PART II. NEED FOR LOW-RENT PUBLIC HOUSING AND PROPOSED 3-YEAR PROGRAM-continued

(1) Tenant-occupied..

3. Total present substandard family dwellings, excluding temporary pub-
lic war housing (Negroes so scattered that no districts or even indi-
vidual buildings can be assigned as being Negro):
(a) Substandard housing on Apr. 1, 1940:

(4)

Total....

1,625

1,625

(b) Standard housing existing on Apr. 1, 1940, which has since become substandard (estimated at 1 percent per year of standard supply for white, and 0 percent for nonwhite) 42-year basis..

(c) Substandard housing existing on Apr. 1, 1940, which has since been
demolished, taken out of housing use, or rehabilitated:

(1) In connection with public-housing projects (equivalent
elimination since Apr. 1, 1940) -

(2) Other..

(3) Total.

(No rehabilitations of any appreciable naturemostly demolished.)

(d) Total present substandard housing (item 3 (a) (4), plus 3 (b), less 3 (c) (3)

(e) Substandard housing as percent of total supply (item 3 (d) and 2 (d))..

4. Total present vacancies in substandard housing, excluding temporary public war housing...

5. Number of families now living in substandard housing, excluding fam-
ilies living in temporary public war housing (item 3 (d) less 4).

6. Percentage distribution of gross rentals, including all utilities, in
tenant-occupied substandard family dwellings on Apr. 1, 1940:
Less than $3.

$3 to $4..

$5 to $6.

$7 to $9.

$10 to $14.

$15 to $19.

$20 to $24.

$25 to $29.

$30 to $39.

$40 to $49.

$50 to $59.

$60 to $74.

$75 to $99.

$100 and over.

Total.

800

7. Families living in substandard housing and paying gross rents or
rental equivalents high enough to induce private enterprise to pro-
vide an adequate supply of standard housing, either new or existing,
for their use:

(a) Lowest gross monthly rents at which new average-sized standard
dwellings for rent were being built in reasonable quantity by
private enterprise in 1940 (none were provided in any appreci-
able quantity. Figures from abutting towns):
(1) Monthly contract rent without furniture.

(2) Additional monthly cost to tenants for utilities not in-
cluded in contract rent..

$35 412

47

(3) Gross monthly rent (7 (a) (1) plus 7 (a) (2)).

(b) Lowest gross monthly rental equivalent at which new average-
sized standard dwellings for sale were being built in reasonable
quantity by private enterprise in 1940 (none-source as above):
(1) Selling price..

(2) Monthly rental equivalent without utilities.
(3) Cost per month of all utilities.

(4) Gross monthly rental equivalent 7 (b) (2) plus 7 (b)(3).
(c) Lowest gross monthly rent or rental equivalent at which an ad-
ditional supply of average-sized standard housing, either new or
existing, appears likely to be provided by private enterprise in
reasonably substantial quantities and available to families of
average size living in substandard housing, taking into account
any possible decreases in the cost of new dwellings below 1940
leve's through improved construction methods, etc., and also
any increased availability of existing standard housing at lower
rentals due to extensive new construction....

3 Opinion of local housing authority and building department. No separate water rent.

PART II. NEED FOR LOW-RENT PUBLIC HOUSING AND PROPOSED 3-YEAR PROGRAM-continued

(d) Monthly rent, or rental value, below which the market for lowrent public housing for average-sized families lies, allowing a 20 percent margin of safety below the rental amounts shown in item 7 (c) in order to further avoid any possibility of competition with private enterprise...

Corresponding shelter rent for white, $24; nonwhite, $0, (e) Percent of families living in substandard housing with gross monthly rents or rental equivalents above the upper limit of the low-rent public housing market, i. e., greater than the amounts shown in item 7 (d) (calculate from data in item 6)

(f) Number of such families (item 5 times percent in 7 (a)).
8. Number of vacant units of standard housing available to families
living in substandard housing, i. e., standard units with rents below
the upper limit of the low-rent public housing market (item 7 (d)).
9. Families living in substandard housing with gross rents or rental
equivalents below the lowest gross rents which can be achieved in
low-rent public housing under a system of graded rents and with
the financial assistance available under the United States Housing
Act:

(a) Lowest average monthly gross rent for all rent grades...
(b) Gross rent per month in lowest rent grade for average-sized
families (attach computing sheet at end of pt. II)

(c) Percent of families in substandard housing with gross rents or
rental equivalents below rent in item 9 (b) (calculate from
data in item 6).

