bls_0424_1926.pdf

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABORJAMES J. DAVIS, Secretary

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICSETHELBERT STEWART, Commiimlorur

BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES \ AO A BUREAU OF LABOR S T A T IS T IC S /................. W O . ^ 4

M I S C E L L A N E O U S S E R I E S

B U IL D IN G P E R M IT S IN T H E

P R IN C IP A L C IT IE S O F T H E

U N I T E D S T A T E S IN 1 9 2 5

DECEMBER, 1926

WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

1926

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ADDITIONAL COPIESor THIS PUBLICATION MAT BE PROCURED FROM

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON, D. C.AT

15 CENTS PER COPY


CONTENTS

Introduction and summary_______ __________ ________________ ____ 1-11Families provided for________________________________________ 3-5Housing trend, 1924 and 1925............... .......................................... 5,6Volume of construction, 1914 to 1925............. - ................................. 6-11

Explanation of general table_______________________________________ 11-13T able A. Number and estimated cost of buildings (new construction,

and repairs, alterations, and additions to old buildings) covered bypermits issued in 1924 and 1925, by intended use of buildings________14-83

Part 1.New residential buildings______________ ______ _______ 14-41Part 2.New nonresidential buildings__________________________ 42-69

Part 3.Repairs, alterations, and additions to old buildings, andgrand total of all permits...____ _____________ __________ ____70-83

in


BULLETIN OF THEU . S . B U R E A U O F L A B O R S T A T I S T I C S

N o. 424 WASHINGTON DECEMBER, 1928

BUILDING PERMITS Dl THE PRINCIPAL CITIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN 1925'INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

Shortly after January 1, 1926, the Bureau of Labor Statistics mailed a questionnaire to each of the 287 cities in the United States which had a population of 25,000 or over, according to the 1920 census, asking for information regarding building permits issued during the calendar year 1925. The questionnaire called for the number and cost of new buildings and for the number and cost of additions, alterations, and repairs to old buildings. The figures here presented apply only to buildings and do not include the ground. Further, the figures are restricted to official city limits and do not take into consideration suburban development.

As in 1924, full reports were received from 274 of these cities, but 2 of the cities which reported for 1924 did not report for 1925. However, schedules were received this year for the first time from Fort Smith, Ark., and Wichita Falls, Tex.' Over 85 per cent of these cities sent in their schedules by mail,

either direct to the bureau or to the State bureaus, and the latter forwarded these to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The States of New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, and New Jersey are now cooperating with the bureau in this work. About 15 per cent of the reports had to be obtained by sending agents to compile the data from city records.

Table 1 shows the total number of new buildings and the estimated cost of each of the different kinds of buildings for which permits were issued in the 274 cities from which schedules were received for the year 1925, the per cent that each kind forms of the total number, the per cent that the cost of each kind forms of the total cost, and the average cost per building.

i Earlier reports concerning building permits issued in the United States are published in Bulletins Nos. 295,318,347,368, and 397 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and in the Monthly Labor Review for July, 1921; April, 1922; July, 1923; October, 1923; June, 1924; October, 1924; June, 1925; September, 1925; October, 1925; June, 1926; July, 1926; and October, 1926.

i


2 BUTLDING PERMITS IN THE PRINCIPAL CITIES IN 1925T a b l e 1.NUMBER AND COST OF NEW BUILDINGS AS STATED BY PERMITS ISSUED

IN 274 CITIES DURING THE CALENDAR YEAR 1925, BY KIND OF BUILDING

Kind of building

New buildings for which permits were issued

NumberPer

cent of total

Estimated cost

AmountPer

cent of total

Average

RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS

One-family dwellings...................................... .Two-family dwellings......................................One-family and two-family dwellings with

stores combined............................................Multi-family dwellings................................... .Multi-family dwellings with stores combined..Hotels...............................................................Lodging houses.................................................All other...........................................................

Totiil.......................................................NONRESIDEKTIA.L BUILDINGS

Amusement buildings......................................Churches..........................................................Factories and workshops................................Public garages..................................................Private garages.................................................Service stations................................................Institutions......................................................Office buildings................................................Public buildings:.............................................Public works and utilities................................Schools and libraries........................................Sheds..:..........................................................Stables and barns............................................Stores and warehouses.....................................All other...........................................................

Total.......................................................Grand total.............................................

235,16838,7845,786

15,1191,771

342120204

4L76.9102.7.3

8 '1

$1,074,031,356

58,865,118 709,501,414 76,564,025

171,798,215 1,137,750

49,000,002

28.28.51.5

18.62.04.5 1.3

$4,5678,369

10,17446,92843,038

502,3339,481

240,196297,294 52.8 2,465,483,909 64.7 8,293

1,0471,2484,9995,196

209,1354,106

2541,879

300615

1,03817,309

56515,768

.2

.2

.9

.937.1

.7

.1

.1

.23.1.12.8.5

116,283,96163,457,806

173,378,31583,161,50188,221,15813,044,94253,429,157

263,904,58923,570,40943,890,487

163,027,8277,492,5461,300,890

243,220,4018,897,366

3.1 1.7 4.52.22.3 .3

1.4 6.9.61.24.3 .20)6.4 .2

111,06350,84834,68316,005

4223,177

210,351140,44978,56871,367

157,060433

2,30215,4253,418

266,062 47.2 I 1,346,281,355 35.3 5,060563,356 100.0 I 3,811,765,264 { 100.0 6,766

i Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.

This table shows that of every dollar spent for building in these 274 cities 64.7 cents were spent for residential buildings against 35.3 cents for nonresidential buildings. This is practically the same proportion as was shown in 1924, when 64.6 per cent of the money spent for the erection of buildings was spent for residential buildings and 35.4 per cent for nonresidential buildings.

It should be borne in mind that the costs shown in these tables are estimated costs declared in most cities by the prospective builder at the time of applying for his permit to build. Frequently the figures are under the real cost of the building. Many cities charge fees according to the cost of the building and this may cause the builder to underestimate the cost. Another cause of underestimation is that builders think that a low estimate will make their tax assessment lower. On the other hand, a builder may overestimate the cost and show such statement to a prospective purchaser.

In some cities the building commissioner checks over the cost and requires the builder to correct his figures. In many places, however, the estimate given is accepted if it is apparently reasonable.

It should also be borne in mind that the data show merely the number of buildings for which permits were issued and that there is


more or less delay before work starts on the building, and considerable time often elapses before the building is ready for occupancy.

More one-family dwellings were erected in these 274 cities than any other class of building and more money was spent for their construction than for the construction of any other kind of building. One- family dwellings made up 41.7 per cent of all buildings for which permits were issued and cost 28.2 per cent of the estimated cost of all buildings. Private garages were tne next most numerous, comprising37.1 per cent of all buildings but only 2.3 per cent of the total cost of all buildings. Multi-family dwellings (apartment houses) ranked next to one-family dwellings in estimated cost, $709,501,414 being spent for their erection, or 18.6 per cent of the total amount expended for the erection of all buildings. More money was spent for the office buildings than for any other class of nonrcsidential buildings, their estimated cost being 6.9 per cent of the total estimated cost of all new structures.

The last column in the table shows the average cost of each kind of building. These averages range from $422, the average cost of a private garages, to $502,333, the average estimated cost of the 342 hotels erected in these 274 cities. The 1924 report (Bulletin No. 397) shows the estimated cost of the 331 hotels for which permits were issued in 1924 was only $275,531. The 1925 average of over a half million dollars per hotel gives some idea of the large size of hotels now in process of construction in these cities.

The average cost of one-family dwellings in 1925 was $4,567 compared with $4,314 in 1924, and the average cost of structures of all kinds was $6,766 compared with $5,721 in 1924.

FAMILIES PROVIDED FOR

Table 2 shows the number and the per cent of families provided for by each of the different kinds of new dwellings for which permits were issued in 272 identical cities in 1924 and 1925.

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 3

T a b le NUMBER AND PER CENT OF FAMILIES TO BE nOTJSED IN NEW DWELLINGS FOR WHICH PERMITS WERE ISSUED IN 272 IDENTICAL CITIES DURING THE CALENDAR YEARS 1024 AND 1926, BY KIND OF DWELLING

Kind of dwelling

Number of new buildings for which permits wore issued

Families provided for

Number Percent

1924 1926 1924 1926 1924 1925

One-family dwellings.................................Two-family dwellings................................One-family and two-fam ly dwellings with

stores combined......................................Multi-family apartments...........................Multi-family apartments with stores

combined................................................Total................................................

214*68643,9814,877

13,0761,429

234,02638,6836,786

16,1121,771

214,68687,9627,765

134,46510,908

234,02677,3669,622

171,27914,803

47.119.31.7

29.52.4

46.215.31.9

33.82.9

278,048 296,378 466,775 507,096 100.0 100.0

In the 272 cities from which reports were received 507,096 families were provided with living quarters in new buildings in 1925 as compared with 455,775 in 1924, an increase in housing units of over 11 per cent.


One-family dwellings cared for 214,685 families in 1924, or 47.1 per cent of all families provided for, as against 234,026 families, or46.2 per cent in 1925. Multi-family dwellings which provided 29.5 per cent of all new housing units in 1924 provided for 33.8 per cent in 1925. Two-family dwellings provided for only 77,366 families in 1925 compared with 87,962 in 1924.

Table 3 shows the number and the percentage distribution of families provided for in tiie different kinds of dwellings in the 257 identical cities from which reports were received in each of the five years, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, and 1925. For convenience, one-family and two-family dwellings with stores combined are grouped with two- family dwellings, and multi-family dwellings with stores combined are grouped with multi-family dwellings.

