The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
FEDERAL
HOME
LOAN
BANK
Vol.
12, No- 6
Washington, D. C
MARCH 1946
O n e of the primary responsibilities of both
Government and industry is to provide prompt and
adequate housing for veterans. O u r veterans have
earned the right to a decent home in which to live.
Housing for veterans is not among the many
responsibilities of the Veterans 1 Administration. Nevertheless, the V A will continue to do everything within
its power to cooperate with all Government agencies
charged with this important task.
During the war our boys overseas were glad to
live in foxholes. Those same boys—our veterans—are
not glad at the prospect of foxhole living in the midst of
the greatest productive nation on earth. A l l they ask
is the simple comfort of a home for themselves and their
families.
General, U. S. Army,
Administrator of Veterans' Affairs
COLONEL LEE
APPOINTED
GOVERNOR
The Federal H o m e L o a n Bank Commissioner has announced the appointment of
Colonel H a r o l d Lee as Governor of the Federal H o m e L o a n Bank System to fill the vacancy
caused b y the recent resignation of M r . James F. Twohy.
A s s o c i a t e d with the Federal H o m e L o a n Bank A d m i n i s t r a t i o n since 1 9 3 4 , Colonel
Lee has been its General Counsel for the past seven years. H e is intimately familiar with
the operations of the District Federal H o m e L o a n Banks, the Federal Savings and L o a n
Insurance Corporation and the H o m e Owners' L o a n Corporation, the three units of the
Bank A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Commissioner Fahey said in announcing the appointment.
" C o l o n e l Lee has an enviable record as an organizer and administrator a n d , as G e n eral Counsel of the Bank A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , he has rendered outstanding service to the savings
and loan institutions of the country," the Commissioner said.
Prior to his promotion to the top legal post of the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Colonel Lee was
Deputy General M a n a g e r of the H o m e Owners' L o a n Corporation, in charge of Property
Management.
H e had a previous broad experience in the mortgage field and was an
officer of one of the large eastern mortgage companies before coming to Washington.
During W o r l d W a r I Colonel Lee served with the United States A r m y in France, first
as a b a t t a l i o n commander and later in command of a regiment of the 1 6 2 n d Field A r t i l lery Brigade. His home is in O k l a h o m a City, O k l a h o m a . H e is a graduate of the
Missouri M i l i t a r y A c a d e m y and received his legal education at the University of Kansas.
158
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
A s leaders in the home financing field, the Presidents and Boards of Directors
of the Federal H o m e Loan Banks can be of invaluable a i d in the Veterans' Emergency
Housing Program, because they can help in attaining the public understanding which is
so necessary to its success.
A n d the member institutions of the Federal H o m e Loan Bank System can d o
a great deal in behalf of the veterans' program. W i t h the present inflation in existing
housing, and with a great volume of new housing being produced, every safeguard should
be given to our veterans a n d their families—desperate in their need for homes. Institutions
with protective services are the best places for these veterans to go for sound advice and
the members of the Bank System can a d d to their stature b y taking the leadership in seeing
that veterans get such services.
I look to savings and loan leaders throughout the country for their counsel and
help in meeting the problems ahead and obtaining preference for veterans in all types of
housing, o l d and new.
ffr&Tfftl«*r
March
1946
159
A PROGRAM OF ACTION FOR VETERANS'
HOUSING
The target of 2,700,000
new homes in two years recommended by
Mr. Wyatt is a challenge to every segment of the home financing and
construction industries. This article discusses in detail the program
for reaching this goal.
By WILLIAM K. D I V E R S
Special Assistant to the Housing
•
Expediter
T H E Veterans' Emergency Housing Program,
which the President approved last month, embraces comprehensive recommendations to remedy
the acute housing shortage. I t has been described
as a daring and novel program. I t is actually one
well within the potential capacity of this country
which has shown clearly that there are no limits to
its ability to produce.
This proposed program, designed primarily for the
relief of veterans and their families, calls for the production of 2,700,000 moderate and low-priced family
units in the years 1946-1947. Admittedly, this is
a request for a staggering volume of production—far
beyond any normal expectation for the growth of
new home construction during this period. To believe that the home building industry can attain
such a goal unaided would be fantastic. Consequently, the basic purposes of the emergency recommendations are to accelerate this expansion of our
home building capacity, to stimulate the production
of building materials and to meet the impending
shortage of skilled and unskilled construction labor.
In essence, this program represents the first step
toward the elimination of a housing deficit which is,
in part, the cumulative product of 15 years of
insufficient activity in the residential construction
field—caused first by economic depression, then by
war. The concentration of home building in the
higher-price ranges in the past and the increase in
family formation in recent years have aggravated
the problem. Now that the war is over, it is the
emphatic opinion of virtually all groups that effective measures must be taken to overcome a situation
which cannot be justified in our peacetime economy.
The lack of adequate housing is a social and an
economic crisis. Immediate action to provide accommodations for about 3,000,000 families must be
undertaken without delay. A large volume of home
building at the proper price ranges offers the only
practical solution. This production is essential if
160
we are to prevent the crisis in housing from becoming a chronic ailment.
The goals which have been set are high. Despite
their magnitude, though, they are realistic—realistic
from the standpoint of need; realistic also from the
standpoint of our productive capacity, provided we
divorce our thinking from the frigid cubicles of the
many restrictive practices which have heretofore
combined to limit our building horizon.
Within the confines of scarcity economics, there is
no basis for a practical solution of our current
housing difficulties. To members of the home
financing fraternity it is undoubtedly apparent that
even the enormous volume of construction which
has been recommended is but a drop in the bucket of
our long-range demand. To those familiar with the
dimensions and characteristics of our housing market
it is evident that this construction volume by no
means will "build us out of our m a r k e t / ' For after
the emergency is met there will still remain an
enormous normal demand based on the continued
formation of new families and the replacement of
deteriorated structures clearly beyond repair, as well
as the large quantity of housing destroyed yearly by
fire, flood and other disaster. Without a doubt, the
building industry is embarking on what will probably
be its greatest period of sustained high production.
Like the other facets of our national economy, it
faces the challenge and the opportunity of continuous
full employment.
Unprecedented Goal
The 2,700,000 family units called for by the end of
1947 represent a rate of construction far in excess of
the peak reached in the twenties. To attain this
goal the home building industry is going to have to
exert itself to the utmost. I t can be done, but the
challenge to productive imagination should not be
underestimated. Current material inventories are
short. Current production capacity of the building
materials industries is inadequate. Labor must be
recruited and trained. Operative builders will need
to expand rapidly their organizations and perfect
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
their techniques. We can succeed only through the
cooperative effort of all associated with home building and finance.
The 1946 building season will perhaps be most
critical for the home construction and building materials industries. Not only will the goal set for the
current year require much humping by both, but our
success in placing 1,200,000 family units under way
this year will be indicative of our capacity to hit the
target for the following year and to accomplish our
entire emergency program within the desired twoyear limit.
Types of Construction
Of the 1,200,000 homes called for in the current
year, 950,000 are to be of permanent construction—
700,000 by conventional site building methods and
250,000 by prefabrication techniques. This is approximately the same quantity of permanent homes
as was erected during the peak year of 1925, and
we are relying upon private enterprise to do the entire job. The remaining 250,000 units going into
the total figure for the year are to be of publicly
financed temporary construction and will be secured
chiefly through the re-use of about 200,000 units of
such war housing as is available, plus the provision of
about 50,000 privately financed new trailer accommodations. For the latter, trailer manufacturers are
to be assisted in obtaining materials and in channeling the product into areas of immediate need such as
educational institutions, etc. From this it can be
seen that the overwhelming responsibility for veterans' housing is one for private industry. I t will require the best that our free, competitive economy can
put forth. Our requirements are great, and plans
must be far-reaching, for we buck heavy obstacles to
reach an expansion in home production such as has
never before been attained. The demands of the
problem make it a challenge; the nature of the problem makes it an obligation.
The solution to veterans' housing is fundamentally
one of industrial logistics. To do the job there must
be the organization, the materials and the manpower
all at the proper place, in the proper quantity and
at the proper time. By far, time is our most important consideration and to that extent it must
necessarily bear a strong influence on our choice of
techniques. First, this is an emergency condition
and in treating it we must approach it as such.
You can't cure a cancer with a headache powder.
Obviously, our entire program must be directed
toward an expansion of the home construction and
March 1946
building materials industries. The first problem to
be overcome is the bottleneck in building materials
production. This demands top priority if the expansion in new home building during the current
year is to be sufficient to reach our 1946 goal of)
1,200,000 units. Logically, our first step must be
to eliminate unnecessary drains on the limited
amounts of materials now being produced and this
will be accomplished through the postponement of
all deferrable non-residential construction until the
rate of production is sufficient to meet both requirements. Furthermore, to assure that available
materials flow into the production of low-cost homes,
we must rely upon a continuation of the priorities
system, while the reinstitution of allocations will be
required to assure that priority rating certificates
are more than mere hunting licenses and that there
is an equitable geographic distribution of materials.
The core of the solution for the building materials
problem rests in an increased production of both
conventional and new materials. To secure this,
it is proposed to expand the capacity of currently
operating firms and to draw into this field new
manufacturers, as well as marginal producers who
are currently unable to compete. A series of steps
has been recommended to achieve these ends, the
most prominent being: (1) the payment of production premiums to the manufacturers of needed, conventional and new-type materials on output in excess
of production previously achieved in a selected base
period; (2) the underwriting of developmental work
in new building materials to encourage the utilization
of substitutes and relieve the pressure on critically
short supplies of "old-line" products; (3) the guarCOMPARISON OF EMERGENCY HOUSING GOALS AND
oEffiHSr. CONSTRUCTION VOLUME IN SELECTED YEARS
1,600
1,400
EMERGENCY .
HOUSING GOAL
1,200
1,000
80Of
1923 '24 '25 '26
ll
IJL
1930 '31 *32 '33
m
1938 '39 "40 '41
ItI
1944 '45 '46 '47
161
anty of markets for new firms undertaking the production of the more critical materials; (4) the
allowance of a rapid tax amortization to encourage
plant expansion and the organization of new firms;
(5) the application of the reconversion priorities
system to assure an adequate flow of new capital
equipment and raw materials to these producers;
and (6) the approval of wage-price adjustments in
those industries where such adjustments prove
necessary and are not inflationary.
Why Production Premiums?
The question has been raised as to the advisability
of using production premiums instead of granting
across-the-board ceiling price adjustments on building materials to obtain greater production. This is
a fair question and demands a direct reply. In
answering, though, it should be made emphatically
clear that the recommendations submitted to the
President call for a production premium and not a
subsidy, in the usual interpretation of that word.
The preference for the production premium as
opposed to ceiling price revisions is based upon this
differentiation. In order to increase production,
manufacturers will in some cases have to go on two
or three shifts and longer work weeks. This will
involve overtime payments and, in some cases,
increased cost per unit. Premium payments will
permit compensation for this increased cost, as well
as others, without granting price increases on the
entire production. From this it can be seen that
the Federal Government in a limited number of
instances would agree to absorb increased costs
which would otherwise be passed along to the home
purchaser and, in being passed along, be magnified
many-fold.
On the other hand, were the Office of Price Administration to grant flat increases in ceiling prices,
there would be two marked results: (1) the cost of
the current volume of building materials, as well as
any increase in that volume, also would rise, and (2)
these cost increments would be passed along through
the retail outlets to the builder and, eventually, to
the home purchaser o r tenant. Through these channels the final cost of the finished home would be
multiplied. To increase housing costs would be to
nullify one oj the prime objectives oj the program,
namely', production in the price ranges which veterans
can afford. From comparison it may be seen readily
that (1) through premium payments the Government
absorbs only the costs of increased production and (2)
this absorption is limited to critical items.
162
Expanding the production of building materials is
but the first step which must be taken. With prerequisite action under way in these fields—enlargement of capacity of the home building industry—site
fabricators and prefabricators may proceed. This
will be truly the critical point of the emergency
program, that to which all other facets are subsidiary.
And again we must approach the enlargement of the
home building potential as an emergency. To construct 2,700,000 homes in two years, we cannot rely
upon our traditional practices and techniques alone.
During the current year we are asking for the
building of 700,000 dwellings by site construction
methods. Clearly, if this is to be done within the
required cost limits, we will have to call upon the
most advanced techniques developed in site construction work. There must be economies in costs, materials, time and manpower, or the job which we have
cut out for ourselves becomes completely unrealistic.
Before the war many improvements in site building
methods were being developed on a very limited
scale. During the war these were perfected and, in
many instances, new techniques were devised. Now
it is the business of the building industry to see to it
that these improved methods are applied universally—not merely for the emergency program alone,
but for the long-range good of both the producer and
the consumer. Long after the emergency is over
the home builder is going to be expected to do a
large volume of construction.
Even after we build the 2,700,000 homes called for
in the Veterans' Emergency Housing Program, we
will be short 500,000 homes by the end of 1947.
And that doesn't take into account the 1,200,000
families now living doubled up with others, families
which will still be doubled up. Neither does it take
into consideration the millions of American families
living in substandard housing which hardly reflects
the wealth and resources of the richest country in
the world.
Necessity for Prefabrication
Prefabrication also forms a vital part of the
program, and here we are not referring to the temporary war housing that has come to be associated with
this name. We are thinking of permanent dwellings
that are designed to be houses which,when completed,
cannot be distinguished from conventionally built
homes, but which are constructed with the maximum
use of off-site fabrication. The Veterans' Emergency
Housing Program calls for the manufacture and
erection of 250,000 of these units in 1946 alone.
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
Again, if we are to face this issue fairly, Federal
aid will be required to absorb the extraordinary risks
of compressing what would otherwise be a long-range
expansion of the prefabrication industry, including
the necessary developmental and marketing work,
into even less than the brief period of the emergency.
This is absolutely essential if the benefits which
accrue from this type of organization in home
building are to be realized in significant proportion
during that time.
How would this aid operate? The mechanism
which has been proposed is quite simple. In essence
it calls for the extension of a Government guaranty
of the prefabricator's market in such instances where
the prefabricator can demonstrate that he is prepared
to produce low-cost housing which meets approved
standards of safety, durability, livability and health;
that he has an effective plan to assure the prompt
distribution and erection of such housing; and that
he will produce at a specific annual rate throughout
the period of the emergency.
This market guaranty would be effected by a
Government purchase contract whereby the Government would agree to accept delivery of the houses
only when the producer is unable to market them
within a reasonable period following their production. Because of the foreseeable demand, we contemplate that the Government guaranty would not
result in the acquisition of any houses, but would serve
to provide credit and assurance to producers so that
they could utilize their maximum productive capacity.
What will the expansion of the prefabrication
industry mean to the site builder and to site construction labor? Briefly, it will mean that in addition to the already staggering job of erecting 700,000
conventionally built homes during the current year,
they will have the added site work of assembling and
outfitting 250,000 prefabricated homes. For the
years ahead—as far ahead as can be visualized
today—they will continue to have an enormous
volume of conventional building which would be
augmented by site work on prefabricated housing.
The significance of prefabrication lies more in its
potentialities than in its record to date. As yet it
is an infant industry. The economies which it will
undoubtedly produce remain to be probed. However, that they do exist potentially can be seen
readily by inference from the record of every other
industry which has adapted itself to the principles
of mass production and marketing. In large measure, the future ability of private enterprise to meet
the nation's low-cost housing needs depends upon
March 1946
the success of the prefabrication industry in bringing
its advantages to bear upon this segment of the
market. Consequently, this phase of the Veterans'
Emergency Housing Program is linked inseparably
with the interests of those vitally concerned with
reaching the broadest possible market through
private enterprise channels.
Manpower
The expansion of the building materials and home
construction industries is a matter of immediate
concern. However, its importance cannot be allowed
to obscure subsidiary problems which the very expansion of these industries will create. At the current rate of building, manpower has not yet become
a critical issue. But the pool of building labor, particularly in the skilled and semi-skilled lines, is inadequate to meet the requirements set by the emergency housing goals. At present there are approximately 650,000 workers employed on both off-site and
on-site home production. To attain our target of
2,700,000 dwelling units by the end of 1947 it will be
necessary to have a peak of 2,150,000 workers on the
job—1,150,000 in actual home construction and
1,000,000 engaged in the production and distribution
of building materials. This means that by mid1947 the number of workers engaged in the home
building industries must be more than tripled.
