From a Pittsburgh trade magazine called the Construction Record for April 4, 1914, we take this article about the implications of American skyscrapers. Already they had reached heights unimaginable in Europe, and the question of regulating the heights of buildings, and perhaps instituting some sort of zoning system, was coming up in cities all over the United States.
Heights of Buildings.
During the last eight months there has been under way a remarkably thorough and intelligent study of the regulation of the heights of buildings. This investigation was financed by a $15,000 appropriation of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment of the city of New York.
The commission has investigated the practice of many cities in America and Europe in height, area and occupancy regulations. Studies have been made as to the effect of these regulations on property and rental values and on the more general growth and development of the community. The attitude of the courts with regard to the constitutionality of such regulations has also been considered.
The commission’s investigations brought to light many interesting facts. One finds, for example, impressive evidence, of New York’s peculiar situation as regards building heights by comparing the city’s tallest skyscraper with the height of buildings in other cities. The Woolworth building is 750 feet in height. This is 670 feet higher than the maximum limit for buildings in London, 678 feet higher than the limit in Berlin, 685 feet higher than the limit in Paris, 671 feet higher than the limit in Rome and 678 feet higher than the limit in Stockholm.
A building erected to a height equal to the combined maximum heights permitted in these five great European capital cities would be seven feet lower than the World building, and the World building is only half as high as the Woolworth building. A building erected to a height equal to the aggregate height limits of London, Berlin, Paris, Rome, Stockholm, Edinburgh, Zurich, Frankfort-on-Main, Cologne, Dusseldorf and Hamburg would exceed the height of the Woolworth building by only 14 feet.
The maximum heights of buildings permitted by ordinance in some of the large cities of the United States having such restrictions are:
| FEET | |
|---|---|
| Baltimore | 175 |
| Boston | 125 |
| Charleston, S. C. | 125 |
| Chicago | 200 |
| Cleveland, O. | 200 |
| Erie, Pa. | 200 |
| Fort Wayne, Ind. | 200 |
| Indianapolis, Ind. | 200 |
| Los Angeles, Cal. | 150 |
| Manchester, N. H. | 125 |
| Milwaukee, Wis. | 225 |
| Newark, N. J. | 200 |
| Portland, Ore. | 160 |
| Providence, R. I. | 120 |
| Salt Lake City | 125 |
| Scranton, Pa. | 125 |
| Worcester, Mass. | 125 |
The commission’s report contains tabulations which were most difficult to obtain, but which were invaluable in framing the recommendations bearing on safety and health. In this connection there are tables showing the number of people on each floor in a number of typical factory and office buildings; showing the use of artificial light near the windows of office buildings on narrow streets at noon in summer on a bright sunlit day; showing the movements of people down stairways; showing the movements of crowds on the level; showing the congestion in office buildings, factories, large department stores, etc. From such data calculations were made showing the length of time it would take to get people out of certain typical crowded buildings, showing the congestion that would result in certain downtown streets if the buildings were vacated in a panic and showing the inadequacy of exit facilities in many buildings.
Much attention has been given by the commission to the districting or zoning system in German and Austrian cities and to the increasing adoption of this system of height and occupancy restrictions in the United States. The American cities represented in such maps are Boston, Washington, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Baltimore and Indianapolis.