4 BUILDING PERMITS IN THE PRINCIPAL CITIES IN 1025

T a b u %-NUM BER AND FEB CENT OF FAMILIES PROVIDED FOR IN THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF DWELLINGS IN 257 IDENTICAL CITIES IN 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, AND 1925

Number of families provided for to Per cent of families provided for in

Year One-family

dwellingsTwo- family

dwellings1Multifamily

dwellings9All classes of dwell

ingsOne-

familydwellings

Two- family

dwellings1Multi- family

dwellings*

1021...................... 130,873170,364207,632210,818226,150

38,858 54,814117,680140,607137,082178,018

224,545377,305

58.3 17.3 24.41022...................... 80,252

06,34405,01086,145

47.5 21.3 31.21023...................... 453,673

442,010401,222

45.8 21.2 33.01024...................... 47.6 21.5 30.01025...................... 46.0 17.5 36.4

i Includes one-family and two-family dwellings with stores combined. * Includes multi-family dwellings with stores combined.

In 1925 housing accommodations for 491,222 families were provided in new buildings in these 257 cities. The largest number previously provided for m any year was 453,673 in 1923. In 1921 only 224,545 families were provided for, or less than half of die number provided for in 1925.

One-family dwellings provided for 58.3 per cent of the total number of families provided for by all new buildings in 1921. The percentage dropped to a low point of 45.8 in 1923, rose to 47.6 in 1924, and dropped again to 46 in 1925. Except for 1924, the percentage of families provided for in apartment houses was higher each year than the preceding year, rising from 24.4 per cent in 1921 to 33 per cent in 1923. The falling off in this class of dwelling in 1924 to only 30.9 per cent of the total nousing provided for was commented on at the time as possibly presaging a different trendthat is, a greater turning to the single-family dwelling. However, the rise of this type of dwelling in 1925 to the high point of 36.4 per cent shows that the apartment house has not yet lost its popularity. More families were provided for in new apartment houses in these 257 cities in 1925 than were provided for in all one-family dwellings and two-family dwellings m 1921, and almost as many as were provided for by one-family dwellings in 1922.

A further illustration of the trend of family habitation toward the apartment house is shown by the fact that the number of families provided for in multi-family dwellings has increased from 54,814 in


1921 to 178,918 in 1925, an increase of 226.4 per cent. In tho same period the families accommodated in one-family dwellings increased from 130,873 to 226,159, an increase of only 72.8 per cent.

HOUSING TREND, 1924 AND 1925

Table 4 shows the number and the cost of each of the different kinds of buildings for the 272 identical cities from which reports were received in 1924 and 1925 and the percentage of increase or decrease in the number and in the cost in 1925 as compared with 1924.T a b l e 4.NUMBER AND COST OF NEW BUILDINGS FOR WHICH PERMITS WERE

ISSUED IN 272 IDENTICAL CITIES DURING THE CALENDAR YEARS 1924 AND 1926 BY KIND OF BUILDING


Kind of building

New buildings for which permits were issued

1924

Number Cost

1925

Number Cost

Per cent of increase (+ ) or

decrease ( - ) in year 1925 com

pared with year 1924

Number Cost

RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS

One-family dwellings........................Two-family dwellings.......................One-family and two-family dwellings

with stores combined....................Multi-family dwellings.....................Multi-family dwellings with stores

combined...................................... .Hotels.............................................. .Lodging houses................................ .Other............................................... .

Total...................................... .NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS

Amusement buildings...................... .Churches.......................................... .Factories and workshops...................Public garages.......................... . -__Private garages................................ .Service stations................................Institutions...................................... .Office buildings.................................Public buildings................................Public works and utilities................ .Schools and libraries.........................Sheds............................................... .Stables and barns............................. .Stores and warehouses..................... .All other............................................

Total........................................Grand total..............................

214,68543,9614,877

13,0761,429

329135157

365,512,81148,323,922

558,519,74454,773,743 91,140^ 790 1,214,800

25,790,437

234,026

5,78615,1121,771

342120

$1,070,640,532 324,189,29458,865,118

709,354,33476,564,025

171,798,2151,137,750

48,997,002

+9.0- 12.1+18.6+15.6+24.5+4.0

- 11.1+29.3

278,669 2,070,276,772 296,043 2,461,546*270 + 6.2

981 1,251 4,854 6,038

223,750 4,120

340 1,521

291 660

1,035 19,150 1,169

14,537 2,783

59,206,095 58,395,579

173,045,738 80,068,49110,985,125 35,572,721

188,504,006 29,510,179 43,664,992

158* 718,052 9,088*240 1,393,020

184,931,512 6,107,648

1,0471,2454,9865,172

208,8714,088

2511,867

291615

1,03817,248

56515,6342,603

116* 283,961 63,438,306

173,288,004 82,922,231 88,187,397 13,002,792 53,232,157

263,224,314 23,382,859 43,890,487

163,027,827 7,475,688 1,300,890

242,326,605 8,897,366

+6.7 - a 5 +2.7

-14.4 -16.7 - 0.8

-26.2 +22.7

ao- 6.8+0.3-9 .9

-51.7+7.5-6 .5

282,480561,149

1,137,631,0803,207,907,852

265,521561,564

1,343,880,884 3,805,427,154

- 6.0+ 0.1

+15.7-1 .3

+ 21.8+27.0+39.8+88.5-6 .4

+90.0+18.9

+96.4+ 8.6+ 0.1+3.6

-10.4+18.4+49.6+39.6-2a 8+0.5+2.7-7 .8- 6.0

+31.0+45.7

In the 272 cities from which reports were received for both 1924 and 1925, permits were issued for 561,564 buildings at an estimated cost of $3,805,427,154 in 1925 compared with 561,149 buildings costing $3,207,907,852 in 1924. This is an increase in buildings of one-tenth of 1 per cent and in money expended of 18.6 per cent.

Residential buildings increased 6.2 per cent in number and 18.9 per cent in estimated cost in 1925 as compared with 1924, while nonresidential buildings decreased 6 per cent in number and increased 18.1 per cent in estimated cost.


The amount of money expended for the erection of apartment houses increased 27 per cent in this period compared with an increase of expenditure for single-family dwellings of 15.7 per cent.

The greatest increase (29.3 per cent) took place in the number of other residential buildings which include clubs with bedrooms, Y. M. C. A. buildings, etc. They also showed an increase of 90 per cent in the estimated expenditure in 1925 as compared with 1924

As shown by reports from these 272 cities in 1925, the United States continues to spend more for amusement buildings than for churches, the estimated expenditure for the former class of buildings being $116,283,961, while that for the latter was only $63,438,306, increases of 96.4 and 8.6 per cent, respectively.

For the first time since the bureau has been compiling these figures the number of private garages decreased as compared with the previous year, a loss of 16.7 per cent taking place in 1925 as compared with 1924.

VOLUME OP CONSTRUCTION, 1914 TO 1925

The Bureau of Labor Statistics, in the Monthly Labor Review for July, 1925, published an article showing the relative changes in the volume of building construction in 130 identical cities reported by year from 1914 to 1924. The 1925 figures as to volume of construction are now available.2 The purpose of Tables 5 and 6 is to show how much the country as a whole and the cities individually have overcome in the past few years the shortage in building occasioned by the war-time curtailment of construction.

In using these figures it must be borne in mind that they relate to new construction of all kinds, covering both residential and nonresidential buildings, and are limited to the 130 cities for which the bureau has permit data each year back to 1914. Further, the figures are restricted to city limits and thus do not include buildings erected in suburbs. Some cities, however, have had an enlargement of area in the 12-year period.

6 BUILDING PERMITS IN THE PRINCIPAL CITIES IN 1925

T a b l e 5.-IN D E X NUMBERS OF VOLUME AND COST OF NEW BUILDING CONSTRUCTION IN 130 CITIES, 1914 TO 1925, BY YEAR

[1914=100]

Year

Aggregate value of all

building construction, as

shown by permits issued

Index numbers of- Ratio of cost of material to labor

Permitvaluation

Cost of build

ing materials

Wagerates

Cost of construct

ing a typical

building

Amount of building done

Population

Material Labor

1914.................... $748,209,763 100 100 100 100 100 100 44.1 55.91915.................... 776,228,606 104 102 101 102 102 102 44.3 55.71916.................... 980,323,685 131 130 104 115 114 104 49.7 50.31917.................... 649,961,875 87 171 111 137 64 107 54.9 45.11918.................... 401,565,104 54 187 124 152 36 109 54.3 45.71919.................... 1,258,875,108 168 218 142 176 95 111 54.8 45.21920.................... 1,342,630,686 179 287 193 235 76 113 54.0 46.01921.................... 1,602,232,041 214 179 196 189 113 115 41.9 58.11922.................... 2,427,734,079 325 183 183 183 178 118 44.1 55.91923.................... 2,959,051,393 396 205 203 204 194 120 44.3 55.71924.................... 3,068,161,900 410 190 220 207 198 122 40.5 59.51925.................... 3,550,572; 815 475 191 228 212 224 124 39.8 60.2

1 See, also, Monthly Labor Review for June, 1925.


Table 5 shows the aggregate value of all buildings erected, as stated on permits issued in 130 identical cities, from 1914 to 1925, inclusive, together with the index numbers of this value, of cost of building material, of wage rates in the building trades, of cost of construction with material and labor combined, of volume of construction, and of population.

The index number f the aggregate value of all buildings constructed was obtained by using the cost of buildings (as shown by permits issued) during 1914 as 100. The building material and wage rate indexes are those of wholesale prices of building materials and of union wages in the building trades published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

To obtain the index numbers of cost of construction it was necessary to get the proportionate cost of material and labor in building as of some one year, and to apply to these figures the change in price from year to year in the two items, material and labor. According to figures complied by'Mr. Barclay White, a builder of Philadelphia, and presented to both the Philadelphia and the National Conference of Construction Industries early in 1921, skilled and unskilled labor together formed 36.99 per cent of the cost of building; and costs of materials, 42.88 per cent. The remainder of this cost is chargeable to supervision, insurance, engineering, etc. These figures are assumed to be as of 1920.

