Chapter 5

The total cost of this apartment-house, including the building-lot valued at, say, $5 a square foot, has been carefully estimated at $617,771.

This is the highest of two competitive estimates given by two responsible builders, and comprises general cooking-plant, electric-lighting, steam-heating and ventilating apparatus, iron staircases and fire-escapes, elevators, copper roofing, architect's commission, and, in short, everything required for occupancy and use except wall-paper.

The first floor contains 16,688 square feet of available room. (By "available" I mean room which is directly occupied by, and which must be separately provided for each owner. That is, it excludes staircases, furnace, laundry, etc., which might be used in common by many owners and therefore need not be duplicated for each, and which are only indirectly serviceable to each owner in contributing to the usefulness of those which are directly enjoyed.) The six floors above contain 23,288 square feet of available room each, making a total of 156,416 square feet. Adding 10,880 square feet for basement storage and trunk-room for the suites, and 2,000 square feet in the basement for barber's shop, apothecary, carriage and other offices along the street fronts, we have a total of 169,296 square feet of available room in the entire apartment-house. Dividing the total cost $617,771 by this figure we have $3.65 for the cost of each square foot of available room in the building.

Our "tower" measures twenty-five feet front on party lines, by seventy feet deep. Its available rooms comprise parlor, library, music-room, eight closeted-chambers, two bath-rooms, a trunk-room, a dining-room, and we may add a kitchen for those who still believe in having an independent cook.

The area of these rooms is as follows:

Parlor 374 sq. ft. Library 374 " Music-room 154 " Chamber No. 1 384 " Chamber No. 2 528 " Chamber No. 3 170 " Chamber No. 4 252 " Chamber No. 5 162 " Chamber No. 6 286 " Chamber No. 7 242 " Chamber No. 8 315 " 2 Bath-rooms 144 " Trunk-room 136 " Dining-room 408 " Kitchen 384 " China-closet 136 " Other closets 410 "

Making a total of 4,859 square feet of available room in the "tower." Its total cost on a twenty-five foot lot of the average depth on the Back Bay, _i. e._, 112 feet, the land being valued as before at $5 per square foot, would be at the lowest estimate $32,000 at the present prices, the wood finish being equally good with that in the "flat." If we figure, however, for the same style of lighting, heating, ventilating and fireproofing, and provide an elevator and outside fire-escape, the cost could not be put below $40,000.

The same amount of available space, _i. e._, 4,859 square feet in our "flat" would cost at $3.65 per square foot as above estimated, $17,735.

If now we consider that the management of a private kitchen and an Irish cook does not actually constitute the essence of a home in its broadest sense, but, that on the contrary, it really deprives a home of its greatest charm, namely, peace of mind and rest of body, the kitchen and the cook's bed-chamber may be omitted from our "flat" in view of the public kitchen. The area of our "flat" then becomes 4,475 square feet, which, at $3.65 per foot, brings the cost down to a little over $16,000.

Finally, if we omit the dining-room also, with its china-closet, our area becomes 3,931 square feet, and the cost only $14,350 for the "flat," against $40,000 for the "tower," the former being but little over a third of the latter.

So much for the saving in the case of a large family and large suite. For a small suite, such as would be required for a single person, or a small family of two or three persons, the saving at once mounts to a very much larger figure; so much so, indeed, as to render the use of the isolated house in such cases a most inordinate extravagance, except for the very rich. Thus a single person, or a family of two or three, could be very comfortably provided for with three or four rooms, and a bath-room in an apartment-house having a good café. Estimating the rooms to measure 18 x 22 feet, their area would be a little over 400 feet each, including closets, and their cost $1,460 apiece; or for smaller rooms of, say, 14 x 15 feet, or 224 square-feet surface, the cost would be but $818 apiece. An isolated dwelling, on the same land, of only eighteen feet frontage and fifty feet deep, would cost, including the lot at $5 a foot, not less than $18,000 or $8,000, without the land. Of course, in such an isolated dwelling, electric-lighting, steam-heating, fireproof stairs, and other luxuries of the "flat," would hardly be expected.

By the arrangement of our apartment-house, there are twenty-four corner-suites out of the eighty. These have direct sunlight on either one or both of their exposed fronts, and may be estimated as worth fifty per cent more than the rest. In other words, 3/10 of the whole available room space is worth fifty per cent more, and 7/10 correspondingly less than the average price of $3.65 per foot. Therefore, $3.65 x 1-1/2 = $5.47 = price of corner-suites per foot, 3/10 x the total area 169,296 square feet = 50,788 square feet x $5.47 = $277,810, which, deducted from $617,771, leaves $339,961 to represent the total cost of the remaining 7/10. The total area 169,296 x 7/10 = 118,507 square feet of available space in the inner-suites. Hence $339,961/118,507 = $2.86 as the price per square foot of the inner-suites, or all suites which are not corner-suites.