(d) Number of such families (item 5 times percents in item 9 (c)) __| 10. Families in the low-rent public housing market:

(a) Number of families (item 5 less 7 (f), 8, and 9 (d))

(b) Number of families as percent of total present supply (item
10 (d) plus 20 (d))

(c) Number of families as percent of all families living in sub-
standard housing (item 10 (a) plus 5)

11. Public housing which will become or may become available to serve
the low-rent public housing market:

(a) Low-rent public housing temporarily converted to war use (PA

412W and PA-671):

(1) Total dwellings..

(2) Less number of present tenants who will probably be
eligible for continued occupancy when these projects
revert to low-rent status.

(3) Number of dwellings which will become available as low-
rent housing (item 11 (a) (1) less 11 (a) (2).

(b) Other public war housing which the local authority would want to
acquire for use in its low-rent program if approved by the local
government and authorized by the Congress (indicate these
projects with double asterisk in the list called for in pt. I, item 4):
(1) Total dwellings.

(2) Less number of present tenants who will probably be eligi-
ble for continued occupancy if these projects revert to
low-rent status

(3) Number of dwellings which may become available as low-
rent housing (item 11 (b) (1) less 11 (b) (2))

(c) Low-rent public housing units under contract with PPHA but not
completed (include deferred projects) –

(d) Total dwellings (sum of items 11 (a) (3), 11 (b) (3), and 11 (c)). 12. Net number of additional low-rent public housing units needed to accommodate families in the low-rent public housing market (item 10 (a) less 11 (a))..

13. Number of low-rent public housing units which the local authority contemplates in the 3-year program for which an allotment of funds is hereby requested:

(a) Number of dwellings.

250

PART II. NEED FOR LOW-RENT PUBLIC HOUSING AND PROPOSED 3-YEAR PROGRAM-continued]

15. Rents in proposed 3-year program and incomes of average-sized families to be served:

14 rooms-2 bedrooms.

96 rooms-4 bedrooms.

PART III. GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND COST OF PROJECTS TO BE BUILT UNDER THE

PROPOSED 3-YEAR PROGRAM

1. Changes to be made based on past experience: The local authority has not developed any public housing projects to date but have in mind the inclusion of the following items in the construction of its public housing program:

(a) Design of dwellings. Each dwelling should have an incinerator with hopper doors accessible from inside the building rather than outside. More space should be provided in each closet with doors rather than curtains. The open kitchen shelving has been found objectionable. Separate dining space apart from the kitchen is also desirable. Adequate storage space for each dwelling unit is recommended.

(b) Construction materials.-As much fireproof material as is possible should be used in the construction not only for economy of maintenance, but also for permanence and durability.

(c) Heating system.—A central heating system to furnish heat and hot water to the 250 dwelling units is also recommended.

2. Number of individual projects in proposed 3-year program: The local authority program to date entails the construction of one project of 250 units for white families exclusively.

3. Type of site anticipated: It is recommended that the site now owned by the Federal Government, known as Curtis Terrace, and upon which a temporary war housing project has been built, be used for the construction of this 250 dwelling unit project. The proposed site contains 20 acres and is situated in the central portion of the city, with shopping center, schools, and industries within easy reach.

4. Types of structures: Row houses made up of four and six apartments per dwelling are contemplated.

99279-47--30

5. Density: The local authority does not have any definite recommendations to make in regard to density, but will leave that question for further study and research.

6. Size of dwellings: The following proportions of bedrooms size units are recommended in the construction of the projects in the proposed 3-year programs:

7. Community facilities: It is the intention of the authority in the development of its future postwar low rent housing projects to include adequate community facilities such as small play areas adjacent to the structures for use of preschool children whose mothers demand that they play in the vicinity of their dwelling. It is hoped, however, that for the teen age children a large centrally located playground can be provided for organized play activities.

It is proposed that the projects would be provided with a combined management and community building which will have provisions for a large assembly hall and small social rooms in addition to space for health clinics, nursery, library, and so forth, all in proportion to the needs and size of each project.

