Please note: this text may be incomplete. For more information about this OCR, view
About OCR text.
REAL > ESTATE
AND
NEW YORK, MARCH 21, 1914
aiiiiii^^
llilii:.l:iMi!li:1|ii:l!iii:iil[;:lliia!ll!l<i?llilli!!llll!lllll!n
DOES RAPID TRANSIT RELIEVE CONGESTION?
The Roads Cannot Make a Lower Rate Than Five Cents, and This Is
Too Much For the Poor to Pay — Excessive Construction Costs to Blame.*
By HENRY C. WRIGHT,
First Deputy Commissioner, Department of Charities, New York City.
â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– IliM^^^^^
T"' HE purpose of this paper is to dis-
â– *â– cuss the inter-relation of housing
and transit, and I wish to emphasize and
make clear the following points:
1. That it is necessary to clearly de¬
fine the kind of housing deemed desir¬
able before it is possible to determine
the kind of transit needed or possible
to secure.
2. Transit heretofore has been looked
upon largely as a business proposition,
with little consideration given to its
important relation to social problems.
3. If transit, in any large degree, is
to aid in solving housing problems, its
fixed charges and operating costs must
be reduced.
If the population of large cities is to
be mainly housed in tenements in order
to accommodate many people on a small
space, there will be comparatively little
need for rapid transit. Surface lines
could largely supply the accommodations
necessary. If the tenement house were
to be accepted as an advisable method
of housing, the housing problem would
more largely resolve itself into a deter¬
mination of the type of tenement house
which would furnish a reasonable pro¬
portion of lio-ht and air, with some play
space adjoining.
If, on the other hand, it seems advis¬
able to attempt to provide single or two-
family houses, with space surrounding,
the city, under such a method of build¬
ing, would occupy a much larger terri¬
tory, and rapid transit would be needed
as a means of reducing the time occupied
in going to and from work.
Economy in Congestion.
If acceptable housing were to be con¬
ditioned solely upon light, air and a cer¬
tain amount of play space, the tenement
house would be the most satisfactory,
because the most economical method of
housing people„not only because it can
accommodate many families on a given
area, but also the crowding together of
many families in a small area reduces
many other municipal expenditures, such
as for transit, sewers, water, fire and
police protection, paving, etc. The
denser a city, the lower the operating
costs. Since, however, operating costs
are secondary to acceptable living con¬
ditions, the method of housing must first
be determined and the operating costs
adjusted accordingly.
It is priiparily essential that each city
should decide through the properly con¬
stituted authorities whether or not it is
practicable to regulate the type of
houses, and, if so, what type should be
aimed at. The extent of the need for
rapid transit will not be clear until this
phase of the housing problem is deter¬
mined.
The Best Way to Live.
My personal feeling is that, so far as
PQSsible, the aim of every city should be
to aid its citizens to build and live in
Single or double-family houses, with
space surrounding. It is my belief that
the apartment or tenement house, shel-
•From a paper read at the National Housing
Conference.
tering many families, tends to destroy
the sense of individual responsibility and
loyalty to the community. When fam¬
ilies are crowded together in close prox¬
imity, they seldom get acquainted one
with another, and soon lose, or fail to
develop, the neighborhood sense, and the
neighborhood sense is the basis of re¬
sponsible citizenship.
Heretofore transit has been viewed
solely as a business proposition. In al¬
most all cases the initiative has been
taken by private individuals desiring to
build and operate transit lines in desig¬
nated streets. In very few instances has
the city taken the initiative in determin¬
ing when or where the transit lines
should be built; nor has due considera¬
tion been given to the question as to
whether or not the proposed transit lines
would properly distribute the people, or
whether or not a five-cent fare was low
enough to induce workingmen to leave
the congested portion of the city and
establish themselves in the relatively un¬
occupied portion.
Transit Lines as a Municipal Function.
Let us assume that the city authorities
have clearly conceived the idea that tran¬
sit should be considered to be and is a
municipal function. Such a conception
of the function of transit raises new
questions which the city authorities have
not heretofore found it necessary to con¬
sider.
If transit lines are to act as distributors
of the city population, they must be
operated with fares sufficiently low to
induce the workingman to move to out¬
lying sections, and the speed of opera¬
tion must be sufficiently rapid to enable
him to go from his home to his work
without a serious loss of time.
No data has been collected in the
United States that will throw any clear
light on the problem as to whether a
workingman will be more inclined to
use a transit line charging a three-cent
fare than one with a five-cent fare. It
is highly important that such data be
collected, and it is hoped that within a
few years we may have some definite
information with regard to this question.
It is reasonable, however, to assume that
a three-cent fare would induce many
workingmen to move to outlying sec¬
tions who otherwise would live in the
congested portion of the city if the fare
basis on transit lines were five cents.
How to Get a Three-Cent Fare.
One of the first things to be taken
under consideration by city authorities
with regard to any proposed transit line
is whether or not the method of financ¬
ing is such as to enable the operator to
transport passengers for less than five
cents, if not at the opening of such line
at any rate after the traffic has become
reasonably heavy.
A fare of less than five cents is con¬
ditioned upon the method of securing
capital, the cost of construction and the
cost of operation. It will be contended
by most traffic men that neither surface
nor rapid transit lines can be operated
at a fare less than five cents. This is
probably true under the present methods
of financing and construction; but, if it
be a matter of vital importance that the
population of a city be distributed as
widely as possible, and such distribution
will not take place without a fare less
than five cents, some means must be
found of reducing the capital charge.
There is no hope of reducing to any
marked degree the construction costs of
surface lines. Any material reduction
in the capital charge of this class of
lines must be brought about by methods
of financing.
Up to the present time practically all
surface lines have been financed by pri¬
vate corporations, which were obliged to
pay relatively high interest rates and
brokerage commissions. In the future,
if the construction costs be defrayed by
the municipality, the interest on such
costs would be reduced at least 1.5 per
cent., and brokerage charges would be
eliminated. Another reduction in cost
could be secured by the city letting con¬
tracts for the construction instead of
having the lines constructed by some
company subsidiary to the transit cor¬
poration.
Use City's Credit.
The authorities in every city wherein
it is proposed to build transit lines
should take these matters under serious
consideration and see whether or not it
is possible for them to use the city's
credit in financing such lines, and
whether such credit, if used, would re¬
duce the carrying charges sufficiently to
permit of a fare that would induce work¬
ingmen to use the lines.
No city can cover a large territory
without the use of rapid transit lines.
A workingman cannot be expected to
use more than a half hour of his time in
going from his home to his work. A
surface line, as ordinarily operated,
would carry him during such half hour
only about four miles. A city with a
four-mile radius, taking into considera¬
tion land occupied by business buildings,
factories, public places, topography, etc.,
probably could not house more than
500.000 people, if they were housed chief¬
ly in one or two-family houses. Cities
as now built have congestion in por¬
tions, and much unoccupied territory.
Cincinnati, Cleveland and Pittsburgh
have each a population ranging around
500,000, and each occupies a territory
approximating that within a circle hav¬
ing a radius of four miles. Each of
these cities has some parts with intense
congestion. Each family of the 500,000
could be comfortably sheltered in a sin¬
gle house within the territory now oc¬
cupied by these respective cities, if real
estate values could be adjusted and
transit provided.
Is This Ideal Unattainable?
This ideal probably will never be
realized; there will always be practical
difficulties; cities will not develop in all
parts evenly; cities exceeding 500,000
population will undoubtedly require
rapid transit to bring into use cheap
land for homes; a rapid transit train
within a half hour can reach the circum¬
ference of a circle having an area seven
times larger than that served by surface
lines in the same time. It is imperative