If 1,500,000 additional workers are to be attracted
to the home building field during this short time,
vigorous recruiting campaigns must start at once
and a large-scale apprentice program will have to be
undertaken promptly to produce the necessary skills.
In submitting the recommendations to the President,
it was emphasized that wherever wages are abnormally low in building materials lines and interfere
with recruitment of manpower, revisions of these
rates should be made promptly.
Since this program was submitted to the President,
the question has been raised on numerous occasions
as to the reaction of labor to the proposals for the
expansion of recruitment and apprentice training.
We are happy to report that the entire program has
received the unqualified support of most of the labor
organizations of the country. Organized labor, like
other groups, sees clearly the need not only to produce housing but to plan for a high level of employment in the postwar years. Furthermore, labor—
and many veterans come from the ranks of organized labor—is emphatic in its determination to serve
the low-cost market in which its members represent
a large proportion of consumer demand.
163
Financing
Unlike the period immediately following the first
World War, there is no shortage of funds for investment in home mortgages. Currently, a vast accumulation of liquid resources in the hands of lending
institutions is readily available for the financing of
new home construction and purchase.
Financial
assistance for builders which has been recommended
to the President to date would involve the adaptation
of F H A Title VI financing. The justification for
90-percent construction financing at this time lies
exclusively in the need to spread the limited resources
of the average builder over as many units as possible.
In other words, it is purely a means of facilitating a
greater annual volume of home production by each
operating constructor.
Beyond this, though, there is a strong and integral
role which home financing institutions must play in
curbing the inflationary spiral of existing home prices.
In their efforts in this behalf the emergency program
will immeasurably strengthen their hand by relieving
the pressure for investment outlets.
Role of Mortgage Lending Institutions
To home financing institutions, particularly those
specializing in loans on moderate-priced properties,
the realization of the emergency housing goals for the
year 1946 alone will mean an unprecedented growth
in construction financing. The key to this high
volume of lending under the emergency program will
rest in the volume production of homes at a moderate to low unit cost, rather than, as has been
customary in the upswing of earlier building cycles, by
a more gradual increase in the number of units placed
under construction with concentration first on the
luxury brackets of the housing market.
The 950,000 new permanent homes slated for
construction in 1946 (the bulk under a ceiling of
$6,000, but with some construction allowed up to a
price of $10,000) would result in approximately $6
billion of low-cost home building. To financing
institutions this would mean well in excess of $5
billion of construction lending during this year.
Loans on well planned, soundly built homes constructed as a part of this program will offer institutional lenders the soundest risks available in the
current mortgage market. Traditionally, the market
for moderate to low-priced properties has proved to
be the steadiest over the long building cycle, and for
the duration of the acute period of this emergency,
our program would restrict virtually all home building to this field.
164
What are the implications of the financing of this
quantity of low-cost housing to lending institutions?
First, it offers sound, non-inflationary investment
outlets for their vast pool of liquid resources, a large
proportion of which are awaiting just such an opportunity. Second, lenders will need to gear their
operations to a high volume of loan closing activity—an expansion generally equivalent to that expected in
the volume of new home starts. To the savings
and loan industry, which has specialized in financing
the construction and purchase of small homes in
virtually all localities throughout the country, even
a ceiling of $6,000 on most new homes will not adversely affect their average construction loan size
in most localities. Under the proposed extension of
FHA Title VI lending provisions to cover the emergency period, a 90-percent construction loan would
be about $5,400 in original face amount and the home
purchaser would take over this loan as substitute
mortgagor upon the establishment of his 10-percent
equity. Even during the depression savings and
loan associations, in most instances, did not elect
to rely upon the insurance protection features of
FHA. But under the currently projected emergency
program they will find that this will enable them to
expand the operations of the builders with whom
they work and thereby aid in meeting the emergency
housing goals.
The Veterans' Emergency Housing Program offers
savings and loan associations perhaps the optimum
in opportunity to invest soundly in the home mortgage market. Volume construction financing and an
improved average loan size will make it possible for
them to place the substantial growth in resources
in mortgage investments. This would represent
for them and for the country a logical follow-through
of their war financing program. In doing this they
would be assisting immeasurably in providing homes
for the men whom in earlier days they helped arm
and equip for the battlefields throughout the world.
Beyond this their aid to the veteran returning to
civilian life would at the same time provide the
answer to their own problems of reconversion as
well as those of the entire building industry.
As local organizations, the home financing institutions of the country not only stand in a strategic
spot in the money market, but they also command
a high place in the leadership in their own communities. Due to this pre-eminence, much of the
responsibility, as well as the challenge and opportunity, of the emergency housing program is theirs,
(Continued on p. 175)
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE BUILDING COST INDEX
The FHLBA barometer
new system of data
facilities.
of building costs has been revised to reflect
collection
utilizing
Bureau
of Labor
This article traces the history of the index and its
tion in measuring the trends of labor and material
•
ON the eve of what shows promise of being the
greatest house-building surge in recent history,
builders, prospective home purchasers, mortgage
lenders and Government officials are asking many
questions. The first one, of course, is "by what
means and how soon can an adequate supply of
dwellings be erected to alleviate the plight of the
homeless veteran?" Next in prominence is " at what
cost?"
Stated in this fashion, the question has a beguiling
simplicity for there are many concepts of cost.
Actually the problem is very complex, referring to
many diverse aspects of our economic life. I t can
refer to the inter-relations of housebuilding and the
total economic life of the nation. I t can pose the
picture of ex-Sgt. Jones studying the "for sale"
sign on the little bungalow on Elm Street, or it can
be interpreted as "how much more would I have to
pay were I to duplicate a house built in my community last year, or the year before, or one constructed before the war?"
It is with this last aspect, changes in construction
costs, that the building cost index of the Federal
Home Loan Bank Administration has been concerned during the past 10 years.
The Standard House
In 1935 the Division of Operating Statistics set
out to measure changes in prices paid for building
materials and labor services by builders and individuals in the construction of a moderate-priced
single-family dwelling. Since that time the index
has undergone considerable evolution both in concept and in method so that changing circumstances
could be taken into account and the reliability of the
basic data improved.
Originally the device for measuring price variations was based upon a bill of specifications that
itemized in detail the quantity and quality of building materials and the number of work hours required
of the various crafts to construct a six-room frame
house.
1
Prepared by Chester Rapkin, Division of Operating Statistics, Federal
Home Loan Bank Administration.
March 1946
685400—46
a
Statistics
applica-
prices.1
Although this hypothetical house is standard in
the index, it is not typical in the sense of being a
strict average of all the houses under construction at
the time. Rather, it is a frame dwelling characteristic of the modest residential districts of many
American cities. The specifications call for high
quality materials, and the house would have sold in
1935 or 1936 in the vicinity of $5,500 excluding land
and items of equipment which are not considered part
of a general contract estimate.
The house is a detached home of 24,000 cubic feet
volume, of good design, containing a living room,
lavatory, dining room and kitchen on the first floor,
and three bedrooms and bath on the second floor.
There is an open attic which may be used for storage
or may be finished into one or two usable rooms. The
cellar or basement is without partitions and contains
the heating plant and laundry facilities. The exterior treatment is assumed to be a combination of
wideboard siding, with brick and stucco as features
of design. A one-car attached garage is included.
The plot is assumed to be approximately level and
no unusual soil conditions have been taken into consideration. Materials, finish and workmanship specified are standard and typical of the practices of
reputable small-house builders. Structural design is
sufficient to meet all reasonable requirements of a
INDEX OF BUILDING
COSTS
1935- 1939 = 1 0 0
(REVISED)
/ TOTAL^LABOfi A ,
/
'*'
<?MATERIA
L
/
iff"
^
S? ^mmfi
ir
s s ^
IlllN iilnlniii iihihilu iiluliiln Illllllllll
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
Mlllllllll Mlllllllll
1940
llllllllll, IIIIIUI ululi.ln uliiliitJ
1942
1943
1944
165
2
municipal building code. Unusual materials or
practices have been avoided. Should they at any time
become common, the specifications for the composite
house will be modified to allow for them.
Building Materials—Labor Costs
In the early stages of the building cost index, a
questionnaire listing 88 material items was prepared
by field employees of the Reconditioning Department of HOLC, who secured price quotations every
third month from a leading local building materials
dealer. They also obtained reports on the prevailing
hourly wage rates for each of the principal construction trades involved.
As the liquidation of the HOLC progressed and
the Reconditioning staff disbanded, it became necessary to secure an alternative source of price quotations. The Bureau of Labor Statistics had begun
the periodic collection of retail prices of 44 building
materials under a Congressional directive continuing
the work begun for a monograph which that agency
prepared for the Temporary National Economic
COMPARISON OF INDEXES ON
BUILDING MATERIAL COSTS
FIRST
QUARTER
1936=100
LOS ANGELES - Minimum Deviation
INDE>
140
Committee in 1940. BLS agreed to make this information available to the Bank Administration,
but it was necessary to reconcile several differences
in the data before the information could be utilized
for purposes of this index.
The initial problem was to determine whether the
variations in prices of the fewer material items collected by BLS faithfully reflected the price trends
in the entire group of 88. I t was found that the
limited number of items comprised a major portion
of the total material bill (75 percent or better in
most cities) and that the trend in price variations
in the limited bill was virtually the same as the
trend in the total bill. This can be seen by reference
to the accompanying graphs which compare t h e
material cost index based on the limited number of
items with the index based on all items for a selected
group of cities.
A similar adjustment had to be made in the labor
constituent of the index. While it was possible to
secure wage rates for journeymen, periodic reports
on h e l p e d rates were not available. As in the case
of the limited bill of materials, the hypothetical
builder's disbursement to craftsmen for the standard
house comprised a very high percentage of the total
labor bill (approximately 90 percent). Since journeymen's wages constituted such a high proportion
of total, it was possible to secure a reliable estimate
of total labor costs through a minor adjustment in
calculations.
130
New Concept
120
/*%>
HO
LIMITED
BILL
~
»•£?
100
^ s ! v » > ^^••••Jr
TOTAL
90
INDEX
140
j
i
i
i
B I L L * ^
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1
1 1
1
1 1
1
1 1
1
BOSTON — Maximum Deviation
A
130
120
r
tfLtMn ED
110
•••
•/
y.
BILL
£
j,
%**••
^
/
V
* 7 * 1TAL BIL.L
100
90
l 1 l
1936
166
1 1 1
1937
1 1
1938
1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111
1941
1942
1939
1940
DIVISION OF OPERATING STATISTICS
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK ADMINISTRATION
1
|
While use of fewer items in the calculation of the
index did not change the final result appreciably, it
did effect a re-orientation in concept. From a precisely specified bill of materials, aiming a t architectural feasibility, the index now reflects price changes in
a limited bill oj the more important items, which closely
approximates the trend in the total cost of materials.
This change in concept is not as drastic as it appears.
Even the original 88 items were not all-inclusive.
Small items which contributed fractionally to total
cost were not listed, b u t their absence was accounted
for by a slightly heavier weighting of similar materials.
To maintain the continuity of the index the selected
material prices and wage rates are weighted to
reflect the trends in the cost of building the originally
specified house.
Utilizing material prices collected b y BLS not
only made possible the continuation of the index,
but it also enhanced the reliability of basic data.
I t is an elementary statistical precept that the greater
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
Revised index of building costs
[1935-1939=100]
Jan.
I n d e x a n d year
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
TOTAL COSTS
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
.
95.1
99.9
104.2
101.5
102.2
108.4
119.5
124.4
131.7
136.1
_
._
..
.
.
.
95.1
101.1
103.7
101.5
102.3
109.2
120.4
124.9
132.1
136.3
95.2
102.9
103.3
101.6
102.2
109.7
121.3
125.1
132.6
136.7
95.5
104.3
103.0
101.4
102.1
110.2
121.6
125.5
133.2
136.8
95.9
105.2
102.7
101.2
102.1
110.7
122.0
126.0
133.7
136.8
96.1
105.8
102.6
101.1
102.1
111.8
122.6
126.3
134.1
137.0
96.5
106.2
102.5
101.0
102.1
112.8
123.0
126.7
134.3
137.2
96.8
106.3
102.1
100.9
102.3
114.3
123.4
127.3
134.7
137.4
97.0
106.2
102.0
101.3
102.9
115.7
123.3
127.8
135.0
138.0
97.3
105.9
101.7 1
101.8
104.7
117.6
123.5
129.1
135.3
138.4
95.9
101.0
104.1
99.9
101.3
106.4
118.0
121.3
128.8
132.5
96.1
102.6
103.4
99.9
101.3
107.2
119.0
121.5
129.4
132.8
96.2
104.6
102.6
99.9
101.3
107.9
119.7
121.7
129.8
133.1
96.3
106.0
102.1
99.8
101.1
108.2
120.1
121.9
130.4
133.2
96.5
106.7
101.7
99.6 ,
101.2
108.4
120.4
122.4
130.9
133.4
96.7
107.0
101.5
99.5
101.2
109.0
120.5
122.6
131.4
133.5
97.0
107.2
101.2
99.4 !
101.1
110.2
120.7
123.1
131.6
133.8
97.4
107.3 1
100.5
99.3
101.3
112.1
120.8
123.8
132.1
133.9
97.5
107.0
100.4
99.9
101.9
113.8
121.1
124.5
132.2
134.1
97.8
106.5
100.3
100.5
103.3
115.7
121.2
126.1
132.2
134.6
93.4
97.6
104.3
104.7
104.0
112.6
122.7
130.5
137.3
143.3
93.2
98.2
104.2
104.8
104.2
113.2
123.2
131.8
137.6
143.4
93.3
99.4
104.6
104.9
104.2
113.3
124.4
132.0
138. 2 ,
143.8
93.9
101.1
104.7
104.5
103.9
114.2
124.7
132.8
138.9
143.8
94.6
102.2
104.6
104.3
104.0
115.3
125.1
133.4
139.2
143.8
95.0
103.5
104.8 j
104.2
103.9 1
117.3
126.7
133.7
139.4
143.9
95.4
104. 2
105.0
104.2
104.0
117.9
127.8
133.9
139.8
144.0
95. 5
104.5
105.3
104.1
104.3
118.8
128.6
134.1
139.9
144.4
95.9
104.6
105.1
104.3
104.7
119.5
129.3
134.3
140.8
145.9
96.3
104.7
104. 7 ,
104. 5
107.3
121.6
129. 5
135.3
141.4
146.1
95.1
97.8
105. 5
101.7
102.3
106.1
118.2
123.6
130.1
135.9
139.0
95.0
98.7
104.8
101. 0
102.3
107.0
118.8
124.3
131.0
136.0
139.2
95.9
98.3
105.9
100.2
101.3
104.5
116.3
-121.4
*127. 2
132.4
135.0
95.8
99.5
105.0
100.0
101.4
105.7
117.1
121.4
128.1
132.5
135.2
93.5
96.9
104.8
104. 6
104.2
109.2
121.9
129.5
135. 7
142.8
147.1
93.4
97.3
104.5
104.8
104.2
111.5
122.4
130.0
136.9
143.0
147.3
MATERIAL COSTS
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
LABOR COSTS
1935
i
ii
!
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945..
.
_
.
..
the number of observations, the more reliable the
data. Instead of securing quotations from one
dealer, the BLS queries a group of distributors in
each city, who report prices paid by contractors for
materials delivered to job site, in average quantities,
for residential construction. The dealers submit to
the BLS data on one or more of the items on a selfchecking questionnaire and a tabulation of individual
items is prepared in the central office to enable further review. After a study of the data, a representative dealer is designated and his prices are considered a reflection of market conditions in the
community. Should the prices quoted by the
designated dealer fall out of line at any time, a
recheck is made and, if necessary, a more representative report is used. Although these data are
not averages in the orthodox sense, they do tend to
a central value. The representative price has the
advantage of being an actual price, while an average
computed mathematically may not.
Quotations on labor earnings are secured through
a canvass of builders, currently engaged in privately
financed residential construction. Information on
gross payroll and number of work hoars for each
craft is obtained from four or five representative
builders and average hourly earnings for each craft
computed for each builder. A tabulation of earnings
March 1946
data is prepared and a representative over-all rate
chosen for each trade. Here again actual earnings
of workers employed by a specific builder are used,
rather than an average for all builders. Earnings
may reflect union or non-union rates, depending
upon the prevailing practice in the area which is
being surveyed.
