Cincinnati, Ohio: Acquisition of site and construction of postal station_ St. Paul, Minn.: Acquisition of site and construction of postal station___ $1, 150, 000 1, 000, 000 Mr. WOODRUM. Are those statements similar to the statements that went in the hearings on the last bill? The CHAIRMAN. They are the same statements. I am simply bringing these in before the committee to show what they have been recommending. Mr. WOODRUM. They are the same statements? The CHAIRMAN. The same statements that were in the hearings of last year; but those hearings are almost exhausted, and Members come in here every day asking for these hearings, and it will be necessary to put them in this hearing in order to give the Members of Congress that information. Mr. BUSBY. I would like to suggest that those lists overlap in certain places. The CHAIRMAN. I am merely offering them as evidence that there has been a necessity for public buildings for some time. Mr. BUSBY. I would like to point out a few cities where the two statements overlap, so that we might compare the two and get a total: Binghamton, N. Y.; Syracuse, N. Y.; Fargo, N. Dak.; Akron, Ohio; Lancaster, Pa. Each of those items is for a very considerable sum, some of them running over $1,000,000, and each of these cities is contained in the two lists. Mr. KERR. They are not contained in the list of 19? The CHAIRMAN. I do not understand that there has been a duplieation; but that is not a matter of any importance at this time. I am merely bringing this statement before the committee to show what recommendations have been made to this committee of Congress for several years back on the public-buildings question. Now, there is another matter I want to call to the attention of the committee. In front of each of you you will find a copy of the annual report of the Public Buildings Commission for the calendar year 1924. That has a lot of valuable information in it in regard to the building question in the District of Columbia. There are certain portions of this that should be in these hearings, and I ask permission to put as much of this report in the hearings as will tend to throw any light on the question of the need of public buildings in the District of Columbia, and in the meantime I suggest to every member that it will be a good idea for him to take this report and read it carefully, because you will find a lot of valuable information in it. If there is no objection, it will be so ordered. (The portions of the report referred to are as follows:) ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMISSION FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1924 To the Congress of the United States: In the annual report of the Public Buildings Commission of 1923 attention was called to the urgent needs of the Government relative to the housing conditions that exist in the District of Columbia. This is again reiterated in this report for 1924. The commission has endeavored to carefully review the housing conditions entering into the activities of the various departments analyzing the space situations very accurately with the purpose in view of alleviating the stress that now exists. The rapid growth of many of the departments has demanded an increase in the allotment of space, and in many conditions it has been almost impossible to answer this call and adjustments have been necessary within the departments themselves to make room for the changes that are occurring, which has resulted in crowding the workers, and in many cases hampering efficiency and health. A careful survey of the situation will bring to the attention the astounding realization that a great deal of money is being spent that could otherwise be saved. Time, one of the chiefest elements in economy, is wasted daily, and efficiency in operation in many cases is almost impossible. INTERNAL REVENUE AND GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE Reference is made to the report of this commission for the year 1923, show ing the conditions of the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the General Accounting Office. Conditions have not been alleviated in these activities during the past year; on the contrary the situations have become even more tense, and the needs have accumulated, as will be seen through a comparison of the reports of 1923 and of 1924. (See map.) Annual rental paid by Government for departments and independent establishments (District of Columbia), January 20, 1925 Arrangements have been made with the owners of the Hurley-Wright Building (now occupied by the Railroad Administration) to lease this building to the Government for the use of the various governmental departments. The Department of Commerce and the Interstate Commerce Commission have been assigned space in this building for future occupancy. THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE HOUSING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS The deplorable housing conditions of the Department of Agriculture are concisely represented by the mere statement that in the city of Washington it occupies 45 buildings or parts of buildings widely scattered. This situation involves an enormous waste of Government time and money. The loss of time and personal touch involved in having entire bureaus of the department, or large units of individual bureaus, so far removed from their respectitve headquarters that necessary official intercourse is hampered and delayed are handicaps on efficient administration that can not be measured in terms of money, yet do unquestionably affect efficiency of administration very injuriously. The condition tends also to create a