72 Chi Sere Bag 93). Pr tse ed mnie ih ns tone Ne Yuk Zn end the Sete Sie ‘The page in 196 of New Yor Sin soning eglation chang he sues of he game for dsp design. To aon w regulating wes by dics (commer rien and worsted), he lew Ene the eight a uk ofl bling with ola cle the zoning ence Desgae o protect some measure of light and air or Manhattan's canyons, egued hat armani veal Nag above thee wa (aly 100 or 125 fet «buing must be stepped baka tose a accordance with ed angle em om he cee fhe set A toner ‘of ented bight war pein or one qurerf he ie. Te lng “setback” of “wedding cake” masting, with or without & ower, became the charter form forthe New York skyscraper from che 1920sebeough he 19504" Fi. 72) “The concept ofthe soning cavape wa enti sew. Rather san 4 {a cap on right 1 a Cicg, the New Yas aw exabshed ree simesional temple, (Fig 75) Before de ordinance, an owner eos tld seige up im the seep. ARE 1916, elt ws toe suid on one quarer ofthe be ut on ee uae of elt, bot alk and fom were eget eat 4 mast, The New Yok tus imposed resins on seven Sve pecent ofthe prope, wile tegen ve pace. Compre wth he ine i yea, eT regulion was substantial. This compro code contin sallow very dene development in pine ates, pili the ats we ses when spsraper requ ibe ty and iy xs o hes, and by mide many wee esa the once 00 be. a 1916 toa fer more than even years of led efoto it all buldngs, New Yoas zoning was ndark vet” Though the ely wen cetay, the onions ong ough to atayexweme density of era, congesion, ck of ight and sh sion rec and inside baling, and eas pb eh and fe, ‘specialise ero fetal become ass pole Ia ke an il dc, taller and ar bling canned ogee, muliphing chenea of thei lots up othr ines or mote and sting melhor into pe manent shadow. A photo Som around 1915 showed the Amin Sure Building, which evens yeas before had reigned over Broad, 208" vated by the Equiuble Bung and other towers. Fig. 73) ‘Urban reformers and City Beau advocates had been promoting 8 lini on bang heights nce the 1890s. Prominent architects such as ‘Thomas Hastings recommended & muximm of eight or ten ries a 1896, Emest Fagg, who later designed the Singer Building, oxi 2 Dan dat both eeglate the height and balk of builngs according 1 2 formula gewed w the wide of the szcet snd limited tower to one = ‘er of the ste, Flags pla, which was a peceden for the 1916 oriaace, ws pred in che pes but fe wo Gad poll sappor From 1906 29 1908, another effort contol height by revi the bung code was wise, bu agin the propos ile to be ipmente, Although there swas pete sympathy at Ciy Hal afer 199, when Fusion yor Wiliam J. Gaynor and Manhatan Boroagh President George P- MeAneay tok ofc, reformers could aot fre legato withou the bucking of bs ness andr ext ners. That sppor finaly began to materialize Between 1911 and 1913 and led direty tothe dang of the ordinance in 1915 and is pase in 1916. A major reat for chs shit was widespread concen for maintaining prope values” The real eae industry wat in eceson in 1913; after record acy i conveyances and consctin in 1995 and 1906, con suction dropped sharly dering the nancial panic of 1907 Anetra ner yearn 1909 saw the largest sumer fbn pins cr ia the borough of Manhattan, yet this burs was flowed by a slow, steady dedine ta January 1915, the Real Etre Record and Builders Guide repose thatthe previous evo years had een ate of “unprecedented seaguation” and tha prospect for recovery wee uncerai” Vacanis in highrise buldiags souk of Chambers Seect averaged 12.5 percent in 1913, with ats for de second rough sixth Hoos runing fom 15 to 17 erent Given these conditions of eversppy, ling oss ad deve ‘oper began to vor zoning resitions ne constrain Bg. 78 Span Lome Manna 915 ual Bag se oe ey aig po ey Chch In this cegard, the Equitable Bulding has offen been cited atthe structure that “wat Bal cause ofthe soning law" Bu ax historian Sally Chappell has shown, chat skyscraper was a hole