I t is important to distinguish the change in prices
paid for materials from the change in expenditures
for home construction. The latter depends chiefly
on variations in income and in structural specifications which are brought about by changing styles,
technological advances, requirements for more or less
space, for additional or fewer amenities, and by Government regulations either on the local or national
level. This is a problem of shifting housing standards
which must be dealt with separately from the measurement of changes in construction cost. The index
of cost is no more than a barometer of prices of
identical goods over a period of time.
For this reason the index cannot be used to evaluate
differences in actual dollar cost among the cities for
which an index is prepared. A high or low index
does not necessarily accompany high or low dollar
cost. I t merely indicates the extent to which costs
have increased over the average for the last five
years of the 1930's.
167
total weekly wage payments for each craft by the
number of work hours performed by that craft. In
this manner all extras were prorated on an hourly
basis and allocated to total labor cost.
Index of building costs 1935-1945
[1935-1939 = 100]
Old index
R e v i s e d index
Year
Total
1935
19361937_
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
. _
95.1
96.4
104.5
102.6
101.5
103.2
113.1
122.4
127.0
134.1
137.4
Material
95.8
97.1
105.6
101.5
100.0
102.1
111.0
120.4
123.7
131.2
133.8
Labor
93.4
95.0
102.4
104.7
104.4
105.4
117.3
126.8
133.7
139.9
144.7
Total
94.7
96.2
104.5
102.8
101.8
103.3
114.0
123.2
127.2
132.8
135.7
Material
95.8
97.1
105. 6
101.5
100.1
102.2
111.5
120.8
123.7
130.4
133.0
Labor
92.6
94.4
102.3
105.4
105. 2
105.4
119.0
127.9
133.9
137.7
141.3
War-Induced Changes
The war brought a great many changes in the pattern of residential construction which necessitated
adjustments in the building cost index. Many
building materials became scarce or unobtainable
and substitute commodities were used. In some
cases it meant "victory grade" instead of the original
quality, while in other cases a different item of alternative function was introduced, such as shower stall
instead of a bathtub. As the war progressed there
sometimes were four or five substitutes on a specific
item, reflecting a progressive tightening of the market. Labor also grew scarce, and the practice of
overtime and bonus pay invalidated the use of base
rates as a measure of labor costs;
These changes were given recognition wherever
possible in computing the index. When a specified
building material was not obtainable the field agents
were instructed to price the nearest comparable item
and describe in detail those elements which did not
conform to the original specification. These notations were examined carefully and appropriate adjustments determined after a comparison of differences
in price level, quality and durability.
The necessity for expeditious completion of homes
in which to house war workers resulted in intensive
use of the available labor supply. The average
number of work hours per work week rose 22 percent
between 1940 and 1945 and was accompanied by increased payments for overtime and holiday work.
Bonus payments to attract or keep workers were not
uncommon.
Because of these conditions, the use of basic hourly
rates in calculating labor costs resulted in an understatement of actual charges during the latter war
years. To secure a more accurate evaluation of
labor costs, the average hourly earnings for each craft
were used. This measure was computed by dividing
168
Indexes (or Cities
To take into account wartime changes and the new
sources of basic data, indexes for the cities were reexamined and revisions as far back as 1939 made
where necessary. The 1946 Statistical Supplement,
which will accompany the April issue of the E E V I E W ,
will carry the revised indexes for all cities and the
United States. These data supersede all previously
published indexes, and all building cost indexes published in future issues of the R E V I E W will be a continuation of these figures. Indexes for several cities
originally covered have been discontinued because of
difficulties encountered in collection of data during
the war. (Indexes for cities which have been
dropped were not re-examined nor revised.) Every
effort is being made to restore these cities to the
current list and to add areas which have not been
included previously.
While the revisions in city indexes were drastic in
some cases, the average for all cities changed but
slightly. In January 1946 the unrevised index of
average total cost for all cities stood at 138.2 (19351939=100) with the index of material cost at 135.3
and labor cost at 144.2. The new index revised the
labor cost constituent to 147.8, with the material
cost index remaining virtually the same, 135.5, and
the index of total cost showing a bit higher, 139.6.
A comparison of the revised and the old index from
1935 to 1945 is shown in the table on this page.
Of the 49 cities carried in the index at the beginning
of 1946, two indicated an increase in building costs
of 70 percent or more over the base period. In 10
cities costs increased between 50 and 60 percent, and
in 12 others the increase fell between 40 and 50
percent. Only one city registered an increase of less
than 20 percent over the 1935-1939 average.
Plans are now in process to further improve the
index, especially on the local level. Variations in
labor efficiency, and in building practices, the introduction of new materials, tools and techniques, all
influence the direction of costs and consequently
should be evaluated in any consideration of cost
trends. At present only market variations are
measured in the index, which is admittedly only part
of the picture, albeit a major part. The non-price
factors which influence cost changes do not lend
(Continued on p. 170)
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
MORTGAGE LENDING IN SELECTED AREAS
Supplementing the broad outline of savings and loan lending presented last month, this article provides more detailed information on
last year's activity.
It is based on the fourth annual state survey
made by the Division of Operating
Statistics.
•
AS shown in the annual survey of savings and
loan mortgage financing activity, 1945 was
characterized by an increase of new loans for home
construction and by the predominance, although on a
slightly receding scale, of home purchase lending.
In order to increase the usefulness to many savings
and loan managers of the data on national trends,
this article summarizes last year's lending activity
in 13 selected areas which accounted for approximately two-thirds of total business. The 1945 loan
volume in these 12 states and the District of Columbia was $1,290,000,000, a gain of 32 percent over the
1944 figure and 44 percent more than the previous
peak reached by these same regions in 1941.
Construction lending totaled $127,000,000 last
year—a 96-percent increase over the year before in
contrast to a decline of 9 percent in 1944. This
brought the ratio of these loans to total activity up
from 7 percent in 1944 to almost 10 percent last year.
A total of $914,000,000 was loaned for the purchase
of existing homes, 29 percent more than in the previous year. This was a slightly smaller increase than
had been registered in recent years, and 1945 saw
the first break in the upward movement of their ratio
to total loans—71 percent last year compared with
73, 67 and 55 percent in the preceding years.
All remaining loan-purpose categories showed
increases varying from 15 percent for refinancing to
38 percent in the miscellaneous group. As a result,
their relationship to total lending in the selected
areas remained substantially the same as it had been
in 1944. Refinancing accounted for 10 percent of
total business; miscellaneous loans, 7 percent; and
reconditioning, approximately 2 percent.
All areas included in this study reported substantially greater lending activity in 1945 than during
the previous year, with increases ranging from 25
percent in Ohio and Pennsylvania to 50 percent in
Florida and New York.
from declines of more than 50 percent in Maryland
and New Jersey to gains of well over 600 percent in
the District of Columbia, Florida, and North Carolina. California led in dollar volume and in the
proportionate importance of this loan type, 29 percent of all business, while New Jersey reported.the
smallest dollar volume, or 1 percent of all lending.
The tremendous change wrought by the withdrawal of wartime restrictions on building is well
illustrated by a comparison with 1944 construction
lending. In that year, seven states and the District
of Columbia showed decreases ranging from 1 to 71
percent, while in only one was there an increase of
over 100 percent. The highest proportion of construction to total lending activity was 22 percent.
H o m e Purchase Loans
Although some slight reversal was shown last
year in the increasing relative importance of home
purchase lending, reference to the charts shows that
no area reported a decrease in the dollar volume
of loans for this purpose. I t is probable, of course,
that the mounting volume of construction presaged
by the Veterans' Emergency Housing Program
will to some extent relieve the pressure on the
market for existing properties. However, it seems
equally likely that the purchase of homes will
NEW LOANS MADE BY SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS
PERCENT
UNITED
O
DISTRIBUTION
BY PURPOSE OF LOAN
STATES, 1944 AND 1945 1
0
20
30
SELECTED
PERCENT
40
50
60
STATES, 1945
70
80
90
100
Construction Lending Pattern
As will be seen in the accompanying charts, the
state pattern in construction lending was more
divergent than that of any other loan-purpose category. Changes reflected by individual states varied
March 1946
HOME PURCHASE
CONSTRUCTION
REFINANCING
RECONDITIONING
OTHER
0IVISION OF 0PERATIN0 STATISTICS
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK ADMINISTRATION
169
continue for some time to absorb the major portion
of home financing funds.
Last year, loans for this purpose totaled $914,000 000 in the areas selected for this study, representing
gains ranging from 1 percent in Florida to 51 percent
in New York. After Florida, the next smallest gain
was 18 percent registered in Ohio and California. In
all areas this type of lending stood first, and in no
instance did it account for less than 40.5 percent of
all loans made. The highest proportion of home
purchase lending occurred in Pennsylvania where it
represented about seven-eighths of the total activity.
In Ohio these loans accounted for the greatest dollar
volume of business, while Florida showed the least
money loaned for home purchases.
New loans made by savings and loan associations
in selected areas—1944 and 1945
[Thousands of dollars]
California:
ig45
1944
D i s t r i c t of C o l u m b i a :
1945
1944
Florida:
1945
1944
Illinois:
1945
1944
Indiana:
1945
1944
Maryland:
1945_
1944
Michigan:
1945-.
1944
N e w Jersey:
1945
1#44
N e w York:
1945
1944
N o r t h Carolina:
1945_
1944
Ohio:
1945
1944
Pennsylvania:
1945
1944
Wisconsin:
1945
1944
170
Home
purchase
Refinancing
$53,621 $99,168 $16, 564
30,387 84, 215 12,006
FLORIDA
Reconditioning
Other
Total
$1,381 $14,834 $185, 568
8,646 136, 487
1,233
PTT
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
NOR. CAROLINA
OHIO
PENNSYLVANIA
WISCONSIN
*
ff
+ 180
mmm
]
^^l#ibiilirti^Bi^S
®
iSiftis *m$m %
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
MARYLAND
WISCONSIN
+220
S&SWL
SiiiSSSBiSSSf alter m:mmmmkm4m:Mm
FLORIDA
NOR. CAROLINA |
OHIO
PENNSYLVANIA |
+200
^iS:^^J^^^U4^kH
UNITED STATES |
CALIFORNIA
DIST. OF COL.
NEW YORK
In 8 of the 13 areas, refinancing loans stood
second in proportion to total lending, representing a
range from 6 percent of all loans made in Maryland
to more than one-fourth in the District of Columbia.
The largest dollar volume of refinancing loans was
reported in Ohio and the smallest in Maryland,
while Pennsylvania was the only state to show a
dollar decline.
Construction
HOME PURCHASE
UNITED STATES
CALIFORNIA
DIST. OF COL.
MICHIGAN
NEW JERSEY
Other Loan Purchase Categories
S t a t e a n d year
PERCENT CHANGE IN LENDING ACTIVITY
SELECTED STATES - 1945 OVER 1944
111.
sSwf
669.3«js;!«
1
I
^m
ift
iffitfSg
JUL isiBHIR
jt»
mm^^mlMimlm^mmmJm^m^mkwmWms' Hfelilss' B.
w ^iiteiirt
* * * i
j i i ii
w^mfmf^vffMf^fXrf^m,
1 1 1
4SpssiS
ili?UL
1
rii|H
!
|
Loans for miscellaneous purposes were, in general,
third in proportionate importance. In Florida they
represented the largest percentage for this type of
loan, 21 percent, while in Pennsylvania miscellaneous
loans accounted for only 2 percent of the total
lending activity.
Restrictions imposed by the emergency were
again reflected in loans made for reconditioning
purposes. Although only three states—New Jersey,
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin—showed decreased
activity in that respect, Indiana was the only state
in which reconditioning loans represented as much as
5 percent of total business.
6,505
901
17, 774
17,072
365
352
10,155
8,151
65, 206
46, 835
7,662
996
13,695
13, 559
4,431
2, 991
766
485
7,241
4,443
33,795
22, 474
Building Cost Index
14,084 124, 324
7,397 96,422
-.-
30,407
20, 359
13,404
12,460
3,018
2,418
11, 879
7,142
166, 709
125, 839
(Continued from p. 168)
themselves readily to quantitative evaluation, particularly in a period of rapid change and uncertainty.
I t is entirely likely that some of the elements may
cancel each other out. For example, the economies
of large scale production may compensate for a
decline in efficiency or the added cost of delay in
material deliveries.
For those readers who wish a more detailed description of the building cost index, a monograph is
being prepared by the Division of Operating Statistics. This will contain a full exposition and analysis
of the method of collecting basic data, theory and
construction of the index, as well as its uses and
limitations.
3,243
1,467
51, 258
39,833
5,687
4,509
3,274
2,787
4,070
2,448
67, 532
51,044
1,441
3,016
36, 667
25,102
2,592
1,559
426
294
3,109
4,779
44,235
34, 750
3,110
4,088
26,948
18,464
6,248
4,959
705
367
3,673
2,276
40, 684
30,154
668
1,598
53, 823
38,843
10,097
8,982
500
671
2,686
3,591
67, 774
53, 685
3,710
1,292
98, 955
65, 539
10, 785
8,616
1,249
954
4,858
2,949
119, 557
79, 350
3,234
406
21, 697
15, 740
2,859
2,328
1,148
978
3,164
2,392
32,102
21, 844
21,054 197, 402
8,663 166, 872
27,177
23,484
8,029
6, 286
21, 634
15, 453
275, 296
220, 758
4,366 122,881
3,248 94,399
11,614
12,876
1,438
1, 530
3,156
2,776
143, 455
114, 829
3,666
3,359
707
718
2,226
1,949
47, 819
38,018
4,519
1,430
36,701
30,562
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION
This article
and
why
leadership
points out some of the reasons for neighborhood
it needs to be stopped.
in addition
meet the
•
I N recent years interest has been developing in
the problem of preserving and improving middleaged neighborhoods, still livable but not stable
enough to withstand for long the devastating effects
of age, obsolescence and neglect. As long as cities
were growing rapidly outward, little thought was
given to the aging neighborhoods left behind. The
growing difficulties of municipal finance and slum
clearance are gradually making it clear that what
happens to the older portions of cities has a bearing
on the whole future of urban living. However, there
is yet little realization by municipal governments
that the prevention of blight is not something to be
accomplished by isolated neighborhood groups, each
attempting to protect itself against some other segment of the population as well as against deteriorating influences that are city-wide.
The belief that what happens within a city
neighborhood affects principally those who own
property or live in it has carried with it the idea
that it is up to the neighborhood associations to
develop the means of their own salvation. Many
such attempts have been made, not one of which,
so far as it has been possible to learn, has succeeded
in achieving more than a limited portion of its goal.
The signs of residential neighborhood decay are
becoming so widespread that it seems necessary to
re-examine the remedies proposed in the past. This
article contains no prescription or panaceas; it only
attempts to point to some of the most vexing questions, and to suggest some aspects of the conservation problem that are still in need of further exploration.
HOLC operations of the Federal Home Loan Bank
Board spotlighted "the alarming extent to which
neighborhood decay has affected America's cities/' 2
and the Board became deeply concerned with the
terrific eventual losses which will be occasioned by
neighborhood blight, decay and final slum developi This article, prepared by Ruth A. Berman of the Urban Development Division of the National Housing Agency, is the seventh in a series on urban planning.
The ideas expressed are those of Mrs. Berman and do not necessarily represent
opinions of the NHA.
a Wavcrly, A Study in Neighborhood Conservation, Federal Home Loan Bank
Board, Washington, D. C , 1940.
March 1946
It also suggests that
to neighborhood
decay
municipal
programs may be needed
to
1
problem.
ment, if that insidious process is not halted. City
plan commissions, developing their inventories of
land use and drafting master plans, made similar
discoveries. The Chicago Plan Commission, one of
the first to delineate the "conservation areas," found
that over half of Chicago's population lived in these
areas (defined as areas in which 50 percent or more of
the residential structures were built between 1895
and 1914, and 50 percent or more rented for more
than $25 a month in 1940 3 ). The 1940 Census of
Housing revealed that almost 40 percent of nonfarm
housing was then more than 30 years old, and 58 percent was more than 20 years old. Because of the low
rate of production of new houses during the war, and
the interruption of slum clearance and demolition
programs, the proportion of older housing is higher
now, and will continue to increase until such time as
the volume of residential building reaches new peaks
of production.