Mr. Whites figures were based on records kept on eight buildings described as follows:

The relative values of the various parts of the building have not been very carefully studied heretofore but we have made an attempt to fix an approximate proportion covering the whole building field in this territory. Wc nave gone about this by taking a composite of building, which includes a reinforced concrete factory building; slow burning or heavy construction ware house building with brick walls; the typical style of two-story dwelling; detached brick and frame residence; stone schoolhouse with wood floor construction; fireproof institutional building; the apartment house; and the steel frame office building. I think you will agree with me that these eight classifications come pretty near to covering the whole field in private building work.

According to Mr. Whites figures the ratio of cost of materials to labor in construction in 1920 was 64 to 46. In 1920 the building- material wholesale price index number of the Bureau of Labor Statistics stood at 287 and the union wage index number at 193. From these figures it was found that the relative cost of material to labor in 1914 was 44.1 to 55.9. The year 1914 is the base year of the table as it is the earliest year for which permit valuation figures are avail able.

Assuming that the percentages of supervision, engineering fees, etc., have not changed, then the actual money costs of these items have advanced at the same rate as the composite increase of building material and wage rates. Adding this cost will make no difference in the index numbers for cost in the construction.

The index number for the amount of building done was obtained by dividing the aggregate valuation index for each year specified by the cost-ox-construction index. The population index number was arrived at by using the population as estimated by the Census Bureau for 1914 as 100 in connection with the estimated or actual figures for the later years.

The chart on the next page illustrates in graphic form the information carried in Table 5.



As shown by the "chart the index of the aggregate value of all building constructed reached a peak of 475 in 1925that is, for every dollar spent in building construction in 1914 there were spent $4.75 in 1925. On the other hand, the cost-of-cons traction index climbed steadily until a peak of 235 was reached in 1920 but declined to 183 in 1922, and although rising thereafter the index number was* 3 3 2 S 2 I s 2 2 I 5 * * * %

8 BUIUMNU PEK MIL'S XX THIS PRINCIPAL CITIES IN 1925

I

g

1

I

i

i

i

S $ I 2 S S 3 s 2 2 I 5 S * s 5 *lower in 1925 than in 1920, being 212 in 1925. In other words, a house which cost $5,000 in 1914 would have cost $11,750 in 1920, $10,350 in 1924, and $10,600 in 1925.

Assuming that the buildings erected in 1914 cared for the needs of the population at that time, then the line of population increase is the normal line of necessary construction increase. It can be readily seen from the chart how the line of actual construction has varied


from this normal trend. The two lines reached the same point, 102, in 1915. In 1916 the amount of building done was 10 points over the population index. For the next five years, 1917 to 1921, the index of building done fell below the population index. This curtailment of building during the war and the early reconstruction years is what brought about the great shortage of buildings, dwellings especially. The low point in building was 36 in 1918 or 73 points below the building requirements for that year. The year 1922 was the first year after the war in which there was a surplus of building over normal requirements as measured by 1914 standards. The next three years, 1923, 1924, and 1925, each showed an excess of building over normal requirements for the specified year, as shown by the population line. At the end of 1924 the figures show that the shortage during the war period had been more than made up. The 11-year average of building done stood at 115.5 while the average population index for the same period was 111. Now 1925 shows a surplus of 100 points over the normal needs for the year, making the 12-year average (1914 to 1925, inclusive) of building done 124.5 as compared with a 12-year average of normal building requirements of 112; tnat is, over this period there is a 12% point surplus of construction over the normal needs of new construction, or in other words in the country as a whole, as indicated by the 130 cities, at the end of 1925, 11.2 per cent more new construction had been done than was necessary to meet normal needs. This conclusion is based on the assumption that the building done in 1914 supplied the needs of that year.

The following table lists the 130 cities separately, showing the index of building done and the population index for each year since 1914. The figures for 1914 stand at 100 for both items in all cities.

Unfortunately, comparison of volume of building with growth of population can not be made in some of the cities because the Census Bureau did not estimate the population of certain cities in which conditions were so unusual that the ordinary rules for estimating the population changes evidently would not apply. For instance, for Los Angeles, the Census Bureau estimated tne population up to 1923 for which year the population index was 155 and the building index 565. Thus, while in this report the building construction index for the average of the 12 years is given, it can not be compared with that of population because after 1923 the Census Bureau decided not to venture an estimate on population. Detroit, Mich., and Akron, Ohio, are other cities for which the Census Bureau has not made an estimate for each year. However, for most of the cities the population figures are available.

In arriving at a total of population for the 130 cities as a whole, the last estimate made was used where no estimate was mado for the specified year.



10 BUILDING PERMITS IN THE PRINCIPAL CITIES IN 1925T a b le 6 .INDEX NUMBERS OF POPULATION AND OF VOLUME OF CONSTRUCTION

IN 130 IDENTICAL CITIES, 1021 TO 1025[1914-100]

City

1921 1922 2923 1924 1925 12-yearaverage

Population

Volume of

construction

Population

Volume of

construction

Population

Volume of

construction

Population

Volume of

construction

Population

Volume of

construction

Populartion

Volume of

construction

Akron, Ohio............. 0) 50 0) 61 0) 90 0) 106 0) 170 0) 160Allentown, Pa.......... 133 50 136 96 140 124 144 135 148 216 122 93Altoona, Pa.............. 112 85 114 164 116 139 117 148 119 132 109 88Atlanta, Oa.............. 118 130 125 246 127 221 130 193 0) 105

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 11T a b le 6.INDEX NUMBERS OF POPULATION AND OF VOLUME OF CONSTRUCTION

IX 130 IDENTICAL CITIES, 1021 TO 1925Continued[1914=100]

1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 12-yearaverage

CityPopulation

Volume of

construction

Population

Volume of

construction

Population

Volume of

construction

Population

Volume of

construction

Population

Volume of

construction

Populartion

Volume of

construction

New Haveh, Conn... 114 77 116 120 118 143 120 92 122 87 111 00New Orleans, La...... 110 157 111 255 112 232 114 27$ 115 263 108 154Newton, Mass.......... 111 102 112 203 114 184 115 230 125 321 100 144New York, N. Y 112 203 114 305 115 335 117 350 114 418 100 102Norfolk, Va...............Oakland, Calif_____

127 133 131 142 166 130 172 157 0) 68 0) 118127 177 130 283 134 283 138 319 142 301 121 173Oklahoma City, Okla. 120 209 130 224 133 198 137 197 0) 130 0) 151Passaic, N. J ............. 111 172 113 254 114 212 116 250 118 360 100 167Paterson, N. J.......... 106 171 107 203 107 342 108 243 109 237 104 161Pawtucket, R. I ....... 110 98 118 128 121 210 123 156 122 276 112 114Peoria. Ill.................. 110 29 111 46 112 39 114 48 115 55 107 56Philadelphia, Pa....... 112 65 114 181 115 181 117 198 119 234 100 121Pittsburgh, Pa..........Portland, Me............

108 68 109 93 110 90 112 86 113 136 106 73112 76 114 146 116 194 117 131 119 83 110 102

Portland, Oreg.......... 116 94 118 148 120 149 122 170 124 210 113 101Providence. R. I.......Pueblo, Colo.............

104 114 105 130 105 174 106 224 116 173 104 116102 185 103 245 103 132 103 244 103 334 102 161

Quincy, 111................ 103 30 103 77 103 114 103 140 0) 111 0) 74Pa 109 180 110 229 111 187 112 255 113 281 108 152Richmond, Va.......... 126 145 128 237 130 226 132 194 134 271 122 146Rochester, N. Y ....... 123 97 126 109 128 129 131 157 128 153 117 03Sacramento, Calif___Saginaw, Mich..........

114 108 116 221 117 204 119 159 121 230 111 114122 237 124 215 126 133 128 202 130 204 114 157

St. Joseph, Mo..........St. Louis, Mo............

101 3 101 107 101 143 101 105 101 172 100 111109 60 110 107 . Ill 159 112 150 113 202 107 102

St. Paul, Minn......... 106 51 107 83 108 100 109 69 110 03 105 66Salem, Mass............. 0) 20 0) 26 0) 20 0) 48 99 33 0) 38Salt Lake City, Utah. San Diego, Calif.......

117 84 120 83 122 105 124 87 126 S3 113 80147 158 153 202 160 215 177 266 195 310 130 127

San Francisco, Calif.. 114 42 116 88 118 81 120 99 122 84 111 61Savannah, Qa........... 117 84 119 52 122 51 124 79 127 57 113 80Schenectady, N. Y__ 114 85 116 146 118 186 126 249 116 215 111 113Scranton, Pa.............Seattle, Wash............

104 75 105 160 106 113 106 154 107 170 103 050) 53 0) 85 0) 89 0) 104

%115

12 BUILDING PERMITS IN THE PRINCIPAL CITIES IN 1925Part 1 relates to new residential buildings, giving the number and

the cost of each kind of dwelling, the number of families provided with dwellings in new buildings and the ratio of such families to each 10,000 of population, in each city from which data were received for 1924 and 1925. It will be noted that the ratio of families provided for is based both on the population according to the 1920 census and on the estimated or actual population for the specified year. The ratio is worked on the two different bases because it is thought some people would prefer the 1920 figures as, in most instances, they are the latest figures compiled by census enumeration. In 1925 a census was made by several of the Statesnamely, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, New York, and Rhode Island. Where these State enumerations were made the Census Bureau did not estimate the population but used the State census figures. The other population figures are estimated in most cases, but they are undoubtedly more nearly correct for their respective years than the 1920 census figures would be. The estimates were made by the Census Bureau of the United States Department of Commerce. For some cities this bureau made no estimates.

