0
S...................  203.4      185.8........    108.6      100.0
Average (blocks 1-7).  169.9     163.9     159.1     107.3      100.0




51

Level of Rents in New York City as Comrpared with Other Cities
The U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics does not limit its collection
of data concerning the cost of living to New York City, but covers
nearly all the larger cities in the country. Table XX makes it
possible to compare the level of rents in New York City with that
in other cities within the country. New York City ranks seventh
on the list of nineteen cities, being about 10 per cent above the
average for the United States as a whole.
If one is interested in the effect of the rent laws upon the increase
of rents, the tabulation of cities according to the increase since
December, 1920, is, perhaps, more significant. Despite the rent
laws, it is evident that rents in New York City have increased more
rapidly during this period than in most of the other cities of the
country. Only Chicago, Philadelphia and Jacksonville have seen
more extensive increases in rent.
TABLE XX
AVERAGE RENT INCREASES IN NINETEEN CITIES
1914-1926 AND 1920-1926
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Per cent                             Per cent
Rank         CITY          Increase  Rank         CITY         Increase
Dec., 1914-                          Dec., 1920 -Dec., 1926                          Dec., 1926
1  Chicago............     96.7      1  Chicago............    32.1
2  Detroit.............   95.5      2  Philadelphia.......    28.5
3  BUFFALO.........        77.4      3  Jacksonville........    26.7
4  Philadelphia........    77.3      4  NEW YORK CITY.          23.2
5  Cleveland...........    71.8      5  Boston.............      22.0
6  Baltimore...........   70.6      6  San Francisco......    21.3
7  NEW YORK CITY.          70.2      7  BUFFALO........          19.5
8  Jacksonville..........  69.9     8  Baltimore..........    14.1
9  Los Angeles.........    61.7      9  Washington.........      10.2
10  Seattle.............    60.3     10  Portland, Me......  3.2
11  Boston.............     53.5     11  Houston............   --1.9
12  Norfolk.............    49.2     12  Portland, Ore.....    -2.5
13  Mobile.............    40.5     13  Cleveland.......... -4.6
14  San Francisco.......    39.5     14  Los Angeles..........  -5.7
15  Savannah...........     38.1     15  Detroit.............   - 6.1
16  Washington.........     37.4     16  Mobile.............   -8.5
17  Portland, Ore........ 33.5     17  Seattle.............   -9.3
18  Houston............     32.6     18  Savannah..........    -  12.9
19  Portland, Me........    23.8     19  Norfolk............    -21.8
Average for U. S. (32                Average for U. S. (32
cities)............  64.2           cities)............   25.6
It must be remenmber-ed that this record primarily shows that
landlords, as a group, have been able to obtain greater increases in
rents in New York City than in other cities. The average, however,




52

disregards the individual case. There are always landlords who
have increased the gross yield of their properties more than the
average, and others who have increased it less. In general, however, it is assumed that there is a fairly regular distribution concentrating in the neighborhood of the average.        It is   probable
that, due to the rent laws, the average increase is a less typical
measure of conditions in New York City than in other cities. There
have been many cases where rents could be increased but little because of the protection, and, on the other hand, landlords have
doubtless attempted to make up for this handicap by a marked
increase in rents asked from new tenants. The general average for
New York City in contrast with other cities is a more or less accidental point between the extremes of market rent and that paid by
the most protected tenants.
In Table XXI, thirty-two cities have been arranged according
to the date when rents reached their maximum. In twenty-seven
cases rents have already reached their maximum          and are now
declining. Some cities reached this condition as early as December,
1920.   However, in five cities -    Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Philadelphia, Scranton and New York -       rents are still rising. For the
country as a whole, rents reached their peak in December, 1924.
TABLE XXI
THIRTY-TWO CITIES ARRANGED ACCORDING TO THE DATE WHEN
RENTS WERE HIGHEST
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
December, 1920.... Detroit          March, 1924..... Cleveland
Mobile                               Indianapolis
Seattle                              Los Angeles
Portland, Me.
May, 1921........ Atlanta
Memphis            June, 1924......... Baltimore
Norfolk
Savannah           December, 1924....Chicago
December, 1921.... Birmingham       June, 1925......... Richmond
Houston                              San Francisco
Kansas City
December, 1925... Boston
September, 1922.... New Orleans                        BUFFALO
Portland, Ore.                       St. Louis
Washington
December, 1923... Denver
Minneapolis        June, 1926......... Pittsburgh
Still rising.. Cincinnati
Jacksonville
NEW   YORK CITY
Philadelphia
Scranton
Market Rents
The figure for average rents, which has been the subject of discussion in the previous pages, is valuable for certain specific uses.