Finally, the current housing shortage is making it
apparent that the middle-aged and older housing is
what most of us will have to live in for some time to
come. A large part of the housing built in the next
decade will go to meet new needs, and to make up
for the demolition of the worst slums. The fate of
the vast neighborhoods afflicted by age, wear and
obsolescence becomes the concern not only of financial institutions, city planners, civic organizations
and a few "crusaders," but of the municipalities and
of their citizens. Trying to create an adequate
housing supply without a positive program to conserve the existing houses is "like trying to fill a bucket
with a good-sized hole in the bottom." 4
Whenever it becomes possible to release materials
for repairs and remodeling, the enormous accumulation of repair and modernization work deferred
during the war will result in a great spurt of fixing
up many old houses even in those areas which are
already showing signs of deterioration.
All this activity may seem to lift the face of many
a declining neighborhood, but chances are slim that
the decline of a single deteriorating area will be
3
Master Plan uf Residential Land Use, Chicago Plan Commission, 1943.
"Rehabilitation is Not Enough," article in Tomorrcw'* Town, April 1944, by
Philip M. Klutznick, Commissioner, FPHA.
i
171
halted by it. To be effective, conservation measures
must encompass not only all the structures in a
neighborhood but also their environment. In these
areas it is not only what is done but what is left
undone that counts.
W h y D o Neighborhoods D e c a y ?
Age alone is not necessarily an indication of decline.
Many dwellings and neighborhoods well over 30
years old are still pleasant and satisfactory places to
live in, and some newer ones are nearly slums. But
generally, after 20 or 30 years of use, houses and
neighborhoods need quite a lot of attention; if they
do not get it, they soon become shabby, then worse.
The 1940 Census of Housing did not show the condition of dwellings in terms of the year built so that
direct comparisons cannot be made between the
condition of dwellings and their age. I t is only a
coincidence, but the 17 million nonfarm dwellings
" n o t needing major repairs and with private b a t h "
nearly equals the 17,900,000 that were under 30
years old. I t is more than likely that the need for
repairs and improvements bulked large in the older
houses and neighborhoods.
In addition to the ravages of age and neglect, the
principal causes of neighborhood deterioration are
obsolescence of location and of structures, the changing pattern of land use, heavy through traffic resulting from a gridiron street system, houses too crowded,
too big for efficient use, or lacking modern conveniences. And in addition to all this, there is the loss
of the amenities that make a neighborhood a pleasant
living place.
Frequently, a list such as this of the reasons for
neighborhood decline includes "the infiltration of
lower income families," and the remedy implied is
to keep such families out. At the same time, it is
expected that by far the greatest part of the housing
needs of middle and lower income families must be
satisfied through filtration into "used" houses
vacated by higher income groups. The obvious conflict between these theories calls attention to the
possibility that it may not be the lower living standard of the infiltrating family that starts a neighborhood on its downward trend, but rather the neglect
of maintenance or modernization of the property
which in turn brings the price down to the point
where the lower income family, seeking to raise its
own living standard, can afford it. The great lack
of clarity on these basic points adds to the frustration
that is characteristic of the search for a workable
formula for a conservation program.
172
W h y Try to Stop Neighborhood Deterioration?
If it were not for the hard fact that the production
of new dwellings in the next five to ten years is not
likely to provide for the replacement of a large
proportion of the middle-aged and old urban housing,
some might debate the advisability of doing much to
conserve these areas. The loss in property values
and tax revenues through neighborhood blight is
enormous, but the most compelling reason for
keeping and making old residential areas as livable
and pleasant as possible is that people must live
in them. More than a third (39.7 percent in 1940),
perhaps now more nearly one-half of all families in
nonfarm areas occupy houses over 30 years old,
and most of these, some 14 to 15 million, will have
to go on living in old houses and old neighborhoods
for some years to come. The number of city families
has grown steadily over the decades but new houses
have been built in spurts, outnumbering the new
families in one decade and falling far behind in
another. The result has been an ever-widening gap
between the number of nonfarm families and the
number of houses under 30 years old.
The new building program with its goal of 2,700,000
homes in the next tw^o years will only begin to take
care of the need for housing newly formed families
and those that must undouble. The program will
accelerate the housebuilding rate and, therefore,
we can look forward to a start toward replacement
of obsolete old houses as well as keeping pace with
increased need. However, during the time new
houses are being built to catch up with the backlog
of new and undoubling families, more and more of
the existing ones will be passing into old age and
obsolescence, thereby becoming increasingly susceptible to deteriorating environment.
The economic and social costs of the slums are
now being totaled into figures so impressive that it is
hardly necessary any longer to explain that cities
lose when neighborhoods rot away. I t should not
take much imagination to see that all the high costs
and low revenues of the blighted spots are potentially
present in the old but not yet bad areas.
In addition to the tremendous financial loss from
increasing deterioration of existing housing, cities
lose to the suburban fringe new construction that
goes there because of the shabbiness of the older city
neighborhoods. The present dearth of building lots
will probably put some new construction in these
neighborhoods; more might be attracted to them if
there were evidence that steps were being taken to
keep them sound and attractive.
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
If one were asked to name the biggest obstacle to
the preservation of satisfactory living standards in
aging neighborhoods, the answer might be the conflict between present profit and future gain. It must
be recognized that a neighborhood conservation program cannot be based on the premise that it will
yield greater financial profit to the property owners.
The kind of improvement that brings an increased
return is that which results from converting large
units into smaller ones, from rehabilitating unused
structures, or from modernizing existing dwellings
and raising rents enough to cover the cost of remodeling and some additional profit. The amount
of conversion and rehabilitation that can be done in
any neighborhood is limited. Remodeling that means
higher rents is limited by the ability of the tenants
to pay, and only enough of it is or can be done to
meet the effective demand at the higher price. None
of these meets more than a small part of the conservation need because the real objective of neighborhood conservation is the maintenance of older
houses: repair, paint, and some modernization, without increased rents and even in the face of declining
rents, plus constant maintenance and improvement
of neighborhood environment. The process of filtration, by which many of the middle and lower-income
families are housed, depends on declining rents as
properties age and the original owners and tenants
move to newer houses. Since lower rental income
does not induce a property owner to spend money
on improvements, the price of filtration has been
deterioration of the houses and the neighborhoods.
Neighborhood Associations
The Waverly project (Baltimore, Maryland) was
an experiment sponsored by the Federal Home Loan
Bank Board and developed by the Home Owners'
Loan Corporation, with the cooperation of the U. S.
Housing Authority and local municipal agencies and
civic leaders. (The details of the study and the
pattern proposed for action are described in the
report and in a series of articles that appeared in the
FHLB R E V I E W in June, July and August of 1940.)
A physical and financial analysis was completed in
detail, and a plan was formulated which would
"restore the area to health and prevent further
decay." The Waverly Conservation League, a
neighborhood association formed with the aid of
organizing personnel delegated by the HOLC, operated for about 18 months before Pearl Harbor.
During this period the volume of repair and remodeling in the area was greatly accelerated, and the
March 1946
financial condition of many properties improved.
However, the improvements requiring municipal
action were not accomplished, and shortly after the
active sponsorship of the HOLC was withdrawn the
League became inactive.
Waverly remains the most nearly successful
neighborhood conservation project. I t has been the
model for most of the later projects which follow
the same general pattern: a survey to determine
what physical improvements are needed, the preparation of drawings to show what the neighborhood
might look like, and the organization of a local
association which is expected to be the instrument
for getting the job done. They differ in the extent
to which they rely on the local group to initiate the
study and to furnish the leadership for organization.
Waverly had the benefit of the services of expert
analysts and technicians from the beginning of the
study through the organization of the League. The
sponsors took a leading part in all the initial work
and carefully developed a remedial program. However, the task of carrying it out was left to the local
association. In the words of the Waverly report,
"its ultimate effectiveness will be exactly measured
by the extent and permanence of the cooperation
which the Waverly Conservation League is henceforth able to inspire among the residents of the area
as a whole." So far as it has been possible to
determine, the League is defunct, and there seems
to be small hope that it will ever be active, much
less achieve the goal that was set for it. The project
made possible a test of the effectiveness of a local
association under ideal conditions, but without active
municipal participation.
Neighborhood associations have not succeeded as
vehicles for neighborhood conservation because they
have tried to accept the responsibility for elements
of the project they cannot control, and because they
have assumed that it is possible to get active voluntary participation in unprofitable and even expensive
activity by people with different interests.
The Problem is City-wide
The neighborhood association way has been accepted because it is democratic. The solution of
local problems by local groups seems right, and it is,
as long as the causes of the local difficulties lie within
the area. But, in neighborhood deterioration many
of the factors like traffic, smoke and industry trends,
are city-wide and cannot be controlled piecemeal;
others are state and even nationwide in character.
No one civic group or governmental unit can make
173
much headway against such a complex task as
neighborhood conservation. Each must assume its
full responsibility, and the leadership should come
from the unit best equipped to furnish it. I t seems
unrealistic for a city government to wait for an appeal from each of its "neighborhoods" for help in
solving problems common to all.
I t must be recognized that saving residential
neighborhoods from ultimate blight is of importance
to the city as a whole, and that the most valiant
efforts of isolated little reighborhood groups cannot
do the entire job. The case for this kind of responsibility has been stated thus:
"If it is logical for a city to use the normal processes of government to secure the sound redevelopment of an area that has become blighted, it is
equally logical to use those processes to prevent
healthier areas from becoming blighted or to ensure
that the initial development of new urban areas
shall be soundly conceived and executed." *
Some Things That Need To Be Done
The country as a whole needs to be made aware
of what is happening in these aging residential areas
and that in them it faces a future slum clearance
problem twice as great as the one it is presently
trying to cope with. A program of public education
in the why and how of bringing neighborhoods up to
a livable standard and keeping them there would
help focus attention on the problems that need to
be tackled and get the popular support that it is
essential to have in order to deal with them. The
Primer, prepared by architect-planners Stonorov and
Kahn for the Revere Copper and Brass Company, 2
presents some techniques for arousing community
awareness and participation. The Cleveland Planning Commission and the Detroit City Plan Commission have distributed similar materials, and the
Buffalo Planning Association has promoted the idea
of neighborhood planning through the public schools.
All of these are excellent attempts to bring the problem to the people although they over-simplify the
solution, in that they seek it in terms of separate
neighborhood groups prodding city governments into
action. Reoriented into a city-wide and nationwide program and extended to include the hard
questions that have to be answered, these efforts to
stimulate wide public interest can become fruitful.
i "Citizen Participation in City Planning," Tracy B. Augur, The Annals,
November 1945.
* You and Your Neighborhood, A Primer, Revere Copper and Brass, Inc., New
York, 1944.
174
Not all old neighborhoods can be preserved for
satisfactory residential use. Some will have to give
way to new uses or be completely rebuilt. An
analysis must be made of the best future use of each
portion of a city, so that the neighborhoods needing
conservation are identified and related to the whole
of the city's housing supply. Perhaps some municipalities may consider the establishment within the
city government of a department of conservation.
A thorough study of the costs and methods of
house maintenance and repair needs to be made.
The usual individual job is expensive. Costs might
be reduced by large-scale operations, possibly
through the organization of maintenance services
by private business companies on a fee basis, or
through group maintenance plans under a type of
mutual insurance. Other ways and means of
bringing down the cost of maintenance and making
it easier to get the work done might be devised, and
perhaps some experiments in this field could be
undertaken by interested private or semi-private
organizations.
New methods of financing repairs and improvements need to be thoroughly explored for the purpose
of reducing costs and to provide for the accumulation
of funds for maintenance. One device for reducing
costs is the provision in the original home mortgage
contract for an additional loan up to a stated amount
for repairs or improvement. Some savings and loan
associations have adopted this arrangement, which
also adds to the security of the loan. Budgeted
savings for maintenance would help assure upkeep.
Monthly mortgage payments now generally include
all regular charges except maintenance—which is a
more difficult item to handle than taxes or insurance,
but one that urgently needs to be systematized.
Another possible aid to better maintenance might
be found in the arrangement of mortgage payments
on a declining fixed charge basis which would reduce
financing costs as dwellings depreciate due to age
and obsolescence and make it easier to pay for repairs when they are most necessary.
Looking ahead, the best safeguard against the
kind of decay that is overtaking our now aging residential districts is so to plan the new building that
neighborhoods will be protected, not against "infiltrating families/' but against the inroads of industry
and heavy traffic, against the handicaps of crowded
land and shoddy building, and against the lack of
green spaces and recreation and other facilities for
pleasant living. Another safeguard is the development of more effective methods of making and financFederal Home Loan Bank Review
ing repairs, and some provision for the systematic
removal of structures when they reach the end of
their usefulness. Houses will continue to grow old
and obsolete, but if they are well designed houses
built in carefully planned and cared for neighborhoods, they can be made to provide satisfying and
wholesome housing for the period of their useful life.
DIRECTORY
^ | ? CHANGES
J A N U A R Y 1 6 - F E B K T J A R Y 15,
1946
Key to Changes
•Admission to Membership in Bank System
••Termination of Membership in Bank System
#Federal Charter Granted
##Federal Charter Canceled
01nsurance Certificate Granted
001nsurance Certificate Canceled
DISTRICT N O . 2
N E W JERSEY:
Assistant Governor Resigns
B
T H E resignation of David Ford, Assistant Governor of the Federal Home Loan Bank System
since 1937, has been announced by I H L B A Commissioner John H. Fahey. Mr. Ford will become
president of the Council of Insured Savings Associations of New York State.
Before joining the Bank System, Mr. Ford was
managing officer of a savings and loan association
in Atlantic City. He also served as a member of
the Board of Directors of the F H L Bank of New
York and as president of the New Jersey Savings
and Loan League. He was chairman of a state
committee recommending to Congress legislation
setting up the F H L B System.
" M r . Ford's services in Washington have contributed to the improvements accomplished in
home mortgage financing, to the advantage of both
borrowers and lending institutions over the past few
years," Mr. Fahey said.
Dennis ville:
**Dennisville Loan and Building Association.
Public
DISTRICT N O . 3
PENNSYLVANIA:
Pittsburgh:
••Freehold Building and Loan Association, 311 Fourth Avenue.
DISTRICT N O . 4
NORTH CAROLINA :
New Bern:
*0First Federal Savings and Loan Association of New Bern, 222 Craven
Street.
DISTRICT N O . 7
WISCONSIN:
Interest Director in Boston
•
T H E appointment of Reuben A. Cooke as
Public Interest Director in the Federal Home
Loan Bank of Boston has been announced by Ralph
H. Richards, Acting Governor of the Bank System.
Mr. Cooke, a banker and savings and loan executive
of Burlington, Vermont, will fill the unexpired portion of a term ending December 31, 1946.
Milwaukee:
••Fidelity Savings and Loan Association, 2222 West Fond Du Lac Avenue.
DISTRICT N O . 9
Veterans 1 Housing Program
LOUISIANA:
Bogalusa:
•0Citizens Building and Loan Association, City Bank Building, 301 Columbia Street.
TEXAS:
El Paso:
••First Savings and Loan Association, 31.5 Texas Street.
DISTRICT N O . 10
COLORADO:
La Junta:
0Otero Savings and Loan Association, 309 Santa Fe Avenue.
DISTRICT N O . 12
CALIFORNIA:
Los Angeles:
0Pioneer Savings and Loan Association, 740 South Broadway.
NATIONAL HOUSING AGENCY
Wilson W. Wyatt, Administrator
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK ADMINISTRATION
John H. Fahey, Commissioner
March
1946
(Continued from p. 164)
for this is a local job despite the fact that instrumentalities of the Federal Government are setting
the over-all goals and providing much of the needed
assistance to builders and their suppliers.
The cooperation of the home financing institutions
and other local groups is essential to determine
accurately the housing demand in their respective
market areas. I t is vital to the proper planning of
the local building program. This must be considered, as indeed it is, a local program, or rather
an aggregate of local programs. Only in this light
can the problem be approached. Only in this way
can the mass of highly local adjustments which are
necessary be achieved. With the determination to
see this job done in each of our own localities, with
the knowledge that it is imperative, it can and shall
be done.