feeling of separateness, even of isolation, on the part of the remoter units that is harmful. Interbureau and intrabureau conferences, coordination, and cooperation are hampered and restricted by separation. When, for example, a conference between the Secretary of Agriculture and the Forester is necessary, the latter must be called from 930 F Street, a half mile or more away. When the Chief of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics wishes to confer with a leader of work in Building C, he must wait until the man sent for can travel the distance, approximately seven city squares, from Building C to 1358 B Street. Intercommunication by messenger and truck is inevitably enlarged by dislocation of department and bureau units and in some cases clerical forces are unavoid ably duplicated. In addition, the difficulty of proper supervision is greatly enhanced, the expenses of operation and maintenance are increased, and the loss of time involved in the transmission of official papers, supplies, and personnel, while it can not be definitely expressed in figures, is undoubtedly enormous. The accompanying chart (see buildings plan), Exhibit No. 1, is not designed as a map of part of the city of Washington but is intended to show the position of the various buildings occupied by the department relative to the administration building in which the office of the Secretary of Agriculture is placed, together with the approximate air-line distances from the office of the Secretary. From the small storage building, located at Seventh and K Streets SW., to the fixed nitrogen research laboratory at the American University Park, the distance is approximately 7 miles. Much more important and significant than the remote location of a storage building, however, is the fact that important bureaus, such as the Forest Service, the Bureau of Public Roads, Bureau of Home Economics, and fixed nitrogen research laboratory, are at great distances from the office of the Secretary. Equally disadvantageous in the light of proper and efficient administration is the fact that branches of several of the larger bureaus are scattered in many buildings in different parts of the city. The picture of the housing conditions in the department shown on this chart discloses a situation absolutely indefensible from the point of view of efficient business administration. The valuable records of the Department of Agriculture-scientific, statistical, and business, as well as millions of dollars' worth of property-are exposed to an extreme fire hazard in many of the buildings occupied. It may be fairly stated that of all the buildings used in whole or in part by the Department of Agriculture only the following can be considered as of modern, so-called, fireproof construction: East wing (owned by Government); west wing (owned by Government); 1358 B Street SW. (Agricultural Economics, rented); 220 Fourteenth Street SW. (extension service Plant Industry, rented); 216 Thirteenth Street SW. (Chemistry, rented); Willard Building (Public Roads, rented); 220 Linworth Place SW. (Publications, rented); 221 Linworth Place SW. (principally cotton work, rented); 1350 B Street SW. (Animal Industry, rented). Of all the others the best that can be said is that their brick-and-timber construction may class them as "slow burning," while even this much can not be said of temporary buildings F and C, the inflammable character of which needs no elaboration. If the sprinkler systems installed in buildings F and C operate promptly in case of fire, the buildings may not become a total loss, but the amount of damage to Government property which might result from the water poured out can hardly be estimated. The best that can be said for the retention of these buildings is that, at the risk of human life and great property loss, the Government has saved considerable sums of money. The three principal safeguards employed-sprinkler systems, constant patrolling of the buildings, and fire drills of employees-are well designed to prevent loss of life. In case of an extensive fire nothing can prevent damage to property by fire or water, or both. The saving of money under the financial conditions of the Government has no doubt justified the risk of using these buildings for a few years, but certainly their use should not be continued longer than is required to provide equivalent fireproof space. No building for the Department of Agriculture has been undertaken by the Government since the completion of the two white marble wings known as laboratories A and B. These were finished and occupied in March, 1908, or nearly 17 years ago. The rapid growth of the department during this period has made necessary not only the occupation of additional buildings but of constant crowding in practically all buildings. Many units are in need of additional space to relieve these overcrowded conditions, which not only reduce the efficiency of operation but involve risk to the health of employees. Overcrowding is especially serious in the following: Agricultural Economics, Bieber Building and others; Plant Industry, west wing (entire); Division of Accounts, east wing; Department of Library, 1358 B Street SW.; Bureau of Entomology, Entomology Building; Insecticide and Fungicide Board, 220 Thirteenth Street SW.; while in buildings where overcrowding is not so serious it can be accurately said that there is no room for growth. Overcrowding has forced the use of far too much basement space for housing employees under conditions of poor light and imperfect ventilation which should not be imposed upon them. This is particularly true of the basement of the |