53
However, in New York City at the present time, it does not
represent the rent paid by individuals moving into apartments.
As has already been pointed out, the average rent is an average of
rents paid by tenants having various degrees of protection under
the rent laws. In a later section, will be discussed these differences
which have developed among the tenants according to length of
tenure. In this section, an attempt is made to express the change
in market rents which has taken place since the rent laws went
into effect.
TABLE XXII
MARKET RENTS IN SEVEN BLOCKS BY SIZE OF APARTMENTS
1922-1926
Survey by the State Board of Housing

MARKET RENTS

BLOCK NUMBER

1......................  $13.69
2......................    21.37
3......................   24.77
4......................    31.35
5......................    20.74
6......................   21.41
7......................  34.09

1..................
2.....................
3......................
4....................
5...................
6...................
7.....................
1...................
2......................
3.....................
4......................
5.....................
6....................
7..................

21.37
27.56
30.76
42.04
26.85
28.07
39.67
*
35.00
37.00
58.33
*
32.85
43.72

THREE ROOM APARTMENTS
$15.63   $17.19    $18.87
21.62    22.14     19.83
25.11    25.57     23.31
30.55    28.08     26.77
22.23    23.00     22.32
23.61    22.37     24.18
32.43    128.00   t35.25
FOUR ROOM APARTMENTS
20.69    22.36     22.07
24.90    25.00     22.10
29.80    28.50     24.60
42.34    42.40     45.58
29.32    27.00     32.75
30.81    31.63     33.42
37.00    t32.50   t42.00
FIVE ROOM APARTMENTS
t34.00........   133.34
36.47    36.33     32.50
55.29    t58.00   t55.00
31.50    33.80    t32.00
44.29    26.50     42.75

$16.30
16.07
21.33
25.19
20.47
19.87
t34.00
24.73
22.20
24.80
38.09
20.20
31.43
t40.00
t30.95
28.83
154.17
t23.00
t35.00

* This class of apartments is so unimportant in the given block that it has been disregarded.
t Based on less than six cases, and therefore of doubtful value.
Market rent is a term used originally by the Commission of
Housing and Regional Planning, referring to the rents paid by
tenants who moved into their apartments during the twelve months




54
immediately prior to the survey. The 1923, 1925 and 1926 figures
are accurate for these are the years in which surveys were made.
The 1924 and 1922 figures are approximately correct, although it
is possible that the 1924 figure is somewhat too low, and the 1922
figure too high. In Table XXII the detailed figures are given by
blocks and by size of apartment. In Table XXIII these records
have been averaged and an index number computed for the area
covered by the entire survey. It is evident from Table XXII that
rent changes are not necessarily uniform      within the same area
among different sized apartments. For example, in the first three
blocks, market rents fell from    1925-1926 for 3-room    apartments
and rose for 4-room apartments. In preparing the summary which
is given in Table XXIII each average figure on Table XXII is
regarded as having the relative importance of the total number of
apartments of its size in 1925, and averaged with the other figures
for the same block. These averages were then expressed as relative
TABLE XXIII
WEIGHTED AVERAGE MARKET RENT IN SEVEN BLOCKS*
1919-1926
MARKET RENTS
BLOCK NUMBER
1926    1925    1924    1923    1922   1919
MEAN AVERAGE RENT
1.................      $18.15  $18.56  $20.18  $20.72  $21.17  $13.88
2.....................  25.83   24.51   24.73   22.33   20.63    14.80
3......................  30.55  30.14  29.75   26.41   24.80    16.77
4.....................  40.26  40.12   39.69   41.41   35.76   19.16
5....................... 22 52  24.30   24.17   25.36   20.39    12.25
6....................... 26.21  28.22   28.47   29.80   26.04    13.99
7.......................  41.77  41.30  34.67   41.83   36.16   21.64
RELATIVE MEAN RENT 1919 = 100.0
1.............130.8             133.7   145.4   149.3   152.5   100.0
2....................  174.5   165.6   167.1   150.9   139.4    100.0
3......................  182.2  179.7   177.4   157.5   147.9    100.0
4...................    210.2   209.4   207.2   216.1   186.6    100.0
5......................  183.8  198.4   197.3   207.0   166.4    100.0
6.....................  187.3   201.7   203.5   213.0   186.1    100.0
7...................  193.0  190.8   160.2   193.3   167.1    100.0
Average of relatives..  180.3  182.8  179.7  183.9   163.6    100.0
* Block 2 will serve to show the method of averaging. In 1925 there were 111
3-room apartments, 138 4-room and 28 5-room. The average rent for each group in
1925 and the other years was multiplied by these constants and the sum of these rents
was divided by 277 in each year. Weights used are apartments of given number of
rooms in 1925 survey. Rents used are average rents for people who moved into
apartments in given year.