In 1924 and in 1925 Miami provided for more families in proportion to population than any other city from which reports were received. As Florida was one of the States taking a census in 1925, the exact population for that year is given, and the table shows that Miami provided for 1,342 families to each 10,000 of population.

Following is a list of the five cities having the highest ratio of families provided for to each 10,000 of population according to the estimated or enumerated population for the year specified for each year since the compilation of such records.

1921Long Beach_______________ 631. 9Los Angeles_______________ 320. 9Pasadena............................... 251. 7Shreveport......................... . 249. 8L akew ood.......................... 191. 3

1922Long Beach..........................1,081. 0Los Angeles.................... ....... 441. 6Lakewood.......................... . 358. 9Miami............................ ....... 268.1East Cleveland...... ........ ....... 267. 6

1923Long Beach....................... 1,038.1Los Angeles........................... 657. 4Miami................................... 611.1

1923Irvington_________________ 432.1Lakewood.............................. 381. 3

1924Miami8........................ ........ 2,248.9Irvington.............................. 501. 2Los Angeles4....................... 448. 3San Diego.............................. 378. 0Long Beach........................... 347. 6

1925Miami8............................... 1,342. 0San Diego.............................. 392. 0Tampa................................. 379. 3Irvington............................... 374.6Los Angeles4.......................... 331. 0

Ever since 1921 California has had at least two cities in this group of five leading cities. This year Florida joins the select group with two cities to match the California cities.

3 The ratio of families provided for in Miami in 1924 was based on the population as estimated by the Census Bureau for that year. In the light of the actual census taken by State enumerators in 1925 it would seem that the estimate for 1924 was below the actual population for that year, hence the ratio here shown for 1924 is probably higher than the actual population in that year would warrant.

4 Population not estimated in 1924 or 1925; 1923 estimate used.


EXPLANATION OP GENERAL TABLE 13Long Beach, which led all cities in the building of new homes in

1921, 1022, and 1923, fell to fifth place in 1924 and this year dropped out of the list altogether.

The 274 cities which reported in 1924 provided for 508,510 families, or at a rate of 136.3 families to each 10,000 of population according to the 1920 census and 123.4 families to each 10,000 of population according to the estimate for that year. This compares with 455,775 families provided for in the 272 cities reporting for 1924, or a ratio of 122.4 families to each 10,000 of population according to the 1920 census and at a ratio of 112.2 according to the estimated population for 1924.

Part 2 of General Table A gives the number and the cost of new nonresidential buildings for each city from which reports were received.

Part 3 shows the number and the cost of additions and repairs to old buildings, the number and the cost of installations, and the grand total of all buildings, both new and old.

The number of installation permits and the construction cost were obtained wherever issued by the building inspector. In a number of cities, however, these permits were issued by offices other than that of the building inspector and no reports on installation were received from such cities. In 1924 there were 83,790 installation permits issued in the cities reporting installations and a total of $36,531,135 spent for this work. This compares with a total of 90,071 permits and with $42,156,913 expended for these installations in 1925.

The bureau attempted to classify additions, alterations, and repairs, under the heading of repairs, etc., for housekeeping dwellings, nonhousekeeping dwellings, and nonresidential buildings. Many of the cities which reported by mail, however, grouped them. In 1924 the total amount expended for repairs and alterations was $349,813,668 compared with $347,177,432 in 1925.

Following is a list of the five leading cities in expenditure of money for building operations from 1920 to 1925 inclusive:

1920New York__Chicago___Detroit____Cleveland. .. Los Angeles.

1921New York..Chicago___Cleveland... Los Angeles. Detroit____

1922New York__Chicago........Los Angeles. Philadelphia. Detroit.........

205520------2

$277, 695, 337 84, 602, 650 77, 737, 215 64,198, 600 60,023, 600

442,285,248 133,027, 910 86,680,023 82, 761, 386 58, 086, 053

645,176, 481 229,853,125 121,206, 787 114,190, 525 93, 614,593

1923New York...Chicago........Los Angeles.Detroit.........Philadelphia.

1924New York...Chicago____Detroit_____Los Angeles. Philadelphia.

1925New York...Chicago____Detroit.........Philadelphia. Los Angeles.

$789, 265, 335 334, 164, 404 200,133,181 129, 719, 831 128, 227, 405

836,043, 604 308,911,159 160, 547, 723 150,147,516 141, 402, 655

1,020, 604,713 373,803, 571 180,132, 528 171,034,280 152, 646,436


T a b l e A .NUMBER AND ESTIMATED COST OF BUILDINGS (NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND REPAIRS, ALTERATIONS, AND ADDITIONS TO OLD BUILDINGS) COVERED BY PERMITS ISSUED IN 1924 AND 1926, BY INTENDED USE OFBUILDINGS

FAST 1.NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS

City and State

. Akron, Ohio............Alameda, Calif........Albany, N. Y..........Allentown, Pa.........Altoona, Pa.............Amsterdam, N. Y _.Anderson, Ind.........Asheville, N. C .......Atlanta, Oa.............Atlantic City, N. J.Auburn, N. Y.........Augusta, Oa............Aurora, 111...............Baltimore, Md........Bangor, Me.............

Year

192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925

Housekeeping dwellings

One-family dwellings

Number

1,128 1,916

369

4294906193392524273

183184 414 595

1,612 1,252

371 411 63

. 45 157 159 289 350

4,59638

Cost

$5,124,9208,742,9311,306*6161,112,8973.137.600 4,825,250 2,897,0253.435.600 1,576,719 1,292,836

282.500624.500 391,270 423,525

1,445,661 2,689,650 4,664,247 3,595,000 1,446,290 1,854,225

313,100 247,776 511,732 585,672

1,414,433 1,93a 050

17,497,625 22,384,300

178,000 138,600

Families

1,1281,916

2994294906193392524273

183184 414 595

1,6121,252

3714116345

157159289350

4,596

Two-family dwellings

Number

136

131214

2311210

1135

16011

Cost

35,7502,630,5503,291,150

39,00039,100

548,000609,500

7,00020,000

1,023,140 516,390 103,375 230,950

3,100 15*720

2,279,8751,143,000

7.0007.000

Families

428

108

110112

4202270

730320

2

One-family and two- family dwellings with stores combined

Number Cost

$14,100 8,000

44,000 30,800

81,60015.00075.000

31.00046.55021.550 76,050

100.000

4,000

146,500184,0008,000

Families

Multi-family dwellings

Number Cost

$86,600165,26096,25075.000

913.000637.00038.00050.000 56,200 35,70018.000

128.000

241,4503,424,800

429,900725,100887,000

20,000660,000

1,345,00012,000

Families

2644337380

146121218104

27

571,074

291321200

615627916

Multi-family dwellings with stores combined

Number Cost

2 $19,83625.000

100,00025.000

156,73571,00043,000

18,60069,000

51.00050.00050.00027.000

Families

6104

143

1215

12121718

BUILDING PERM

ITS IN

THE PRIN

CIPAL CITIES

IN 1926


Battle Creek, Mich___Bay City, Mich___Bayonne, N. J.........Berkeley, Calif........Bethlehem, Pa.........Binghamton, N. Y__Birmingham, Ala__Bloomington, 111___Boston, Mass..........Bridgeport, Conn...Brockton, Mass.......Brookline, M ass....Buffalo, N. Y ..........Butte, Mont............Cambridge, M ass...Camden, N. J..........Canton, Ohio...........Cedar Rapids, Iowa.__Charleston, S. C___Charleston, W. Va.......Charlotte, N. C.......Chattanooga, Tenn-----Chelsea, Mass_____Chester, Pa...............Chicago, 111..............Chicopee, Mass....... .

1924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925

20023845421412

1,3231,426

203238

3,2653,058

97157304

1841725189

2,207

83443

442

8704813462435

197163648624210341

54

182311

9,149222180

971,5751,021,700

239.500 159,03082,500 58,200

5,38a 548 5,615,405 1,054,410 1,384,800 1,062,3011.321.200 6*126,432 6,304,548

480,000713.500

2.304.200 3,422,988

372; 715 531.990 907,200 871,350 958,400

1,27a 200 8,048,555

2,800 13,549

448,600 587,100

1,993,975 3,008,425 4.144,934 4,065*540 1,867,825 l,50a490

54,830 124,050 725,980 531,450

2,23a 385 % 153,388

480,410 793,700 21,800 18.500

835*600 1,607,500

48,653,725 50,627,150

902,400 711,800

20023845421412

1,3231,426

206246

3,2653,058

9715730452692

1281841725189

2,2072,258

38

3443

442

8704813462435

197163648624210341

54

182311

8,5279,149

222180

36

6490TS

30765

514514126995

1,061824

110

3,673129154

27a 000

485.000 412,500400.000495.000

414,550696,900374,710368*47048.00041.000

4,726,025 9,428,200

375,850113,50098,500

675.8501,637,5004,725,9403,684,865

1,258,8501,397,740

314,700318,600

10,600 61,100 6,000

58.150 81,10054.150

135,850 330,200 427,000

36*553,50042,992,500

966*5001,207,800

72

12410880

110

128180146614

1210

1,0741,872

102902824

138190

2,1221,648

220278

74

4222

365240

16868

104

6,5667,346

29

10,000

62,100 5a 90018,00035,55029,35010,00051,50035,000

20,000

67 j 95 !