175
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ACTIVITY AND SELECTED INFLUENCING FACTORS
INDEX
1935-1939=
BY YEARS
100
BY MONTHS
INDEX
" 1 — I — I — I — I — I —
400
400
ADJUSTED FOR SEAS. VAR.
350
350
300
300
i
|
250
250
/
PRIV CONSTRUCTION^!
1 8 2 FAMILY DWELL UNITS ^
(FED. HOME LN. BK. ADM.)
^
( U S : DEPT OF L A B O R ) ^ ^
200
\
f 4 t*
</
i
V fSVGS. 3 LN -J£
- LENDING —
100
/
XV
(F.H.L.B.A.)
%r.
\
50
# V
'•^» , ^
T\f**
i
!
y
IV
200
!
;
/
/
\
150
-
'
150
-j
i
/
100
A 1.
V
.
\Sj
50
NONFARM
FORECLOSURES^^
^NONFARM FORECLOSURES
( F E D HOME L N BK. ADM.) 1
1
0
150
L_l
1
L. ...J
r 11 i r 1 T i 11 T 1. 11 n 1 r r l i UL
i
,
T~T—I—i—r—i—r~
^RENTS
s_...
(U.S.DEPT. OF LABOR)
^BLD<3. MAT'L PRICES
r
RENT
4=
100
'^BUILDING
I
50
300
I
150
,.._l._.L..L.L..i..J..
—
100
MATERIAL PRICES
(U.S. DEPT OF LABOR) I
I
1 1
1 1
i i 1 i i JLJ_
i i
i
i
i
i
1 1
i
1 1
i
_L.J_ JLI
i
J 1.
1 1 50
300
i—r
ADJUSTED FOR SEASONAL VARIATION
pINC. PAYMTS.
250
INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTK / W > >
2A
200
(1-fc.U. K E b t K V t
bUAND)
r *
\
INDUSL.
/ j
*
/\, » " \
•,<4
NTS
ICOME PAYME
^ p a y s.c)EPT.
100
*:
^
"v*«
&*
OF 30MN1ERC
N*N«
500
100
100
s
\f
Y
0 L-niwin
1943
176
i ^ ^ L
/
^
r
r
I I I I I' I II 1
1944
THOUSNEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCT.
50 r
ALL LE NDERS
600
200
G. E 'MP .OY
S.C)EPT OF l.ABO R)
t<*
MORTGAGE RECORDINGS
$700r
300
(J
150
MFG. EMPLOY.*
_J
1930'31 *32 '33 *34 '35 '36 '37 '38 *39 *40 '41 '42 '43 *44 '45 *46
MILLIONS
400
:)
200
PROD.^\
150
50
250
r* *-*f
NO. OF NONFARM DWELLING UNITS
I I II I1 II 1I II I I1I I I III I
1945
1946
50
INDEX WHOLESALE COMMODITY PRICES
180
1935-1939= 100
/
{LUMBER '
J
BUILDING MATERIAL
ALL INDUSTRIAL
i t i n i .it t. •-•••••••••
1944
1945
1946
1943
1944
1945
• hllilli
1946
100 n I iiln lull ih iln I nil i lull i In111111111
1943
1944
1945
1946
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
« « «
MONTHLY
SURVEY
» » »
JANUARY HIGHLIGHTS
/. Index of industrial production, reflecting labor unrest in major industries, registered a further decline.
II. Continued progress in resumption of home building indicated by contra-seasonal 31-percent increase in number of private residential
units started.
A. Permits for private construction in all nonfarm areas totaled 38,000/
no new public residential building was reported.
B. One- and two-family units accounted for the major portions of the gain.
III. Home financing activity continued to move upward at a rapid pace.
20 percent from December.
IV. Savings and loan lending aggregated $217,000,000—nearly
November 1945.
Mortgage recordings reached a new high of $634,000,000,
up
10 percent above the peak for monthly lending volume established in
V. Both labor and material costs in home building advanced slightly.
average.
The composite FHLB index stood at 139.6 percent of the
1935-1939
VI. Repurchases of share investments in savings and loan associations were equal to almost three-fourths of new investments, following the
January pattern of the last three years.
ft ft ft
BUSINESS CONDITIONS—Employment,
production down somewhat
Industrial production in the first month of this
year continued the downward course which commenced just prior to VE Day. In January it dropped
4 points to 159 percent of the 1935-1939 average of
the Federal Reserve Board's seasonally adjusted
index. This figure, the lowest since April 1941, was
36 percent below the wartime peak of 247 achieved
in late 1943.
The January decline was based on a decrease in the
manufacture of durable goods which more than offset
a slight increase in nondurable manufacturing. In
spite of this over-all slackening in industrial activity,
production in most non-manufacturing lines continued to increase.
Employment in non-agricultural establishments
totaled 35,706,000 in January, according to the Department of Labor. This represented a decrease of
600,000 from December and was almost 3,000,000
less than in January last year. This decline was entirely concentrated in manufacturing industries and
in Government service. During the year, construction employment almost doubled to a total of
1,095,000, and employees in the financial, service and
miscellaneous group increased over 600,000 to
4,996,000.
Income payments, reflecting the decreasing employment, dropped from 234.1 in December to 231.6
percent (1935-1939=100, Department of Commerce
index). In January 1945 the index of income payments stood at 241.9.
March 1946
Department store sales, as measured by the Federal Reserve Board, rebounded from the December
decline and in January were back a t the November
level—226 percent of the 1935-1939 average. This
seasonally adjusted figure, the highest for the series,
was 15 percent above that shown in January 1945.
Wholesale commodity prices, according to the
Department of Labor, showed no change from December when the index stood at 129.9 (1926 = 100,
converted to 1935-1939 base). The consumer price
index likewise remained stationary at what had
been the 25-year high of 129.9 (1935-1939=100)
which had been reached in December.
Showing the largest single-month decline since the
days of the defense program, money in circulation
dropped $538,000,000 during January and at the
end of the month totaled slightly less than $29,000,000,000. A drop in January is the normal seasonal
expectation and it is anticipated that, with the end
of the wartime emergency, normal trends will be
characteristic in the future.
[1935-1939=100]
Type of index
Home construction (private) l - Foreclosures ( n o n f a r m ) 1 .
R e n t a l index ( B L S )
B u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l prices. _.
Savings a n d loan lending K
Industrial production i
Manufacturing
employment ! . „
. __.
Income payments *
-
Jan.
1946
250.3
Dec.
1945
Percent
change
Jan.
1945
Percent
change
' 173. 8
7.9
108.3
133.4
318.2
« 163.0
•
+44.0
47.0
+432.6
108. 3
134.0
442. 5
159.0
0.0
+0.4
+39.1
-2.5
108.3
130.4
208.8
234.0
0.0
+2.8
+111.9
-32.1
126.9
231.6
' 124. 2
« 234.1
•
+2.2
-1.1
168.7
241.9
-24.8
-4.3
r
Revised.
i Adjusted for normal seasonal variation.
177
A d d i t i o n a l construction data
Monthly breakdowns now available from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics make it possible to
present national figures for residential construction on the basis of all nonjarm, as well as
urban, areas of the United States. As in the
past, state and regional figures (Table 1) are
shown on an urban basis but with a more
detailed breakdown.
Nonfarm area totals, which are shown in
Table 2, include all incorporated places and all
unincorporated areas except farms. This provides wider coverage than that of urban areas
which take in only incorporated places with a
1940 population of 2,500 or more and, by special
rule, a small number of unincorporated civil
divisions.
and 147.8, respectively. Material price increases
have been noted in virtually all of the 17 cities surveyed in this cycle, reflecting OPA price adjustments for lumber, brick, tile and cast iron pipe.
Although overtime payments have been eliminated
in some cities, increases in basic wage rates in other
areas have served to sustain the upward trend of
labor costs. (See page 165 for a detailed discussion
of the revised building cost index.)
Advances in wholesale prices of most building
materials were indicated by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics index which rose 0.4 percent over December 1945. Prices for structural steel, plumbing and
heating materials and paint and paint materials
remained unchanged, while all other items showed
fractional increases. Since January 1945, the composite wholesale price index has increased about 3
percent, from 130.4 to 134.0. [TABLES 3, 4 and 5.]
Construction costs for the standard house 1
B U I L D I N G A C T I V I T Y — J a n u a r y volume
exceeded 1941 level
Permits were granted during January for private
construction of more than 38,000 family dwelling
units in all nonfarm areas. This was almost five
times the total for the same month of last year, and
exceeded by 4 percent the January 1941 volume of
permits for private construction. Normally there is
a seasonal decline from December to January, but
this pattern was reversed with a 31-percent gain.
Activity in 1- and 2-family dwelling units accounted for the major share of the increase in construction, registering a one-third larger volume in
contrast to a 12-percent rise in multifamily units.
More than 9 out of every 10 permits issued during
January were for 1- and 2-family units. Residential
building in urban areas made up 67 percent of the
nonfarm January total.
The average permit valuation per unit of nonfarm
construction was 5 percent lower than in December,
while the average for urban dwellings was down 7
percent. I n 1945, however, average permit valuations rose substantially. [TABLES 1 and 2.1
B U I L D I N G COSTS—Labor and material
costs up fractionally
The increase in prices and wages paid by builders
of small homes continued during January when the
revised index of building costs rose from 139.2 to
139.6 (1935-1939=100). Both material and labor
costs gained fractionally and now stand at 135.5
178
[Average month of 1935-1939= 100]
Element of
cost
Material
Labor_ _
Total1
Percent
change
Jan.
1945
Jan.
1946
Dec.
1945
Percent
change
135. 5
147. 8
135. 2
147. 3
-f 0. 2
-fO. 3
132. 5
143.3
4-2. 3
4-3. 1
139. 6
139.2
+ 0.3
136. 1
4-2. 6
Revised.
MORTGAGE LENDING—Volume
passed $200,000 / 000-marl<
January lending by all savings and loan associations reached a total of $217,000,000, extending the
generally upward trend of the past three years.
The aggregate volume of new lending more than
doubled the activity for the same month of 1945,
and also passed the previous peak (November 1945)
for mortgage loans made in any month during the
past decade.
All types of associations shared in the 16-percent
increase over December. Activity of Federals rose
20 percent from December to $109,000,000; that
of state-chartered members increased 12 percent to
$92,000,000; and nonmember loans were up 5 percent
to $16,000,000.
Geographically, this contra-seasonal increase in
the demand for mortgage credit was general throughout the country. December-to-January gains ranged
from 6 percent in the Des Moines region to 41 percent
in the Little Rock area.
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
New mortgage loans distributed by purpose
lenders reached new peak volumes
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
Jan.
1946
Purpose
PerDec.
cent
1945 change
$30, 807 $22, 922
145, 342 129, 557
21, 372 17, 848
3,803 3,958
15, 518 13, 425
Construction _
Home purchase
Refinancing
Reconditioning
Other purposes
Jan.
1945
Percent
change
+ 34.4 $3, 772 + 716.7
+ 12. 2 77, 395 + 87.8
+ 19.7 11,267 + 89. 7
-3.9
1,868 + 103.6
+ 15.6 7,999 + 94.0
216, 842 187, 710 + 15. 5 102, 301 + 112.0
Total
Loans for home construction, which have been
growing steadily since VJ Day, amounted to $31,000,000 in January—an eight-fold jump over the same
month of 1945. Loans for this purpose accounted
for 14 percent of the current total as against 4 percent
a year earlier. Home purchase loans of $145,000,000
made up 67 percent of the January 1946 total
compared with 75 percent of the same 1945 month.
The proportion of refinancing, reconditioning and
" other purpose" loans to total lending has changed
little in the past three years. [TABLES 6 and 7.]
TOTAL LOANS MADE BY ALL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS
UNITED STATES - feY TYPE OF ASSOCIATION/
MORTGAGE RECORDINGS—Four
In sharp contrast to the pattern of previous years,
mortgage financing activity increased substantially
throughout the country during January. The aggregate volume of nonfarm mortgages of $20,000 or less
recorded by all types of lenders was 20 percent higher
than in December and reached a record level of
$634,000,000. The number of mortgages, 166,000,
also represented a new monthly peak for this statistical series on mortgage recordings which was inaugurated in 1939.
Mortgage recordings by type of mortgagee
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
Type of lender
Savings and loan associations _
Insurance companies
Banks, trust companies _ _
Mutual savings banks
Individuals
Others
Total
1944
1945
UNITED STATES —BY PURPOSE OF LOAN
OF DOLLARS
I-HOME PURCHASE
J-CONSTRUCTION
H-REFINANCING
I-RECONDITIONING
I-OTHER
u%jy&s«££
1.V4 f '/,'•
>*•*•'• '•*•>>
iiiiiilillil
__
+ 13.4
+ 21. 8
+ 25.8
-3.4
+ 29. 2
+ 24. 3
+ 20. 2
34.8 $220, 420
4. 2 26, 936
21. 9 139, 126
3.Q 24, 401
23.9 151,601
11.3 71, 633
+ 97. 7
+ 50.6
+ 113.7
+ 95. 2
+ 52.8
+ 48. 0
100.0 634, 117 + 78. 8
With the exception of mutual savings banks, all
types of mortgagees shared in this greater activity.
The largest relative gain in dollar volume of recordings, 29 percent, was shown by individual lenders,
followed in order by banks and trust companies,
" o t h e r " lenders and insurance companies with
increases of 26, 24 and 22 percent, respectively.
Recordings by savings and loan associations were
13 percent above December while those of mutual
savings banks declined 3 percent.
In amount of mortgages financed, four of the six
general types of lenders established new monthly
records in January: savings and loan associations,
$220,000,000; individuals, $152,000,000; banks and
trust companies, $139,000,000; and "other" mortgagees, $72,000,000.
Financing activity by all types of lenders has
increased sharply during the past 12 months.
Percentage comparisons in this January-to-January
period ranged from 114 percent for banks and
trust companies to 48 percent for "other" lenders.
[TABLES 8 and
March 1946
Percent
Percent Percent
change
Jan.
change of Jan.
Jan.
from
1946
1946
Dec. amount amount 1945Jan.
1945
1946
9.]
179
F H L B SYSTEM—Advances showed
seasonal decline
Outstanding Federal Home Loan Bank advances
to member institutions dropped $21,000,000 during
January, bringing the total to slightly less than
$174,000,000. Repayments exceeded new advances
in each of the 12 Bank Districts, indicating the
general nature of the decline.
Aggregate repayments of $38,700,000 doubled the
December total and established a new high for the
volume of advances paid off in a single month. The
previous peak had been reached in January 1941.
The Los Angeles District had repayments of more
than $7,000,000 and the New York and Chicago
regions each exceeded the $5 million mark.
New advances made by the Banks dropped considerably from the all-time high of December 1945,
but the $17,700,000 total for January was a comparatively large volume for this period of the year and
substantially above the January 1945 level. The
Chicago and Los Angeles Federal Home Loan Banks
led in the amount of new borrowings by member
institutions. In all, six Banks reported new advances of more than $1 million.
In spite of the seasonal decline, the balance of
advances outstanding at the end of January was the
highest for this month since 1942 and almost $70,000,000 greater than at the end of January 1945.
The largest reductions in unpaid balances occurred
in the Los Angeles and New York Bank Districts,
while the smallest drop was registered in the Cincinnati region.
Both the gross new investment and the repurchase
of savings and loan association share capital reached
new high levels during the opening month of 1946.
The net excess of new investments, although lower
than in the preceding month (as is always the case
immediately following dividend months) was greater
than in any other January for which data are
available.
The estimated $335,000,000 credited to share
accounts during January exceeded by 42 percent
the comparable figure for 1945. Over the same period the amount of withdrawals rose 58 percent to
$245,000,000. The larger percentage gain in withdrawals in this comparison boosted the repurchase
ratio from 63 percent to 73 percent.
The net addition to the share capital of all savings
and loan associations approximated $90,000,000
during January. This was considerably less than
Share investments and repurchases, January 1946
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
A11
I t e m a n d period
.
associations
All
insured
associations
Uninsured
members
Nonmembers
Share investments:
J a n u a r y 1946
J a n u a r y 1945
Percent change
$334, 961 $283, 487 $33, 907 $17, 567
236, 567 195, 077 25, 004 16, 486
+ 42
+ 45
+7
+ 36
Repurchases:
J a n u a r y 1946
J a n u a r y 1945
Percent change
$244, 619 $205, 537 $24, 354 $14, 728
154, 978 123, 943 17, 316 13, 719
+ 41
+ 58
+ 66
+7
Repurchase ratio (percent) :
J a n u a r y 1946
J a n u a r y 1945
73.0
65. 5
72. 5
63. 5
71. 8
69.3
83.8
83. 2
[TABLE 12.]