55
numbers with 1919 as a base. It will be seen that market rents have
been falling on Block 1 since 1922 and on Blocks 5 and 6 since 1923.
On four of the blocks rents were highest in 1923, but in Blocks 2
and 3, market rents are still advancing.       This movement corresponds rather closely to the market conditions on each block as
described by the number of vacant apartments, except for Block
2, in which market rents are rising despite the existence of a
vacancy percentage of 15.9.
The index of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics for
average rent and that of the Commission both indicate an advance
of about 70 per cent over 1914. The figures in Table XXIII show
that market rents are now about 80 per cent above the level of the
spring of 1919. But there had already been an increase by 1919
of about 10 per cent     over the 1914 rent.   Table XXIV     shows
the increase in the market rent over 1914.
TABLE XXIV
RELATIVE 1MAARKET RENTS IN SEVEN BLOCKS       1914-1926
(1914-100)                    Market Rent
Date                                                         Index
1914a.........................................................  100
1919b..................................................  110
1922c...........................................................  180
1923c.......................................................  202
1924c.......................................................  198
1925c.......................................................  201
1926d..........................................................  198
a December.
b April estimated.
c Average for year ending September.
d Average for calendar year.
This table more nearly accords with the general impression of
rents in New York City than does the table of averages.       In the
first place a market level approximately 100 per cent above the 1914
rent explains why tenants fear so strongly the lapse of the emergency rent laws, although the average rents in New York City have
advanced only 10 per cent more than they have in the country as
a whole. In no other city studied by the United States Bureau of
Labor Statistics have average rents advanced so far above the prewar level as have the market rents in New York City. In the
other cities there has been no rent control and average rents are
comparable to the New York City market rents. The level of rents
in Chicago and Detroit now is at 96.7 and 95.5 per cent above the
pre-war level, respectively, but market rents in New     York City
are now 98 per cent above the pre-war level. Although New York
SThe exact figure cannot be determined. The survey was made in March and April
of 1919 and showed an increase of 7.5 per cent over February, 1909. (See page 45.)
The U, S. Bureau of Labor Statistics gives a figure of 6.5 for December, 1918, and 13.4
for June, 1919. The estimate of 10 per cent is close enough.