589,050840,800

311

104,800151,670

4.500 2,000 1,200

44,70027,0008.500

5a 5002,900

48,500

4,104,0804,181,600

5a 200

100148

370367

314405421

42355631

1,6091,500

51

sa 000746,000

1,28a 2001,444,0501,094,154

42.000 338,906 427,440

1,015*29218.000 8*000

11,994,50013,969,744

8

264'480402

12109180365

74

3,2413,310

2,3iaooo1,823,1001,670,000

707,0004,000

2,356,5002,637,000

110,000125.000 506,750218.000 141,437

102; 50024.000

454,100 572; 200171.500113.500 274,00085.000

120,000 98,631,300 92,998.400 r 623,000

623,000

183297159

44085242520

1795042

416

15714083

1066218

42

11624

18,719 |19,271 |

201 !........219 i 4

1,14a 000

88,750

55,000

1,400,000

39,000567,900

11,000

9,55065.00087.00043,000

141,49012.170.00020.785.000

144,000

360

10

55226

977

6182020

1,7233,377

40

NUMBER

AND ESTIM

ATED COST

OP BU

ILDIN

GS


Table A . NUMBER AND ESTIMATED COST OF BUILDINGS (NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND R ^ A I ^ ^ T O I U nONS,AND ADDITIONS TO OLD BUILDINGS) COVERED BY PERMITS ISSUED IN 1924 AND 1925 BY INTENDED USE OFBUILDINGSContinued PART 1.NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGSContinued

at

City and State

Cicero, 111.....................Cincinnati, Ohio.........Clarksburg, W. Va___Cleveland, Ohio.........Clifton, N. J...............Colorado Springs, Colo.Columbia, S. C.......... .Columbus, Qa............ .Columbus, Ohio......... .Council Bluffs, Iow a...Covington, Ky........Cranston, R. I..........Cumberland, M d.._Dallas, Tex...............Danville, 111............ .

Year

192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925



Number

2851,4181,573

135 51

2,3732,445

303315222179136 160

2,2172,130

240275300323105

982,9002,708

197150

Cost

$2,123,0(702,207,750

10,199,96010,447,965

509,800167,485

17,014,89015,113,4701,509,1001,768,550

509,615437,790368,54582,775

10,124,800 9,916,800

737,625 881,450

1.350.0001.292.000

573,3002,156,600

696,750465*290

9,308,9768*437,775

975,100823,000

Families

1,4181,573

135 51

2,3732,445

303345222179136 16089

205 2,217 % 130

240 275 300 323 105 394 138 98

2,900 % 708

197 150


Number

65107193257

91,3351,428

6118

41038511273893482310

300468

51

Cost

$1,511,5901,332,4501,566,3002,276,900

40,0008*007*010

10,992,030 1,026,347 1,540,675

42*0002,2007*5008*800

3*383,7003,066,600

5.0005.000

148,500 190,000 437,050 387,550 159,43076,550

1,695^ 5002,488*75021,200

7,500

Families

13021438651418

2,6702,856

246442

1222

16820770

22

5476

186964620

600936102

One-family and two- | family dwellings with stores combined

Number Cost

$385*759380*5001 r 117,30018,050

83,000161,200

10,400274,900438,500

9.0004.000

45,000179,90034,30047,350

Famines

3031 1

1514610

12


Number

3103761

9

104190

2

Cost

$516,400 648,000

1* 115*100 418*000 37*500

U 212; 000 12,503,000

14,000 182,50023,73027,00035,950

2,879,000620,00016,00020,00080,000

574,70070,600

4,327,3003,769,450

40,000

Families

184156

3,099

541161

86

1718922

1,2018


Number Cost

$1,454,000255,000

1,057,300851.50037,000

420,000120,000534,500

4,950191.000464.000

30,000

53,000865,265110,000

Families

9944

19312

10534

154

3674

10"32"id

BUILD

ING

PERM

ITS IX

THE PR

INC

IPAL,

CITIES IX

1025


Davenport, Iowa.........Dayton, Ohio...............Decatur, 111..................Denver, Colo................Des Moines, Iowa........Detroit, Mich...............Dubuque, Iowa............Duluth, Minn..............East Chicago, Ind........East Cleveland, Ohio..Easton, Pa...................East Orange, N. J........East St. Louis, 111........Elgin, 111.......................Elizabeth, N. J............Elmira, N. Y ...............El Paso, Tex.................Erie, Pa........................Evanston, 111................Evansville, lnd............Everett, Mass..............Fall River, Mass..........Fitchburg, M ass.........Flint, Mich..................Fort Smith, Ark .......Fort Wayne, Ind.........

1924 2341925 1631924 5651925 5621924 6051925 7891924 2,7971925 2,6931924 1,1211925 9371924 11,8481925 11,9511924 1791925 1381924 6521925 6701924 2961925 1721924 661925 411924 521925 1041924 1621925 1971924 4991925 5851924 2021925 3451924 1601925 2881924 1541925 1861924 721925 841924 5421925 4531924 2741925 3601924 5571925 4341924 491925 821924 2021925 2551924 891925 1141924 1,2231925 9631925 1691924 1,3601925 1,326

1,024,750536*475

2,717,6902,601,7402,446,0003.347.300

10,804,10011.758.300 3,993,312 3,652,440

46,103,556 52,373,619

753,350 666,420

3,215*664 3,372,845 1,002; 245

671,218454.800338.800

1,172,9551,301,7151,455*1251,803,464

898,8001.980.0001. 200.000 1,728,000

840,545898,185274,528299,728

2,720,9582,646,7282,313,8653,759,5471,764,5421,514,915

202,600809,160

1,179,200341,595544300

2,887,3013,006,610

457,7356,718,9826,763,943

234163565562605789

2,7972,6931,121

93711,84811,951

179138652670296172664152

1041621974995852023451602881541867284

5424532743605574344982

114963169

1,3601,326

159115

47

57742511

3,1443,122

246

27121 76 94

. 33 2

85 793738 9 2

314358

13

6013353

456664

1045861943

24,0001,175* 146

834,450 61,600 64*750

446.000602.000 179,90082,500

23*782,029 26* 119,333

21,000 30,720 56,600

258*500899,985718,700890,000291,50011,635

815,918301,100270,500107,20022,000

2,600,0002,880,000

4,80022,100

351,900692,200779,500

377,500544000449,750793,260351,000427,55056,50028,92610,00019,000

8318230

814

1141485022

6,2886*244

48

1254

242152188664

1701587476184

628716

26

120266106

901321282081161221886

15.000 74,80050.000 10,500

28,75016*610

353*1006,500

27,48010,000

511,536410,984

6*10411,200

197,00048*472

202,250

2,000 i 1 6*000 1

117,300173,400172,000

428*9009415042,5507,000

55,6005,8004,000

10

13878 1

12

1718 23

41 57 134

637 437

2

10,000400,060134,625534,75075.00088.000

1,663,500 1,478,000

267,00079,500

21,469,16620,360,962

32,000185*000149,000664,478

1.514.5001.787.500

15*00032.000

2,310,600 1,532,000

68.000 315,300162,00045,000

35400014,50059,550

159.000 22400033.000

4,621,100 3,323,000

24400012.000

134.000676*700365,150231,200150,000107,154154,342184000

6 100 67

176 10 20

672 1,155

84 20

4269 4415

84835

185109431476

35

47439124814218

1214

8260309

872766754

33

1328147364548

24

332312

47.70077.70015,000

35,00062,500

8*810,95510,564231

60,000494950285,000474000

681,000649,000

261,000288,000

75,000

1,229,000

28,000 32,10015*000

122*50038,400

11"4

1020

1,3471,529

1212535

102

129128

64104

102

3215

NUMBER

AND ESTIM

ATED COST

OF BU

ILDIN

GS


PART I.-N EW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS-C ontinued

T a b l e A .NUMBER AND ESTIMATED COST OF BUILDINGS (NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND REFAIRS, ALTERA HONS,AND ADDITIONS TO OLD BUILDINGS) COVERED BY PERMITS ISSUED IN 1924 AND 1825, BY INTENDED UbL 0*BUILDINGSContinued

oe

City and State

Fort Worth, Tex..........Fresno, Calif................Galveston, Tex.............Gary, Ind.....................Grand Rapids, Mich__Hagerstown* Md..........Hamilton, Ohio............Hammond, Ind............Hamtrarack, Mich.......Harrisburg, Pa.............Hartford, Conn............Haverhill, Mass...........Hazleton, Pa................Highland Park, M ich.. Hoboken, N. J.........

Year

192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925



Number

1,120 1,243

250 192 125 211

1,043 1,193

966 1,274

99 83

386 466 806 766 160 108 341 328 134 177 57 61 54 62

Cost

$3,765,429 4,799,190

599,481 653,592 411,034 666,381

4,182; 6905.202.350 3,723,1505.166.350

396,000 320,450

1,192; 996 1,522; 941 2,525,225 2,890,250

544.700391.150

1,947,000 2,007,850 1,394,780 1,720,037

173.150304.700372,249206.500120.50028,500

Families

1,1201,243

250192125211

1,0431,193

9661,274

99

466806766160108341328134177576154


Number

44

100

512422111617 60 2918 1

224210

37

121843821

Cost

$33,00033,500

400,000

188,900328.200 132; 000129.000

9.0005.000

133.800 149,700357.800164.200144.000 18,000

2,300,5502,087,735

18,50051,000

1,001,6001,052,705

338.000 186,50053,800

Families

88

200

56102484422

3234

12058362

448420

614

242168764210

One-family and two- family dwellings with Multi-family dwellings

Number Cost

$2,500

15.00030.000

237,965123,60087,50085,6006,0007,000

47,500149,900187,000375,00011,500

130,0007,000

136,376106,78920,00094,5007,000

Families

60

Number

21162011

552

1412703111

Cost

$91,60087,4003,850

15.000 1,969,650 % 737,550

17.50067.50090.00029.000

271,200184,00021,000

347,00012,500

5,050,2004,831,238

14,000104,44371,539

2,997,300802,900175,000

Families

440783

8211710

1103

1,6611,632

6

17254


Number

45

Cost

$10,00020,000

803,80037.00050.000

168,00064,00060,000

317,5001,215,400

375,00083,000

Families

12

200

1032

42157831

10720

BUILDING PEBM

ITS IN

THE PRIN

CIPAL CITIES

IN 1925


Holyoke, Mass........Houston, Tex..........Huntington, W. Va___Indianapolis, Ind . . .Irvington, N. J____Jackson, Mich.........Jacksonville, Fla___Jamestown, N. Y ...Jersey City, N. J___Joplin, Mo...............Kalamazoo, M ich...Kansas City, Kans___Kansas City, M o.. .Kearney, N. J.........Kenosha, Wis..........Kingston, N. Y .......Knoxville, Tenn___Kokomo, Ind...........Lakewood, Ohio___Lancaster, Pa..........Lansing, Mich.........Lawrence, Mass___Lewiston, Me..........Lexington, Ky.........Lima, Ohio..............Lincoln, Nebr.........

