SOME REASONS FOR THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.

RECOMMENDATION No. 1.-A "HOUSING LAW," DISTINCT FROM A "BUILDING LAW."

What is a "Housing Law"?

In brief, it is a unified and logically arranged code of regulations governing the construction and maintenance of the dwellings of the people. It omits technical requirements of construction common to all classes of structures. It includes whatever regulations are necessary to secure at least the minimum amount of light, ventilation, sanitation and supervision essential for healthful homes.

It is not a "tenement house law," since it includes all classes of dwellings within the scope of its operation, although its requirements do not apply equally to each class. No housing code can afford to disregard the necessities of the great number of people who live in one, two and three family houses.

The committee submits herewith the draft of "An Act Relative to the Housing of the People in the City of Boston.' ""*

Why Does Boston Need a "Housing Law"?

Because the present requirements for dwellings are scattered here and there throughout a code known as "The Building Law of the City of Boston," and in a few additional acts of the Legislature covering minor details. The housing sections of this code are not even consecutive. Details of construction are mixed up with details of maintenance. Matters which concern buildings hereafter erected are not separated from requirements intended solely for existing buildings. The functions of the Health and Building Departments are not clearly inter-related. And there is a lack of precision in the remedies provided for existing housing evils.

The standards of the present laws are in many respects not as high as they should be. In the eleven years which have passed since most of this legislation was

*Printed as House Bill 1308.

enacted such standards have been advanced in all parts of the country. While it is quite true that the topography of Boston compels specific standards not always necessary in other cities, it is also true that houses built under existing laws are not securing the light and ventilation they need. In matters of maintenance also in both new and old buildings, good housing standards require a more satisfactory code of law than now exists.

How are Dwellings Classified in the Proposed Law?

As (1) private or single-family dwellings; (2) twofamily dwellings; and (3) multiple dwellings. The third class divides into those multiple dwellings in which rooms are more or less permanently occupied in groups, and those in which rooms are more transiently occupied singly. No home of any sort can be excluded when the public health is considered. In varying degrees the Health Commissioner must include within his jurisdiction every building in the city where human beings live.

RECOMMENDATION NO. 2.- STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF ALL BUILDING AND HEALTH LAWS WHICH APPLY TO HOUSING.

Have the Present Laws Been Strictly Enforced? Few laws are enforced as strictly as they might be. The enforcement of building and health laws is the duty of officials who are opposed energetically by private interests adversely affected and are supported halfheartedly by a somnolent public opinion and an overburdened municipal executive. The committee has ground for believing that no thoroughgoing enforcement of the building or health laws has been accomplished in recent years. Even where it may be assumed that the will to enforce was present, the means have not always been sufficient.

Records of the Building Department contain no mention of violations that have been pointed out to the department and admitted. The records reveal hundreds of cases of violations that have been called to the owners' attention without result and referred to the Law Department where they are hung up today.

The Health Department has of late years taken its own cases into court. Usually this department's threat to commence proceedings has moved owners to make a beginning of amendments. The cases have been placed on file and the work left uncompleted. In many cases, more or less serious, no effective action whatever has been taken. (See Appendix A.)

In many cases the Health Department has no record of its own efforts to remedy bad conditions pointed out by responsible observers. In one case the record shows that a complaint on August 27, for filthy water-closets, accumulated ashes and garbage in the cellar, and missing rainwater conductors, led to prosecution in November and a fine of $5. In some fifty odd cases where prosecutions had been advised by the Deputy Commissioner of the Division of Sanitary Inspection no action had been taken for four months or up to the time when this committee began its inquiry. Yet prosecution when instituted appears to be effective in at least a majority of cases. It is said that 99 per cent of the defendants are found guilty and pay fines from $1 to $50. Even in the few cases that are appealed the conditions complained of are generally remedied before the case comes to trial and it is thereupon placed on file. What is needed is far more of such prosecutions.

The conditions ordered remedied are often less severe than other conditions, such as dark rooms, which both the Building and Health Departments have either failed to discover or have allowed to continue.

The Building Department admits in recent cases various irregularities that have been called to its attention. (See Appendix B.)

The building law reads (section 59): "Where an inner court is not located on the lot line, but is inclosed on all four sides, and the building does not exceed 50 feet in height, the least width of said court shall be not less than 16 feet." The department has interpreted this section to mean 8 feet, presumably because lot line courts under the present law may have a minimum width of 8 feet.

The department rules that section 63, paragraph 2, "The alcove shall have at least one window," means that the window may be in the room into which the alcove opens. This encourages the building of unventilated alcoves for sleeping purposes and defeats the intent of the law.