FLOW OF PRIVATE REPURCHASABLE CAPITAL
180
the estimated $129,000,000 added during the preceding month, but was 11 percent greater than the
net addition in January 1945.
During the last few years, seasonal variations excepted, the ratio of new share investments to outstanding privately owned share capital has been
rising steadily. Until the middle of last year, however, the ratio of withdrawals to outstanding capital
remained almost stationary, resulting in a steady
upward trend in the rate of growth of these accounts.
Since mid-1945, the repurchase ratio has moved
upward, thus flattening out the curve of share
capita] growth.
INSURED A S S O C I A T I O N S
increase shown in resources
Large
The increase in the aggregate resources of insured
associations during the opening month of this year
was twice as large as in the same 1945 month. Compared with a gain of $23,000,000 a year earlier, total
resources of the 2,477 insured associations rose
$57,000,000 in January to a new high of $6,205,000,000. During the month, $3,200,000 of share capital
was repurchased from the Federal Government, reducing the amount owned by the U. S. Treasury and
HOLC by 14 percent to $20,165,000. F H L Bank
advances were reduced $22,000,000 to $164,000,000.
Both new private investments and repurchases
from insured associations were substantially greater
during the reporting month than a year earlier.
Investments increased 45 percent to $283,000,000
while repurchases rose 66 percent to $206,000,000.
(Continued on p. 186)
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
Table 1 . — B U I L D I N G A C T I V I T Y — E s t i m a t e d number and valuation of new family dwelling units
provided in all urban areas in January 1946, by Federal Home Loan Bank District and by State
[Source: U. S. Department of Labor]
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
Permit valuation
N u m b e r of family dwelling u n i t s
P r i v a t e construction
P r i v a t e construction
Federal H o m e L o a n B a n k D i s t r i c t
a n d state
Total
residential
Total
construc- private
tion
construction
1-family
dwellings
2-family
dwellings
Total
1
residential
Total
1-family
construc- p r i v a t e
dwelltion
construcings
tion
Public
construction
3-andmore
family
dwellings
3-andmore
family
dwellings
2-family
dwellings
$4,922 1
Public
construction
$8,797
25, 678
25, 678
21, 638
1,296
2, 744
1 $118,069
$118,069
$104,350
455
455
395
10
50
2, 809
2, 809
2, 557
40
212
90
14
302
6
42
1
90
14
302
6
42
1
79
5
264
6
40
1
6
2
5
7
38
677
44
1, 828
39
216
677
44
1,828
39
216
5
607
18
1,678
39
210
5
30
4
40
22
150
1, 595
1,595
757
63
775
8, 050
8,050
5,292
372
1, 223
372
1,223
332
425
18
45
22
753
2, 505
5, 545
2,505
5, 545
2,319
2,973
659
659
564
25
70
3,933
3,933
3,663
96
512
138
3,985
9
512
138
9
436
119
12
13
64
6
42
3, 402
489
42
3,402
489
42
3,168
453
70
26
3,985
3,201
301
483
14,906
14, 906
12, 537
938
402
74
1, 791
538
279
399
192
310
402
74
1,791
538
279
399
192
310
382
74
1,285
490
254
311
175
230
8
12
325
26
936
548
7,481
1,214
1,422
1,343
469
1,493
893
548
5,749
1,164
1,344
1,119
440
1,280
14
181
22
25
44
8
13
936
548
7,481
1,214
1,422
1, 343
469
669
39
78
98
19
21 I
1, 373
122
882
369
1,373
122
882
369
1,222
85
393
5, 208
1,179
6,780
393
5,208
1,179
449
55
30
66
12
22
32
6,165
110
805
307
357
4,832
976
338
111
166
36
38
92
1,709
358
1,351
1,709
358
1,351
1,648
326
1,322
42
24
18
19
8
11
10,569
1,695
8, 874
10, 569
1,695
8,874
10,306
1,587
8,719
193
84
109
70
24
46
1, 233
1,233
983
250
1,134
63
37
26
32
4
7, 890
6,341
1, 549
7,890
6,341
1,549
7,394
983
250
6,025
1,369
340.
180
160
156
136
20
935
121
353
401
14
46
935
121
353
401
14
46
828
107
335
326
14
46
77
14
18
45
4, 686
510
2,269
1,738
34
135
4,686
510
2,269
1,738
34
135
4,259
455
2,156
1,479
34
135
362
55
113
194
65
L i t t l e Rock
.. . ...
Arkansas
_
__ __ _
Louisiana _ _
.. _
Mississippi
_ _ .
N e w Mexico_ .
Texas
._.
_ _ __ ._
__ _
4,237
186
338
248
190
3,275
4,237
186
338
248
190
3,275
3,899
180
325
244
164
2,986
197
6
13
4
12, 606
502
923
505
483
10,193
11, 765
489
913
497
421
9,445
480
13
10
8
361
26
115
12, 606
502
923
505
483
10,193
Topeka--Colorado .
Kansas.-Nebraska
Oklahoma
1,352
1,352
25
4
6
3
12
4,859
4,859
4,522
137
1,586
1,081
366
1,826
1,586
1,081
366
1, 826
1,286
1,061
365
1,810
53
16
20
1
16
284
503
275
83
491
1,190
362
269
80
479
137
503
275
83
491
1,698
126
57
627
173
678
37
1,698
126
57
627
173
678
37
1,492
124
53
539
125
614
37
27
2
179
7,772
462
200
2,722
791
3,422
175
7,772
462
200
2,722
791
3,422
175
7,222
90
5
460
457
188
2,510
761
3,221
175
6,447
185
6,148
114
6,447
185
6,148
114 |
5,308
170
5,031
107
381
6
373
2
33,209
867
31,939
403
33,209
867
31, 939
403
28,668
819
27,465
384
Connecticut
Maine
_
_-
N e w Jersey
New York
-
__
-
-
_ -
9
W e s t Virginia __
•
_ _
Winston-Salem
__
Alabama
_ _
District of C o l u m b i a
Florida
. _
Georgia
N o r t h Carolina
S o u t h Carolina
Virginia
_
_ _
. _
__
_
.
Cincinnati _
Kentucky
Ohio
_
__
_
_
Indianapolis
I n d i a n a . _.
Michigan
_ __
Chicago
Illinois
Wisconsin
__
_ _ ___
_ __
Des M o i n e s
__
Iowa
....
Minnesota
__ Missouri.
_ .
North Dakota
South Dakota.
_
__
_ __
_. .
_______
_
Portland
Idaho
Montana-.Oregon
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
Los Angeles
Arizona- __
California
Nevada..
_ __
__ _
___ ___
_
__
_ _.
___
___ _
March 1946
_..___
__
914
220
2
174
10
15
1
44
9
67
1
30
141
4
78
48
49
758
9
744
5
1,493
6, 780
1
36
30
5
.
6
324
.
2, 434
83 1
241 |
2,331
449
36
49
1,557
32
1,515
10
103
174
1
164
10
1, 431
29
1,063
11
126
10
192
.
65
62
299
284
12
176
120
152
2,984
16
2,959 1
9
181
Table 2 . — B U I L D I N G
A C T I V I T Y — E s t i m a t e d number and valuation of new family dwelling units
[Source: U . S . Department of Labor]
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
N u m b e r of family dwelling u n i t s
M o n t h l y totals
Type
Permit valuation
M o n t h l y totals
A n n u a l totals
J a n . 1946
D e c . 1945
38,084
29,100
P r i v a t e construction
38,084
29,100
33,847
1,382
2,855
25,116
1,426
2,558
J a n . 1946
D e c . 1945
J a n . 1945
169,300
$157,997
$127,065
$20,437
$892,398
$468,802
138,711
157,997
127,065
19, 342
848,175
391,318
202, 592
9,966
16, 599
114, 547
10, 626
13, 538
143, 663
5,197
9,137
112,467
4,912
9,686
16, 598
639
2,105
758,327
33, 696
56,152
319,040
33, 573
38, 705
16,343
J a n . 1945
Total
A n n u a l totals
30, 589
1,095
44,223
77,484
1945
1944
7,700
245, 500
7,302
229,157
6,290
243
769
398
1945
1944
NONTABlf
1-family dwellings
2-family dwellings l
3-and-more family dwellings •
P u b l i c construction
.
URBAN
25, 678
Private construction..
1-family dwellings
2-family dwellings ! - - _
3-and-more family dwellings >
- --
5,046
' 160, 720
' 114, 799
118, 069
95,040
14,184
' 644, 557
' 341,419
19,256
5,046
' 150, 712
' 93,173
118,069
95, 040
14,184
' 627,229
' 287,195
21, 638
1,296
2,744
15, 494
1,241
2,521
4,095
213
738
' 125, 495
' 9, 248
' 15,969
' 71, 278
9,908
11,987
104,350
4,922
8,797
80, 639
4,275
10,126
11, 561
580
2,043
' 540, 616
'31,728
* 54,885
'220,175
32,134
34,886
' 10,008
_
19, 256
25, 678
Total
' 21, 626
' 27,328
' 54, 224
P ublic construction
1
* Includes 1- and 2-family dwellings combined with stores.
Table 3 . - B U I L D I N G
Includes multi-family dwellings combined with stores.
' Revised.
C O S T S -Index of building costs for the standard house in representative
cities in specific months l
[Average month of 1935-1939=100]
1944
1945
1946
1943
1942
1941
1940
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Federal H o m e Loan B a n k
District and city
Feb.
Nov.
Aug.
May
Feb.
N o . 3—Pittsburgh:
Wilmington, Del
Philadelphia, P a
Pittsburgh, Pa.1
Charleston, W . Va
138.5
170.0
137.2
136.3
' 137. 9
161.1
136.6
136.1
' 137.0
158.3
135.0
135.4
' 136. 2
151.9
134.7
134.1
134.9
151.4
134.6
134.2
133.4
148.5
133.5
' 121. 6
129.2
138.8
130.7
'121.1
131.0
' 135.0
118.6
' 115. 9
108.4
' 118.0
110.2
' 108.6
97.0
105.8
101.7
'101.6
N o . 5—Cincinnati:
Louisville, K y
__
C i n c i n n a t i , Ohio
C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
Memphis, Tenn
142.9
140.1
145.9
141.3
138.4
138.2
149.2
' 139.9
135.7
138.3
148.1
137.7
136.3
138.2
147.5
136.9
135.2
137.7
147.9
136.0
' 126. 5
131.2
139.5
' 134. 4
' 119. 9
119.1
128.3
' 120.1
' 112. 8
111.1
125.1
'115.8
' 106.6
100.3
110.5
' 107. 2
104.1
96.7
106.9
103.7
142.3
143.1
141.6
133.9
132.3
140.9
' 142. 7
141.1
132.5
128.6
138.8
141.9
139.2
132.3
126.8
139.0
141.9
139.0
132.0
126.8
138.4
141.9
137.2
134.7
126.4
135.4
141.3
132.3
' 133.8
123.1
134.6
131.3
123.4
' 117. 0
116.2
127.9
128.5
122.6
' 116.6
119.5
111.8
' 121.0
113.5
' 105. 6
106.3
103.9
104.8
105.4
' 102.7
101.0
121.9
153.7
138.4
130.8
121.9
' 153. 7
136.5
133.5
122.3
151.9
136.1
133.1
122.4
151.4
136.3
133.0
122.3
150. 9 •
135.8
133.0
' 118. 5
146.5
128.4
124.6
111.4
130.9
110.3
114.9
'119.0
116.1
103.9
101.6
103.3
109.0
99.0
95.4
102.4
105.0
N o . 9—Little R o c k :
Little Rock, A r k . .
N e w Orleans, L a
__
Jackson, MissAlbuquerque, N . Mex
Houston, Texas
N o . 12—Los Angeles:
P h o e n i x , Ariz
L o s Angeles, Calif
S a n Francisco, Calif.'
.._
-.-
119.2
»Indexes of February 1941 and thereafter are based on retail material prices collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, except where specifically noted.
» BLS data from February 1945.
> BLS data from February 1942.
' Revised.
This index is designed to measure the changes in prices of construction materials and average hourly earnings for building workers, weighted to reflect variations
in the cost of constructing a standard house. It provides a basis for the study of cost trends within an individual community or in different cities.
Material costs are based on prices for a limited bill of the more important items. Current prices are furnished by the BLS and are based on information from a
group of dealers in each city who report on prices for material delivered to job site, in average quantities, for residential construction. Because of wartime conditions,
some of the regular items are not available at times and, therefore, substitutions must be made of similar products which are being sold.
Labor costs are based on prevailing rates for residential construction and reflect total earnings, including overtime and bonus pay. Either union or nonunion rates are
used according to which prevails in the majority of cases within the community.
Figures presented in this table include all revisions up to the present time. Re-visions are unavoidable, however, as more complete information is obtained.
Cities in F H L B Districts 2, 6, 8, and 11 report in January, April, July, and October of each year; those in Districts 3, 5, 9 and 12 report in February, May, August
and November, and those in Districts 1, 4, 7 and 10 report in March, June, September and December.
182
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
Table 4 . — B U I L D I N G COSTS—Index of building costs for the standard house '
[Average m o n t h of 1935-1939=100]
J a n . 1946 D e c . 1945 N o v . 1945 Oct. 1945 S e p t . 1945 A u g . 1945 J u l y 1945 J u n e 1945 M a y 1945 A p r . 1945 M a r . 1945 F e b . 1945 J a n . 1945
E l e m e n t of cost
135.5
147.8
___
Total
135.2
147.3
135.0
147.1
134.6
146.1
134.1
145.9
133.9
144.4
133.8
144.0
133.5
143.9
133.4
143.8
133.2
143.8
133.1
143.8
132.8
143.4
132.5
143.3
139.6
Material
Labor
139.2
139.0
138.4
138.0
137.4
137.2
137.0
136.8
136.8
136.7
136.3
136.1
i Revised.
Table 5 . — B U I L D I N G COSTS—Index of wholesale prices of building materials in the United States
[Source: U. S. Department of Labor]
[1935-1939=100; converted from 1926 base]
All b u i l d i n g
materials
Period
1944: J a n u a r y
..
_
.
1946: J a n u a r y .__
______
__ ___
_ __ . . .
P e r c e n t change:
J a n u a r y 1946-December 1945
J a n u a r y 1946-January 1945
Paint and
paint materials
Lumber
Cement
Plumbing
and heating
Structural
steel
Other
126.7
. . . - ._
1945: J a n u a r y
February
March
April
_. . . .
May
June
.-_ -_July
August
September
October..
November _
December
Brick a n d
tile
110.3
102.7
164.4
127.2
120.6
103.5
111. 2
130.4
130.6
130.8
130.8
131.0
131.1
131.2
131.5
131. 8
132.1
132.5
133.4
121.5
121.6
121.8
121.7
121.8
122.1
122.9
122.8
123.7
126.8
128.4
128.4
106.9
108.7
109.1
109.1
109.1
109.1
109.1
109.1
109.3
109.6
109.9
110.3
171.3
171.4
171.3
171.4
171.9
172.5
172.7
172.9
172.6
172.8
173.2
175.7
130.7
130.8
130.7
130.7
130.8
130.7
130.4
131.9
132.3
132.3
132.4
132.5
121.4
121.4
121.4
121.4
121.4
121.7
121.7
122.7
124.8
124.8
124.8
124.8
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
103.5
111.9
112.0
112.3
112.3
112.0
112.8
112.8
112.8
113.0
113.1
114.0
114.5
134.0
128.7
111.0
176.5
132.5
124.8
103.5
115. 3
+0.4
+2.8
+0.2
+5.9
+0.6
+3.8
+0.5
+3.0
0.0
+1.4
0.0
+2.8
0.0
0.0
+0.7
+3.0
Table 6 . — M O R T G A G E LENDING—Estimated volume of new home mortgage loans by al savings
and loan associations, by purpose and class of association
[Thousands of dollars]
Purpose of loans
Period
1944..