8. Total development cost of projects:

(a) Total development cost per unit by types of sites:

On vacant land___

On semivacant land__

On slum land-

(b) Average total development cost per unit under 3-year program__ (c) Total development cost of all projects to be built under the 3year program.

$1,250,000

5, 000

1,250,000

Senator BUCK. This concludes the hearings on S. 866 and other related housing bills.

(Thereupon at 12:35 p. m., the committee adjourned upon the call of the chairman.)

(The following were later received for the record:)

NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY,

Washington 25, D. C., March 27, 1947. The CHAIRMAN, UNITED STATES SENATE Banking and CURRENCY COMMITTEE, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: In view of the "agitated" statement made before your committee yesterday by a representative of the National Home and Property Owners' Foundation, you may be interested in the accompanying report of the National Capital Housing Authority.

Because the witness presented figures purporting to deal with local public housing in the District of Columbia I hope you will check them with the section of this report entitled "Finance and Accounts" (p. 22), and especially the data on page 24. Among other pertinent items are NCHA's Financial Objective (p. 4) and NCHA's Rent System, Permanent and Low-Rent Housing (p. 5). The kind of doleful forecasting in which this witness indulged has been familiar since the attack upon public housing began back in 1943. (See footnote on p. 5.) Though granted three successive opportunities during hearings that extended over a full year, the opponents of public housing failed to substantiate their assertions.

This letter is submitted for the record, and the report (National Capital Housing Authority, Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1946) is for the official files of the committee.

Sincerely,

JOHN IHLDER, Executive Officer.

(Annual report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1946, is on file with the Senate Banking and Currency Committee.)

Re S. 866.

WHITCOMB & KELLER, INC., South Bend 2, Ind., March 26, 1947.

Mr. C. DOUGLASS BUCK,

Senate, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. BUCK: After more than a half century's experience in building houses, I am convinced that one of the principle reasons we are not getting more new homes is still the shortage of material for building. This definitely was the principal reason last year and while the material situation has materially improved, yet the shortage of certain items prolongs the completion of homes and discourages many people who have been wanting to build, from doing so. Of course the shortage of labor has occurred more this year than last year.

Of course the very high cost of building also tends to deter building and the Wagner-Ellender-Taft bill would only increase the cost and would really slow down building. I am satisfied that the private builders will supply all the houses this year and next, that buyers can afford to pay for.

Part Government building and part private building will not work. England affords this example.

Secretary, Committee on Banking and Currency,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. HILL: My attention has been called to section 502 of S. 866, by Senators Wagner, Ellender, and Taft, which purports to give Federal savings and loan associations the right to convert to associations under a State charter. As the supervisory authority of State-chartered associations in Colorado and as secretary-treasurer and member of the executive committee of the National Association of State Savings, Building, and Loan Supervisors, I wish to protest against certain provisions of said section 502 and respectfully request that these objections be brought to the attention of the committee which I understand is now conducing hearings on the bill.

(1) The section as drafted makes the right of a Federal association to convert to a State association subject to approval by the Federal Home Loan Bank Administration and also the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, and to such regulations as the Administration may see fit to promulgate, which presumably will determine the meaning of and what constitutes "upon an equitable basis."

I sincerely feel the citizens of this State, or any State or Territory, who are member shareholders of savings and loan associations operating in this State under a Federal charter, should have the right and the free choice to determine whether they wish to continue operating under a Federal charter or to convert and operate under a State charter. Member shareholders of associations operating in this State under a State charter have that right and free choice and it is not subject to any approval by this Department or any regulation issued by it. To me, that right and free choice is fundamental and must be preserved.

The Federal Home Loan Bank Administration, of which Mr. Fahey is the Commissioner, believes in that principle when applied to the conversion of a State association to a Federal association. The Administration, after its creation by Congress, presented drafts of conversion bills to State legislatures giving the right to State-chartered associations to convert to Federal associations and none of these suggested drafts, to my knowledge, provided for conversion subject to approval by the State supervisory authority, but only required a favorable vote of the member shareholders. Most of the States passed such legislation, and we have been given every assurance during the past 10 years or more that reciprocal Federal legislation would be enacted. It seems only fair and equitable under our dual system that Federal associations and State associations be permitted to convert on an equal basis.

(2) The section as drafted also gives the Insurance Corporation, in addition to the right and power to approve or disapprove any application for conversion, the right "to elect" to terminate its insurance and thereupon subsection (a) of