# SHALL WE SAVE NEW YORK?

## A Vital Question To Every One
### Who Has Pride In This Great City

SHALL we save New York from what? Shall we save it from unnatural and unnecessary crowding, from depopulated sections, from being a city unbeautifull from high rents, from excessive and illy distributed taxation? We can save it from all of these, so far at least as they are caused by one specified industrial evil—the erection of factories in the residential and famous retail section.

### The Factory Invasion of the Shopping District

The factories making clothing, cloaks, suits, furs, penticoats, etc., have forced the large stores from one section and followed them to a new one, depleting it of its normal residents and filling it with big loft buildings displacing homes.

The fate of the sections down town now threatens the fine residential and shopping district of Fifth Avenue, Broadway, upper Sixth and Madison Avenues and the cross streets. It requires concentrated co-operative action to stem this invading tide. The evil is constantly increasing: it is growing more serious and more difficult to handle. It needs instant action.

### The Trail of Vacant Buildings

Shall the finest retail and residential sections in the world, from Thirty-third Street north, become blighted the way the old parts of New York have been?

The lower wholesale and retail districts are deserted, and there is now enough vacant space to accommodate many times over the manufacturing plants of the city. If new modern factory buildings are required, why not encourage the erection of such structures in that section instead of erecting factory buildings in the midst of our homes and fine retail sections.

### How it Affects the City and its Citizens

It is impossible to have a city beautiful, comfortable or safe under such conditions. The unnatural congestion sacrifices fine residence blocks for factories, which remain for a time and then move on to devastate or depreciate another section, leaving ugly scars of blocks of empty buildings unused by business and unadapted for residence: thus unsettling real estate values.

### How it Affects the Tax-payer

Every man in the city pays taxes either as owner or tenant. The wide area of vacant or depreciated property in the lower middle part of town means reduced taxes, leaving a deficit made up by extra assessment on other sections. Taxes have grown to startling figures and this affects all interests.

### The Need of Co-operative Action

In order that the impending menace to all interests may be checked and to prevent a destruction similar to that which has occurred below Twenty-third Street:

We ask the co-operation of the various garment associations.

We ask the co-operation of the associations of organized labor.

We ask the co-operation of every financial interest.

We ask the co-operation of every man who owns a home or rents an apartment.

We ask the co-operation of every man and woman in New York who has pride in the future development of this great city.

### NOTICE TO ALL INTERESTED

IN view of the facts herein set forth we wish to give publicity to the following notice:—We, the undersigned merchants and such others as may later join with us, will give the preference in our purchases of suits, cloaks, furs, clothing, penticoats, etc., to firms whose manufacturing plants are located outside of a zone bounded by the upper side of Thirty-third Street, Fifty-ninth Street, Third and Seventh Avenues, also including thirty-second and thirty-third Streets, from Sixth to Seventh Avenues.

February 1st, 1917, is the time that this notice goes into effect, so as to enable manufacturers now located in this zone to secure other quarters. Consideration will be given to those firms that remove their plants from this zone. This plan will ultimately be for the benefit of the different manufacturers in the above mentioned lines, as among other reasons they will have the benefit of lower rentals.

R. ALTMAN & CO.

ARNOLD, CONSTABLE & CO.

BEST & CO.

BONWIT TELLER & CO.

J. M. GIDDING & CO.

GIMBEL BROTHERS

L. P. HOLLANDER & CO.

LORD & TAYLOR,

JAMES McCREERY & CO.

R. H. MACY & CO.

FRANKLIN SIMON & CO.

SAKS & CO.

STERN BROTHERS

The undersigned endorse this movement for the benefit of the City of New York

Vincent Auster
University Club
Union Language Club
Oriental Club
Rita Carlucci
Hotel McAlpine
A. A. Veatch & Co.
Mark Cross Co.

Aster Estate
Waldorf-Astoria
St. Regis Hotel
Hotel Astor
Hotel Astor Hotel
Hotel Astor Hotel
Hotel Astor Hotel
Hotel Astor Hotel
Charles Tuchley

Aster Trust Co.
Columbus Trust Co.
Fifth Avenue Bank
Gentlemen's Trust Co.
Hartman National Bank
H. E. Kessler & Co.
H. W. Johnson Bank Co.
Yale & Towner Mfg. Co.
Sant & Fourie Co.

Tiffany & Co.
Gartman Co.
Fifth Avenue & Front
Thornberg & Stern, Inc.
Dresser & Co.
Tiffany & Co.
Tiffany & Taylor
E. M. Gable & Co.
Dudley & Co.
Dudley, Gable & Co.
T. L. Shriver & Son

W. & J. Shriver
American Company
G. C. Goodrich & Co.
A. J. Jackel & Co.
Tiffany & Taylor
Dudley, Gable & Co.
T. L. Shriver & Son
Brooks Brothers
Kant Hal Co.
Thomas Hatcher & Co.
Johns, McCutchan & Co.
J. & J. Shriver, Inc.
Dr. Pliny
Kinnison & Company
Froh's Kappel & Co.