January—
1945.
Construction
Home purchase
Refinancing
$95,243
$1,064,017
$163,813
7,872
55,000
9,976
180,550
1,357,555
196,011
Class of association
Reconditioning
Loans for
all other
purposes
Total
loans
Federals
State
members
Nonmembers
$30,751
$100,228
$1,454,052
$669,433
$648,670
$135,949
1,521
6,609
80,978
37,076
35,456
8,446
911,671
836,874
164,133
40,736
137,826
January—
February..
March
April
May
June.
July
August
September
October. __
November.
December.
3,772
3,081
7,406
9,541
13,032
17, 567
17, 658
20,730
16, 375
23,985
24,481
22,922
76,495
78,140
105, 307
113,684
120,244
116, 798
112,761
120, 557
113,103
135,224
135, 685
129, 557
12,167
12, 524
15,922
16,800
15,887
17,147
15,622
17,146
16,786
18, 751
19,411
17,848
1,868
1,994
2,559
2,951
3,396
3,364
3,351
3,971
3,980
4,857
4,487
3,958
7,999
10,270
10,287
10,778
10,520
12,435
11,007
11,259
12,189
13,562
14,095
13,425
102,301
106,009
141,481
153,754
163,079
167,311
160,399
173,663
162,433
196,379
198,159
187, 710
46,439
49,900
69,430
71,375
75,607
79,603
76,355
82,197
77,321
95,815
96,709
90,920
46,452
46,575
60,688
67,955
71,921
74,219
70,264
75,644
70, 642
84,819
85,804
81,891
9,410
9,534
11,363
14,424
15,551
13,489
13,780
15,822
14,470
15,745
15,646
14,899
1946
January.._
30,807
145,342
21,372
3,803
15,518
216,842
109,146
92,103
15,593
March 1946
1,912,678
183
Table 7.—LENDING—Estimated volume of new
loans by savings and loan associations
Table 8.—RECORDINGS—Estimated nonfarm
mortgage recordings, $20,000 and under
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
JANUARY 1946
[Thousands of dollars)
C u m u l a t i v e new loans
(12 m o n t h s )
N e w loans
Federal H o m e Loan
B a n k District and
class of association
January
1946
December
1945
January
1945
1945
1944
Percent
change
U N I T E D STATES
$216,842 $187, 710 $102, 301 $1,912,678 $1,454,052
UNITED STATES
+31.5
109,146
92,103
15, 593
90,920
81,891
14,899
46,439
46,452
9,410
911,671
836,874
164,133
669,433
648, 670
135,949
+36.2
+29.0
+20.7
______
12,003
11,268
6,852
125,996
106, 780
+18.0
Federal
State m e m b e r . .
Nonmember.._
5,601
5,217
1,185
4,968
4,856
1,444
2,447
3,656
749
53,840
56,991
15,165
40,898
52, 504
13, 378
+31.6
+8.5
+13.4
F e d e r a l - _._
State m e m b e r
N o n m e m b e r . _.
Boston..
New York
_.
__ _
Pittsburgh
._
_
20, 573
18,259
9,483
187, 331
133,035
+40.8
7,822
9,434
3,317
Federal
State m e m b e r
Nonmember
Savings I n s u r - B a n k s
Muand
and
ance
tual
Indiloan
t r u s t savings v i d u a l s
comassocia- panies combanks
tions
panies
Federal H o m e Loan
B a n k District
and state
6,455
8,537
3,267
3, 259
4,555
1,669
66, 576
89,971
30, 784
43, 253
68,146
21,636
+53.9
+32.0
+42.3
16, 865
14, 324
8,608
154, 716
123,055
+25.7
Federal
.. _ .
State member _ . .
Nonmember.-
8,714
5,070
3,081
6,724
5,082
2,518
3,952
3,169
1,487
73,534
53, 400
27,782
56,972
41,872
24, 211
+29.1
+27.5
+14.7
W i n s t o n - S a l e m . - ._ ___
31,814
25, 628
13, 329
243,851
171,441
+42.2
16, 764
12, 508
2,542
13, 606
10,456
1,566
7,139
5,428
762
128,459
99,687
15, 705
89,135
71, 861
10, 445
+44.1
+38.7
+50.4
33, 668
29,839
15,071
313,820
249, 679
+25. 7
15,730
16, 540
1,398
12,673
15,862
1,304
6,148
7,814
1,109
135,090
158, 388
20, 342
104, 716
124, 925
20,038
+29.0
+26.8
+1.5
12, 267
11, 282
5,616
108, 216
81,198
6,213
4,654
415
2,781
2,517
318
58, 605
44, 997
4,614
40, 339
37,159
3,700
+45.3
+21.1
+24.7
-
_ _
Federal
_
State m e m b e r . . _
Nonmember..,
Federal
State member_._ _
N o n m e m b e r . . - ._ . .
Indianapolis
Federal
State mem b e r . . .
Nonmember
C hicago
Federal
State m e m b e r .
Nonmember
21, 789
.. .
3,954
4,982
950
91, 988
106, 893
15, 647
__
12, 576
11,908
6,108
6,545
4,782
1,249
6,534
3,882
1,492
2,689
2,432
987
12, 256
8,673
6,407
5,761
88
4,234
4,344
95
.
...
Federal
State member
Nonmember
.
Topeka
_ _
. -
Federal _ _ S t a t e m e m b e r . . . . ._
N o n m e m b e r ._
+30.9
68,405
81, 701
13, 751
+34.5
+30.8
+13.8
116, 997
91,443
+27.9
61,444
40, 375
15,178
47, 686
31, 989
11, 768
+28.9
+26.2
+29.0
6,426
90,802
75,042
+21.0
3,195
3,160
71
44, 942
44, 678
1,182
32,940
41,193
909
+36.4
+8.5
+30.0
10,063
6,213
96, 974
70,149
+38.2
7,138
3,855
1,074
F e d e r a l ._ .
State m e m b e r . _ _ . .
Nonmember _
184
163,857
12,067
Federal
State member
Nonmember _
Los Angeles
214, 528
8,641
9,661
1,297
Little Rock
Portland
9,886
9,876
10, 971
942
.
Des Moines
Federal
State member
Nonmember._
19,599
5,761
3,042
1,260
3,265
1,900
1,048
53, 683
28,144
15,147
37, 264
19, 570
13, 315
+44.1
+43.8
+13.8
9,016
6,566
3,956
64, 927
47,196
+37.6
5,956
2,897
163
4,442
2,064
60
2,432
1,379
145
40, 998
22, 565
1,364
30, 422
15, 133
1,641
+34.8
+49.1
-16.9
21,948
20,301
10,753
194, 520
141,177
+37.8
11, 825
9,997
126
10,669
9,451
181
5,178
5,460
115
102, 512
90,785
1,223
77, 403
62, 617
1,157
+32 4
+45.0
+5.7
$220,420 $26, 936 $139,126 $24,401 $151,601 $71,633 $634,117
607
5,726 12,144
6,970
3,271
45,102
2,002
735
11, 241
489
1,655
262
397
19
191
2,287
321
2,281
209
523
105
2,110
736
7,488
813
612
385
2,221
458
3,231
328
506
226
1,371
68
1,393
32
394
13
10,388
2,337
25, 825
1,871
3,690
991
18, 273
1,989
11,156
9,123
20,192
7,728
68, 461
4,850
13, 423
800
1,189
4,256
6,900
1,139
7,984
5,133
15,059
2,467
5,261
18, 645
49,816
15, 785
2,307
12,087
915
9,613
3,450
44,157
269
14, 389
1,127
171
1,855
281
259
10,049
1,779
97
818
369
8,498
746
98
3,180
172
1,263
38, 789
4,105
.
20, 987
3,192
7,776
203
20,136
5,132
57, 426
Alabama
District of C o l u m b i a
Florida
Georgia
. . .
Maryland
. _ .
N o r t h Carolina
S o u t h Carolina
Virginia
_.
747
3,199
3,414
2,434
5,372
2,395
442
2,984
307
288
937
162
190
648
217
443
485
809
1,466
1,364
1,229
560
516
1,347
1,140
2,077
8,502
1,357
2,045
1,632
801
2,582
527
632
1,457
480
322
697
315
702
3,206
7,005
15, 776
5,797
9,361
5,932
2,291
8,058
40,076
2,293
18,008
915
8,645
5,619
75, 556
3,556
35, 388
1,132
400
1,088
805
1,951
14,193
1,864
915
602
7,309
734
185
1,954
3,480
6,694
60, 847
8,015
14, 666
2,617
14, 550
8
5,023
2,613
39, 477
8, 583
6,083
1,230
1,387
5, 511
9,039
8
1,963
3,060
1,041
1,572
18, 336
21,141
24,110
1,371
8,936
31
18, 967
5,143
897
474
5,237
3,699
13,170
2,375
11, 365
3,666
4, 582
4,408
278
236
160
326
1,802
17
70
2,799
2,467
5,777
132
190
12, 749
4,337
1,136
2,845
632
266
7,870
139
334
150
10
3,704
13,459
2,401
4,293
1,394
5,371
..
_
New York.
N e w Jersey
New York..
Pittsburgh
Delaware.. .. .
Pennsylvania..
W e s t Virginia
.
Winston-Salem.. .
Cincinnati
C i n c i n n a t i - _ __ _
Total
16, 384
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
R h o d e Island
V e r m o n t __
+33.3
6,768
5,071
428
Boston
Other
mortgagees
.
_.
Kentucky
Ohio . . !
Tennessee
... _
. .
Indianapolis.
-
Michigan
Chicago .
__ _
Illinois . _.
Wisconsin..
_.
Des Moines
__
.
Iowa
. . . __ . .
M i n n e s o t a ._ .
Missouri.__ . . ...
N o r t h D a k o t a . . ....
South Dakota
Little Rock
A r k a n s a s _.
Louisiana
Mississippi.
N e w Mexico.
Texas.
.
Topeka
.
.
.
Colorado _ . _ _ _ .
Kansas
_.
Nebraska.
__ . . .
Oklahoma
._
Portland .
_.
I d a h o . . _. .
Montana
Oregon _.
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
Los Angeles
_
Arizona.- . .
California
Nevada
203
10,061 10,023
54, 532
31
5,829
4,232
9,223
800
40,153
14, 379
272
7,077
6,806
41,065
1,187
1,647
3,872
150
221
354
1,868
4, 507
67
10
8,166
11,162
20, 366
644
727
3,596
10, 605
4,594
35, 881
709
218
401
95
2,173
667
2,075
607
393
6,863
57
649
196
21
3,671
2 708
6,121
1,986
785
24,281
1,049
4,364
7,945
2,760
29,577
114
308
285
342
1,119
1,399
461
1,385
3,946
1,127
556
2,316
1,148
802
153
657
8,728
7,929
2,849
10,071
7,884
899
7,248
790
5,469
2,964
25, 254
576
403
1,985
714
3,939
267
96
26
294
249
224
10
220
426
857
1,059
4,303
383
38
585
539
2,104
444
1,376
421
116
43
627
153
1,974
51
1,593
1,437
5,905
2,619
12,568
1,132
22,877
3,900
34, 314
39,865 16, 673 117,629
851
21,859
167
73
3,812
15
1,024
33, 097
193
4,367
2.291
128
37, 043 16, 514 112, 325
937
531
31
272
752
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
Table 9 . — M O R T G A G E RECORDINGS—Estimated volume of n on farm mortgages recorded
[Dollar a m o u n t s are s h o w n in. t h o u s a n d s ]
Savings a n d loan
associations
M u t u a l savings
banks
Banks and trust
companies
Insurance
companies
O t h e r mortgagees
Individuals
All mortgagees
Period
Total
Percent
Total
Percent
35.7
Percent
Total
Total
Percent
Percent
Total
Percent
31.4
32.8
34.9
34.5
35.4
36.1
36.2
37.0
37.2
37.2
36.6
36.9
26, 936
19.4
$216,982
3.9 $1,402,103
24.9
$658, 945
11.7
$5, 623,190
100.0
5.0
4.7
4.8
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.3
4.2
4.1
4.0
4.1
4.2
65,109
63,933
80,000
88, 749
91,023
91, 336
90,199
93,358
91,661
110,429
114, 636
110,588
18.4
18.9
18.5
19.5
18.7
18.8
19.2
19.1
19.7
19.9
20.5
21.0
12, 500
10,343
13,599
15,680
18,981
18, 572
18,062
18,488
18,472
23, 711
23,310
25,264
3.5
3.1
3.1
3.4
3.9
3.8
3.9
3.8
4.0
4.3
4.1
4.8
99,200
93,248
114,971
118,713
125,849
121,800
116, 964
120,015
111,384
131, 590
130, 986
117,383
28.0
27.5
26.5
26.1
25.8
25.0
24.9
24.5
24.0
23.7
23.4
22.2
48,407
43,963
52,737
55, 749
57, 702
57,481
54,087
56,013
51.154
60,928
63,087
57,637
13.7
13.0
12.2
12.2
11.8
11.8
11.5
11.4
11.0
10.9
11.3
10.9
354, 578
338,697
433,337
455,790
487,435
487,041
469, 269
489, 389
464,157
555,893
560,180
527,424
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
139,126
21.9
24, 401
3.9
151,601
23.9
71, 633
11.3
634,117
100.0
17,882
16, 034
20,669
19, 718
21,459
21,801
20,173
20,359
18,935
22,229
23,061
22,112
34.8
4.4 $1,091,021
$244, 432
111,480
111, 176
151, 361
157,181
172,421
176,051
169,784
181,156
172,551
207,006
205,100
194, 440
220, 420
_
...
Total
Percent
4.2
$2,009,707
1945
January
February
March...
April
May
June. _ _
July
August
September
October .
November
December
Total
1946
January
Table 1 1 . — F H A — H o m e mortgages insured
Table 1 0 — S A V I N G S — S a l e s of savings bonds *
[ P r e m i u m p a y i n g ; t h o u s a n d s of dollars]
[ T h o u s a n d s of dollars]
Series E
Period
Series F
Series G
Total
Redemptions
Title I I 2
Title V I
(603)
Period
$12,379,891
9,822,065
8C3,819
653,222
712,133
684,424
1,194, 712
1, 467,673
1,031,778
571, 286
420, 058
509, 706
865, 022
908, 232
$772,767
595.153
42,034
30,695
26,487
23,112
62,940
178,003
47,409
21,629
17, 760
7,922
53, 839
83. 323
640,862
1944
1945
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
1946
J a n u a r y . _.
40, 342
$2,891,427 $16.044.085
2,519,749 12,936,967
1,074,180
228, 327
847,990
164,073
889,076
150,456
837, 636
130,100
1, 540,089
282,437
2,178,055
532,379
215,288
1,294,475
106,825
699, 74C
76, 296
514,114
106, 842
624, 470
264, 760
1,183, 621
261.966
1.253.521
$3,263,168
5,332,496
333, 443
317,083
437, 892
381,198
404, 209
382, 536
406,103
515,161
514, 382
595, 663
510,675
534.151
New
1945:
January,-..
February..
March
April
May
June
July
August
September.
October
November.
December.
' U . S . T r e a s u r y W a r S a v i n g s Staff,
t h e U . S. T r e a s u r y .
959,560
Existing
Total
insured
a t e n d of
period
$67
27
37
63
80
374
347
666
968
1,228
1,777
1,965
$19,006
14,085
16,480
14,813
22, 272
18,841
18,207
17,286
15,165
18, 606
18, 887
18, 051
$38, 640
31,417
29, 886
26,885
23, 707
20,413
19,056
14,992
12, 634
15, 253
10, 779
11,383
$6,082, 273
6,127,802
6,174, 205
6, 215,9G6
6, 262,025
6, 301,653
6, 339, 263
6, 372, 207
6, 400,974
6, 436,061
6, 467, 504
6,498,903
3,095
1946: J a n u a r y
278,356
l
24, 275
11, 293
i 537,566
,
587,395
i Figures represent gross insurance w r i t t e n d u r i n g t h e period a n d do n o t t a k e
account of principal r e p a y m e n t s on previously insured loans.