1924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925

144110

2,467 807 822

1,692 1,897

239 495231232 7301,22025732886195084

218192886769

2,6853,648

167

476114107

1,01573313280

35524029022171649942261833

220267351155492642

1,050,500 931,500

7,23a 505 8,259,762 % 965* 153 2,977,290 6,666,980 7,658,172 1,368,630 2; 759; 775

945*000 898*200

2,562,505 4,698,960 1,196*350 1,644,100

150,200218,700752,100 622,400

2,011,368 1,567,735 9,211,300

13,150; 050827.900

1,556,218 2,521,875

524,170 589,750

3,051,460 2,454,268

422,765 285,065

2,944,350 2,256,800 1,490,600 1,743,000 2,423,065 1,995*700

184,700 151,300 90,000

17a 000 537,670 894*100

1,415*250617.900

2; 108*225 3,043,825

144110

2,467807822

1,6921,897

239495

7301,220

25732886195084

218192886769

2,6853,648

167205323476114107

1,01573313280

355240

71649942261833

220267351155492642

93 1,020,500 186 1 15,000 2 3 180 000 4653 591,000 106 5 45,000 7 3 14a 000 40 3 290,000 67108 715,783 216 17 60,300 28 80 1,042; 050 366 5 52,000 16126 869,425 252 21 150,500 30 144 2,833,873 727 2 45,000 921 200,500 42 31 181,200 39 4 43,500 18 12 171,272 5013 89,500 26 58 22a 200 72 7 179,800 52 10 295,000 87761 3,588,519 1,522 4 sa 300 7 30 1,96a 000 563 4 139,500 63576 2,677,251 1,152 9 4a 700 9 35 % 88a 750 654 4 125,650 32260 2,804,464 520 4 oa 000 6 107 2,80a 500 618 33 997,000 210239 % 507,750 478 23 348,000 40 29 597,850 120 19 572,100 1103 18,500 6 1 7,000 31 5*800 220 155,800 40 4 60,000 6 10 29a 700 6980 545,925 160 18 104,600 30 30 558,200 132*10 66,900 20 1 11,000 2 4 44,000 1613 101,500 26 4 43,500 22334 3*116,950 668 41 406,585 65 178 a 039,500 1,574 4 316,000 64369 3,275,000 738 50 954,500 129 106 7,797,500 2,036 13 889,000 229

2 10,800 4 4 29,500 6 1 7,500 41 5,000 2 2 8,000 318 90,000 36 1 oa 000 1230 165,000 60 32 247,500 50 12 166,000 2867 601,500 134 1 3,500 1 124 3,443,000 1,837 5 40,000 19107 915,000 214 6 49,000 9 116 4,197,000 1,243 4 60,000 24129 926,900 258 4 123,000 25147 1,477,600 294 4 443,500 77 2 isa 000 4422 174,600 44 8 78,100 16 2 225,000 4565 47a 000 130 18 244,950 25 1 12,000 34 31,500 8 2 18*000 23 30,000 63 12,000 6 5 9,800 7 5 29a 400 6011 63,000 22 4 16,000 4 6 519,800 734 23,300 8 4 35,800 187 44,425 14

307 2,317,800 614 29 1,615,000 725 18 690,000 180223 2,755,000 446 12 68a 000 74 14 655*000 528 68,300 16 2 16,000 81 3,000 2 1 5,500 i15 oa 000 30 21 105,000 42 3 175,000 12 2 75,000 107 44,500 14 9 82,500 18 .2 2a 000 1773 74a 300 146 52 641,330 222 0 166,300 4842 410,600 84 8 2a 500 8 34 391,200 116 4 80,000 4521 210,000 42 5 75,000 5 3 135,000 5227 27a 000 54 10 27,000 14 15 245,000 67

18 291,000 80 7 355*000 1006 118,000 407 145,000 55 O

NUMBER

AND ESTIM

ATED COST

OF BU

ILDIN

GS


PART 1.NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS-Continued

T a b l e A . NUMBER AND ESTIMATED COST OF BUILDINGS (NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND REPAIRS, ALTERATIONS.ANI^ADDITTONS TO OLD BUILDINGS) COVERED BY PERMITS ISSUED IN 1924 A&TD 1925, BY INTENDED USE OFBUILDINGSContinued

City and State

Little Rock, Ark.. Long Beach, Calif.Lorain, Ohio........Los Angeles, Calif. Louisville, K y_...Lowell, Mass.......Lynchburg, V a...Lynn, Mass..........McKeesport, P a..Macon, Ga...........Madison, Wis......Malden, Mass___Manchester, N. H.Mansfield, Ohio__Marion, Ohio.......

Year

1924102510241025102410251024102510241025102410251024102510241025102410251024102510241025102410251024102510241025 1924 1025



Number

726807

1,218031307308

14,600 12,4821,8021,622

13120710304

11010526836617814040855577

117264103102240163148

Cost

$1,822,003 2,153,651 3.576,230 3,266,060

088,245 1,302,280

42,147,252 43,436,258 6,382,750

11,056,450473.000 826,550 415,387 336,125 580,700

1,030,5501,020,850

070,055370,260411,785

1,053,0502,684,025

301.100606.100 730,740 606,355 861,865

1,33a 700525.000 384,100

Families

726807

1,218031307308

14,600 12,4821,8021,622

13120710304110

10526836617814040855577

117264103102240163148


Number

1865885

3,4571,643

13170048451

Cost

$072,150355,50046*15033,500

16,703,3610,078*565

878.000 5,112,200

338.000 281,40010,000

210,000704,10043.00012.000 0,000

200.500 111,000674.700 727,050327.500 202,255131.700 82,300

Families

3721161610

6,0143,286

2621,418

06002

56162

822

261581661126642


Number

187108

21

Cost

$21,0006,800

108,00011,200

511.000905.000

9.0005.000

3,00031,000

142,500

07,600176,500

0,00023.50031.50010.500 7,500

Families

261172

21


Number

3710110506

88763033

105554

Cost

$605,750281,450

2,507,5001,000,600

67,00010,810,58116,274,566

005*0002,602,000

47.50044.500 37,000

433.000 016*00026,000 22,000

261.000 75,000

272,000320.000447.000 252,15048.00010.000

13,600

Families

20071

04638022

8*2816,304

252510221014

130310103

74255765

28004

128213

Multi-family dwellings with stores combine!

Number Cost

$2,020,900145,05078,075

170,390806,01017,500

35,000

22,000

Families

53,000 i

1Co

1130

60258H

8

37,000 j 13

55* 000 ;.......20

nUUJMKG

lMiKM

ITS IN

Till? PRIN

CIPAL CITIES

IN 1925


Medford, Mass........Memphis, Term......Meriden, Conn.......Miami, Fla..............Milwaukee, Wis___Minneapolis, Minn___Mobile, Ala................Moline. Ill..................Montclair, N. J..........Montgomery, Ala.......Mount Vernon, N. Y_Muncie. Ind...............Muskegon, Mich........Muskogee, Okla......... ,Nashville, Tenn.........Newark, N. J............. .Newark, Ohio............. .New Bedford Mass....New Britain, Conn___New Brunswick, N. J..Newburgh, N. Y..........New llaven, Conn..New London, Conn___New Orleans, La___Newport, Ky...........Newport, R. I ......... .

