ancient cities

802 Tenement
therefore, met with resistance and were often
“watered down” and easily avoided. An inadequate
number of inspectors and their inability to
assign significant fines further diminished their
effectiveness. Consequently, construction of poorquality
housing continued over several decades.
Legislation began with minimal restrictions at
mid-century and became increasingly restrictive as
growth and overcrowding continued. Fireproofing
legislation, for example, at first mandated the use
of stone, brick, or iron for common walls only, then
fireproof stairwells, then complete fireproof construction
at the end of the century. Each increasingly
restrictive law met with resistance, as these
materials were more expensive than wood. Fire
escapes were also introduced in the second half of
the nineteenth century; their use as additional storage
space by tenants, especially for bedding during
the day, reduced their effectiveness for escape as
they were frequently blocked.
Public health and sanitation legislation introduced
codes regulating ventilation and building scale. These
laws sought to prevent the growth and spread of
disease as understood by nineteenth-century medical
science, which relied on a miasmatic theory of disease.
The theory argued that disease originated from
chemical ferments produced by dirt and decay and
could generate spontaneously under the right atmospheric
conditions, especially wherever sunlight and
fresh air were lacking. The crowded, dirty city slums
were a prime source and breeding ground. Increasing
the amount of light and air, considered to be natural
disinfectants, was thought to improve the health of
the city overall. Building codes, therefore, attempted
to produce new buildings with improved ventilation
and more windows.
Even with the introduction of germ theory at
the end of the nineteenth century, tenement neighborhoods
were still considered to be unhealthy.
Physicians as well as the general public continued
to believe in the spontaneous generation of disease;
the knowledge that germs could spread disease just
further emphasized the threat caused by tenement
houses. Clothing sold in the new department stores
of the nineteenth century was often manufactured
in tenement homes. Many people believed that
disease could be carried by these clothes to stores
and then to middle- and upper-class homes; servants
residing in tenements also brought these
germs with them to the homes of their employers.
These concerns led to legislation addressing
sewers, drains, windows, building heights, and the
size of yards and courts. New York, for example,
allowed building heights to reach six stories.
Boston, however, adamantly opposed tall buildings,
and most of its neighborhoods maintained
three- to four-story structures, the exception being
the crowded immigrant neighborhoods of the
North and West Ends where five- and six-story
tenements were built.
Although building codes became more stringent
by the start of the twentieth century, they did little
to address existing structures, and enforcement, in
any case, was difficult. Appropriation and demolition
of private property was rare in Great Britain
and the United States and, when undertaken by
local governments, removed only individual properties.
By contrast, Haussmann in Paris removed
large areas of working-class neighborhoods. New
housing for the displaced working class was not
built, and this created overcrowding in other areas
of the city.
Tenement House Reform Movement
Tenement house reform originated in London in
the 1830s and in New York and Boston in the
1840s. By mid-century, concerns for public health
encouraged philanthropic reform activities in many
European cities as well. Leaders of this movement
came from the private sector, including physicians,
philanthropists, and businessmen. They took two
paths. One emphasized the reform of tenants and
their homes; the other focused on rental housing
and sought to change management practice as well
as multifamily housing design. The first approach,
pioneered by London’s Octavia Hill, developed
into the more scientific social work approach by
the late nineteenth century. The second approach
promoted “5 percent philanthropy,” which urged
rental owners to limit financial returns to 5 or 6
percent and to invest more in maintenance while
keeping rents affordable.
Actual improvement of tenement house design
began to occur in the 1890s, when trained architects
tackled the design problem of affordable multifamily
housing. Early twentieth-century multifamily reform
housing featured increased ventilation, with most
projects emphasizing cross-ventilation through
apartments. To accomplish this, architects built