Page:EB1922 - Volume 31.djvu/437

Rh

City; W. G. Savage, Rural Housing; J. Nolen and others, Houses for Workers; Housing by Employers in the United States, Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 263; Report of the United States Housing Corporation, issued by the U.S. Department of Labor; State Housing Manual, and Annual Report of the Com- mission of Immigration and Housing (California) ; R. Reiss, The House I Want; J. Robertson, M.D., Housing and the Public Health; Houses of the Working Classes in London 1855-1912 (a Report of the London County Council) ; Housing (a monthly journal issued by the Ministry of Health); The First Annual Report of the Ministry of Health 1919-20; Part II. Housing and Town Planning (Cmd. 917), and various other official publications particulars of which may be obtained from H.M. Stationery Office or the Ministry of Health. Note. A useful short catalogue of books on housing, etc., is issued by the Garden Cities and Town Planning Association, 3, Gray's Inn Place, W.C. I. (K. W.; T. A. R.)

UNITED STATES. The housing conditions prevalent in the United States do not differ materially from those of European countries, although, being new, the country suffers somewhat less from survivals of antiquated forms of architecture and obsolete forms of sanitation. On the other hand, the general use of wood in house and apartment construction renders the fire risk greater than that of European cities. It can be safely stated that every one of the European housing problems is reproduced in the United States to some extent. Reports of investigating commis- sions for American cities show congestion, poor planning, poor lighting, inadequate ventilation, overcrowding of rooms, and wretched conditions of sanitation and of general maintenance. These undesirable conditions of sanitation and maintenance are reproduced also in the poorer agricultural regions.

Since 1910 there has been a notable increase of interest in the housing problem in the United States. The establishment of the National Housing Association in that year, and the efficient publicity conducted by its secretary, Mr. Lawrence Veiller, led to the establishment of temporary or permanent housing associations or commissions in virtually every important city. Fairly extensive housing investigations have been conducted in more than 60 cities. Among the more recent investigations of this character the surveys of urban and rural housing conditions of California by the State Commission of Immigration and Hous- ing are notable. The report of the Housing Commission of Mich- igan published in 1916 may be mentioned as another admirable example of a survey by state authorities. Many local investiga- tions by private agencies have also been made during this period.

Among the best of the reports of these studies are : The Housing Problem in Chicago, edited by Sophonisba Breckinridge and Edith Abbott of the School of Civics and Philanthropy (1910-2); The Houses of Providence, R.I., by John Ihlder (1916); Housing Condi- lions in the City of St. Paul, prepared by Dr. Carol Aronoyici for the Amherst H. Wilder Charity (1917); Housing Problems in Min- neapolis, by the Civic and Commerce Association (1914) ; The Housing Report, made to the City Plan Commission of Newark, N.J., by James Ford (1913) ; the annual reports of the Philadelphia Housing Commission ; and A Study of the Housing and Social Con- ditions in Philadelphia, prepared by Dr. Frank A. Craig for the Henry Phipps Institute (1915).

Legislation. The modern period in American housing legislation dates from the enactment of the Tenement Housing Act for New York City in 1901. Mr. Lawrence Veiller, who is largely responsible for the framing and passage of that law, published in 1914 A Model Housing Law (revised edition 1920), which has served as a model for legislation in many American cities during the past ten years. The housing legislation of Columbus, O. ; Duluth, Minn. ; and Grand Rapids, Mich., for example, is very closely modelled upon this book. Housing laws have been passed during 1910-20 in California, Con- necticut, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota and Pennsylvania. In most instances such legislation applies only to cities of a specified minimum size. In a few cases, however, the law is universal in its application. The legislation of Massachusetts is permissive in its character, but when adopted by any town or city it has the force of state law, and cannot be re- pealed or changed without the consent of the state Legislature. The enforcement of state legislation in New Jersey is centralized in a state board of tenement-house supervision, under a law passed in 190^. The annual reports of that board show efficiency in adminis- tration and considerable accomplishment in the control of housing conditions, in spite of the small appropriations made to the board. In other states the power of enforcement is either largely or wholly decentralized, with the minor exception of the laws of Pennsylvania, which centralize certain powers over sanitation and maintenance of old buildings. The most striking example of vigorous and effective enforcement of tenement-house legislation has been offered by the

Tenement-house Department of New York City. The Tenement- house Act of 1901 lodged with that department exceptional powers and established heavy penalties for violations of the law. The appropriations to the department have been relatively large and its administration has been unusually competent.