in the ground {in 1913 when the Heights of Buildings Commision drated dhe ond ance, and was complete in 1915, that, when the pital suppor for the lw was solid Neverbles, the enormous structure di become 2 lighining ro for crc. A monotonous linestone wal ety 200 fet long and $42 feet high, cutoff many views co he arbor, while shading rime property for some four Blocks tt north The design was eazed by the pres at ee pug example of greedy, overcled development “The Equitile muted the area oft ot some tiny mcs, whereas the xml proposed bythe new zoning allowed only about ele nes the lotare. ‘Moe important, though, than the publ profesional esqu of ts eter of form was the inset fact of its vst inetiorspce—I.2 milion sare fet. Before the el was ede developer had opened 3 leasing fice and started an aggressive musketng campaign and although the ”Z se . ee x ae SS % % *, Seas = ake % = eee = See Fe 7 es anew Te 7 Zag ang ee ih oulling id no it up immediacy, id socceed in stealing tenants 3 vvell as sunlight fom surrounding bling.” Asa esl, many owners requested and were ranted reductions in tax aneuments, a station dat reat concemed ity ofc "Tn was that oached many ote, the guitable Building demonstrated the vlnebiy of the busines dict, 1 contnaed unregulatd development and broadened dhe suppor for Psd by the Cis Boar of timate on July 25, 1916, he zoning ‘ioance applied the principe ofthe zoning envelope to all commercial highs, whether office buildings, ght mansfictring los, oF resides tial hotels (though aot to apartment houses until a change in the Mattiple Dwelings Law ia 1929) There were fve formulas bsed on the wid of the see andl he ange ofthe setback These were described “dati which refered to the height ofthe maxima versal wall lve the sree permied in hat ares" (is. 74, 75) For example, in 2 11/2 times dsc,” where the sect was 100 fet wide, te builing ‘could rise sher 150 Ect before the fst setick, Above tha eel, ehe nas had to step back in aio of 1:3 oe foot back fr each three feet of addtional height. On 4 10000 wide set in a "2 eines ds trick” the fede could reach 200 fee Before ie Hegan stepping back at the ate of Is. The ive formule produced umerous permutations ince n"89.7577 Peemo Bun (1927) ao 10 WS (093), both the width of ret and the fctor of multiplication vad, In gener a, blldings on avenues could se sheer for about fouren to eighteen floors on side streets, nine to tele stories before dhe fis setback mas The zoning envelope had several important effects on skyscraper ie 75(20 al See ein gr fos er ce og Kb, Building a Times Square o 120 Wal Sueet show how owner and archi ‘ects squeezed the maximum from the zoning envelope (Fig, 76-78) “Thee ziggoat ike structures did not develop the option fora omer, “which wat offen the cae on mide sted lots. eau tomers were expen sive wo bil, many developers pei more eomdmieal strc hat fered good sate of rtm without higher as. In prime ates wit high ress, though, rowers were standard. The Lincla, Chania, Freeh, and General Hlectic Bultags and $00 Fith Avenue all capitalized on Proximity to Grand Cental (Fig. 79, 8, 82-84 The Bank of Manbatan Company, Irving Trast/1 Wal Sret, and City Bank Farmers Trost rowed towers of ity to seventy storie into the congete finns tee. Fig. 81, 85,86) Symmetry and visa balance wee architectaral eas often stcrBced for addtional ret, especially in buildings that Fond on two suces governed by dillrent envelopes, a astra by the asymmetrical masing of mos ofthe buldags shown hee nop ina on os 108) ‘san. oes ha ta 920) en Bs ag 9. on g/t Wee 08) Ba Fame ok 3 ” 1s1g 7 Cha ang 198). pe Sa “The ring formula also encourged lage bullings. The unlimited ‘eight permite on one guar ofthe site made large lots pariulely sees, since they allowed for taller, more profitable rowers, Besse such ofthe space inside a towers conumed by eeator hasan bee serie aes, at least 100 x 200 fe was seeded tw make 