56

City appears seventh in the list of cities for which rent data are
reported by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, as shown
in Table XX, New York City would be first in a list based on
current market rent.    Chicago and Detroit are the only cities in
which rent increases above the pre-war level even approximate the
advance shown by New York City. In all other cities present rent
levels are far below the levels of these three cities.
The Differential in Rents
The above presentation of average rents and market rents disregards the essence of the present rent structure - the differential
between the rents of the new and the old tenants. In general, the
longer a tenant has lived in his apartment, the lower his rent.
To understand this phenomenon, some knowledge of the operation of the rent laws is necessary. The laws contain two essential
features. The first relates to dispossess proceedings and makes it
impossible for a landlord to gain possession of his premises on any
other than certain specified grounds. The second is concerned
with the rent charged, and provides that i t must be    reasonable".
A tenant may, within the first three months of occupancy, plead
in court that the rent stipulated in his contract requires revision
because it is unfair. After three months he may no longer claim
such revision but may refuse to accept an increase until the landlord has proved to the court's satisfaction that it is reasonable.
Roughly, as these laws operate, they insure a tenant the maintenance of a rent status quo as of three months after the date he
entered the apartment. Thus, if the market rent in 1919 was
$20.00, and was $23.00 in 1923 for the same type of apartment,
the one tenant is protected against unreasonable increase at $20.00
and the other at $23.00.
The resulting peculiarity of the rent structure is illustrated in
Table XXV. This gives for 3-room apartments the average rent
now paid on each block according to the year in which the tenant
entered his present dwelling.
This table, giving the data for 3-room apartments, is significant
as an illustration, but Table XXVI, which takes into consideration
every apartment on each block, is a much more accurate and complete picture of these differential rents. In this table, 100.0 is
taken as the level of rents in 1926, i. e., the market level, and the
rents in other years are referred to that 1926 figure.1    A careful
examination of Table XXVI shows that in general, tenants who
came into their apartments at any time within the last five years
SThe method of averaging was as follows: in each block, for the number
of apartments at various room sizes, a relative rent was figured from the
sort of averages presented in Table 25. The final average for any particular year was obtained by weighting the relative for each apartment size
by the niumber of canses in that particular year. It is impossible to average
the actual prices. because if there happen to be fifteen 3-room and eight 4 -ro00m,ap artiienits in i125, l and ten 3-room and ten 4-room in 1924,the average
prices will plartly idescribe at difference in apartment types.




TABLE XXV
AVERAGE     RENTS     IN  THREE-ROOM       APARTMENTS       ACCORDING      To  LENGTH     OF TENANCY
Survey by State Board of Housing, January, 1927
YEAR IN WHICH FAMILY ENTERED PRESENT APARTMENT
BLOCOK
1926     1925     1924    1923     1922     1921     1920    1919      1918       1917       1916       1915    1914 or
earlier
1.......$13 69    $15 21   $14 50   $16 47   $19 50  $15 67    $17 40 $19 00      $15 83     $15 59    $18 88     $12 50    $16 06
2.......   21 37    20 76   22 61    20 50    19 88    17 60    20 00   16 80      17 14      21 50      20 36      16 00     14 71
3.......   24 77   26 74    26 78    25 55    22 17    19 50    19 60   23 40      19 50      17 93      18 20      20 35     17 77
4.......   31 35    31 05   30 62    27 75    22 21    25 67    23 00   20 50      18 00      19 77      20 27      21 38    20 48
5........20 74     21 53   21 13    19 68    18 75    19 87     18 30  18 64      16 50      15 06      16 82      15 90     15 41
6.......   21 41   21 30    22 81    24 00    25 50    19 40    19 83   19 75      17 07      22 00      18 81      14 50     16 20
7.......   34 09    30 00   33 12    31 67    25 70    26 29    24 15   24 38      25 15      23 25      21 25      25 25     22 69
8....... 23 19     22 85    22 89    22 86    25 00    25 00    23 50   25 50      23 00      22 00      22 00      22 00     21 80




TABLE XXVI
AVERAGE RELATIVES oF AVERAGE RENTS IN EIGHT BLOCKS AC~CORDIN"G To LE.NCTH OF TENLANCY
Survey by State Board of Housing, Janitwry, 1927
YEAR IN WHICH FAMILY ENTERED PRESEINT APARTMENT
1926     1925     1924    1923     1922     1921   1920   1919       1918       1917       1916       1915      earlier
I.__________________   _______________________________________.-  _______________________ ________________________   ________________________   ________ea rlier_________

2.
3....
4....
5....
6....
7.
8.
Average.

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.1
94.3
102. 9
100.9
106.9
97.9
98.9
1015.2

102.9
100.2
100.1
97.9
105.1
104.3
97.8
108.8

110.5
102.9
96.4
91.4
96.9
106.2
89.5
100.0

127.7
101.9
86.7
82.3
102.5
112.7
79.5
104.5

111.7
87.2
81.3
87.8
99.3
109.2
82.7
100.3

114.9
93.5
74.3
77.6
91.2
95.3
75.7
85.7

98.3
75.7
83.2
69.7
90.2
84.5
77,7
98.9

104.4
80.5
75.7
68.9
85.4
88.4
71.8
98.3

104.5
91.6
72.7
70.1
81.4
85.8
68.0
80.7

105"'. 5
84.3
72.8
66.9
81.7
86.9
70.3
100.0

97.6
105.4
75.1
70.8
79.6
74.7
70.6
t79. 0

104.8
70.3
72.0
67.9
76.6
80.4
65.0
88.8

100.0

1 101.0

S102. 1

99.2    99.6

94.8

88.51

86.0

84.21

81.8

83.5

81.6

78.2

t A single 6-room apartment renting for only $10.00 lowered this figure. Were this apartment excluded from the computation, the figure
would be 96.6 instead of 79.0.