2 Figures for J a n u a r y 1946 are e s t i m a t e d .
A c t u a l deposits m a d e t o t h e credit of
Table 1 2 . — F H L B A N K S — L e n d i n g operations and principal assets and liabilities
[ T h o u s a n d s of dollars]
L e n d i n g operations,
J a n u a r y 1946
Principal assets, J a n u a r y 31, 1946
C a p i t a l a n d principal liabilities,
J a n u a r y 31, 1946
Federal H o m e L o a n B a n k
Advances
Boston
Now York
Pittsburgh
Winston-Salem
Cincinnati
Indianapolis
Chicago
Des Moines
Little Rock
Topeka
Portland
Los Angeles
J a n u a r y 1946 (All B a n k s )
December 1945
J a n u a r y 1945
1
Includes i n t e r b a n k deposits.
Marc/? 1946
Repayments
Advances
outstanding
Cash *
Government
securities
Capital2
Debentures
$160
1,702
867
2,2.17
2,434
1,773
3,170
902
467
228
890
2,905
$1, 275
5, 355
2,205
3,277
2,970
3,478
5,343
2,740
1,784
1, 593
1,615
7,059
$11, 697
11, 860
15, 575
15, 889
15,928
10,462
32, 259
15,151
5,956
3,390
5.138
30, 588
$1, 893
3,385
2,326
1,737
4,707
2,408
4,960
740
852
1,341
1,912
3,881
$10, 626
26, 922
7,360
4,124
24,195
13,172
4,295
8,161
7,625
7,528
5,709
9,854
$20, 435
28, 600
17, 446
19, 117
28, 666
15, 356
24, 520
14, 631
12, 837
11,011
9,022
17, 726
$2,000
3,000
6,000
2,500
5,000
4,000
12, 500
8,500
1,000
1,000
3,000
20, 000
30, 142
129, 571
219, 367
68, 500
118,392
219, 217
156,183
207, 522
17,715
38, 694
173, S
116,849
18, 908
194, 872
10, 946
35, 783
105, 726
2
25, 77:
Member
deposits
T o t a l assets
J a n u a r y 31,
1946 1
10,767
1,899
199
11, 388
5,789
4, 555
979
167
314
778
6,632
$24, 316
42, 383
25, 364
21, 835
45,103
26,166
41,618
24,133
14, 509
12, 329
12, 809
44, 427
44, 340
334, 992
45, 697
50,000
31, 695
' 285
,
C a p i t a l stock, s u r p l u s , a n d u n d i v i d e d profits.
185
Table 1 3 - I N S U R E D A S S O C I A T I O N S Progresi of institutions insured by the FSLIC
Insured Associations
(Continued from p. 180)
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
Operations
Number of
associations
P e r i o d a n d class
of association
ALL
Total
assets
New
New
mortgage p r i v a t e
investloans
ments
Private
repurchases
Repurchase
ratio
INSURED
$76, 215 $195,077 $123,943
63,08fi
79,47tt
125,769
71,488
110, 287 138,709
65,701
113, 296 133, 651
62,980
121,808 130,182
56,279
126,824 163,156
121, 572 196,944 144, 932
83,357
131, 239 156,189
77, 855
122,098 146, 290
91, 668
150,000 163, 628
92,650
151,335 147, 022
71,777
144, 664 180,352
63.5
50.2
51 5
49 2
48 4
34 5
73 6
53 4
53.2
56 0
63.0
39.8
283,487
205, 537
72 5
46,439
49,900
69, 430
71, 375
75,607
79,603
76, 355
82,197
77, 321
95, 815
96, 709
90, 920
129,640
82, 862
91, 627
88, 356
85, 977
106, 770
129,958
102,190
96,180
108, 252
97,373
120,195
84,624
41, 374
46, 574
41,856
40,063
33,601
100, 301
55,016
51, 428
59, 925
59, 023
44, 352
65 3
49.9
50 8
47.4
46 6
31.6
77.2
53 8
53.5
55 4
60.6
36.9
109,146
190, 748
144, 388
75 7
1945: J a n u a r y
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
2,466
2,463
2,465
2,469
2,469
2,471
2,473
2,475
2,476
2,476
2,474
2,475
$5, 035,626
5,076, 554
5,136,903
5,204,641
5, 292,169
5, 549, 563
5, 594,461
5, 666,351
5, 725, 962
5, 797, 238
5, 878,098
6,148, 230
1946: J a n u a r y
2,477
6, 204, 954
169,107
1,464
1,464
1,465
1,465
1,466
1,465
1,467
1,469
1,467
1,466
1,466
1,467
3,178,132
3, 200,324
3, 237,942
3, 280, 506
3, 337, 648
3, 528.027
3, 552.154
3, 595,087
3, 632,197
3, 676, 401
3, 732, 490
3,923, 501
1,467
3,955, 391
FEDERAL
1945: J a n u a r y
February..
March..
April
May..
June
July
August-.
September
October
November
December
1946: J a n u a r y
-
..
.
The greater relative gain in withdrawals boosted the
repurchase ratio from 64 percent to 73 percent.
At the beginning of 1946, general reserves and
undivided profits accounts of these institutions
aggregated $386,400,000 and represented 6.2 percent of total assets. [TABLE 13.]
FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS
On January 31, 1946, there were 1,467 Federally
chartered savings and loan associations, a net gain
of three during the year. In this period the combined resources of Federals increased $777,000,000,
or 24 percent, to $3,955,000,000. General reserves
and undivided profits totaled $223,400,000—5.6 percent of total resources.
Progress in number and assets of Federals
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
Number
Class of
association
STATE
1945: J a n u a r y
February
March
April
May
June
Julv
August
September,- _..
October
November..
..
December
1,002
999
1,000
1,004
1,003
1,006
1,006
1,006
1,009
1,010
1,008
1,008
1,857,494
1,876,230
1, 898,961
1, 924,135
1,954, 521
2,021, 536
2.042, 307
2,071,264
2,093, 765
2,120, 837
2,145, 608
2, 224, 729
29,776
29,579
40, 857
41,921
46, 201
47, 221
45, 217
49,042
44, 777
54,185
54, 626
53, 744
65,437
42,907
47,082
45,295
44, 205
56, 386
66, 986
53,999
50,110
55, 376
49, 649
60,157
39,319
21,715
24, 914
23, 845
22,917
22, 678
44, 631
28,341
26, 427
31, 743
33, 627
27,425
60.1
50.6
52.9
52.6
51.8
40.2
66.6
52.5
52.7
57.3
67.7
45.6
1946: J a n u a r y __
1,010
2, 249, 563
59,961
92, 739
61.149
65.9
Table 15—FORECLOSURES—Estimated nonfarm real-estate foreclosures, by Federal
Home Loan Bank Districts
Cumulative
(12 months)
Foreclosures
Federal Home Loan
Bank District
Dec.
1945
186
Oct.
1945
1,193
UNITED STATES.
Boston
New York
Pittsburgh
Winston-Salem.
Cincinnati
Indianapolis
Chicago
Des Moines
Little Rock
Topeka
Portland
--.
Los Angeles
Nov.
1945
76
231
193
132
115
9
48
71
39
55
103
279
301
109
107
18
56
63
29
57
7
64
! Percent
ichange
Dec.
1944
1, 455 14, 436
269
176
109
107
26
56
59
27
179
355
271
193
129
44
51
54
50
62
8
59
1,343
3,393
2,637
1,569
1,624
473
652
666
408
939
117
615
17,574 j -17.
2,069
4,747
3,080
1,996
1,583
361
870
894
439
715
112
1
681
-35.1
-28.5
-14.4
-21.4
+2.6
+31.0
-25.1
-25. 5
-7.1
+31.3
+4.5
-9.7
New
Converted
Total
Jan.
31,
1946
630
837
1,467
Dec.
31,
1945
Approximate assets
J a n . 31,
1946
Dec. 31,
1945 .
630 $1, 369, 985 $1, 358, 278
837 2, 585, 406 2, 565, 223
1,467
3, 955, 391
3, 923, 501
FORECLOSURES—Twenty-year low
reported in 1945
The foreclosure situation during 1945 was the
most favorable in the past 20 years. The total number of nonfarm foreclosures completed during the
year, 14,436, was roughly equivalent to the activity
for a two-week period in 1933 when the index reached
160.8 (1935-1939-= 100). The annual index for 1945
was 9.2, which, expressed as a rate, was equivalent to
0.7 per 1,000 nonfarm structures.
Nonfarm foreclosures during the last quarter of
1945 totaled 3,302, a reduction of 23 'percent from
the same period of 1944 and slightly under the previous quarter. The indexes for October, November
and December, after correction for normal seasonal
variation, stood at 8.2, 9.0 and 7.9, respectively.
The foreclosure rate during this quarterly period,
expressed on an annual basis, was 0.6 per 1,000
nonfarm structures. [TABLE 15.]
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
Table
Table 1 6 . — H O L C — M o r t g a g e loans outstanding and properties on hand
1 7 — GOVERNMENT SHARES-lnvestments in member associations 1
[Dollar a m o u n t s are s h o w n in t h o u s a n d s ]
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
Properties owned
1942: J a n u a r y 1943: J a n u a r y
1944: J a n u a r y .
$333, 332
50, 865
360, 541
272, 859
38, 599
365,009
218, 084
29, 393
939, 852
__
$326,990
1,180, 723
.
__
$1, 613,829
1, 397, 411
__
.
D u e on
property
sold
378, 248
82, 571
11, 267
724, 306
709, 620
693,190
678,134
662, 020
647, 024
632, 598
618,121
605, 742
590, 747
577, 748
565, 923
344, 311
339, 642
334, 092
328, 846
323, 046
317, 592
312, 329
306, 982
302, 233
296, 405
291, 208
286, 396
9,157
8,278
7,342
6,439
5,194
4,144
3,522
2,966
2,524
2,001
1,594
1,367
1,446
1,337
1,207
1,071
881
710
613
512
435
357
296
249
550, 745
1941: J a n u a r y _
279, 977
1,133
212
...
1945: J a n u a r y
February
March
April
May
June
July
August September
October __
November
December
_
- __ _
. -_
_-- ._ _- .
.
- . _ _ _ _ .
__
-
__
1946: J a n u a r y
1
H o m e O w n e r s ' L o a n Corporation
Treasury
D u e on
original
loans
Month
T y p e of operation
Book
value
l
Number
Federals
October 1935-December 1945:
Applications:
Number..
Amount.
Investments:
Number
. .
Amount
_.
Repurchases
... .
N e t o u t s t a n d i n g investm e n t s ._ .
2
State
members
Federals
Total
1,862
$50, 401
4,710
$213,701
995
$66, 495
5,705
$280,106
1,831
$49, 300
$47, 318
4,243
$178, 401
$162,288
738
$45, 456
$40,148
4,981
$223, 857
$202, 436
$1,982
$16,113
$5, 308
$21, 421
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$73
0
0
$1
0
0
$74
F o u r t h q u a r t e r , 1945:
Applications:
Number.
.
Amount
Investments:
Number
Amount
__ . . . .
Repurchases
__ .
1
Refers to numbers of separate investments, not to number of associations in
which investments are made.
1
Investments in Federals by the Treasury were made between December 1933
and November 1935.
Includes re-acquisitions of properties previously sold.
Table 18.—FHLBS—Membership in the Federal Home Loan Bank System
[Dollar amounts are shown in thousands]
1945
T y p e of i n s t i t u t i o n
December
No.
1944
December
September
No.
Assets
Assets
1943
December
No.
No.
Assets
Assets '
______
Savings a n d loan associations
_
Federal
Insured state
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ .
_ _
$8,641,304
3,697
$8,144,151
3,699
$7,265, 763
3, 748
$6,345,449
3,658
7,663, 944
3,658
7,192,282
3,659
6,415,119
3,705
5, 540,817
1,467
1,004
1,187
... _
.__
3,697
3,923, 501
2,217,853
1,522, 590
1,467
1,005
1,186
3,632,197
2, 086, 970
1,473,115
1,464
998
1,197
3,168, 731
1,837,873
1,408,515
1,466
977
1,262
2, 617,431
1, 559,617
1 363 769
25
All m e m b e r s
591, 546
25
566, 553
22
480, 221
21
363,015
14
385,814
14
385, 316
18
370, 423
22
441 617
_
_ _
__
M u t u a l savings b a n k s
I n s u r a n c e companies
__ _
Table 19.—FHA—Insured home mortgages (Titles II and V I ) held, by class of institution *
[Thousands of dollars]
Commercial
banks
M u t u a l savings b a n k s
Savings a n d
loan associations
$2, 754, 725
3,115,616
$1, 300, 734
1, 447,101
$174, 706
205, 748
$237,056
255, 296
$668,069
791, 617
$220,400
233, 628
$153, 760
182, 226
_______
3, 551, 421
3, 795, 519
1, 614, 392
1,694, 963
242,619
263,825
277, 704
288,611
966, 441
1, 095, 276
245, 206
251,871
205, 059
200, 973
__ _ _
4,153, 657
4, 308, 362
1,819,942
1, 894,913
301,058
328, 041
319,147
345,938
1, 231, 638
1, 374, 570
259,495
116, 330
222, 377
248, 570
4, 514, 290
4,555,672
1,929,054
1,919,999
371,071
392,643
371, 947
379,482
1, 465, 561
1,495,245
133,042
134,551
243,615
233,752
4, 677, 345
4, 563, 797
1, 982, 879
1, 954, 736
416, 254
418, 505
407, 994
404, 391
1, 550, 409
1, 557, 603
99, 362
40, 584
220,447
187, 978
Total
C u m u l a t i v e t h r o u g h e n d of m o n t h
1941: J u n e
December
_
1942: J u n e
December
1943: J u n e
December..
___
_
_
___
1944: J u n e
December
1945: J u n e ._
December
_____ .
___
.
...
.
_
_
Insurance
companies
Federal
agencies *
Others«
i Original face amount of mortgages held; does not include terminated mortgages and cases in transit to or being audited at the Federal Housing Administration.
The RFC Mortgage Company, the Federal National Mortgage Association and the United States Housing Corporation.
3 Includes mortgage companies, finance companies, industrial banks, endowed institutions, private and state benefit funds, etc.
2
March 1946
187
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING O F F I C E : 1 9 4 6
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
Contents
Page
A P R O G R A M OF A C T I O N FOR VETERANS 1 H O U S I N G . .
By William K. Divers, Special Assistant to the Housing
Expediter.
M A R C H 1946
The Federal Home Loan Bank Review
is published monthly by the Federal
Home Loan Bank Administration under
the direction of a staff editorial committee. This committee is responsible
for interpretations, opinions, summaries,
and other text, except that which appears in the form of official statements
and signed articles.
Each issue is written for executives of
thrift and home financing institutions,
especially those whose organizations are
insured by the Federal Savings and
Loan Insurance Corporation and are
members of the Federal Home Loan
Bank System.
Communications
concerning
165
169
NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION
The seventh article in a series on urban planning.
No. 6
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE BUILDING COST INDEX
A n explanation of the background and the recent revisions
of this statistical series.
M O R T G A G E LENDING IN SELECTED A R E A S
A summary of the fourth annual state survey of mortgage
financing activity of savings and loan associations.
Vol.12
160
171
STATISTICAL D A T A
New family dwelling units
Building costs
Savings and loan lending
Mortgage recordings
Sales of U.S. savings bonds
'.
F H A activity
Federal Home Loan Banks
Insured savings and loan associations
Foreclosures
Quarterly tables
..«
181 -182
182-183
183-184
184-185
185
185
185
186
187
187
REGULAR DEPARTMENTS
Directory Changes of Member, Federal, and Insured Institutions
Monthly Survey
175
177
material
which has been printed or which is desired for publication should be sent to
the Editor of the Review, Federal Home
Loan Bank Building, Washington 25,
Contents of this publication are not copyrighted
D. C.
•
•
•
The Federal Home Loan Bank Administration assumes no responsibility for
material obtained from sources other
than itself or other instrumentalities of
the Federal Government-
SUBSCRIPTION PRICE OF REVIEW.—A copy of the REVIEW is sent to each member and insured institution without charge. To others the annual subscription price, which covers the cost
of paper and printing, is $1. Single copies will be sold at 10 cents. Outside of the United States,
Canada, Mexico and the insular possessions, subscription price is $1.60; single copies, 15 cents.
Subscriptions and orders for individual copies should be sent with remittances to the Superintendent
of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C.
APPROVED BY THE BUREAU OF THE B U D G E T
@FedFRASER