3 rower of iy oie paccale, The Bank of Manhattan Company crammed seventy floors onto an ineguar Wal Sweet loc af abou 150 x 200 fee. (ig. 81) In midtown, the seventy story Chrysler Bung occupied a ste 200 x 205, fee, ad had rower lors with p 0 8,800 square fet (Fi. 7, 90) The cnormity of he Epic State Buillings te, 197 425 ee, meant hits ower could expand to 100 x 212 fee; this aorded upper Hors with out 15,000 square feet ofetabe space (ig. 96) Ths, bh he logic ‘ofthe zoning envelope ad the econo of development argued for big uns on large tes Some developer did ty to pack tl buildings oto smaller pares At te bay comer of Fifth Avenue and Forty second Set, By nine sos vere pled ont 3 lt esting only 100 x 208 fet, al the area of the Cher Bulag the rover floors of 50 Filth Avenue contained upto 4,500 square feet (Fig. 84, 89) The thiny-ightstory Fred French ullding, on FiRh Avene a Fory-B8h Sweet, occupied aft only 79x 200 ee and bal tower Hors fol 50D to 3,00 square fet (Fp. 3, £88) In comparton, in 1912, Bankers Test had squeezed about the me number of stores onto ase half the sae! An ate fm The American Archie 1930 noed thatthe French Bung was among the fst ro show “the econorie ponies of 3 tower on lot tat was ot t tat ‘ime, considered large enough,” and tht “the subsequent constuction of two mre tower ext fot along the avenue prove the soundness of the poli These bildings demonstrate how the equation of fore fills Finance savas esrching fr ew proo or its hanging variables Zoning ao affected the aethecs of dyscaper desig, By the mi 19204, number of artes and ees were writing about 2 new design spprosch tat some Ibe dhe setback sje.” The teen aes used in ‘his study with reservations, nevertheless, 4 new sethenicclealy had cvelved om the requirements ofthe zoning Iv" The change began ound 1922, when architect Haney Wiey Corbet and dlnetor Hugh ese began to publish ares and drags oa the potential inuence of zoning. Around 1923-1924, several new skyscrapers had turned the requirements ofthe zoning frnul o advange by redcing the number ‘of setbacks and emphasizing dhe power ofthe pyramidal mas in paw lar, the Shelton Hote andthe Barly Vere Telephone Buding were landed by crits who found heay in ther monumental scale and sing: fed slhoucte. These buildings helped to popalize an asthe of imple,FRENCH BUILDING CHAIN. BUILDING ‘ecto sph Fet ag 1927) 3-84 ayn ail seulpural mas shat became dhe benchmatk of progresve design by the Ini rwenies Bly Jacques Kaba, one ofthe most proie skyscraper designers of the period, abuerved: The New Yook zoning laws protecting ‘propery igh, light andar have encourage new at by resto ofthe very eteitions they contain, * “Finance tts the Fonesraton Ret Ralls Rul the Pet” In cones to easier periods when the best dexrpsons and nas of dhe rst apc of lice building desig were ofed by profesional writ crouch s Ba ence and George Hl the most ince dcusons of the high to appr in the prosonal prs inthe ewes were wren by the sgsraper architects themsehs, Tas ais give litle atenon face restment or oder pints of sg, but forse insead on ise of plan and program a they dctermined form, The fndamental of layout vere not mach hanged oa hot descbed eae, bu tis interesting wo hear them arcuate by pestcngstehiteces rather than by developers, Inulin managers, oF other profersonae ofthe real eae industry, The usp of dese ales may hae been in par forthe rhe r stalsh {ei creat a8 exper. Tesees, though, ut one mesie was 0 ep colleagues comprehend that ofc bung design had an inti logic ‘that had best be followed 4 produse asc bing Several aril, for example, described ow skyscrapers must be Akesigned fom dhe inside out, ftom the top down, and om the soles room to dhe lage whole, At Corbet explained in 1924 arc in The Arita Fru: “Th pen nr plan asic sa with he ru oor and ull 9p. Buia planing oc bing, one must reve si ocean fm he op ad ul sw, That one deve! opp uper Soo