59

are paying rents at the current market level; that tenants who
came in prior to 1918 are paying rents in the neighborhood of 80
per cent of the market level, and that tenants who came into their
apartments during the years 1918 to 1921 are paying progressively
higher rents between those paid by the older tenants and the current market level.
The table illustrates clearly that the movement is by no means
uniform in the various blocks. For example: in Block 1, the
tenants who entered their apartments in 1922 are paying rents
27.7 per cent above the current market level; in Block 2, tenants
who entered their apartments in 1922 are paying rents at approximately the market level; and in Block 7, tenants who entered their
apartments in 1922 are now paying rents at 20.5 per cent below
the current market level. These variations are neither due to
chance nor to difference in the nature of the apartment for which
rent is paid. Wide differentials are found within single houses,
the controlling factor being the length of tenure.
A   further method    of examination    of this differential was
developed by the Commission of Housing and Regional Planning
in its Report in 1925.1 This test was to compare the differential
between tenants who had entered their apartments in 1919 and.
earlier, and tenants who had entered their apartments in 1921
and 1923 at various times. These data for 3- and 4-room apartments are given in Tables XXVII and XXVIII.
TABLE XXVII
DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN RENTS PAID BY TENANTS WHO ENTERED
IN 1921-1923, AND 1919 AND EARLIER: THREE-ROOM          APARTMENTS, 1923, 1925 AND 1927
1921-1923 TENANTS    1919 AND EARLIER      DIFFERENTIAL
BLOCK
NUMBER
1927   1925   1923  1927   1925   1923   1927   1925  1923
1....... $16 65 $16 73 $17 64 $16 15 $14 60 $14 74  $0 50  $2 13  $2 90
2....... 19 20  17 25  18 63  16 80  14 72  15 04  2 40  2 53    3 59
3....... 22 90  21 33  22 96  18 86  18 39  17 99  4 04  2 94    4 97
4....... 25 69  24 30  24 75  20 27  19 28  18 55  5 42  5 02    6 20
5....... 19 65  18 25  21 10  15 98  15 83  15 20  3 67  2 42    5 90
6....... 22 18  21 98  22 46  17 30  16 50  15 69  4 88  5 48    6 77
7....... 27 39  28 63  32 50  23 58  23 58  21 85  3 81  5 05   10 65
8....... 23 50  24 07..... 22 60  16 60..    0 90   7 47
These tables show that some advance has been made during the
last year between these two groups. It is interesting to note that
1 Legislative Document 1926, No. 40 page 63.




