The Newtown bee. (Newtown, Conn.) 1877-current, 1906-05-25
INCREASE IN THE COST OF BUILD
INC,


COrQlQRly comparison Is maze between
the prices of various kinds of lumber,
Steel. bricks, ETC., in 1901 and the pres
emit time.
We can undertake to give only few
illustrative cases. Thus ordinary
spruce frame lumber was quoted at SIT
in May, 1901, $40 year ago ana CPS
now; matched spruce boards Sl8 to $40
in 1901, $l9 to S2l year ago and $24 to
$25 now; extra cedar shingles $3.50
minimum in 1901, 50 80 in 1905 and
So 60 now; white pine uppers S62 mini
mum in 1901, $83 in 1905 and S68 now.
1t is not necessary to extend the list;
the cases given show the tendency and
its approximate extent. The increase
of prices was noteworthy for the four
years to 1905; it has been greatly ex-
true generally of other building ma
terial. Thus common bricks, while
standing still at $7.75 to SO for the
four years to 1905, have now jumped
up to SO Is and $40 SO. Portland &C.
ment rose from 81. 81 per barrel in 1901
to 81. IS in 1905 and to 81 80 this year.
Steel frames increased in price little
at all in 1905 as compared with 1901,
but within a year have advanced
about per cent.
Making, then, a percentage compar-
iSOn between 1901 and the present
time the Bulletin gives the following:
Increase
Per. cent.
Spruce, ordinary frames, At
Spruce, 10 and 12-ihch diameter, AZ
Spruce, matched boards, %
Shingles, cedar, extras, 20
Clapboard, spruce, feet, extras, 80
Laths, II inch, 80
Oak, Quartered, inch, %
Oak, plain white, inch, p
Whitewood, inch, 81
Maple, inch, %
Ash, brown, l inch, 81
White pine, Michigan uppers inch, 80
Cypress, inch, IS
Bricks, 20
Lime, Is
Cement; Is
Steel beams and channels. 3(015 inch,
Steel beams and channels larger
than Is, S
Angles, 3-inch and larger, 5
Average advance on materials, 274
1t is further found that wages of Ia
Dor have increased about IA per cent,
but on the assumption that labor in
the production of building materials
increased to an equal extent, it would
appear that the Increase in costs OF
building is about equally divided, d.
rectly and remotely, as between ma
terial and labor.
And here we have the summing up
as given by the Bulletin
Five Years.
Increase,
Per cent.
Building materials, 274
Building labor, l3f
Architects fees, 2
Contractors charges, 2
Total, 454
From actual quotations and conserv-
alive estimates it hence appears that
it really does cost about As per cent
more to build to-day than five years
ago.
This is taken to refute conclusively
the notion that costs of building have
doubled within five years or increased
by 100 per cent. And, of course, it
does, assuming the correctness of the
quotations which is evidently not to
be questioned. But as matter of
fact the Bulletin unwittingly or care
lessly comedies far more than it should.
The adding together of the several
percentages of increase for various
groups of charges is, of course. wholly
wrong, and this may quickly be expos
ed by indicating that if the groups of
costs were further divided total per-
centage increase of 100 or over could
be obtained. 1t is as If the percent
ages of the first table given above had
been added together to find the tota
or net average increase of cost and
that would have given 500 per cent
increase or thereabouts. Assuming
that the cost of building is equally d.
vided between labor and material, the
figures given would show an average
increase in cost of only about 20 per
cent instead of As.
But an increase of one fifth or 20 per
cent is large and must be keenly felt.
When plumbing, fixtures and the like
are taken into consideration, the &C.
tual increase in cost of building may