1924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925

234 281

1,377 1,188

96 120

1,422 3,559 1,303 1,621 2,800 3,145

211 189 90

124 350 299 66

130 158 209 205 181 218 180 129 106 642 581 302 449 160 142 170 237 98

137 96

134 116 112 122 124 70 68

918 712

3 15 31 26

1,196,675 1,645,500 5,758,070 5,237,140

356,450 483,250

2,637,361 8,448,065 7,765,8808.355.245 9,851,300

11,928,310530,940528,810360.000525.000

3.826.246 3,498,214

190,5251,587,500 2,105,250

530,164 402; 755 606,000 499,050 261,880 239,950

1,233,640 1,617,965 2,407,615 3,578,463

489,700426.000994.000

1,348,000579,320

1,007,050384.000670.000706,600938,000960,475422.500312.500

2,340,200 2,213,800

6,70026,800

154.500 142,400

234 281

1,377 1,188

96 120

1,422 3,559 1,303 1,621 2,860 3,145

211 189 90

124 350 299 66

130 158 209 205 181 218 180 129 106 642 581 302 449 160 142 170 237 98

137 96

134 116 112 122 124 70 68

918 712

3 15 31 26

2412172562262326

193 246 738 475 175194

10724

1992038072

112641516

126 1161525

615702

510

2,095,7001,890,6001,070,470

832,340159,200166,600209,375817,995

6,940,4504,232,0001,418,4901,571,900

sa 000 10,000

313,367 173,100

1,517,287822,80063,845

12,500 31,800 59,000

8,553,020 8,210,130

8,0001,791,5001.750.000

738,700 813,900672.000384.000144.000165.000

1. 110.000 515,462106.000 175,500

2,700,7002,774,985

20,00050,300

4824345124524652

386492

1,476950350

1025813032

61620

1,4481,360

2

4061601442241283032

3050

1,2301,404

1020

2211612

1455949513

316736

167,30059,15025,35012,00026,500

225,000297,115860,500790,800

5,100

4,000

17,000

12,5002,000317,750

2,2755,000

17,000100,000144,000

23,0001,725,625

174,323

14624

1646665793

37 1 1

3305

65753139

383434425378863

1249

178138

5266

169210

12512

440; 000 1,170; 000

964,600 213,80096.000

5,864,38413,579,7943.065.0003.275.000 2,127,540 2,262,700

21.000

1,091,400482,500

3.729.0003.673.000

2,5008,00062,000

336,0007,295,5004,162,600

627,0001,353,5002,702,4502,942,900

2,000,0002,006,848

10,00025,000

605,950

4304075920

6,6254,967

81197674891819

110

726798

48

2298

1,427819

216604875

8354

11225207

1362818163

30122

144,300127,400

655.000 1,175,600

869.000 I 505,750 228,500

156,90085,500

373,7001,220,000

12,500

255,000

50.00070.000

272,000 374,725

201,5001,674,030

31,000

6322

5652771389275

3020

74240

64

155863

9836612

to

NU

MBKU

AND

ESTIMATED

COST

OF B

UILD

ING

S


T a b l e A . NUMBER AND ESTIMATED COST OF BUILDINGS (NEW CONSTRUCTION. AND REPAIRS, ALTERATIONS,AND ADDITIONS TO OLD BUILDINGS) COVERED BY PERMITS ISSUED IN 1924 AND 1925, BY INTENDED USE OFBUILDINGSContinued

PAST LNEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS-Continued

to

City and State Year



Number Cost

Families


Number Cost

Families


Number Cost

Families


Number Cost

Families


Number Cost

Families

Newport News, Va___New Rochelle, N. Y ...Newton, Mass.............New York City, N. Y.:

Bronx.....................Brooklyn...............Manhattan............Queens...................Richmond.............

Niagara Falls, N. Y___Norfolk, Va.............Norristown, Pa.......Norwalk, Conn.......Oakland, Calif.........Oak Park, 111...........Ogden, Utah............

19241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925 1924 392519241925192419251924192519241925

409541

1,8391,5107,4066,602

97

10,59614,8911,8471,332

202266470381187230191194

3,9914,641

313272279245

$44,000122,000

3.668.000 3,436,460 4,807,336 6,234,540

11,302,53010,211,90041,725,06539,777,325

493.5001.050.000

59,974,620 82,844,0407,445,430 5,721,048 1,027,858 1,422,335 1,734,855 1,500^ 669 1,049,270 1,175,458 1,182,300 1,387,875

12,706,572 14,814,035 2,472,500 2,605,200

704.500 753.450

262409541

1,8391,5107,4066,602

97

10,59614,8911,8471,332

202266470381187230191194

3,9914,641

313272279245

12035

143244

2,501813

5,0283,271

58204,8423,930

3261381261833022

$5,000235,400386.000

1.727.000 3,275,450

3a 963,200 9,041,150

51,042,850 32,273,7201.018.000

449.000 42,165,950 32,009,8652,256,800

987,9751,455,190

136,30077,200

24070

286488

5,0021,626

10,0566,542

11640

9,6847,860

6522762523666044

$161,00035,00027,500

17 $1,877,5002,153,500

387473

$230,000260,000

111248

1,589,4002,902,655

12.388.50015.131.500

200469

1,9742,672

3,500151,500315,800

1,004,1901,139,425

232,00076,50018,000

24070

31640432126

1,177 1,360

70 66 21 29 5 1 2 5 7 2

53 55

12,578,86013,763,600

519,600469,400187,375325,94023,70010,00018,02053.50067.50018.500

323,951 368,186

1,9982,334

8011,8192,246

431900

656

11 35 113

20,00052.090.00093.505.000 48,000,750 93,364,250

100,270,100112,335,00011,461,70026,656,350

649.000227.000 92,500

453.600 785,090178.600180.000

13,48623,53712,62924,91111,25911,962

1461

1171.400.0008.113.000 7,142,500

8,2451476333

1403689722

53101

1.424.0003.996.000

114,000261,965301,213

3a 000

32,000

42

213 179 , 27 ! 33 ! 2 i5

42.000 22,500

4,077,0172,929,1902,739,9503,185,200

27.000 134,000

61,001 1,188

404 700 18 66

4a 500 301,328 701,447 806,000 755,500

3550

3421,8631,544

324990235770

1180

210200144

BUILD

!N

Oklahoma City, Okla..Omaha, Nebr...............Orange, N. J.................Oshkosh, Wis...............Pasadena, Calif............Passaic, N. J.................Paterson, N. J..............Pawtucket, R. I...........Pensacola, Fla..............Peoria, 111.....................Perth Amboy, N. J___Petersburg, Va_............Philadelphia, Pa..........Phoenix, Ariz...............Pittsburgh, Pa.............Pittsfield, Mass............Plainfield, N. J.............Pontiac, Mich..............Port Huron, Mich.......Portland, Me...............Portland, Oreg.............Portsmouth, Ohio____Portsmouth, Va_..........Poughkeepsie, N. Y__Providence, R. I..........Pueblo, Colo_________

1924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925

732 1,139 1,741 1,802

70 108 129 192

1,147 857 100 100 214 224 183 250 100 100 378 434 96

104 41 24

9,597 12,473

246 416

2,001 2,195

181 176 201 214 165 210 142 56

160 165

3,988 3,500

325 358 87 92 51

497371356

% 002,109 3,076,850 7,042,970 7,174,655

652,764 1,161,079

393,6105,484354 4,362; 011

778,700700.000

1,225,251 1,206,978

833,8501,354*150

400.000 450; 000

1,859,900 2; 156,585

359,500 410; 039 134*710 71,600

54,117,937 66,609,967

726,121 1,360; 732

13,903,271 25* 302; 249 1,043,025 1,205,600 1,485,146 1,484,468

637,105 700,150 330,550 97,950

800.000 707,200

14,990,430 13,607,725 1,149,080 1,068,450

263,942352,900 414,700

6,605*500 4,836,900

822; 177 886*765

732 1,139 1,741 1,802

70 108 129 192

1,147 857 100 100 214 224 183 250 100 100 378 434 96

104 41 24

9,597 12*473

246 416

% 001 2,195

181 176 201 214 165 210 142 56

160 165

3,988 3,500

497371356

9239

11179

1982491472362525 148

26 221254

11540 36

187 2213462242424

1445

1682132

2326

267247

225

183,800559,700427,400260,500

429,541218,829741,320786.700

1,452,492 1,637,515 1,016,500 1,638,400

100; 000 100; 000 144,200170.000 161,800 175,950

5*100 460

398,790 764,662 160; 000 152,275

2,188*501 2,520,900

300.000465.700213,280

5,00018,200

230.000 120,700450.000 1* 684 000

8,6008,000

12,3004,000

207,200243,500

4,345,6003,815,800

8,500106,900

54132964244

18478

222158

29447250502816524424

1082308072

37444268

124484848

462890

3364264

4652

534494

450

441

11

3,800

15,000142,000

11,000

480,00016,00034,5006a 60044,80010,000 sa 00074,0004,000

64,700

3,25a 498 2,841,331

255,980429,300

8,500a7oo41,00033,200

8,00016,000

42,500a 100

9a 000

420514

33

59107201023349824 75

118

74121

2222

1115110

11572

107.000 34a 500 63a 125592.000 64,000

704.0001290,00024a 406827.000154.000833,000469.700319.700sa 00041.000

613,00072.00027.000

9,100.000 15,65a 000

204000 124,200

1,392; 032 2,19a 399

77,500 99,0002a 000

32a 000147,500 7a 500

335,000 32a 500

2,615,500 4* 47a 750

4a 50019.00027.0002a 000

222,200 347,500

1,54a 000 1,958,400

44,20014.000

4413317520016

16936

19895

14774

106231200105359

1442510

1,3072,478

6741

25837236326

8032

12073

731960167

101658

109355372217

33,000 7a 000

27a 000220,50089,90093.000

1,726,83021.00092,10068,000

124.000252.000

sa 000

17,70042,600

421

10

331610

174524

14

11

4 is

toCO

NUMBER

AND ESTIM

ATED COST

OF BU

ILDIN

GS


FAST 1.NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS-Continued

T a b l e A .NUMBER AND ESTIMATED COST OF BUILDINGS (NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND REPAIRS, ALTERATIONS,AND ADDITIONS TO OLD BUILDINGS) COVERED BY PERMITS ISSUED IN 1924 AND 1925, BY INTENDED LSt OFBUILDINGSContinued

t o

City and State Year

Quincy, HI............Quincy, Mass....... .Racine, Wis.........Reading, Pa..........Revere, Mass....... .Richmond, lndRichmond, Va......Roanoke, Va.........Rochester, N. Y ...Rockford, 111.........Rock Island, 111.... Sacramento, Calif..Saginaw, Mich......St. Joseph, Mo......St. Louis, Mo........