60

in Blocks 1 and 8 the differential for 3-room apartments has
practically disappeared, and that in only five of the sixteen cases
has the differential increased during the past year. There is reason
to expect that the differential computed in this manner would
increase, because the protection is most valuable to the tenants
whose protection is greatest. These tenants are presumably the
ones who will most strongly resist moving, and, therefore, as the
group of old tenants becomes smaller and smaller, it might be
expected that the average of the rents paid by the survivors would
decline below that paid by the larger group several years previous.
In every block examined, the average rent paid by tenants who
entered their apartments in 1919 and earlier has advanced during
the last year, although it has already been shown that market
rents are falling. Among the tenants who entered their apartments during the years 1921-1923, in seven of the sixteen cases
the average rent paid has declined during the last year. Thus,
the equalization process goes on.
TABLE XXVIII
DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN RENTS PAID BY TENANTS WHO ENTERED
IN  1921-1923, AND 1919 AND EARLIER: FOUR-ROOM           APARTMENTS, 1923, 1925 AND 1927
1921-1923 TENANTS    1919 AND EARLIER      DIFFERENTIAL
BLOCK
NUMBERi
1927   1925   1923   1927   1925  1923   1927   1925   1923
1....... $23 53 $25 72 $23 54 $20 94 $20 14 $19 35  $2 59  $5 58  $4 19
2....... 30 20  22 73  28 33  22 06  18 33  21 78  8 14   4 40   6 55
3....... 26 94  27 88  24 31  21 79  21 11  20 12  5 15   6 77   4 19
4...... 38 42  38 28  41 09  29 19  28 33  28 93  9 23   9 95   12 16
5....... 27 32  28 44  28 28  22 43  20 02  20 11  4 89   8 42   8 17
6.......30 37  30 39  31 02  23 68  22 55  21 80  6 69   7 84   9 22
7....... 33 95  31 96  41 50  27 54  26 53  25 48  6 41   5 43   16 02
8......  32  86  38  95....  28  80  26  66....  4  06  12  29...
In Table XXIX, data from Chapter II is coordinated with the
record of differential rents to show, in the briefest possible way,
the significance of the rent law     protection.   All tenants who
entered their apartments in 1919 or earlier have been grouped
together, and the percentage by which their rent must be raised to
reach th e market level has been determined. The record is that
this group, representing 41.7 per cent of all the tenants, would
be forced to accept an increase in rents on the average of 26.0 per
cent in order to reach the market level. It must be realized that
these figures are averages of a widespread distribution. Certain
tenants would undoubtedly have to pay double their present rent




61
in order to reach the market level, and a much larger number
would be required to accept increases of 50 per cent.
TABLE XXIX
PERCENTAGE OF TENANTS WHo ENTERED APARTMENTS IN 1919 OR
EARLIER, AND DIFFERENTIAL IN RENTS
Survey of State Board of Housing, January, 1927
Per cent of total  Per cent by
tenants who     which rent
BLOCK NUMBER                entered present   must be
apartments in  raised to reach
1919 and earlier  market level
1........................................  37.6           - 1.4
2.........................................   45.7            27.4
3.........................................  48.8          36.2
4.........................................  46.8           46.0
5.........................................   44.3            24.7
6......................................... 41.5            20.9
7.........................................   48.0           44.1
8.....................................      21.1            10.4
Average..............................    41.7           26.0
The number of tenants in September, 1925, who had occupied
their apartments since 1919 or earlier was 52.8 per cent, and at
that time the average increase necessary to bring their rents to
the market level was 30 per cent. It is evident, therefore, that
the past year has seen a considerable improvement in the rent
structure, in that the number having considerable protection and
the degree of that protection have both been reduced.
Summary
Average rents have risen slightly during the year. Market rents
have fallen about 1 per cent. The rent differential has decreased,
although 41.7 per cent of the tenants would be required to accept
an average increase in rents of 26 per cent to reach the market
level. However, the differential is rapidly decreasing, both in
extent and importance.




62

CHAPTER VI
BUFFALO
Rents
Despite the protection of the rent laws, average rents in Buffalo
have increased over the pre-war level beyond the uncontrolled rents
in all but two of the nineteen cities reported by the United States
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Rents exceed the Buffalo level only
in Chicago and Detroit. In part, this indicates the ineffectiveness
of rent control in Buffalo, but it more clearly demonstrates the
rent adjustment which families have been compelled to make in
recent years. In the past year this upward trend has stopped and
there is evidence that rents are stabilizing at the present level,
which is 177.4 per cent above the 1914 figure. The peak was
reached at 179.5 per cent in 1925. The movement is shown in the
following table:
TABLE XXX
RENTS IN BUFFALO
U. S. B. Bureau of Labor Statistics
1914, December............................................  100.0
1919, December................................................  129.0
1921, December................................................ 161.7
1923, December..................1..................................  171.8
1925, December................................................. 179.5
1926, December................................................. 177.4
New   Construction
The volume of new construction in Buffalo in the past year has
kept pace with the record of the previous two years. This is reflected in the number of permits issued by the Bureau of Buildings,
as shown in Table XXXI.
TABLE XXXI
NEW   CONSTRUCTION IN BUFFALO,
1924-1926
1924   1925   1926
One-family dwellings...............................; 2,207  1,886  2,258
Two-family dwellings...........................  1,741  702    824
Multi-family dwellings.............................9  5  8
Store  dwellings..                                  70............................  92  116
At the public hearing held in the city and county hall, February
24, 1927, Lawrence Schwab, Building Commissioner of Buffalo,
testified that of the total new construction, one family houses are
ibilt for sale at prices ranging from $5,500 for the bungalow type
to $10,000 and more for the larger houses.      Of the rest, none is
offered for rents of less than $15 per room per month. This testimony was confirmed by Adam        H. Cormack, of the Buffalo Real