We ask Citizens, Merchants and Civic bodies to co-operate and send letters endorsing this plan to the committee, care of J. H. Burton, chairman, 267 Fifth Avenue.

74. The New York Times advertisement which ran on March 5 and 6, 1916.

THE NEW YORK TIMES.

Gentlemen, you are like cattle in a pasture, and the needle trade workers are the flies that follow you from one pasture to another, nagging you into abandoning one great centre after another and leaving a trail of ruin, devastation, and bankruptcy up and down the length of the city. The rich pasture of your predecessors was in Grand Street. The flies drove the trade to Fourteenth Street, where most of you took up the burden of trying to do business against these odds of a city that had no law and no

# SHALL WE SAVE NEW YORK?

## A Vital Question To Every One
## Who Has Pride In This Great City

SHALL we save New York from what? Shall we save it from unnatural and unnecessary crowding, from depopulated sections, from being a city unbeau- tiful, from high rents, from excessive and illy distributed taxation? We can save it from all of these, so far at least as they are caused by one specified industrial evil—the erection of factories in the residential and famous retail section.

The factories making clothing, cloaks, suits, furs, petti-coats, etc., have forced the large stores from one section and followed them to a new one, depleting it of its normal residents and filling it with big loft buildings displacing homes.

### How It Affects the City and its Citizens

### How It Affects the Tax-payer

### NOTICE TO ALL INTERESTED

IN view of the facts herein set forth we wish to give publicity to the following notice:—We, the undersigned merchants and such others as may later join with us, will give the preference in our purchases of suits, cloaks, furs, clothing, petticoats, etc., to firms whose manufacturing plants are located outside of a zone bounded by the upper side of Thirty-third Street, Fifty-ninth Street, Third and Seventh Avenues, also including thirty-second and thirty-third Streets, from Sixth to Seventh Avenues.

B. ALTMAN & CO.
ARNOLD, CONSTABLE & CO.
BEST & CO.
BONWIT TELLER & CO.

LORD & TAYLOR
JAMES McCREERY & CO.
R. H. MACY & CO.

Viscount Auster
University Club
Union Road Club
Circein Club
Circein Club
Hotel Biltmore
Hotel Biltmore
Hotel Macmillan
Hotel Macmillan
A. V. Vauquell & Co.
Buck Cross Co.

Aster Estate
Waldorf-Astoria
St. Reginald Hotel
Hotel Caruthers
Hotel Caruthers
Hotel Macdonald
Hotel Macdonald
Hotel Northwood
Hotel Northwood
Charles Thorley

Aster Trust Co.
Columbia Trust Co.
Fifth Avenue Bank
Connecticut Trust Co.
Hartford National Bank
H. K. Grumman & Co.
H. W. Johnson-Marville Co.
Yale & Townsend Mfg. Co.
Scott & Fowler Co.

Tiffany & Co.
Tibbals Co.
Black, Gray & Frost
Domein & B. Stur, Inc.
Domein & Co.
Mansfield & Co.
E. H. Guttin & Co.
Charles Sabin & Co.
Mallard's

W. & J. Brown
American Company
C. G. Gambrel's & Co.
A. A. Gambrel & Co.
Tiffanv & Co.
Hugger & Senior
E. H. Guttin & Co.
Charles Sabin & Co.
The Liberator
Frank L. Shattuck

Brookfield Brothers
Lawn & Co.
Thorn, Haines & Co.
James McCotchan & Co.
J. & J. Simon, Inc.
DePauw & Company
Peabody Kappel & Co.

THE NEW YORK TIMES.

# SHALL WE SAVE NEW YORK?

## A Vital Question To Every One
Who Has Pride In This Great City

SHALL we save New York from what? Shall we save it from unnatural and unnecessary crowding, from depopulated sections, from being a city unbeautful, from high rents, from excessive and illy distributed taxation? We can save it from all of these, so far at least as they are caused by one specified industrial evil—the erection of factories in the residential and famous retail section.

The factories making clothing, cloaks, suits, furs, petticoats, etc., have forced the large stores from one section and followed them to a new one, depleting it of its normal residents and filling it with big loft buildings displacing homes.

The fate of the sections down town now threatens the fine residential and shopping district of Fifth Avenue, Broadway, upper Sixth and Madison Avenues and the cross streets. It requires concentrated co-operative action to stem this invading tide. The evil is constantly increasing; it is growing more serious and more difficult to handle. It needs instant action.

It is impossible to have a city beautiful, comfortable or safe under such conditions. The unnatural congestion sacrifices fine residence blocks for factories, which remain for a time and then move on to devastate or depreciate another section, leaving ugly scars of blocks of empty buildings unused by business and unadapted for residence; thus unsettling real estate values.