an St, ese thee at 2 pene of ‘pial wpe oor tooo god Boor The mor incame i oe oe9 Fr 50 e831. yp oo, a aoe cic plan range 0 be mei night te beer made one on te ground Boor thn (0 be teed weno thirteen th ne ws andre ae eta, the pel oor musth nad on the a fe piece nit So ae fn lan th un then oe rigs eel of thee seg ech sider of aie plas the nese in of ret Gel in a el pl he cio ming ett 9 afore Emphasiing the plac ofthe interior layout, Waker Kaha, Je, who vs employed in the ofc of Raymond Hood, observed in 2 1930 ale in The Amerown Arhitece “The fame of ding should noe be designed fon the point of view ofthe most practical engineering, but fom the standpoint of whac the space it endoses tobe wed for™ Sina, one ofthe architects of the Empire State Building, R. H. Sines, gsipped “Finance dictates the fenestration: ent rol rule he pari “There was a gent del of consensus abou the bet dimensions for the standard fice ui, which was generally abou ane fet wide ad twenty to tiny et deep, Ae Loomis Harmon noted that in oder w pei ‘the greateesibliy, “a nine fot wide oie is considered most desir able bythe greatest numberof tents, so thatthe column spacing. is ermine a about eighteen fet nd the fnesuation becomes a series of windows, each from four to Bie eet wide an from sx 0 seven Sct high, about nine eet on center." A 1925 study by the National Asiocition of Balding Owner and Managers (NABOM) contemed this point, showing that 4 nine foo width would accommodate the layout of ightyawo percent of ll private ocr ia the seven cies surveyed.” Deo architec Albert Kab favored somewhar smaller unit of cght fect with struct bays of atecn and 3a wo seventeen fet ™ Opinion ‘oti somensat on the opinal depth for ofce space, Corbet defined ‘the bese ofc ace in ems flit “The depth of well igh fice is never over ice the clear cling Height and twenty fee fr beer than swe”19 For Cae sing (199, se hans In “The Economic Design of Office Buildings," R. H. Shreve scribed ow the rpc fice unt in New York approinatelyeveaty feet wide and twenty-five to they fet deep could be divided ito eo sal ofices of rine to ten fe, ech wth a window “perhaps 46" oc 510" ide and with an aneroom oe wor space opening onto the publi cor Aon” These andar unite col be tned up slong both es af carsdor ssc or seen fet wide o proce ancien nd wel pln this arrange ment can be een in the tower etn ofthe Linco Bilin, or ina va sign on an CH plan, ain the mide seevons of the Chaser Bung ia 90) eis table une at est thee Boor plane cua iferent eves of the balling are needed exp the fem ofa New York setback, where- 2s inch ear peviods in both Chicago and New York, a wel as in (Chicago inthe evens, most all buildings could be described eter by lone plan of yp oor or bys plans, one ofthe bate and another of the omer scion. The erangement of the core—the elevators, series, and circle Sion—depended cn these ofthe site and it location, on wheter wat a corer of mi oak lt and on the presence of aeighborng structures oe the man dtecon of pedestrian tific. Foe small or medium sized los {here was more variation, sine the postion ofthe core hd tobe ape to renting satis, sich the ease of subdividing ofc sites ofthe potent lee fill ors.” Tis war he cae, for example athe French nd Lincoln Bung, and at 50D Fith Avene, where the eletors were placed tthe frend the lobby. (ig #8, 89) For arger sts that could support ters of adequate dimensions, dhe optimal arrangement was 2 fll perimeter of oficesencelng cea ‘ore, a8 seen in the Chaser and Empire Sate Bulag. (Fp: 90, 96) Because tower ace commanded the highest ofce rents per square foot, the potion of the elerators on upper Boor feted the plan ofl lower lett explained, where several banks of elevators were sequel “the problem becomes one of wo baking, ne placed en rp of the other, wih dhe verte creation of the tp building cunning trough the lower aan “express” sevice." The challenge wo the arctce »