63

Estate Board, who expressed the opinion that there is an actual
surplus of housing in Buffalo today in all rent ranges. That there
is an adequate supply of housing in Buffalo at rents in excess of
$7 per room per month is now evident from all the facts presented
to the Board, and confirmation of all witnesses who testified at the
public hearing. However, much testimony was introduced to show
that no change has occurred in the condition of the average wage
earner's family restricted to rental expenditures of $7 per room
per month and less. In this range the pressure is unrelieved by
the new construction, and conditions are substantially as reported
a year and a half ago. The few vacancies in this lower rent class
are explained by their deplorable condition. The status, with respect to rentals below $7 per room per month, can be summarized
in the following extracts in the testimony presented at the public
hearing:
Dr. Frances N. Hollingshead, representing the Buffalo Foundation, referring to the reported vacancies in rents below $7 per room
per month, said:
"I have discovered that the reason that they are vacant is
because living conditions are very bad in those places; that it
is the lowest grade of any, and it is very difficult to use them;
that sometimes the sanitary conditions are so bad that the
agencies won't put their families in them; and on the East
Side, in the congested areas, it is commonly that type of house
that they have to choose from."
Further, Dr. Hollingshead testified:
"I have had no report of increased rents. I had only one
report of decreased rent, and no report of increased rent:
it has been a stationary situation so far as I know."
Q. Do you think that these rent laws have a good effect
upon the situation of the smaller price places?
A. I asked that question of each one of the agencies and they
all responded, to a man, that they thought they did, and that
they thought it would be very wise to continue them solely for
that type of individual in the community. They all acknowledge, without hesitation, that among the better class of houses,
there is a lot of property available; they say they know that
good apartments are available in this city much more than in
the past five years; but that for this particular type of working individual, they are having real difficulty still.
Q. Do you find that rent protection for apartments up to
$8 per room per month would satisfy all the conditions?
A. Yes, I think that by far the larger range of families
would come within that category."
David C. Adie, Secretary of the Charity Organization Society
of Buffalo, said:
"I should think the situation was easier that it has been:
we find of course, that the vacancies, as far as they come under




64

our observation, are still in the higher grade rents; there are
an enormous number of flats one can observe personally,
especially two family fiats, that are vacant, and are carrying
signs, but they are at higher prices than our clients can pay.
Q. That is, below $9 per room per month?
A. Yes I would say rather below $7 per room per month
than $9. I think there, is a margin in there that our people
can't reach, because of the fact that that range does not carry
that proportion of rent. I mean, the man earning from $25 to
$30 a week, and that is a good average working class wage
today."
Clara L. Payne, representing the City Welfare Bureau, confirmed these statements, as follows:
"I should say that the type of house that the laboring man
needs, from $20 to $25, is very scarce. Which means that they
pay $40 and $45, and two or three families live in the one
house.
Q. That is to say, the number of houses is not sufficiently
great, so that two or three families living in one house has not
been eliminated?
A. No, it has not been, and that is due to the higher rents."
On the facts and the testimony introduced, the Board believes
that further rent protection in Buffalo is needed. However, it is
apparent that the public welfare will be adequately safeguarded
if such protection is limited to apartments renting for $7 per room
per month and less. With continuing improvement, as already
evidenced in all but the lowest rental ranges, the Board is of the
opinion that a further extension of control for one year will be
sufficient to permit the discontinuance of all rent control at the
end of that time.
The Board, therefore, recommends that the rent laws be extended, as applying to Buffalo, until June 1, 1928, except that after
June 1, 1927, they shall not apply to dwellings and apartments
for which the rent on December 31, 1926, was more than $7 per
room per month.




UNIVERSY OF MICHIGAN
3 9015 01326 9082

THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
DATE DUE

j.a &t IA

AU'

- ~4~