Agencies of Improved Construction. Most of the houses for the use of wage-earners in America are designed and erected by building contractors. Such houses are built to rent or sell for profit. The interests of the investors are considered before those of the occupants. Restrictive legislation is always necessary to govern the conditions of structure, sanitation and maintenance in such properties. In general, shrewd investors have found increasingly that tenement- house property does not pay as well as other forms of investment ; hence such properties tend to be sold to recent immigrants who are eager to possess real estate but fail to appreciate the weight of the carrying charges of rapidly deteriorating residential property. In some cities, notably Philadelphia, row houses are still constructed in large numbers by operative builders to be sold in units to occupants. Nevertheless, home ownership, which would be facilitated by de- vices of this sort, is becoming less general in America from decade to decade. The population is increasingly living in rented houses or apartments, and housing conditions are determined by the owners and builders of these properties except in so far as legislation may protect the tenants. Attempts to improve upon prevailing house types have been made by other agencies of house construction, by philanthropic or limited-dividend housing companies, by employers of labour or industrial firms, by cooperative housing associations, or by departments of the state and national Governments.

Limited-dividend Companies. Construction of model tenements has continued in New York City under the direction of the City and Suburban Homes Co., a corporation which in 1920 had a capital of $6,000,000 divided into shares of $10 each. Dividends amounting to 41 % were paid on the invested capital. More than 13,000 persons were housed by this corporation. The construction of tenement houses has been improved in many ways by this company. Open stairways, roof gardens, central-heating systems and large courts are a few of its contributions to tenement-house construction. Its buildings invariably improved upon prevailing local standards in lighting, ventilation, fireproofing and general maintenance. The tendency of improved housing is, however, increasingly in the direction of residential decentralization, so that the construction of attractive homes for individual families has largely superseded the building of model tenements. Such homes are detached, semi-de- tached, grouped in units of from three to six families per building, or in rows. American village and suburban housing has borrowed its standards largely from the English garden-city and garden-suburb movement, though some concessions to local architectural practices are almost invariably made. Recent examples of suburban housing by limited-dividend companies are offered in the dwellings con- structed by Schmidlapp in Cincinnati, the Improved Housing Associ- ation in New Haven, Conn., the Philadelphia Model Housing Co., the Billerica Garden Suburb, Lowell, Mass., and in the work of the Boston Dwelling House Co. near Forest Hills, Mass.

Many American chambers of commerce have established limited- dividend companies which have erected buildings of a suburban type. Among the better examples of such work during the past ten years are the buildings constructed by the Albany Home Building Co. at Albany, N.Y., the Bridgeport Housing Co. at Bridgeport, Conn., the Civic Building Co. at Flint, Mich., and the Williamsport Improvement Co. at Williamsport, Pa.

Industrial Housing. Employers of labour and industrial cor- porations have constructed garden villages in virtually every state in the course of the past ten years. Probably the greatest actual contribution to improved construction of cottage dwellings up to the year 1918 was made by agencies of this class. Very pleasing indus- trial villages have, for example, been erected and operated by the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. at Goodyear Heights, Akron, O. ; by the Norton Co. at Indian Hill, Worcester, Mass.; by the Mount Union Refractories Co. at Kistler, Pa. ; by the Viscose Co. at Marcus Hook, Pa.; and by the Lehigh Valley Coal & Navigation Co. at Hauto, Pa. Practically all improved housing undertaken since the termination of the World War was fostered by industrial corporations or by chambers of commerce. These agencies alone can afford to invest considerable sums of money without expectation of an im- mediate return at the market rate of interest. In the long run in- dustrial agencies presumably profit from their housing ventures through the better health and increased contentment of their employees, which increases their output, and reduces friction.

Cooperative Housing. British experience in the formation of cooperative tenant societies has been closely watched by many Americans who are interested in the improvement of housing con- ditions. For several years a committee on new industrial towns, with headquarters in New York City, has issued pamphlets urging the establishment of cooperative garden suburbs and of garden cities.

As yet, their recommendations have not been adopted in any instance. The state of Wisconsin has passed an Act which is designed to promote cooperative housing in that state, but so far no associa- tion has been formed. Nevertheless, during the past decade many cooperative apartment houses have been constructed for the well- to-do and the movement has extended as a protest against rent