102419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925



Number

120 243 529 769 320 471 365 436 124 122 141 228

1,096 1,007

576 570

1,596 1,732

527 641 124 118

1,128 1,273

468 422 258 245

1,949 2,514

Cost

$607,000 986,350

2,403,900 3,765,130 1,720,172 2,754,954 1,753,600 2,289,000

410,450 415,540 434,500 705,675

5,703,475 8,942,110 2,057,398 2,163,765 9,221,687 9,718,115 2,071,290 2,541,400

372.000417.000

4,376,564 1,128,975 1,152,861

667,400 536,750

6,627,435 8,778,375

Families

120 243 529 769 320 471 365 436 124 122 141 228

1,098 1,007

576 570

1,596 1,732

527 641 124 118

1,128 1,273

468 422 258 245

1,949 2,514


Number

178146

27

34

742 727

Cost

$1,352,4001,088,550

45,0006,000

519,000423,80020,000

1,711,192189,950

3,117,3502,014,190

151,000276,50012,0003,500

264,871246,348

21,00024,000

4.106.9004.815.900

Families

356

1149810

37654

664444509642

8284

68

1,4841,454


Number Cost

$9,00021,500

80,00017,700

113,50038.00026.000

190,00047,000

351,100405,90018,60022,00010,00010,000

3.000 15.0002.000

34,250735,400

Families

41

121


Number

127

265

773

Cost

$30,200136.000251.000 113,825355.000

3,00026,00060,000

1,494,0004,370,150

26,5001,246,000

561,600215.500423.50026,000

372,550

246,000111,500

4,196,80011,290,608

Families

47102356236

13

1,03710

35717588

1188

1252047034

1,8083,971

Multi-family dwelling? with stores combined

Number

36

Cost Families

$150,000

111,500126,000

3518

179,000 67

592,3001,232,300

55.00085.000

360,000303,263274,978

123265

1620

1075

101

1,149,000 289

BUTIJDINfi

PERMITS

IN TIIK

PRINCIPAL

CITIES IN

1025


St. Paul, Minn...........Salem, Mass...............Salt Lake City, Utah.San Antonio, Tex.......San Diego, Calif___ ...San Francisco, Calif...San Jose, Calif............Savannah, Ga.............Schenectady, N. Y .......Scranton, Pa........... .Seattle, Wash..........Sheboygan, Wis......Shreveport. La........Sioux City, Iowa....Sioux Falls, S. Dak___Somerville, Mass__South Bend, Ind___Spokane, Wash.......Springfield, 111.........Springfield, Mass.. .Springfield, Ohio__Stamford, Conn.......Steubenville, Ohio..Stockton, Calif........Superior, Wis..........Syracuse, N. Y____

1924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925

1,771 2,015

43 46

876 803

1,780 1,724 2,808 3,151 3,379 4,001

446 453 193 247 495 470 403 327

2,818 3,618

234 227

1,276 799 696 609 280 257 1 11

734 1,217

451

434557537

16618975

168401367110152569720

8,629,7309,982,166

340,400337.000

3,230,575 2,001,170 4,424,320 5,216,477 7,003,422 8,975,691

14,945,937 15,428,952 1,311,110 1,423,740

805.950 939,275

2,919,6002,894,3001,935*4251.572.000 8,753,275

11,780,9601,043,3401.063.000 3,154,24S 2,022.6832.104.000 1,893,2001.085.5001.130.000

5,00095,500

2.835.500 4,872,900 1,294,0582.413.075 1,813,1752.028.075 2,272,775 2,115*950

639,350 902,860

1,182,550 1,357,100

354.000672.000

1,538,050 1,605*200

493,600613.950

3,189,310 4,596,650

1,7712,015

4346

876803

1,7801,7242,8083,1513,3794,001

446453193247495470403327

2,8183,618

234227

1,2767996966092802571

11734

1,217451

43455753724629316618975

168401367110152569720

12431452469 2 4

31135060964511199

143907570 47

13 8

59140814 26 83 81

248158

849,4681,200,390

385.000576.000 89,100

594.600 10,000 10,400

778,158 1,150,000 4,712,719 4,266,814

7.0007.000

125,35051,000

1,265,600830.600 543,800 519,285 387,280357,100 283,800

17.00012.000 3a 00048.000

507,500 891,30014.00028.000 40a000

146,900 85*400

3,823,200 2,642,800

6a 550 138*300 752,200 72a 00035,00048*20093,600

2,103,0001,321,300

184

9048

13848

622700

1,2181,290

22

3818

28618015014094

648

12116178

48

17626 16

1,182 816 28 52

166

496316

124.3201121800

5,00017,000

S!V82

17

137,700 195,318 185,300 66,610 50,860 8*500

221,300150,00030.000

151.000

58,50023,000

35*200

10,000

60,00033.500 44,8009,6008,800

44.500 9,000 5,250

28*50016,0008*000

4a 000

27,00025*3003,300

8 < 91,500 14 I 154,000

25

2845858

2513234474

489475

45 1

61

741,3202,052,100

170.000140.000 160,500

1,224,000402,400375,250577,084

1,075,2118,560,271

12,827,23156,45566,8057,500

609,000 4a 000

3,052,0007,812,500

100,000

51,000 29a 00012,000

2,072,0001,206,500

9.00010.00065,000

243.000348.000

2,144,500 1,513,000

458,169 505,100 12,000 7a 000

134,545 4a 000237.000209.000 371,500

1907153230

122621129141174279

2,8805,235

26254

10614

7641,952

20135

4304356

34

561

156116

34849 124371

118

3 I 338,840 I4 ! 249,600

108,450

28,220 ;

40.000 i63.000 1

20,000

35.000131.00025.000 46, (XX)

14.000 152,00015.00014,000

4a 000 168,000

5859

42105,850 | 40 10,000 4

418

60,000 I 260,000 ! 82,500 ioa 000

6271525

431

NUMBER

AND ESTIM

ATED COST

OF BU

ILDIN

GS


T a b l e A .NUMBER AND ESTIMATED COST OF BUILDINGS (NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND REPAIRS, ALTERATIONS,AND ADDITIONS TO OLD BUILDINGS) COVERED BY PERMITS ISSUED IN 1924 AND 1925, BY INTENDED USE OFBUILDINGSContinued

PART 1.NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS-Continued

to05

Oity and State

Tacoma, Wash___Tampa, Fla...........Taunton, Mass___Terre Haute, Ind..Toledo, Ohio.........Topeka, Kans____Trenton, N. J....... .Troy, N. Y .......... .Tulsa, Okla.......... .Utica, N. Y.......... .Waco, Tex.............Waltham, Mass...,Warren, Ohio....... .Washington, D. C. Water bury, Conn., Waterloo, Iowa__


Year One-family dwellings

Number

1924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925 1924 J92519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925

1,130 1,201 1,129

84 112 266 210

1,219 1,182

427 460 719 911 93 80

702 904 222 309 433 320 101 204 429 303

2,780 4,596

179 263 52 69

Cost

$2,569,3302,820,6502,457,4726,857,112

336.000448.000 801,525 664,700

5,012,660 4,646,606 1,276,460 1,435,400 2,860,780 3,793,812

614,910 597,650

3,022* 391 4,140,925 1,469,1001.869.500 1,341,700

996.900375.000

1,008,5501.419.500 1,050,900

21,318,03229,751,490

825,6201,326,300

572.900 599,500

Families

1,130 1,201 1,129 2,662

84 112 266 210

1,219 1,182

427 460 719 911

702904222309

101204429303

2,7804,596

179263


Number

2025

11467413

1342343931

121131

4264884

1265

Cost

$252,000 160 000 16,200 28,500

839,300 516,37038.00010.000 22,000

152,200 393,700 305,000 178,125 117,650

1,151,200 1,119,500

24,160272,700478,60054.00019.000

1,367,54447.000

215,000 262,750

7,000

Families

56404

10228134

826

2684687862

242


Number Cost

$19,0006,000

21,00016,8004,000

553,095271,400

800186 618 128,200

35,70069,00043,50084,3003,7001,500

12,00048,4004,200

34,700206,50016,0003,500

Families

35

Multi-femily dwellings

Number

21134

212

7412363

100

Cost

$241,100 2,891,545

24.00012.000 110,000337.000 815,200 112,900147.500335.500105.000

1,111,50042.00028.000 27,500 16,000

117,500272,00037,288

7,216,00016,480,000

925,300959,750

Families

97884

63

35104176

264121188

168318

1,9043,799

260

Multi-family dw< with stores combi

Number Cost

$98,000146,000

32.000 59,994

150.000

20,000149,000

7,100

1,946,000317,000

22,100

Fami-

2048

42015

427

BUILDING PERM

ITS IN

THE PRIN

CIPAL, CITIES

TN 1025


Watertown, N. Y .......West Hoboken, N. J ..Union City, N. J.___West New York, N. J.Wheeling, W. Va_......Wichita, Kans............Wichita Falls, Tex___Wilkes-Barre, Pa........Wilmington, Del........Wilmington, N. C___Winston-Salem, N. C .Woonsocket, R. I .......Worcester, Mass.........Yonkers, N. Y ............York, Pa.....................Youngstown, Ohio___Zanesville, Ohio..........

Total:272 cities.........274 cities.........

1024192519241925192419251924192519241925 192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925192419251924192519241925

19241925

1379420599

4262548658259731992062503817556

5424116346

620702467591301165

1,1131,070

197145

214,685235,168

739,450500,50085.000

496.50094.000

2,511,362 1,455,430 2,184,936 2,365*151 2,933,089

847.5001,480,374 2,094,614

345,700 210,000

1,901,169 1,602,083

295*250 222,400

2,834,435 3,416,865 4,087,850 5,529,208 1,065,875

657,777 5,190,125 5*158,200

437,225

925,000,5251,074.031,356

bls_0424_1926.pdf

Documents

t e d s t

t ic s

bureau of labor s t

i s c e

t i s t i c sn

b o r s t

t able

s o f t h e u n