Evening star., 1920-05-22

Even as it is, owners are hesi-
taunS long before going to the high
cost OF building. unless the struc-
lure is so urgently needed that they
hnd they can recoup its cost bv protit :
Nlthln short period. As prospective
fronts do not govern in residence
construction. il is only natural that
the building of dwellings, should lag
Tar behind that of industrial and
commercial buildings because the
monetary return in the case of the
residence is not SO easily traceable,
nor can the cost be repaid by busj-
ness profits.
Evidence of Overcrowdins.
lhlrty years ago the United States
had about 11a families to every 100
nss'aenees- Inree years ago the fig
ure was about 11o families to every
Inn residences: today it is more than
III This points to heavy over
erowding IN some sections and to
the substitution of apartments and
tWo-family houses for the single
houses of our forefathers. To get
hack 10 conditions of 1917 would
Iequire the construction in the United
states of more than a million resi-
dences. and this without making any
mroNisioh Tor expanding population.
rms means that the million would
De IN addition to the normal annual
requirements of nearly 100000 per
year TO take care of increasing pop
uIS liOn- -
Because of the conditions outlined
above much delay may be expected
in making up this back work On
the other hand. large projects. such
a : factories and commercial houses.
VIII go ahead. regardless of condi-
tlons- SO long as the increased cost
of building can be passed eventually
TO the ultimate consumer"
But II does not have to be empha
sized that a million dollars of build
ing today means far less than a mil
lion dollars of building meant five or
ten years ago Relative unit cost fig
ures have been compiled, showing
about how the comparison runs per
unit bulk of building. To get fair
comparison with the 1920 program it
VIII be necessary to increase all the
other figures up TO 1920 prices This
Increased by about = per cent. 1918
figures by about Is per cent 1917 fig
ures by 50 per cent, 1916 figures by
81 per cent and previous years by so
per cent. Figured on the new basis
SO that the amounts shown repre-
sent building volume and not merely
depre ciated dollars. we have the fol-
lowing comparison of building con-
struction in the area east of the
Missouri and north of the Ohio:
1870 ... 81 20 coo 600 estimated
1913. a.I39 OO0. 900 on 1870 prices
1sis.. .9Oa. .OO0. .00o 1920 prices
1sf7... 100000. OO0 on 1920 prices
1915 -......- :.o9o. ooo. 600 on 1920 figures
1915. ...... 692 ono. 900 on 1870 figures
19Ie. 1.56o. .00O. 900 1870 prices
twill be recognized that the figures
immediately above have been cor
rected- for all price differences. and
that consequently they will represent
the actual amount of building. all fig
ured on the same unit costs. which
we are experiencing today.
Labor Increase Heavy.
The completion during 1920 of the
stupendoUS building program out
lined above will depend upon num- :
Der of factors. Press dispatches an
nounce that renewed strikes in Chi
cago have resulted in boosting the
price of common building labor 10
81 per hour. and skilled labor to s1.20
per hour The same dispatches tell
us that. because Of these exorbtant
figures fully 30 per cent of the pro-
y jected building construction in that
city has been abandoned Similar con-
cut hundreds of millions of dollars
from the building operations. which
we might otherwise safely expect.
Forecast for 1919.
In the Philadelphia Ia ltimore-
Washington district. the history OF
the past ten years Of building shows
1ha%-23.37 per cent Of the total an
nIal contracts were placed during
the first three months of the year
As the 1920 contracts placed prior
10 April l amounted to S10s.0So.00(
IL would appear that. II 1920 is &c
follow its predecessors the tota'
building volume expected may be
placed at Si6i 100000 for the year
This compares with si63. 3.000.e00 in
1915 which was tine previous best
wear: $500 eoO.oG0 III 1919 and less
than s215ccp.o0o in AL other years
obviously. il would nc unfair to
use these comparative figures with
out due reference to the present en-
hanced cost Of building. If, there
fore We refgurc tho building pro
grams of previous years on the basis
of this years prices. we fnd the fol
lowing results
1aao estimated $iG! 900 n00 t0-9ct of the total
1919 . zfN ptsD tsri 80 of the tot al
19fs .. 4Ic c,rt n'e, Ga ~ tie total
1qI3 ..... .7G ts't t4pt ~ +. ~ he :ptal
1glG .... -; f-a D'.u Z 49, ~ tho to:al
rala ....... ~ .tt0 raH fIn.. ~ tfe total
1872 .....- 80 600 900 tlG.f-s ~ the to.a
Hog Island ard Other big shipbuilG.
ing prolcc.e Influenced the great tofa
for 1918. aside fro-0 that wear. n.
districts aVcra=. share Of tho tota
building volume has averaged abou
n per cent. This Sr.rS proDabl.
percentage is - ID adv hcio;v tina
average though tHc building bulk.
greater than ever before and is al
most double the average Of the pas
ten years.