Now, as our estimates on the "tower" were made on the basis of its being an inner building in a block and not a corner-house, our estimates for the "flat" should be on a basis of $2.86, instead of $3.65, as taken. Therefore, our suite of 4,859 square feet would be but $13,896 if the "flat" were any other than a corner one, and if the public kitchen and café were used, it would be $11,242, or _but a little more than a quarter of that of the "tower!"_

The foregoing figures are easily explained, and their correctness verified by the following simple diagrams and considerations:

In Figure 2 the shaded parts of the plans represent the unavailable room which, under the apartment-house system, are rendered unnecessary, and they are practically wasted. Thus the eighty families, by uniting their eighty homes in one coöperative apartment, save 156 staircases consisting of seventy-six front and eighty back staircases, seventy-eight furnaces, seventy-nine laundries, etc., and nearly all the space they occupy, and the land, foundation and roof they represent.

This waste space may be graphically shown by the diagrams in Figure 3. The large black-and-white line represents the "tower," and the shorter the "flat." The black part of each line denotes unavailable, and the white part available room, the sum of the two denoting the total cubical contents of each dwelling. The white parts of the lines measure the same length in each case, because the amount of available room in "tower" and "flat" is assumed at the outset to be the same. Thus in the "tower," the front and back staircases and halls take up 22,000 cubic feet out of the total 106,000 cubic feet covered by the entire building. In the "flat" the proportional part of the halls and staircases for each suite is represented by a comparatively insignificant quantity as shown.

Again, an enormous waste is shown in the flooring, roof and air-spaces of the "tower," while this item is but a trifle in the "flat." The six floors, each 16 inches thick, and the roofing make up together in the "tower" 12,000 cubic feet, or nearly the equivalent of an entire story. Add to this 12,000 cubic feet of air-space under the roof and over the concrete, and we have in these items a waste of 24,000 cubic feet, against only 4,000 in the "flat."

Thus we see that the waste space in the "tower" actually exceeds the available. Yet it must be paid for at the same rate with the latter. Deducting the waste in the "flat" from that in the "tower," we find the balance of waste space in the "tower" to be equal to the available, showing graphically that the "tower" must cost, in these items alone, just twice as much as the "flat."

Figure 4 shows a block-plan on a very small scale of the apartment-house, and a block-plan on the same scale of 40 "towers" adjoining each other, and having the same available space as the apartment-house. These plans show how much more land is required to give the same accommodations (minus the conveniences and luxuries of an apartment-house) in the "tower" system than in the "flat."

The shaded portions in each block-plan represent the aggregate of available room in each case. This shows very strikingly what an enormous proportion of land and material is wasted in the "tower" system.

In short, the possible saving in first cost for each family adopting the "flat" system of building lies between $14,265 and $28,758, making an aggregate saving for the 80 families occupying the apartment of between one and two millions of dollars.

The annual running expenses are also greatly in favor of the "flat" system when the advantages of coöperation are used to its greatest extent.

Eighty independent Irish cooks give way to a professional _chef_ and half-a-dozen _attachés_. The wages and maintenance of the 80 cooks would amount to an annual sum of not less than $40,000; those of the _chef_ and his assistants to hardly $10,000, making in this one item a possible annual saving of $30,000.

The management of the 80 independent Irish cooks, if possible at all, could only be accomplished by the constant struggle of 80 worried and largely inexperienced owners or their wives. The management of the _chef_ and his _attachés_ could more easily be managed by a single person, either selected from among the 80 families and suitably recompensed, or employed as a professional manager at a regular salary. Or the entire control of the _café_, and kitchen could be let out by contract to some suitable caterer, if preferred.

Corresponding savings are evidently possible in every other department of housekeeping, including steam-heating, ventilating, laundry-work, lighting and elevator-work. In all of these particulars, coöperation, judiciously conducted, has been shown to yield surprising economies.

But there are other advantages even more important than its economy in favor of the "flat." Freedom from housekeeping cares has already been touched upon. In the "tower," life is spent in training and treating with servants, mechanics and market-men. The private cook is a volcano in a house, slumbering at times, but always ready to burst forth into destructive eruption. True repose is out of the question, and we are told that "the motive for foreign travel of perhaps one-half of Americans is rest from household cares and the enjoyment of good attendance, freed from any responsibility in its organization and management."