## NOTICE TO ALL INTERESTED

The undersigned endorses this movement for the benefit of the City of New York

Viscount Astor
University Club
Union League Club
Crescent Club
Rice-Carson
Hotel Bluestone
Hotel Bismarck
Hotel Macdonald
Hotel Market
Hotel Landmark
A. A. Venner & Co.
Mark Cross Co.

Aster Estate
Waldorf-Astoria
St. Regis Hotel
Hotel Bluestone
Hotel Market
Hotel Macdonald
Hotel Landmark
Hotel Landry
Charles Thayer

Aster Trust Co.
Columbia Trust Co.
Fifth Avenue Bank
Continental Trust Co.
Havre's National Bank
M. Knudsen & Co.
H. W. John Manville Co.
Yale & Tower Mfg. Co.
Scott & Fawcett Co.

Tiffany & Co.
Gershwin Co.
St. Germain & Frost
Thurber & Stearns, Inc.
Dresser & Co.
Hartley & Co.
E. M. Gathit & Co.
Charles Jortham's Sons
Mastin's

W. & J. Shatt
American Company
C. J. Stockton & Sons
A. J. Stockton & Sons
Tiffany Studios
D. C. Stockton & Co.
The Library of Congress
Franklin & Marcella

Brooks Brothers
Kensei Hotel
Kensei Hotel & Co.
J. J. McCutchen & Co.
C. J. M. Mason, Inc.
De Place
The Library of Congress
Franklin & Marcella

THE NEW YORK TIMES.

["1. New York City's pioneering 1916 zoning resolution, the first in the nation, was in large part a response to such new buildings as the Equitable Building, 120 Broadway, which rose 540 feet straight up from its lot line without setback.", "2. To protect the streets and avenues from being turned into dark canyons, the 1916 regulations established height districts. These limited the height a building could rise, in proportion to the width of the street it fronted on, until it had to set back. For each foot", "it set back it could rise \"x\" additional feet, the ratio depending on its height district. The two most commonly mapped height districts in Midtown had rise-to-setback ratios of 2½:1 and 3:1, equal to sky angle planes of 68.3° and 71.6° or an average of 70°. A tower rule permitted a portion of the building, up to 25 percent of the lot area, to rise without setbacks provided it was a distance from the street. There were no other limitations on height or bulk.", "3. In reaction to the \"wedding cake\" shape of much of New York's skyline built to the 1916 zoning envelope, and to meet other needs, zoning was completely revised in 1961. A \"sky exposure plane\" replaced height districts to govern setbacks. To meet the need for larger office floors, the tower that could penetrate the plane was increased from 25 to 40 percent. A new tool to govern bulk was introduced, the floor area ratio (FAR). The basic floor area for the largest office building was set at 15 times the lot area, or FAR 15.", "1. Pre-1916 building, 120 Broadway", "2. Typical 1916 \"wedding cake\" building", "Note: dotted lines represent maximum zon-
ing envelope", "3. 1961 tower on base,\nFAR 15", "62"]

4. and 5. Another major goal of the 1961 zoning was to get more open space around new buildings. The "tower in a plaza" epitomized by the elegant new Seagram Building—actually a 25 percent tower conforming

to the 1916 regulations—was the model. A 20 percent floor area bonus was offered to a building with a plaza, raising the largest building to FAR 18. It was the start of incentive zoning.

6. To meet other needs and to keep the continuity and vitality of avenues like Fifth and Madison from being destroyed by plazas, the incentive system was expanded. Bonuses were offered for interior spaces and sometimes compounded, bringing FAR up to 21.6. Combined with the restrictions of the tower regulations on the smaller lots left in the core area and the increasing use of "air rights," these interior bonuses put great pressure on regulations meant to protect the openness of the streets.

Note: dotted lines represent maximum zoning envelope

4. Seagram Building

5. 1961 tower with bonusable plaza, FAR 18

6. Special Permit building

Fold Line

Fold Line

63

CURRENT BUILDING VS.
PRESENT PERMITTED ENVELOPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL 1½ HEIGHT, B AREA, DISTRICTS

CURRENT DEVELOPMENT
ROCKEFELLER CENTER
FLOOR AREA RATIO - 11.9

SINGLE OWNERSHIP
200' x 600' BLOCK
70-STORY TOWER
FLOOR AREA RATIO - 28.5

MULTIPLE OWNERSHIP
200' x 600' BLOCK
45-STORY TOWERS
FLOOR AREA RATIO - 190

PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT

unnecessarily restrictive in the wrong places. In
many instances, particularly in the high-bulk areas,
the present provisions dictate the shape and design
of structures, without regard for economy of con-
struction or the developer's specific needs for his
site and building. For each individual lot, the regu-

lations establish a rigid envelope within which any
building must be constructed. The central areas are
full of buildings in which the outer walls are de-
signed to fill the envelope, and the space inside is
then arranged as best it can be. Opinions differ as
to their appearance, but there is no denying that