Security against burglary and fire is another. In a good apartment-house, trained watchmen stand on guard night and day to protect the occupants, and stand-pipes, hose and fire-buckets are provided in all the halls, and kept in repair for emergency.

The family may leave their apartments for travel summer or winter, knowing that their property is as secure as modern appliances, system and ingenuity can make it. Not so with our isolated dwelling. The cost of providing all these means of protection is too great to make them practicable. The result is that the fear of burglary and fire at all times causes uneasiness, particularly on the part of the wife during the absence of her husband.

Beauty in the architectural arrangement of the rooms is a third advantage of the "flat." In this it has all the advantage of the double house or residence of the immensely rich. The rooms may be grouped in a manner which renders possible the highest architectural effect, whereas in the "tower" the perpendicular arrangement evidently precludes such opportunity by limiting the design to a wearisome and monotonous repetition from basement to attic.

No argument can be sustained against the "flat" on the ground of transmission of sound or want of privacy and isolation, for sound may be as fully deadened as in the "tower" by means of the 12-inch brick separating walls shown in our plan, and the most improved deafening treatment of the floor-joists.

Isolation may be made complete in the "flat," the private halls and front doors of each suite being in every respect the equivalent of those in the "tower"; the only difference being that with the "flat" the outer world begins with the public hall and its elevator, while with the "tower" it begins with the public street and its horse-car.

Add to these advantages the possibility for a greatly enlarged and delightful social intercourse which a properly arranged and conducted apartment-house provides, and we have as near an approach to the ideal of a human habitation as has yet been devised.

J. P. PUTNAM.

ARCHITECTURE IN BROOKLYN.

The city of Brooklyn has at last waked up to realize her size and importance architecturally. Brooklyn, though growing very rapidly and having many buildings of importance, has really had very little good architecture, for the simple reason that the profession, not being in any way organized, could not, as a rule, receive the treatment due respectable architects. For this reason many young men who would not be capable of practising elsewhere, have flocked to this city, and by various methods, many of which are far from honorable, have succeeded in getting control of most of the work. However, we hope for better things.

The Brooklyn Institute some time ago decided to organize a Department of Architecture, and for this purpose a meeting of architects was called, which led to several more meetings and the attendance at these was exceedingly hopeful for the new department, some forty or fifty architects signifying their willingness to help along in the work; finally a public meeting was held in the Institute on Friday December 13, at which some six or seven hundred persons were present, and the Department was fully organized; the constitution carefully thought-out at the previous meetings was adopted, and the following list of officers chosen:

_President_, G. L. Morse; _Vice-President_, Louis De Coppet Berg; _Secretary_, William B. Tubby; _Treasurer_, Gustave A. Jahn; _Committee on Current Work_, Richard M. Upjohn, R. L. Daus and Louis De Coppet Berg; _Committee on Museum and Library_, Walter E. Parfitt, Pierre Le Brun; and Wm. Hamilton Gibson; _Committee on Competitions and Awards_, R. L. Daus, D. E. Laub, Russell Sturgis; _Committee on Professional Practice_, Walter Dickson, Albert F. D'Oench, Richard M. Upjohn; _Committee on Social Intercourse_, H. P. Fowler, Charles T. Mott and General Ingram.

During the necessary intervals of balloting, etc., the President, Mr. George L. Morse, made a short address, setting forth the history of the previous meetings, and congratulating the local architects on the prospect of having a strong and well-organized society.

Mr. Louis De Coppet Berg, of the firm of J. C. Cady & Co., Architects, then addressed the meeting as follows:--

When a young man enters a profession, and particularly the profession of architecture, if perchance he gets an original idea, or a little knowledge, he at once becomes very secretive, tries to keep it all to himself for fear some one else will benefit by it, and marks all his drawings "The property of...," and "Not to be copied, or used, without the consent of the author, _under penalty of the law_." As he grows a little older in his profession he begins to find out that a few others have ideas as well as himself, and know a little something once in a while; and as he grows still older he finds that there are a great many others, who know a great deal more than he does, and who have a great many better ideas than he has; and then it is, that he longs for communication with his professional brethren, and he finds that, in order to get the benefit of their ideas and knowledge, he must freely communicate his own to them. Hence it is that in most of the large cities we find some association of architects; Brooklyn, however, the third city of the Union, is unique in this respect, that it has absolutely no place where professional architects can meet and discuss the different problems of their profession.

To remedy this evil, the Brooklyn Institute proposed to establish a Department of Architecture, and for this purpose called together a large number of local architects.

Now, we have decided that, if we have any Department at all, it shall be a live one; and this reminds me of a squib I read in the paper the other day, telling how, somewhere in Spain, they had unearthed an old painting, which was pronounced a genuine Murillo. It was said that the experts could not as yet determine whether the subject of the cracked and dingy old canvas was a Madonna or a Bull Fight, but that, nevertheless, they did not hesitate to declare that it was a great acquisition to art. Now, that is the trouble with most associations of architects; if the subject for discussion is only old, cracked and dingy enough, they are happy. Nothing delights them more than to spend all their time and energies in discussing Etruscan or other antique architectures, or the exact differentiations between the many styles of architecture. Now, while we value the history of an art, and shall give it all due attention, we propose to remember that the modern architect, besides being an artist, must be one of the most practical and executive of business men.

We admit that our ancestors in the profession designed beautiful castles, magnificent cathedrals and lovely châteaux, but we remember that these castles, these cathedrals, these châteaux were planned without any comfort; that they had no plumbing devices, no methods for cooking, no systems of heating or ventilation, and no way of getting light but the miserable taper; while to-day the architect, besides being a thorough artist, who knows how to design and to color, besides being thoroughly up in the history of his art, must know how to plan for comfort, to construct for strength and stability; must understand all the details of boilers, machinery, dynamos, electric-wiring, heating and ventilating systems, plumbing and sanitation, and lastly must be able to manage the complicated finances of large undertakings.

Now, to carry out these ideas in our work, we shall, in the first place, establish a museum and library, to which we shall welcome all gifts of books, pictures, models, casts, etc., whether illustrating the artistic, or the practical side of the profession. Then we shall have a course of monthly, public lectures by competent authorities, the subjects of which will probably be very largely chosen from the artistic side of the profession. We also propose to have stated meetings of the Department monthly, at which some carefully selected papers will be read by experts, the subjects of which will be given out as long in advance as possible, in order that all may be thoroughly prepared for a full and open discussion; and then, after these meetings, in order to promote sociability amongst the members, and to show how thoroughly practical we are, we propose to have something to eat. We also hope later to establish schools, not only for young men, but particularly for draughtsmen, where they can be taught, not only the art of drawing, but also the many practical branches connected with the profession.

The meeting was also addressed by the Rev. Dr. Chas. H. Hall, President of the Associate Members. He spoke at great length and kept his audience intensely interested by describing his own acquaintance with architecture, beginning with the original negro log-house down South, then the prim buildings of old Andover and Harvard, and finally how he saw the great former St. Ann's of Brooklyn, the likeness of which, he said, could be seen any day on the piers of New York when they were unloading dry-goods boxes; and how he finally went abroad and saw the beautiful architecture of Paris, which he could not praise enough. He was also unstinted in his praise of the modern beauty and architecture of Washington. He also spoke of his visits to London, and, while he admitted that Englishmen thought their architecture beautiful, he took exception, and claimed that the great St. Paul's, though beautiful to the English eye, was a cold barren building, blacked with smoke inside and out, a place where you could not be comfortable, nor hear the speaker at any distance. We regret that we are not able to give a verbatim account of his witty address.

At the end of Dr. Hall's address, the lecturer of the evening, Professor Russell Sturgis, architect, of New York, addressed the meeting as follows, his subject being "The Study of Architecture," with particular reference to the architecture of to-day.

ADDRESS OF MR. RUSSELL STURGIS.

With regard to architecture and all the arts of decoration, there is a strange difference between the practice of them, and such study as looks toward practice, on the one hand, and the history and theory of them, with such study as that involves, on the other. Quite completely are these two studies separated, each from the other. A man may be most active and successful as a practising designer, and successful in an artistic way, too, with no knowledge and little thought of the history of his own branch of art, and with little curiosity as to its philosophy or its poetry. And, on the other hand, a man may be a very earnest student, and a happy and delighted student of the history and criticism of art, and know nothing, and care as little, about the profession or practice of any art, or about studio ways and studio traditions. I do not know that in any branch of human study this distinction is so marked and so strong. This is to be regretted, for many reasons, but it can hardly be done away with so long as the community is generally careless of both the theoretical and the practical--so long as the students and the practitioners alike feel themselves nearly isolated units, floating in a sea of good-humored indifference. This state of things only time can alter. Only time can civilize our new community in intellectual and perspective matters; but there are some other conditions which are more immediately in our power to modify, perhaps--let us see: