BUSINESS DISLOCATION AND RELOCATION
UNDER URBAN RENEWAL:
A STUDY OF
1900 BOSTON FIRMS
by
JOE L. WARD
B. ARCH.,
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
(1965)
SUMITTTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS
DEGREE
FOR THE
OF MASTER
IN CITY PLANNING
at the
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
January,
1968
Signature of Author
Department of City andRegional Planning
Certified by.
Thesis Superv\sor
Accepted by
,
,
rtmental
Chairman, Da
on Graduate S udents
Committee
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
77 Massachusetts Avenue
02139
Cambridge, Massachusetts
October 2,
1967
Professor John T. Howard, Head
Department of City and Regional Planning
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Dear Professor Howard:
In partial Fulfillment of the requirement for the
degree of Master in City Planning, I submit this thesis
entitled, "Business Dislocation and Relocation under Urban
Renewal: A Study of 1900 Boston Firms."
Sinc rely yours,\
r/1
i
Joe L. Ward
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I want to thank the Business Relocation Department
of the Boston Redevelopment Authority for making data and
clerical assistance available to me without which this
I particularly wish
study would not have been possible.
to thank Fred Troy and William O'Malley of the relocation
staff for their assistance and patience.
I am grateful to the many businessmen of Boston who
had the interest and took the time to answer my questionnaire
I regret that there was not
and write of their experiences.
with those that extended
talk
and
contact
to
time
sufficient
an invitation.
In addition, I should like to extend my thanks to my
friends for their encouragement and willingness to listen
Special thanks must go to Wren
to my ideas and complaints.
their assistance in helping
for
McMains and Miss Sara Mills
program.
me prepare the computer
Finally, my thanks go to my thesis advisor, John T.
Howard, for his counsel, advice, suggestions, and occasional
I appreciated the concern and
bits of much needed humor.
interest that was shown and the effort made in my behalf.
ii
ABSTRACT
BUSINESS DISLOCATION AND
RELOCATION UNDER URBAN RENEWAL:
A STUDY OF 1900 BOSTON FIRMS
by
JOE L. WARD
Submitted to the Department of City and Regional
Planning on October 2, 1967, in partial fulfillment
for the degree of Master in City Planning.
The purpose of this thesis was two-fold; first, it attempts
to document urban renewal business dislocation activities in
the City of Boston and second, an attempt is made to evaluate
the conditions under which relocation of the discontinuance of
The study was undertaken in the belief that
a business occurs.
the consequences of renewal action resulting in forced business
dislocations have not been adequately and correctly perceived.
With the coming recognition of the urban crisis, the inevitable
accompanyment of federal programs that the Model Cities Program
prefigures, and the increased degree of implementation of the
renewal, highway and other programs that cause dislocation,
hopefully will also come an increased awareness of the effect
of these programs on the business community.
Three basic issue areas were encountered: (1) The characteristics of the firm and the impact of dislocation on the firm;
(2) The impact of dislocation on the city; (3) The impact of
relocation services on the relocation process.
Under (1) above; (a) Can high discontinuance rates be
explained due to a high percentage of marginal firms and the
losses therefore be dismissed? (b) What sort of problems and
difficulties do the firms encounter? (c) What sort of assistance
should be given to the firms?
Under (2) above; (a) What is the impact of the dislocations
on the socio-economic fabric of the city? Is the magnitude of
displacement sufficiently large enough to cause concern? (b) How
have the dislocations affected employment, the relationship
between work and place of residence, and the land use pattern
of the city?
Under (3) above; (a) Although financial assistance to dislocatees may be morally just, is it also helping to reduce the
number or discontinued businesses and employment losses? (b) Have
relocation services rendered to dislocated businesses improved
or even met the needs of the dislocatee?
iii
The gathering of information to shed some light on the
above questions was limited to the -nonresidential dislocation
and relocation activities of the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
The agency cooperated in supplying information on eight renewal
projects and the 1900 firms therein that were relocated between
In addition to this a questionnaire
1958 and March, 1967.
was sent and data was supplied by 240 survey respondents as
regards their relocation experiences.
of
The following major conclusions were drawn from the analysis
the data:
Business dislocation is a major factor in the renewal
1.
process and the cumulative effects of displacement are conIt is estimated that by 1972 one-quarter of all
siderable.
retail firms and manufacturers and approximately one-seventh
of all wholesalers and service establishments will have been
Estimated job losses due to discontinuances and
displaced.
departures from the city average respectively .32 and .65
The majority of the job losses
persons per firm displaced.
due to discontinuances appears to be made up by growth in
surviving firms within two to three years after displacement.
Business dislocation urban renewal and its associated
2.
The retail
problems are pre-eminently small business problems.
and service establishments are the most heavily affected and
comprise nearly fifty-five percent of the load.
Relocatees are generally dependent on a good supply of
3.
The rate at which this space becomes available
low-rent space.
is governed by general business activities and thus the timing
of the dislocation load and the magnitude of it appear to be
variables influencing the discontinuance rate.
Abnormal liquidation rates on displacement occur among
4.
The rate is highnearly all business types and sizes of firms.
The
est for the retail and personal service establishments.
majority of the firms are not marginal and it appears that the
high rates are the result of forced displacements.
Beneficial effects are sometimes realized through the
5.
relocation process principally by the wholesale and manufacturing
The improvement is an increase in efficiency and is often
firms.
accompanied by an improvement in the location of the firm and a
probable improvement in the land use pattern of the city.
Overall business relocation policy and procedures have
6.
Gradually lower liquidation rates over time
improved over time.
have been accompanied by an increasing proportion of the firms
that have felt they have received adequate compensation and view
the relocation process in a positive manner.
Thesis
Title:
John T. Howard
Supervisor:
Head, Department of City and Regional Planning
iv
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
11.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
v.
SUMMARY
1
Chapter
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
16
BACKGROUND
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
FIRM
34.
RELOCATION PROCESS
51
IMPACT ON THE FIRMS
68
IMPACT ON THE CITY
90
RELOCATION PROGRAMS
107
COMMENTS
134
APPENDIX
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A-1
A-174
V
CHAPTER I
SUMMARY
The purpose of
in
to document business dislocation activities
and second,
an attempt is made to
evaluate
involves
the dislocatees
also means
This
beliefs
ation
and
of
that
the
and the relocation process
some
a re-evaluation uf
characteristics of
in an attempt
that
is necessary
The second part of
to establish the needs
the study
considers the
location and relocation program, attempts
to
face.
the relocatees
of the
of
The
occurs.
commonly Aeld
relocation personnel in a spirit of objective
opportunities and possibilities
determin-
of the relocatee
the relocation program.
impact of the disthe impor-
to identify
in the relocation assistance program and illustrate
tant elements
the degree
the conditions under
of the
the scrutinization
the difficulties and problems
determine
the City of Boston
of a business
which relocation or the discontinuance
first part
it attempts
first,
two-fold;
this study was
of their effectiveness
part of the
as
total relocation
endeavor.
There are
be brought
are
three basic issue areas
under consideration if
to be met:
the
the
is
the issue
percentage
of
the numbers
firm and the impact
the city;
on the relocation process.
the
characteristics of
of marginal businesses,
of marginal businesses
to discontinuances
of the study
impact of dislocation on
impact of relocation services
Primary in the consideration of
necessarily must
objectives
characteristics of the
of disloation on the firm;
the
the
that
is high
can be easily explained
then heavy
the
firms
for if the
losses due
and dismissed.
Also
2
of importance
or heavy
rendered
to
of
sort
then what
considerable,
city.
cause
Is
also
on the
impact of the dislocations
important
affected employment,
The gathering of
questions was
and relocation
The
agency
as
activities of
shed some light
the non-residential
dislocation
cooperated in supplying information on 1900
available included information
of employees,
The
on the types
discontinuances.
and dates
along with limited clerical help that
that
data that was
number
grants,
loans,
of moves,
In addition, addresses of
firms
of firms,
square footage, reimbursements,
for discontinuances,
on the
the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
were relocated between 1958 and March, 1967.
reasons
efforts be
they are?
information to
limited to
the needs
the number of
to reduce
Should relocation service
expanded, curtailed or left
the
to dislocatees
assistance
it also helping
is
discontinued businesses?
above
improved or even met
Although financial
may be morally just,
and
Finally, have relocation services
city?
rendered to dislocated businesses
the dislocatee?
of the
large to
the relationship between work and place of residence,
of
the
question
to
sufficiently
How have the dislocations
land use pattern of the
should
socio-economic fabric
the magnitude of displacement
concern?
are
to private interests
assistance has been or
It is
firms?
the
in
occur are presumably
that
the losses
If
interest.
the public
be
the dislocations
since
assumed by
rightfully
should be
that
losses
financial
public
the
individual firms sustain unusual
is whether the
payments and
relocatees were
supplied
assisted in the mailing of
3
a questionnaire.
240 survey respondents in
provided additional
to their relocation experiences
regards
information as
of
Data supplied by
to
the relocation process and the
the relocatees.
dislocation
impact,
Evaluations of
the firm characteristics,
and relocation service programs
be noted
of
basis
that
and in some
country
It should
in Boston, it
dislocation and relocation practices
least on a par with those
these practices
of other agencies
throughout
the
course
the study:
1.
process.
Business dislocation
Even though yearly
cumulative effects
the
can be
affected for by
all retail firms
seventh
a major factor
displacements
and
firms
of displacement are
significant portion of the
city
is
total number of employees
of the
of
are
cases better.
The following conclusions were drawn during the
of
there-
are made on the
although many critical comments
author's general impression that
-was the
at
available.
published information generally
are
and then tempered
fore heavily dependent on the Boston experience
only by
attitudes
in the City of Boston,
considerable.
and service
A
and economy of a
it is estimated
and manufacturers,
of all wholesalers
affect but a fraction
entire employment
1972
in the renewal
that one-quarter
and approximately oneestablishments, will have
been displaced.
2.
problems
Business dislocation in urban renewal and
are pre-eminently small business
displacement percentages by
problems.
its associated
Even though
type of business vary over time,
it
4
is
the retail and service establishments
comprise nearly fifty-five percent of the load.
affected and
3.
for
Abnormal
on displacement occur
liquidation rates
and sizes of
nearly all business types
among
are the most heavily
that
The percentages
firms.
size and
according to
those liquidating varies inversely
the
the retail and personal service establishments, particularly
the eating,
shops, experience a proportionately
beauty
and
the barber
drinking and liquor retail stores and
greater number of
dis-
continuances.
The rate of departure or of
4.
activities
city as
in
such
activities
appears
at which
rate
space
the
and
activities
business
and the magnitude
for the
of
to provide
thus
the
appear
it
of
to be variables
due
is
the
space.
relocation
of
available
timing
through
space vacated
the bulk
becomes
of business
apparently a critical
a whole is
relocation
successful
factor
The
for the
terminations
to general
dislocation
load
influencing
the
discontinuance rate.
located
firms and
in character,
the
are not
addition,
liquidated firms
average rents,
confined
high business turnover rates.
6.
are undoubtably marginal
for displacees,
and their
to the lower size categories.
the.high liquidation rates
liquidation rates
of the dis-
Many of the liquidated firms
the majority are not.
pay average and above
numbers
although a portion
It would appear that,
5.
The
are the result
In
cannot be associated with
conclusion is
that
the high
of forced displacements.
Forced dislocation can sometimes have beneficial
Although retail
and personal
service
firms
suffer adversely
effects.
and
5
in efficiency, accompanied by an improvement
the firm and
the city -
a probable
improvement in
an improvement due
to
an increase
The result is
the move.
significant advantage of
take
are often able to
establishments
sale and manufacturing
the whole-
negligibly,
professional and business service firms
the location of
in
of
the land use pattern
the move,
relocation, not
redevelopment per se.
reason
aiost often given for the failure to relocate.
ficult
problem exists
elderly businessmen.
arise
in the displacement
to
Due
the age of
in financing the move and,with
stamina required to make the move,
the
is
to retirement
activity due
Discontinuance of
7.
A dif-
operated by
of firms
the displacee, problems
the physical
and emotional
in social costs
result
to
the elderly.
The process of
8.
problems that the businessman
that he
involves many
relocating a business
cannot control,
introduces
that require decision making
is unable to anticipate and
beyond his experience and information beyond his
these are
the
problems
reach.
Among.
following:
(a)
The inability
resulting in uncertainty and
to
control
the
time
of the move
confusion.
of sales,
(b)
The loss
(c)
The inability
customers,
and
income prior
to the move.
upon
the real estate market and
decreasing volume of
to control
the pressures
placed
the resulting higher rents
suitable low rent space.
and
6
(d)
The adoption of irrational attitudes toward
to be from a
relocation by some businessmen that appears
high degree
of emotional and economic involvement
(e)
information
size
to
The
lack of sufficient
consider alternatives
transactions,
The
time, knowledge, and
type and
financing and staging.
of building space,
(f)
the business.
in
to location,
as
high
of
lack
estate
with real
familiarity
and financing procedures.
negotiations
zoning problems.
(g)
The
licensing and
(h)
The
retraining of employees.
(i)
The vagaries
of the adjustment
period after
the move.
9.
relocation policy and procedures have
Overall business
improved over
Gradually lower liquidation rates
time.
over time
have been accompanied by an increasing proportion of the firms
that
felt
they have received adequate compensation and view the
relocation process
the
relocatee survey respondents
been able
10.
felt
that
to remain in business without
to
-and property losses.
the compensation
Its
compensation.
the characteristics
adequacy of
of
compensation and attitudes
at
the
is
received for moving
the payment,
the liquidated
significant improvements
(SBDP)
area of coverage, according to
size of business receiving
of
they would not have
The Small Business Displacement Payment
effective addition
and
Nearly one-third
in a positive manner.
conforms
firms.
of the
an
expenses
the
type
nicely to
Checks on the
firms
time the program was
disclose
introduced.
7
11.
loan program as
disaster
The small business
The
to be underutilized and therefore ineffective.
of
istics
The
increase allowed recipients
smaller
the
12.
about
to the
The estimated job
.32 persons per
estimated job
loans
is
losses due
loss to
appeared that
after
to
firm displaced and
of firms
.65 jobs per
the
-
the
the
city
of
2,400 due
3,680
two to three years
1972,
The redevelopment authority and
Administration have not
to
departures
a majority of the
relocated firms.
up by
job
growth in the
the Small Business
adequately attempted to cope with the
dislocatees.
for grants
type of dislocatee
By
is
In addition, it
jobs.
surviving,
and applications
jobs lost
reached totals of
conditions should have
to discontinuances had been made
the
number of
to outlying areas
losses due
difficulties of
averages
discontinuances
firm displaced.
from discontinuances and about
Beyond the processing
little has
been done
of
claims
to provide
that
(small retail and personal service establish-
ment) with the higher
technical assistance.
authority's
regressive
area size
in Boston under present and past relocation
losses
practices and market
13.
size character-
the
one-third maximum floor
of the
city through departures
for a total
to
cover-
load
firm.
estimated to be about
1,280
to conform
of business fails
all displacees.
appear
relocation conditions would
applied under urban renewal
age by size
presently
liquidation rates with
informational and
The problem has been compounded by
reluctance to become
involved actively in
the
the real
8
the major
1956
Since
advances
in the
relocation of
businesses have been in the area of financial
assistance with
that
the exception perhaps, of phased project takings
effects
detrimental
Instead of
area.
different
times
for
of takings
throughout
individual takings
for takings
that
a project
a project area,
at different
therefore a retail area might be delimited and scheduled
a taking before a nearby residential
area
reduce the
in different portions of
portions can be scheduled
and
the
trust
to
accept advice.
and to
authorities
disinclination
the dislocatees'
estate market and
contributed to
business due
to
area or manufacturing
and in
retail sales
this way
a loss
of
a loss of customers could be partially avoided.
Aside from the introduction of this very basic technique little
has
been done to provide non-cash services
businessman.
It
seems
also true
that if
to be made in relocating businesses,
number of businesses
are reimbursed
the dislocated
further advances
they must come
Although efforts should be made
area.
to
to insure
in this
that a greater
for expenses and more
receive SBA loans, even these efforts must be based on
relationship between the
LPA and
legislation for reimbursements,
adequate and
but the
also exists for
are
the relocatee.
grants
and loans
a better
The basic
is now quite
the provision of non-cash services
implementation of a service program has
yet to be
effectuated.
There are many reasons
initiation
of
contributing
a service program.
to
the
Many agencies
lack of the
are apparently
9
the added
understaffed and over worked now without taking on
burden of the provision
and evaluate
to stop
probably not been able even
they are now providing.
Most have
of adequate services.
The agencies
also have a recruitment
problem often stemming from the low salaries that
ever present
erroneous attitude
businesses
are marginal and
relocation
efforts
argument is
losses
of
is
further compounded by
for the
can be
that businesses
conversion of
if
is
the
they
Thus
the belief
possible with
the usually
compensated
can be
for
easily quantified,
the new property or any upgrading
seem to be based
The reservations
the business.
little as
real estate market.
due to forced dislocation,
but not
there
the majority of the
that
should interfere as
free enterprise and the
are paid.
thus implicitly worth only marginal
and this
that the government
implicit
personnel problems,
to the agencies'
In addition
the services
that a certain competitive business
aura would be
on the belief
the
upset and
government would find itself in the position of improving
the relocated business.
the competitive position of
position ignores
had on
the
impact dislocation activities have already
the Boston business
establishing services is
the
renewal agency
business
loss
the
that may be
or settlement,
advice
that has
attitude of
fighting the
also supposed
the businessman who
and understandably so,
the power of
of LPA relocation officials
marketing
Another difficulty in
community.
to be inherently distrustful,
seems
Such a
eminent domain.
LPA in court
to be
as
of
Is
the
over a property
trustingly accepting the
to possible
techniques and managerial assistance?
locations,
10
Nevertheless,
the groundwork for meaningful
The reimbursements
and property losses provide
of the
"introduction"
used
firms
provides an added enticement.
could be held by improving
impression
cedures
of
a favorable reaction;
to solicit
and
there are
several simple
could be reasonably
I.
initial favorable
The
the reimbursement pro-
that
To provide
and objectives
are
development:
a higher number of opportunities
and
firms
changing functional city areas.
Recommendations
A.
land use and activity
the real estate market,
changes,
business activity should be made
In
and peripheral
might include
intended renewal efforts
change patterns
areas
population
available by
expected
particular, the
to project
information on anticipated
source of
A continuous
1.
that
procedures,
implemented.
for successfully relocating
authority.
adoption
the
such as
steps,
consideration and further
GOAL:
could be
the smaller
for
SBDP
the
The following goals, recommendations
suggested for
for the
an excellent means
cost accounting
and
fixed payment schedules
into
provided for moving
to the businessman and
agency
business
should be changed
overtones
relocation with its negative
expenses
exploitation -
already been set and needs
a positive process.
the dis-
relocation officials and
and cooperation between the
placees has
communication
shifts,
to
spelled
zoning
to enhance activity
of business activity.
the redevelopment
changes
should be
and general
occur within
out -
adjustments,
centers or
changes
and
generally
11
2.
the
Different
types of problems should require
types
development of different
the retail
of solutions;
-and personal service establishments are inherently different
firms.
from the manufacturing
Retail and Personal Service Establishments
a.
An intensive
1.
within
canvassing for available space resources
one-quarter to one-half mile
A lcal market analysis
2.
population shifts and
for various
locations
of firms
corporations
land,
and
5.
of
types
of firms.
for
space priorities
the relocation
into other renewal areas.
A means
4.
the effects
to determine
the desirability of surrounding business
The development of
3.
the project area.
of
of encouraging displacees
and cooperatives
that might
to
form redevelopment
them to obtain
enable
secure financing and provide needed shopper amenities
services.
The provision of
assistance in the marketing
and display
of goods.
b.
1.
and Manufacturing
The provision of technical
layout and
2.
Wholesale
improvements
The provision
staging operations
Firms
assistance as
to
changes
in
in operations.
of assistance in the preparation
of complex
to lessen an interruption in business
due
to the move.
3.
The
formation of industrial parks prior
with priorities
given to
dislocatees.
to
dislocation
12
4.
The promotion of industrial redevelopment
5.
The exploitation of the positive aspects
should be
group efforts
and the
community,
undertaken by both
agency and
the hundreds
3.
To acquaint
the authority with
intended alternative planning
of dislocatees.
of the
improve the land use pattern
To
city.
the full consequences
proposals so as
staging, magnitude and probable impact of
location loads
of
rationalize the many decision making efforts
the
2.
4.
the business
renewal authority.
further
To
timing,
the dislocatees,
Oblectives
AA.
the
the information
to increase the meaning-
should be made
communication between
ful amount of
1.
of
complemented by an active program to disseminate it.
Personal and
help
upgrade a business through the
The gathering and processing
3.
the
forced dis-
of
loan program.
disaster
of
chance to
the
i.e.,
location,
corporations.
to
influence
the re-
on the city.
evaluate the work of the relocation personnel -
To
acquaint
them with
the
changing needs,
problems
to
and attitudes
the dislocatees.
5.
To inform the dislocatees of market
changes that may
their often
and
affect their business operations;
unfounded fears
with information and
of relocation;
techniques
and
activity
to
lessen
to prepare
to make a successful move.
them
13
B.
Recommendation
An evaluation of the
space and
low rent building
supply of medium to
the development of alternatives
to
its
destruction,
for example:
The use of rehabilitation
(a)
dissimilar land uses
compatible, of
a way
new environment in such
space
BB.
Objectives
1.
To preserve some of
on which
would appear
the
to be
city and
continuing relocation program
dependent.
the
discontinuances and departure
financial losses
to
The policy on disbursements should be
receive a minimum payment
later filing
according to
disbursement.
prior to dislocation and the
to
overhauled and
It is proposed that all
a statistical basis.
its probable
losses
the businessman.
1.
firm and
of
suitable low rent building
the
Recommendation
should
the
dislocation unrecessary.
C.
built on
of making
integrating them into
to make
as
a successful and
To lower
2.
use of ways
The development and
(b)
conversion
real estate.
in business
techniques
and
the size of the
The payment should be made
firm should
for additional sums
firms
to
then have
the option
cover entire property
losses and moving expenses.
A
2.
undertaken
new and
cost accounting and
research program should be
to determine when total
or partial reimbursements
improved facilities might prove beneficial
to
for
all parties.
14
3.
The Small Business Administration's
program should be made into
financial assistance
SBA officials
to
attempt
1.
to an increased number of dislocatees.
the
should join with
renewal officials
in the
The maximum limit on the allowable increase in
changed
should be
CC.
a viable program that provides
increase the amount of communication with the
businessman.
space
disaster loan
small firm.
for the
Objectives
To
improve the relationship between the dislocatee and
all participating agencies.
To upgrade the existing programs.
2.
II.
to fulfill
GOAL:
fair and equitable
To provide
an extended obligation of
A.
All moving
be borne as mandatory
2.
costs
of
just compensation.
expenses
such assistance
and property losses should
the renewal program.
The practical
displacement payment programs
extension of
and
Recommendations
1.
provide
treatment
success of
as well as
the disbursement
the moral
to forced dislocatees
obligation to
justifies
these efforts. to other federal and
and
the
federally
assisted programs.
3.
of firms not
receiving disbursements
4.
should
Every effort should be made
Coordination with
be maintained to
assure the
to
to keep
the numbers
a minimum.
other governmental agencies
retraining and
employment of
15
displaced employees.
elderly;
and
a consideration which might
the help
B.
given to
include financial
the
assistance
of social workers.
To have
the economic and
social costs
of renewal
the public.
2.
to
should be
Objectives
1.
borne by
Special attention
To lower
the city and
the discontinuance and departure losses
the financial
losses
to
the businessman.
CHAPTER II
BACKGROUND
Concern over
the actions
and
dislocations by public agencies
seen
consequences of
is
a fairly recent one
the first meaningful legislation
only a decade ago.
Under the power
governmental authorities have
of eminent domain certain
the right
to acquire private
against the owner's will for use
provided
that
pensated has
been left to the courts with the
property and
Historically
the government
only for small
reach
loss.
can be com-
result
that until
for the transfer of
takings,
fairly
a fair
for example,
the
exception to
extensive takings made by
such proportions
eminent domain
the acquisition of sites
one
the Second World War did
to the development
and reasonable price.
used the power of
and court houses;
probably the
after
for his
the ensuing litigation was primarily concerned with
the determination of what was
Only
the public good
is just and what
recnetly, compensation was paid solely
for schools
for
owner has been justly compensated
Traditionally the problem of what
that has
on the subject developed
property
the
forced business
this was
the railroads.
the magnitude of
to be of concern and
this was
the
takings
due
primarily
of the urban renewal and interstate highway
programs.
Displacements due
programs have
1
to all
federal or
averaged about 10,900
federally assisted
firms per year
for the last
Relocation: Unequal Treatment of People and Businesses
Displaced by the Government.
(Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations), p. 4.
17
Of this
three years.
nearly
total
the renewal program accounted for
the displacements are due
one-half of
and
that are
property
to the taking of structures
tenant occupied and
these
of course
con-
compensation given for real
in any of the
cerns do not share
than
Slightly more
approximately 7,180 businesses per year.
or
another 29%,
66 percent and the highway programs for
property.
are
Displacements
the
current
total about
to
expected
10,900 firms
increase
to over 17,800
13,120 firms may be
reach
over
100,000
dislocated under
cumulative
a consequence
as
considerable
costs
takings which may be due
to a variety
of reasons
firms
the moving and installation of heavy equipment,
of a commercial establishment, and
of business prior to
losses
acquisition or the
a consequence
expenses
a majority have incurred moving costs
argument
is
therefore usually made
the public good
should not have
then in all
to bear the costs
2
the refurbishing
incurred due
to a loss
In Boston over 5%
in
excess
of over
that since
fairness
such as
interruption of business
of the move.
have had moving
the displacees
for
total should
incur
activities as
that
firms. 2
The displaced
of the
the
Of
per year.
firms
expected to be
the urban renewal program and by 1972
from
substantially
of
$10,000
$1,000.3
the
and
The
takings are
the individuals
and damages.
of
affected
Furthermore,
since
Study of Compensation and Assistance for Persons Affected
by Real Property Acquisition in Federal and Federally Assisted
Programs. (Committee on Public Works, House of Representatives),
pp. 26, 272 and 258.
3
Appendix, p.
126.
18
the
be given for
damages sustained as
damages
sustained by renters
owners.
Another argument is
and
a consequence
as well as
lessees
that the
that
the city
or
are attempting to
that was initiated under
the
bility.
Yet,
even
considered simply as
relocation procedure and
and the
clearance of
the business
slums
a means
or
The
a matter of providing
and little consideration was
that would be affected and no
their relocation.
Not until
1954 did
provisions
it become
that redevelopment required the provision of services
and jobs in addition
monies
relocation;
redevelopment.
thus
viewed renewal primarily as
were made for
amended
Very
though financial relocation assistance was
expediting
apparent
of business
paid to the subject
for families, it was
taken of
essentially a federal-local
the 1949 Housing Act.
authorized
housing
other governmental
relocation of families was deemed a public responsi-
however,
housing act
property
open up more job opportunities.
attention was
little
taking
of the
improve the economic vitality of
The urban renewal program is
program
also
failure to compensate only
serves to increase the burden on the city and
agencies
real property
that compensation should not
is not morally just
then it
the taking of
legally required for
compensation is
to permit
to housing and
the Housing Administration
to a maximum of 10%
4 Relocation:
in 1954 the housing
Unequal
of that
to devote
act was
federal
available to projects of
Treatment, p.
17.
-
19
The requirement was
non-residential purpose.
that
also made
the area under consideration had to be substantially occupied
by slums.
the
increased to. twenty.
percentage allotment was
Another
increase was made in 1961 when the allotment was raised
30%
again in 1965 when it
and
reached its present value
These funds were made available as
apparently
and commercial
HHFA,
to
to
of 35%.
and were
to
authorities
and industrial
they were not devoted to relocation costs.5
It was not until 1956
displacees
project funds
enable local
seen as necessary to
provide a mix of residential
services -
and
the slum restriction was removed
Later in 1959
Congress saw fit to assure
that
could receive'compensation
through
the Urban
Renewal
as
a matter of
that
right.
Aindstation, made known the changes
the local public agencies:
The Housing Act of 1956, enacted August 7, 1956,
amends Title I of the Housing Act of 1949, as
amended, by adding a new section 106(f) which
provides that Title I projects may include the
making of relocation payments to individuals,
families, and business concerns displaced by
an urban renewal project...(payment) shall
not exceed $100 in the case of an individual
or family, or $2,000 in the case of a business
concern. 6
It should be noted that the amendment was
for
only
it did not require that authorities make
that
they may
do
so.
It
is
a permissive one
relocation payments
interesting to
note
the
5Rutherfor Platt, Background Paper No. 1, Changing ConRenewal
gression Provisions for Small Business Displaced by Urban
(Chicago, 1966).
6
LPA Letter No.
80
7
LPA Letter No.
134
(Urban Renewal Administration,
1956)p.l.
(Urban Renewal Administration, 1957)p.
3
.
20
when
payment,
to
reaction
Administmtion's
the
the relocation process
comment
on business
commented
the
that
should
services,
relocation
combined with adequate
improve
they
for
change
the exclusion of any
and to
concerns concluded:
Effective utilization of these payments
may well reduce the number of "disappeared"
families and facilitate the rehousing of
families in "decent, safe, and sanitary
accommodations." 8
allowed for moving expenses
The compensation
1957
the maximum payment was
again in 1959
raised
to
In
1961
and
then it was
the limit on moving
both moving and property losses were
to be reimbursed;
in 1962 a maximum payment, for moving expenses was set
the
and
$25,000
limitation remained.
$3,000
discontinued operations
due to the
forced sale
and typically
to re-establish
a forced sale, may be
property loss
alone
exceed
maximum of
In
8
to
and also
The
Thus
goods
is
firm that
the firm that
loss
or,
for
relocates or
losses due to
compensated for both moving
$3,000, may be
at
eligible
sustains property
a maximum of $3,000
however,
sustained a property
of equipment and
maximum reimbursement of $3,000.
plans
if
$3,000 maximum only applied
eliminated and the
exrpenses was
$2,500
raised to
$3,000.
In
liberal since 1956.
to businesses has become more
losses
and property
expenses
and
if moving expenses
compensated only
for that
to
a
$25,000.
1965
the maximum payment permitted was
LPA Letter No.
80.
p.
1.
again modified to
21
allow payments in excess
grant, of
As has
ing expenses
the costs above
the purposes
or property losses
just a little
been the development
SBDP.
The
in excess of
SBDP is a grant to
the discontinuance
the total and
for
cover loss
1965 to $2,500.
several points with
was
and loss
an average
that
of sales
the
9
The
of
firm had filed
did
the time
the business
first
later raised
conditional on
that the business
that
of approval;
totaled
taxes
to
under the 1964
1964,
important being
annual net income before
salaries, etc.,
wages,
of income due
award of the grant was
the most
loss of
a new location
an amount that was
established in a project area at
gross receipts
firms.
of income and
to
adjustment either
for $1500,
The
thus for
significant has
or liquidation of the business.
Housing Act and were
very
after 1961
incidental to moving,
grants were authorized as of January 27,
in
$25,000 is
Small Business Displacement Payment
relocation or to unemployment
after
firms incurring mov-
directives have been contained in
of the
and generally
type
on the
9
the number of
over 1% of
profits, monies and time spent
good will,
figure.
acts and of these probably the most
the housing
the
dependent
the vast majority of the
Three other series of
or
local public agency
of analysis and evaluation,the changes
quite insignificant for
are
that
been pointed out,
and runs
small
if the
one-third to one-quarter,
would pick up
of
of $25,000
over
$1,500
and including
certain
not exceed a maximum of $10,000,
income tax returns with
the
and
and
Internal
Platt,
Background Paper No.
1, p.
18, also see the
Renewal Manual, Sec. SS3.110, and LPA Letter No. 362.
Urban
22
Revenue
The
Service.
of the business that
conditions
may receive
effectively
thus
the grant.
Small Business
the
the coverage of that agency's
extended
in 1961 that
The program was
disaster loan program to displaced businesses.
the concern in
ments
and
of
the loan was extended in 1965
liberal financing and
more
provide monies
currently
at
to
thirty years
less
and in 1964 a
securing arrangements,
at below market rates;
and
the SBA loan rate is
relocation assistance program consists
services but the
extent and quality
it
of the
required that
the
Not until 1964 was
agency must
establish a service program and in 1965
Platt, P.
18 and LPA Letter No.
of
services
the Urban Renewal
Authority.
11
for new
collateral than normal,
apparently not been well stipulated by
10
to
44%.l1
The other
counselling
and equipment
allowed the loan to be used
The loans require
construction.
i.e.,
for obsolete equipment,
The initial twenty year term limit
modification was made that
has
expenses
the firm to purchase machinery
facilities.
upgrade its
engaged in
adjustment period, to allow it to make improve-
the
and pay for replacement
to enable
firms
to provide them with sufficient capital to carry
and
relocation
of
the financial difficulties
intended to ease
the size
10
Another program was initiated through
Administration
limit
local public
the directive
362'.
'Handbook for Participation Loans with the Small Business
Administration, (Small Business Administration, 1966) pp. 99-100.
23
was
extended
tion to displacees.
supplement
was
already
to supply real estate informa-
to require the LPA's
In
a service that it
the LPA in rendering assistance,
the
empowered to provide under
Small Business Act.
The Boston Redevelopment Authority provides
that are
required under the housing
provides
a referral service
for moving expenses
for
is
confined to
the Massachusetts
claim.
business
The present
actions
and
costs
The Boston
.and promises to
projects
coordinate citythe claims,
the major project
for preparation
claim and help the relocatee
determine what
are compensable.
renewal program has
continue to be
so.
started or completed by
been a fairly extensive
one
There have been nine major
1967 and of
relocation information was available
1 2
to
and approve
instructions
assistance and
filing of the
claims and of
organization consists of a central
and examine, audit,
that offer
applications
the relocatee in filing
of site office organizations in each of
areas
and
to
and processes
relocation assistance
relocation staff whose function is
wide activities
and
loans,
the evaluation and processing of
providing information and assistance
his
Department of
and property losses and
A very high portion of
SBDP grants.
of
in locational studies,
SBA for technical advice and
Commerce or the
claims
to
aids
12
those services
act and as a matter
suggests relocation resources,
policy
to
directed
SBA was
the
addition,
on the
these, business
following eight:
and Operation of
Oranization
See also:
Platt, p. 18.
Representatives,
of
Small Business Administration, (House
Washington, 1964), p. 3.
24
West End, Government
Charlestown, South
Cove, South End,
completed and data was not
already
information
(313
firms)
The
other
(178 firmT
and
(281
firms)
o)f
285)
classification, only
a group,
the displacements
reached but about
Center
is
from
probably very
the Waterof the
is nearly completed and
the Castle
a fairly heavy displacement load in
As
the Government
four projects which have been grouped under
projects"
The
readily available.
first phase of relocation scheduled for
front Project
The
of firms yet to be displaced
and the number
the Washington Park Project
small.
Castle Square.
appendix is quite -complete
summarized in the
as
for both the West End
firms)
and
the New York Streets industrial project, was
ninth project,
(849
Center, Washington Park, Waterfront,
the "other
Square Project with
1963-64 has been
from the
completed.
other projects have
one-quarter of the nearly
1000
that are
anticipated. 13
The West End project area was
area that was
typified by high land
percentage of dilapidated
vacancy ratio was
rentals in
$26
a heavy
and substandard dwelling units.
5% as
against
a comparable $38.40
Commercial
buildings
coverages and
the area were depressed by
rate versus
city.
about
a predominantly residential
1%
for the
city and
approximately
rate for the
50%
rest
areas were frequently mixed in with
on extremely narrow streets.
14
The
the
or a
of the
residential
As has been adequately
1 3
Industrial and Commercial Business Relocation in the City
of Boston (Boston Redevelopment Authority, 1966), Table I, and
22, 27.
, 7, 12, 17,
see the Appendix, pp.
1 4
West End Project Report
(Boston Housing Authority, 1953).
25
in
pointed
various
concentration of
to
Italians and other ethnic
Whatever the conclusions
the North End.
have drawn, it would appear that
area was
typically smaller,
lower rent
of
found in
areas, and
storage
of businesses were not
types
of
other areas
that the
of the
the rest
structure than for
the different
these studies may
relocation firms,
even for
the city
likened
from a business viewpoint the
of decay and
in an advanced state
had
groups that
could probably be
that
a particular life style
developed
had a high
the area
studies,
sociological
for tattoo
firms were
and had a much
Some
city.15
to be easily
shops,
push-cart
liniment firm were to be
even a horse
displaced.
Dislocations
of businesses
got under way in 1962 with
465 businesses
to
east and
the
to relocate near
their
the West End
detrimental effects
15
load
industrial and was
the
of dislocated
former place of business,
from the West End and from the
Appendix, pp.
takings
con-
Because of the
earlier
forced to move again.
the takings were phased to minimize
of
of
Central Artery on the
Boston CBD.
Central Artery Highway Project, were
Unlike
Center Project
total clearance
and the-tendency
the West End
the relocatees
many of
commercial and
at the eastern end of
businessmen
This nearly
the West End, bounded by
close proximity to
Government
the heaviest dislocation
in a single year.
area was predominantly
tiguous
in the
the
in one section of the project area
10 and 47.
26
from
designated
with
an effort
to have
This
for acquisition.
to increase
regards moving
locatees as
rendered one of
fairly
the most
area was
the payments increased
to reduce the
the size of
at this
industrial, the
70%
for this
In
of
the
use.
land not devoted to public
1963 two
other projects besides
time.
proposed new
the
It is
Center
The Washington Park
an area of
inhabited principally by non-whites.
contemplated was
Government
to consist
The
district
renewal action
of a combination of
activities that
clearance and
included extensive use of re-
techniques and also
improvements and services.17
about 150
from the central business
acres situated several miles
habilitation
taking
first neighborhood rehabilitation project,
into execution at this
redevelopment
this would
16
Project, Boston's
and
time;
rights of way assigned
began producing sizeable dislocation loads.
went
the firms
activities with
uses have largely centered around governmental
over
in the
Although the
liquidation rate.
commercial and
largely
the re-
Several qualifications must be made
for as will be discussed later
also serve
combined
significant reductions
however,
amount of
to be
available, appears
and reimbursements
discontinuances.
the
simple act,
and maintain contact with
rate, of
and
areas yet
severely hurtingbusiness activity in
the introduction of public
Displacement
activities were
to,
16
Urban Renewal Project Characteristics (Department of
Housing and Urban Development) and Appendix pp. 12-16.
17
Urban Renewal Plan, Washington Park Renewal Area (Boston
See Appendix, pp. 17-21.
Redevelopment Authority, 1963) p. 5.
27
families and 280 businesses.
or have affected, over 1500
the businesses,
about 62%
liquidation rate of about
second project,
the
and
time
Castle Square, was
lies quite
data for this project
The
at about
the same
the early
comprises most of
as Other Projects.
close to the city
and
core
and is being developed into
residential
lower-middle class
area with some retail
service shops.
In
1964 another project,
comprises
which
Government
taken,
the norm of 23%
services
that
lie on either
the Harbor and
Center Project.
about 60%
the Waterfront, was started
about eighty acres
the Central Artery between
Of
the nearly 180 firms
thus far
and only about
one-quarter were in retailing or
a base value established from the data
firms).compared to a norm of about 56%.18
exclusively
commercial area
Central Artery
have
among
and Government
Some efforts have been made by
Appendix, pp.
22-26.
almost
Center project areas which means
the businesses have either had
I
1 8
This
formerly accepted displacees from
to move previously or
been affected peripherally by public land
them.
the
were in manufacturing or wholesaling as versus
(the norm is
that many of
side of
the south side of
on all 1900
the
the
than normal.
undertaken
and
170 businesses were dislocated from this project which
Not quite
and
is higher
26%
load presented on the data sheets
dislocation
a middle
trade establishments
than normal percnetage,
this higher
partly because of
retail
were
Of
the
takings
around and
renewal authority
28
to promote joint moves
and formations of cooperatives
the many meat, fruit and produce merchants,
in
the area.
The formation of cooperatives
the
facilitates
use of services
financing of
florist wholesalers
and manufacturers'
have only
garment
These
thus
recently been started and have
far produced
therefore been grouped
They have
together with the Castle Square project and designated,
purposes
of discussion, as Other Projects.
square
feet of floor space occupied
than all the other projects with
West End.
These projects have also had
normal
one-third.
in the retail
Center
to
activities
Projects;
trade
the
a high
the
exception of
47%
category as
of all discompared to
the
1 9
Between 1958 and 1962
were due
of the number of
and in the number of persons
employed
placed businesses
for
The businesses dis-
in terms
placed have so far been smaller both
two
South Cove projects
the Charlestown, and
dislocation loads.
minimal
the
and
representatives
areas.
the Central Business District project
projects along with
in
efforts
and cooperative
the South End Project Area and among
manufacturers, wholpcalers
in
and the joint
and distribution facilities.
are being promoted among the
suppliers in
fish dealers
and group moves
the new location
Other group displacements
moving
and the
among
nearly
in either
however, since
1 9 Appendix, pp.
27-31.
100%
of the dislocation
the West
End
loads
or Government
that period an increasing number
29
for
do dominate different sectors
For
example,
the
over two-thirds
accounted
of it after that
loading during
1965 with peak
the dominant loads were supplied by
projects with the
Government
exception of
This study
date.
occurred from
1967
and
or "Other"
the
20
analyzes data on
1900
made available
to
the
firms.
All of
the
SBA loan information was
author by the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
The information on firm characteristics was
the dislocation process
itself.
Three
intermediate steps
transfer and possible error
data was ready for final
the BRA
collected by
renewal process and
during survey and planning phase of the
in-
took place before
computer processing by
in
the
the author.
the author has no knowledge of
the accuracy of
the first
survey
and transferral
of
step performed by
20
the
of
comprised a significant
disbursement, grant and
Although
Most
In' 1966
1964.
the 1964
of
for 50%
the Waterfront
site-occupant,
data
thereafter
the service category where
Center displacees still
portion of the load.
volving
two-thirds of
from the Washington Park Project
displacements
1963 to
10%
in 1963 and under
the Waterfront displacees
load and
type of business.
of the load by
Government Center accounts for
the wholesale businesses
whereas
different projects
As one might expect
loads.
the total
one project accounts
that no
of projects has been introduced so
the BRA in the
Appendix, pp.
2-3.
30
information of
of
this
transferring this
step
information
to
program
almost
discard and describe gross in-
of
information.
The post-relocation survey
direction of the
under the
information was
author and with
some clerical assistance rendered by
the questionnaires, was
The process of
data manipulation.
of data from the BRA forms,
and principally
to 1960,
carelessly
affected is
The
data on
firms
of apparently
checked
for
the bias that
Appendix, p.
8.
and
care
in
early data, that
the number of
runs abnormally high.21
dislocated after 1960
form in such endeavors.
21
firms
good quality.
the
in
Information on the number
totally lacking and
'kinknown" types and sizes of
First,
on the West End Project, was
and haphazardly collected.,
of employees
inherent in the
consistency
recording information was scrutinized.
prior
Once again
used.
evaluating the data was
stages of the
different
the exception of
solely processed by him.
also
solely
collected
the BRA in the mailing of
computer error checking system was
transfer
An error checking
the raw data was built into the computer
that was designed to
consistencies
the third
sheets and
tally
the author with reasonable care.
system to scrutinize
was
second step
the
of punching computer data cards were performed
solely by
the
cards,
file
information to
Second,
is of uniform
the
The
character and
survey information
is nearly always present
The questionnaires
were
in some
sent to all
31
relocated
and
this meant the
recently
also
and
firms for which
returns were highest
relocated.
larger
there
The businesses
on the whole
also
the BRA had recoided
tended
than
those
for those most
that
answered were
that
had been
to be a higher number
from service and professional persons
flects
addresses
relocated
of responses
that presumably
a higher percentage of the better educated in
group.22
Therefore, where
the data was
felt
to be
rethis
sufficient-
ly extensive, it has been presented by both
type of business
and
compensate
size of business to
the differences
was
allow the reader to
that have occurred.
not collected on a 100%
chance of
error.
information, the
presented by other studies
were
found.
sample basis
However, as with
data was
This third
Because
the
for
the survey data
there
is
still a
BRA site-occupant
compared, when possible,
to
that
and no noticeable inconsistencies
check suggests
that
some of the
more original data should also be quite valid but of course
it does not preclude the necessity of
further efforts
and
research.
In summary, we may note
mental agencies
that
although the right of govern-
to acquire property was
constitutional law, it was not
War
that
the magnitude
until after the
of the takings became
generate interest and concern for those
22
Appendix, pp.
established under
32-35.
Second World
great enough
suffering
to
from damages
32
incidental to
for
the takings
not
been unfair
have
it may be argued
vitality
of the cities.
increase
costs
According to
of
simply
nationally have
Current takings
this
per year and
largely due
figure is
to expanded activities
to over
17,000 firms
data available in Boston,
in
per-
the incidental
substantial and are
$1,000 for the majority of dislocatees.
Compensation
dislocatees was
for incidental damages
not authorized until
initiation of
pensation for moving expenses
for
the smaller
incurred by renewal
1956,
the renewal program.
liberal payments were authorized
supplemented
Further-
the property, providing
for moving and property losses are
in excess
the
compensate
the taking
generally preserving the economic
the renewal and highway programs
year.
to
that failure
averaged nearly 11,000 firms
expected to
for
the public interest.
increases the problem of acquiring
job opportunities,' and
it would likewise
just as
compensation
to pay just
real property for
of private
more,
the takings,
that it
grounds
clearly established
to compensate for
is morally unfair not
incidental to
the
been attacked on
damages has
incidental
for
Failure to compensate
taking of real property.
the
costs
sharing in the compensation
and not
through
seven years
after
Since then increasingly
1962.
and property
In 1964
com-
losses have been
firms by the Small Business Dis-
placement Payment, a grant
paid to ease
relocation or liquidation.
In 1962 the
the burden of
Small Business
33
authorized to supplement the work of
Administration was
Local Public Agencies by.providing
vide
to pro-
technical and managerial assistance.
Dislocation
the majority
relocatees
The
to date
have
varied
residential.
the agency's
load of
clearance
services
relocation
claims.
1900 Boston
from a number
sites throughout
from total
rehabilitation-and the
ranged
of
is an agglomerate of loads
scattered
exception.
to provide counseling
total dislocation study
projects and
efforts
is no
currently expended in processing
is
typically
country
throughout the
some effort is made
Although
effort
services
financial assistance and Boston
emphasize
for
and helping
loans
the
the
firms
of different
The renewal
city.
to residential
areas designated for
land
takings
from predominantly commercial, to predominantly
CHAPTER III
FIRMS
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
The
been
analysis
into
separated
the
of
two
of
characteristics
parts.
The
first
the
discusses
eral characteristics of all dislocated firms
they
difficulties
part
As we
businesses.
dislocation
lected
and
as
are
shall
times
some
presented
an
analysis
manufacturing
reader
to
of
authority.
cluded,
lion
and
over
square
enable
feet.
in depth.
To
one-half
period of
us
have been
total will
one-quarter
a
Since
to
date
all,
be
time
that.
-
an
look at
of
a
of
forced
is
con-
been
col-
classifications
however,
it
service
sufficient
is
and
to allow
the
situation.
program
1958
in
over
Boston has
six million
the
if highway
reached
these
Such
an
takings
have
been
square
redevelopment
estimated
takings
are in14.5
mil-
affected
over
and by 1972 will be
figures
opportunity
this
second
types
actually
retail,
thousand employees
times
take a
have
has
acquired by
In five more years,
that
eight and
space
the
displacement
active one.
floor
to
The
the problem
six major
of wholesale,
comprehend
The business
feet
made
establishments will
lucidly
extremely
Data
to
according
if
gen-
the
the special
four major
complexities
obscurred
one monolithic mass.
and
that
the
and
relocation.
firms by
see,
often reference will be
felt
an
attempting
in
look at the
is a closer
sidered
face
has
firms
is
process
can
thus
in
two
only accrue
furnished
time
as
well
to
as
5
was
those
firms but
of firms
for different types
typically
Retail and service establishments
for
the relocation
of
over 55%
of
facturing
firms
and
that
indicated
small.
and other,
firms
percent
nonprofit clubs
from various
found
of
employed three
the firms
median size of
in
of
parts
renewal
3000
areas
65%
persons or under
appendix tables
(p.
square
footage runs a steady 500±
steady at about
typically
occupied
and at least
or less.
80
The
little over
the years,
show,
the median
43 and 45)
the
are
have
Sixty percent of
employed eight persons
the firms has varied
is also
the country
square feet.
and as
employees
establishments.
nondesignated
Boston is no exception for over
firms
is
comprised of finance
rooming houses,
quarters that were under
all
Wholesale and manu-
the remaining 20%
category is
"other"
Other reports
firms
the storage and distribution and "other"
in
real estate firms,
and corporations
and
for 23%
account
This
of all
form the
of every three
total load and one
the
comprised of firms
categories.
55%
Together they accounted
loads.
a retail establishment.
displaced was
In
were displaced.
manufacturing firms
major part
not only
as well.
instance, approximately
for
same two years,
displaced
The erratic loading varies
since 1958 were taken.
all
firms
1900+
of the
1963 over 40%
year
one
Indeed,
1962 when approximately 460 were affected.
in
in 1962 and
for
firms -displaced in any
maximum number of
The
and the median number of
three.
36
fall into
Renewal firms
categories
and 8% pay below
the
structure is one of
firms
in
firms as
fairly low rental
for the location of
Rentals
areas.
Furthermore,
paid by
a group have been steadily increasing as
circled median values
in 1958
takings.
to 1960,
As was
is not
this
time
were
actually paid at
of business and
the data available for
to the poor records kept at
to
this
then,
in the city.
with those
generally reported
substantiated
projects.
its designation
Median rents
$.75;
in the period 1961 to
about
$.75
by
to
$1.00.
This,
1963
rent
a fact
that
of Boston's renewal
stage ran about $.50
the median was
the second
the Government Center Project
is also
are not too inconsistent
the first
in the first
It
of the lowest
for the area as
relocation
than now after
The findings
the
that was
a condition
area undoubtedly had one
structures
authority.
to offset
personnel have learned to stage their takings.
true that
those that
the redevelopment
customers -
apparently much more frequent
first stage
The
They were constantly being lowered in order
heavy loss
the
indicate.
the rents that were recorded were
that time
dislocated
the West End project
of
the years
the best due
period
47
three steps.
explained earlier,
this
and
table p.
on appendix
The increases have occurred in
was
This
$1.50.
prime reasons
renewal designated
range of rental
$.25/sq./ft./year.
and
$.25
50% pay between
over
the lower
steady
stage, was
to
at
dominated
and it would appear
that
37
median rents have actually climbed very
time.
The third stage,
$1.50,
is due
professional
firms
that were dislocated after
course, that
Rentals vary
inversely with
$1.00
$1.49/per sq.
six percent
and
of
ft./per year
$.75/sq.
ft.
and
to
firms
all dislocated
and they pay
Boston
of business,
firms
The rate of liquidation has
business
it has declined
downward
to
A rise
sharply
run two
over one such business
lows
of
to
the firm.
Firms
for those employing
$.75
$1.00.
to
employ more
rates
than
throughout
$.50
for businesses
three times
to
first quarter
1966 and up
of 1967.
dis-
that.
In
for all
in 1958 generally
22 percent in 1964
apparent in
in
discontinued.
not been constant and
of 45%
the
annum dependent
in every five has
from highs
from 17
in the rate is
for the
is biased.I
its size,and number of years
from renewal areas
located
is,
2
National liquidation rates
business.
that
The result
nation run between six and eleven percent per
type
typically
the lowest median rents between
Typical business discontinuance
on the
1964, most
a median rental between
the rate drops
between six and twenty
20 persons
the size of
five persons pay
one to
Only
all
the median rental for
employing
and
service and
as will be shown under
section on service and professional firms.
of
to
$1.00
The professionals
rents
office space
pay high,
about
the larger number of business
to
attorneys and CPA's.
notably
at
median rents
little since that
It is
to
1966.
even more
not too
38
inversely with the
one to
in four,
about one
liquidate.
eight
to
After
that,
twenty range
and
zero
between
the
only 10%
it is
and
1962
that,
and over
firms.
all displacement has
Of the
203 firms
somewhere
occurred
concerned about one-
the rest were in a variety of other
Forty percent of the
occurred in
displacement
feet of
to date over 1.7 million square
1963 and
the
5
five.
third were in food and
categories.
for in
sharply,
rate drops
only
and seven
that employ between four
Approximately 1/10th of
among wholesale
liquidates, whereas
three person firms
five firms
in
one
Approximately
the firm.
size of
tend to vary
rates
to find that liquidation
surprising
floor space has been acquired and
1500 employees
over
affected.
By 1972 an estimated 280 firms will have been displaced and
the
3.8 million
risen to
of building space will have
cumulative totals
to over
square feet and the number of employees
4000.
are
Wholesale firms
firms.
The median square
three times higher
steady over time
highest
and 1963 and
Whereas
square
footage per
than that
for
at about 3000
and lowest values,
from 5.100 to
typically larger
averages
square.
from that
time on
only 37%
about
two to
been fairly
Excluding
the
over the years ranged
10,300 with general highs
seventy percent of all
feet
firm runs
firms and has
all
feet
than most displaced
in the years
they have been
1962
generally steady.
establishments were under
of all wholesale
firms were
under
3000
that.
39
35%
of the wholesale firms
the
60%
value for
all
employed under 3 persons versus
and
firms
the average
1966 -
amount of floor
1100 sq.
eleven
space used per employee runs
to
from 800
in the years
once again
and highs
65
firms the average
For all wholesale
67.
with highs
ft.
in 1963 -
lows
for
to three persons
the two
fluctuates between six and
persons with highs in 1962-63,
again-in
been steady
The median size has
all firms.
five in comparison to
at about
Only
firms are also larger employers than average.
The
and
1962
1963.
Normal liquidation rates
for wholesale firms
averaged about seven percent, but
have been two to
17%.
No
absence
trends
are apparent,
for all
dropped
risen
in 1964
to 11 percent but
to nearly
displaced
firms
in the
eating and
"other"
and
the hardware,
grocery
account
that about
for one
drygoods,
are
1967 had
third of all
Of the remaining
fairly
clothing,
appliance classifications.
rate
4 are liquor stores and
20% have
stores,
the remainder
1966 the
first quarter of
drinking establishments.
16% are
lower
6
double that.
and of
In
the
Even so
in contrast to
those years.
firms during
Retail establishments
about
to
in part probably due
and 1965
they
total of
of a relocation load in the earlier years.
highs have occurred
rates
in the renewal areas
that with an overall
three times
have
been
well
and
By 1967
classified
as
among
distributed
furniture
75%,
and
over 1.6 million square
4o
feet of retail space had been acquired;
increase to
to six years.
The number of
employees affected by
probably more than double from the
of
84%
employed less
60%
and
size
80%
for
employed
totals
all retail firms
is
the extremes are
firms only
that for wholesale
slightly higher
for all
3900
ignored.
sq.
The median
years
at
three
Highs
8
occurred in
the same pattern
space occupied by retail establishments
than that
ft. with
for all
firms
and is
The average
steady
square
over
footage,
fluctuates between 1400
lower values
in the earlier years
Although the median size of retail firms
the firms
70%
firms.
firms.
space occupied is slightly higher
about
comparison to the
1967 -
ignoring the extremes,
1958 to 1960.
of
in
steady over the
time at about 1-3000 square feet.
once again
than three persons and
less
and again in 1966 and
63
The median floor
75%
Although
The averages do fluctuate and run from 3 to
if
1962 and
and
1972 will
smaller than the average
than eight persons
respective
employees.
persons
are slightly
About 62%
displacee.
is
five
all employees worked in retail establishments.
Retail firms
as
2200.
present
all firms displaced were retail
third of
that
a figure
over 3.1 million in the next
is expected to
one
is
it
than is
do occupy less than
by
typical, nearly
3000 sq.
ft.
compared
to
for all firms.
Liquidations
more frequent
among displaced retail firms
than for any other
category.
The
are much
rate is
over
41
14
means
The normal national rate runs
one-half.
percent,
thus
the rate under
ment from renewal areas is
and
are
the high rates
subcategory.
A more
the thesis
the liquor establishments
among
the
rooming
trend
one
for it is
dealing with
discontinuances.
survival and
1958 to
high in the years
then drops
to 50 percent and
the middle years
of
liquidation rates.
is
is
1960
an interesting
at about
of from 26
the rate begins
is
of 1967
40
to 32 percent
Thus the period of
1964.
accompanied by the
After 1964
the first quarter
lows
to
1962 to
highest relocation loads
and
that portion
detailed discussion occurs in
of the retail liquidation rate
The
again
The
can be regarded as a particularly unique piece of real
estate.
in
Such rates
connected with licensing problems whereas
house
of
These sub-
than 60%.
less
equalled only by the rooming house
reasons for
are
rates slightly
A
this norm.
occurs among liquor,
eating and drinking establishments.
categories have
account for
forced displace-
times
four
about
This
35%.
at about eight
conditions of
of the displacements
heavy percentage
firms
retail
of all discontinuances,
that
at about
and stands
all firms
times that for
lowest
to
climb
up sharply from the
50%.
year before at a new high of over
Personal and business service and professional firms
comprise
over one-fifth of
personal
service
total
the
total relocation
firms accounted
service category;
for
there has,
load.
about one-half of
The
the
however, been an increasing
42
proportion of
the total
four
and
in
1961 to
to
composed of business
1960
there
five times as many personal service
firms
services and professionals.
were about
that is
category
In the
1958 to
years
1963 they were only 50
to
of the
70%
service
load.
From 1964 onthe proportion has
smaller
and
currently between 20 and 50%.
is
1972 the
total is
expected to
loads have not been nearly
this
in the others;
to date has
occurred during the
The number of
so
far has
double
one
To date about
reach over two million.-
The displacement
category as
become even
been acquired
million square feet of building space. has
but by
total
as erratic in
however, most
of the
load
four year period 1962
to
1965.
service employees affected by displacement
been in excess
that by 1972.
of 1800
and is
Although service
fifth of displacement,
expected
firms
to be
accounted for
they occupied only seven to
eight
percent of all acquired building space.
Service firms
firm with
are smaller than the typical displaced
the median occupied floor space steady
500 and
1000 sq.
service
firms occupied under 3000
value
for all
once again
ft.
firms.
over time.
Eighty-nine percent of all
The average
the extremes,
sq.
ft.
size of
versus
fluctuates between 600
between
employee is
100 and 300 sq.
ft. per
steady over
employee.
the
70%
the firm, excluding
square feet with a noticeable upward trend.
space required per
at between
and 1900
The average
time and varies
43
as
60%
and 80%
between four and
employees fluctuates
the median is
category and
of
70%
service firms
Median rents for service
rising and
this
undoubtably due
is
in
the numbers of professionals -
in
this
the
size of the
medians
-
slightly for firms
However,
in
this
over 20
only
ft.
about
-
Firms
$1.50 and
ft.
and
ft.
over
an increase in
under 6 employees exhibit
$300
/sq.
ft.
and
employing between 6 and 20
employees,
sq.
$3.00
$3.00/sq.
others,
from 1958
sharply
$1.50
and
CPA's
attorneys,
to
steadily
strong increase
the
decrease slightly with
firm.
of between
firms with
.49/sq.
remained in the
Rentals
category.
to
foot
square
firms have been
The median increased
category.
1965 it has
like
of any
the highest
are
the firms pay over $1.00 per
per year.
to 1961 from $.25
persons. and
six
steady over time.
also
Rentals paid by
Since
than the respective
average number of
The
for all firEIs.
values
and 86%
than four employees
than eight, somewhat higher
less
employ
employ less
firms
all service
three quarters of
About
steady at 2 employees.
median is
for the service
the median for all firms,
indicated by
typical
are also slightly smaller than is
Service firms
the median is
this
decreases
For
persons.
about
$.75/sq.
five percent of all service firms
ft.
fall
category.
One out
displacement.
of every
This
five service
fact,
firms
liquidates
however, disguises
on
the more important
44
that personal services have a liquidation rate of
point
or five times
30%
over
The
firms.
and business service
one
thigher than that for professionals
taken not to disguise the differences
will be
In general a fair assumption would seem
two.
personal service
firms
for
The liquidation rate
steady
at between 21%
through 1964,
27%
Actually it
experience
an upward shift
for the
category produced as a result of the
higher
liquidation rate, it is
still
subcategories
that are con-
entire
the latter have a
low enough to compensate
for
increases in the personal service subcategory.
and
1966
business
service
rates
liquidation
the first
to 33%
the proportion of the
subcategory
not
quarter of 1967
and the
firms in the
increases
surprisingly
ratio for
to
dropped
the liquidation
the firms
service
increase in business
and professional firms;although
service
despite an
in liquidation rates
by a generally steady rate
cealed
light.
generally
that after 1962 both
appears
of retail
and business service
increasing percentage of professional
firms.
to be that
in that
firms is
all service
and
between the
of the traits
firms exhibit many
they should probably be thought of
anid
some care
therefore and
somewhat misleading
category is
two into
of the
combination
In 1965
professional and
about
to
80% and
8 to
10%.
the
In
rate had jumped up
changed to 50:50.8
45
DETAILED ANALYSIS OF
SERVICE FIRM DISCONTINUANCES
Year of
Personal Services
No.
of Displacees
No.
of Liquidations
Percentage Liqd.
Displacement
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
3
7
55
45
27
19
10
6
6
3
0
17
16
7
1
4
28
27
100
-
31
36
26
37
10
67
4
6
6
37
20
33
72
37
6
-
2
l
6
1
4
0
-
5
5
18
1
11
58
59
18
22
5
60
7
Business Service and
Professionals
No.
of Displacees
No.
of Liquidations
Percentage Liqd.
First Quarter only.
2
*
Displaced manufacturing firms
They
total relocation load.
the building space and
one-quarter of the
in the printing and allied industries
fabrics,
square
apparel and textiles.
feet
firms
dislocated
number
1.2 million
Approximately
is
a sharp
The cumulative
anticipated.
that have been displaced, over 100 were
in 1962,
43%
of employees
and by 1972
about 15%..were in
about 3.2 million square feet by 1972.
total should reach
the 237
the firms were
of space have so far been acquired and
increase in these takings
Of
and
the
affected
employees
one-quarter of
of
of
for about 18%
accounted
Approximately
by all takings.
comprise about 12%
of
the total.
affected is
the cumulative
By
1967
the
known to be at
total is
total
least
2,200
expected to reach over
8,200 persons.
As
one would expect in the manufacturing industries,
Nearly
are larger than the average displaced firm.
the
firms
45%
of the
70%
value for
firms
are under 3000
all firms.
sq.
ft.
However, only
as
compared
a small
the
fraction, 7%,
occupied building space over
20,000 sq.
even most businesses
category may be rightly con-
sidered as
2,800
The average size
and 10,500 sq.
excluded.
that
small.
time
The
in this
ft.
of the
they have moved
in 1963 and 1964.
and therefore
firm varies between
if the extreme highs
averages are mixed prior to
vacillates between three
lows
ft.
to
steadily upwards.
and ten
and lows
1962 but
are
since
The median value
thousand square feet with
About 4 to 600 sq.
ft./employee is
47
of the
typical
value is fairly
steady over
The number of
the other
for
employees per
firm increases
firms
$.75
slightly since then.
-
vacillates
the number of
at about
$.50
Liquidation rates
any major
category.
a labor
-
.75 by
.49/sq.
the
per square
ft.
1961 and
$.25
only slightly higher
employees is
employ
on displacement.
The medians
The median rental by
ft.
Of
about 80%
of $.25
to values of between $.50
to $1.00/sq.
measured by
for
fifty persons
the maximum median
at four
four percent of the
about
tight grouping with the minimum at
category and
is
of the firms
firms
increased from median lows
increased only
a fairly
for all
To date
have employed more than
1958 to 1960
have
one-third have
Fifty-eight percent
than eight whereas
Rentals
in
about
are
larger.
definitely
trend is
than eight persons.
less
Median values
ten to twelve.
force under 3 persons.
less
average number of
The
over time but slightly and
all manufacturing industries,
employ
firm runs well above that
employees per
to five persons and the
and this
time.
three categories.
typically at about
firms
for the
requirements
space
form
-
.49
at
size of firm as
quite steady
and
foot.
for manufacturing
firms
are
the lowest
A maximum value of 11% was reached
that time the rate varies
in 1959
but since
between
three
quarter
rate for
1967
is
low number, have
thus
far been displaced.
and ten percent.
up to
It is
16%
true
but only
at a lower
that the
level
first
6 firms,a very
The national
48
liquidation rate
for manufacturing firms
for
the renewal rate
and so
the distinction of being
this
is
approximately
11%
category not only bears
the lowest among
the other categories
but even falls under t- national rate. 9
the main, it is apparent
In
between 1958 and 1967
extend
to at
least 1972.
have been affected by
and
1972 the cumulative
a quarter times
floor
far
Over six million square
placement
firms
totals will have
loads
displaced
prised
occurring
reached about
18,000 employees
have
in
been
these
and
1963
of the
firms
employees.
adn
of
load with
over 55%
of
Thus
with heavy
all
disthe
com-
of the displacees
two categories.
Dislocation under the renewal program
the displacement
ft.
affected.
erratic
and
1962
two
the retail and service establishments
the bulk of the
falling into
8000 employees
that with over 14.5 million sq.
loads
dislocation
and over
feet of
the dislocation of 1900 businesses.
space acquired and
the
and
to increase in activity
that is
floor space have been acquired
By
displacement program
Authority embarked on an active
ment
the Boston Redevelop-
that
typically means
of small businesses with about three-fifths
occupying under
3000 sq.
The median size of all
ft.
and/or under four
firms runs between
two
three persons with the manufacturing and wholesaling
concerns generally above
service
that value
establishments below.
and the
retail
The median size of
and
the firms
49
by
generally remained
both square footage and employees has
constant over time with the
exception of the
industries where increases
are evident.
paid by the displacees
The median rentals
generally
firms
amount of rent paid tends
the
suggest
firms
are met under
the
of the
foot per year
typical in most
that unusual hardships
all firms
rate for
the
saling,
two,
categories
conditions of forced displacement.
Although
the rates
categories with the heaviest displacement loads
tended
have
and
and difficulties
rates have generally been decreasing over time,
in those
for
60%
to vary inversely with size.
The high discontinuance rates
of
The
since 1960.
low with about
than $1.50 per square
paying less
of
early years
increased during the
the program but have generally held steady
rental structure is
manufacturing
runs
about two
firms under
to
three
times higher than
normal market conditions
following categories:
over all the years
cent;
a value that
discontinuance
The rate
approximately
is well below the
rate of
inversely with the
is
firms.
wholetwenty-
for the entire
twenty-two per-
national urban renewal
one-third and that
size of the
rates
thirty-five,
and manufacturing are respectively
group
the
and the
retailing, services,
seventeen and seven percent.
for
The rates
to increase in the later years.
tends
to vary
50
FOOTNOTES
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
1
Appendix, p.
47.
2
Appendix, p.
48
3
FIRMS
John P. Alevizos, An Effective Program for
Relocation of Businesses from Urban Renewal Areas
1963), p. 12.
4
pp.
The
10-13.
5
6
7
Failure Reckord Through 1960
Appendix,
Appendix,
pp.
49-50.
pp.
59-63.
Appendix, pp.
64-68.
QAppendix, pp.
74-78.
8
Appendix, pp.
79-83.
the
(Boston,
(Dun and Bradstreet,
Inc.)
CHAPTER IV
RELOCATION PROCESS
The task of moving a business
men's
are at
livelihoods
and
risk of general
the
forced dis-
the impact of
In order to
naire was
the
facilitate
of re-
this a survey question-
sent to relocated business men in an attempt
their comments
It has
offer.
activity
cessation of business
it -is now appropriate to question the process
location itself.
of
a total
and opinions
What kinds
them?
prepared
to make
and what
techniques
accompanying
What
to be made;
of problems
to meet
to
and
and conquer?
how well is
kind of knowledge is
can be used
to gain
to answer some
attempt
difficulties do different concerns have
What kinds of decisions have
they had
and the data that
proved useful in the
following questions.
for
of the men's dependents.
Thus far we have considered simply
location as measured by
a serious affair
stake as well as
and the well being
economic loss
is
firm
the
available
to ameliorate the conditions
forced dislocation?
The process of
relocating a business
requires
a great
deal of planning and coordination on the part of the owner
and
often of
must somehow
and
cope with about
interrelated problems:
uncertainties
often occurs
He
tasks that he has never before encountered.
as
five major sets
(1)
The delays,
to project status,
prior
to the property
and
the
taking;
of a contraction or an expansion of the
of sequential
time
consumption,
income loss
(2)
that
The decision
business based on
an
52
evaluation of
prospects
of the
firm, the
evaluation ofthe
firm;
als;
accompanying changes in
the
changing floor space
move and
(4)
the move itself
of
remodeling, renovation and
mize the
"down time"
means a loss
for property losses
assure proper
and moving
expenses
required after
formed-business-clientele relationships,
and receipts,
and the
The period prior
be filled full
and
to even the
About
the
taken.
as
the
-
a
or newly
loss
of income
to which buildings
After the announcement itself
to occur, a loss of
inability to rent space often causes
one-third of
the move
project announcement can
of rumors and uncertainty
land parcels will be
the
and grants;
retraining of employees.
and when dislocations begin
and
to mini-
and prompt
the re-establishment of,
that may require
as
liaison with
and the establishment of
The adjustments that are
period
of both new
the business interruption that
required,
of income,
the
the
the space;
the installation
the redevelopment. authority to
payment
that may include
the staging of the move so
and
the
The planning of the
alteration of
purchase of new equipment and
and old equipment;
The
locational needs of
or purchase such space and
decision to rent
the making
and
(3)
suitable space at reasonable rent-
locating of
the
ensuing real estate transactions;
(5)
layout,
of operation, and/or line of products handled;
method
the
the economic
changing status of the market and
the
customers
incomes
survey firms indicated that
to decline.
they had
53
lost
customers and
the event
the property has been
that
authority and
that the
can show a loss
was
raised in
dislocatee
rent..
the survey as
leasing problems prior to
forcefully brought this
to
(at
this stage a
tenant)
to
Although no specific question
to relation, it
the taking and
the
or
loss of private rentals
One respondent
an uncommon occurrence.
is not
the renewal
taken by
the authority does provide some
of business,
relief by lowering the
In
the property taking.
to
loss of income prior
ienced a
they had exper-
one-quarter reported that
authors
quite
attention:
Shortly after the project was announced
our tenants lease was out leaving 3 floors
(15,000 sq. ft.) vacant for nearly four
No one would rent space in the
years.
whole area...The reimbursement for moving
was adequate but was $15,000 less than we
We
had to spend on the new location.
have been relocated twice (Central Artery,
All our
and the Government Center).
working capital has been depleted by these
We feel that the improvement
takings.
of the area had been made, in part, at the
expense of those that were relocated.
This is not right.
Some businessmen anticipate the action
renewal
authorities and move out
the properties.
Even though they
or grants
imbursements
prior to
rentals are
the
the
forfeit any
for moving expenses,
believe they benefit by eliminating the
income before
taking.
By
taken by
taking of
claim to re-
they
risks
the
apparently
of a loss
of
finding a new location before
forced up by heavy dislocation
able to find more suitable space
in the
loads,
they
are
face of an impending
54
It
supply.
dwindling
fulfills
initiative simply
decline of
often argued
is
the prophecy and hastens the
reason the
for this
the area and
economic impact of the
The actual
"prior-moveouts" would appear to be
to 10%
indicated that up
In 1958-59,
their move was
unknown.
unknowns
and moveouts has
some of
it is
business
groups.
seem that
the
In the survey
find
one-fifth indicated that
.It would
the
improved accounting
instituted but
the selectively staged
to minimize
long it took them to
about
the
total for both
four percent.2
that were apparently
also due to
areas which helps
the
dropped to about
attributed to
survey procedures
displaced
or the status of
category
declined significantly
has not
this can be
category.
Although the number of known prior-
moveouts
of
the firms
of all
in Boston about 20%
the prior-moveout
Some
studies
of all firms were- in this
were either in
how
for in Bostor.
slight
one percent took such action but previous
only
and
practice is
through the policy
officials
strongly discouraged by renewal
of withholding monies.
such individual
that
success
disruption to different
the
relocatees were asked
their present
it
taking
location and
took no time
of the
at all. 3
staging policy
and
the decision to withhold payments has had some effect but
the businessmen have apparently retained
being
able to
find adequate space
One respondent replied
and
the
their concern about
right location.
that he had obtained space
long before
55
he was required to move
rents)
undoubtably paying double
(and was
and explained that he had wised up
and knew
early
that he needed "insurance".
A somewhat
as
traumatic experience must gradually unfold
The variety and
and relocate his business.
of
learn that he must dislocate
the business man begins to
the decisions
are numerous;
and the consequences
great
some of the
written by
convey this
the
complexity
the
chances of error are
The
can be disastrous.
survey respondents
notes
could not but
impression:
The property was taken March 1, 1966, and
fortunately we did not run scared so that
This is our
we are still in business.
second forced move and we now pay rent
We have been doing business as
to the BRA.
we
are hanging by a thread, not
usual, but
Relocating
knowing when the axe will fall.
for our type of business is very difficult,
so where it took us 20 years to get where
will
probably take the BRA
we are, it
30 days to knock us out of business and out
of our livelihood.
,Another respondent put
just
tough
The
it down in
as
for those who happen to be
act of
"new",
and
businesses
simply picking
involved in relocation!"
up a business
and plunking
a new location, even if it could be
that, means
that
as is
is
in many cases
known, the
indeed high.
done as
it must be redefined
liquidation rate
as
a change in
in suppliers
It can also mean a change in
simply
for new
A new location means
clientele and quite possibly a change
distributors.
"It's
it much more simply,
the
and
type of products
56
handled and
therefore be made before one
Decisions must
for
a new piece of
decide what kinds
will take
place
advantage
and
of
selling them.
displaying and
the method of
in the market have
of shifts
that might be to his
advantage
retail merchants who often have smaller
and
are
dependent on a closer personal and
merchants
location as
types
compared to one-fifth
of businesses.
the relocation
of
The heavy
and renewal
the
of
to one-third
the retail
due
for
shifts possible
for them.
One
to re-
the other
through
process therefore make
relocation most difficult
in explaining
time-physical
customers
they had lost
of course
trading areas
About 50%
customers.
indicated that
or dis-
affected are
the
relationship with their
taken or
decide how he might best capitalize
The most critically
these facts.
looking
try and
The owner must
real estate.
then he must
starts
this part
survey
respondent,
quite
financial loss she had assumed,
candidly put it like this:
We lost about $30,000 because the removal
of people and our business did not move in
My late husband had
the same direction.
given credit to all the people in the
Washington Park area.
They scattered all
over
the
area
-
leaving no
forwarding
addresses.
About 10% were honest notified us of their new addresses.
Dependent on the
prospects
made as
type of market
of an individual business,
to whether it might be
contract,
drop
and
the
and
the economic
decisions must
advantageous
to
or add product or product lines
expand
be
or
and/or services.
57
found relocation to be
firms have
the
Some of
industries
and manufacturing
The wholesale trade
disguise.
a blessing in
often able
to realize real benefits
for
the move gives them a chance
to reorganize the layout
of
are
in particular
substitute new machinery
the production or shipping processes,
firms
retail
operating methods.
firms
changed their method
of operation and/or dropped or
added products, product lines
40%
of
How much
could be considered beneficial as
not known, but
up process
the percentage
occupied
it is
occurs.
by
the
5
apparent
of
change
survey
only
Of
firms
the
firms
percent
ten levels
and
over,
of
is
an adjustment
after
evident in
change is also
floor
of
amount
space
displacement
Although the
that
is
from the
median for all
amount
the
to nine percent increase
fell within
the firms
of change ranging
to
trade area
retail
the
versus
indicated about a five
about five percent of
the
and almost
that a considerable shaking
The degree
they occupied previously.
survey
in
of the changes
of the
Over 40%
in products or
underwent changes
the retail firms
services.
or services.
their method of operation
firms changed
wholesale
change
to
the survey
of all
About one-fifth
their
Even
the concern.
of
the opportunity
to take
are often able
to generally im-
and
the working space and conditions
prove
spaces
one level working
for a smooth flow of goods
allow
that
efficient
change to more
for old,
this
from a, negative
a positive fifty
category.
fifty
percent and over,
the
58
firms were
greatest number of
Approximately
values.
indicated
one-quarter of
over 25%.
in size
of suitability of
Of all
important.
these
6
among the highest
the businesses
that
responded
the other had
two items
also in
are
the
them-
the major problems encountered
these two were
one and/or
one-third
and between
acquisition of building space and location;
finding and
half
the respondents had
a variety of problems associated with the
There is
selves
found at the extreme
a decrease in size of over 25%
and one-half increased
degrees
to be
to
for about one-third of all
the survey indicated
caused them difficulty.
that
About
one-
of the wholesale trade and manufacturing industries
they had
reported that
whereas
the values
quarter to
for the other
one-third.
the smaller
categories ranged
A check by size
firms have less
percentage values
suitable space
difficulty in finding
trouble
increase as
of firm suggests
larger for
than the
the size
of the
An increase in values with an increase in size
when we consider the problem of
It would appear that
small service
firms among
the problems
fifths
of
of all
the small
the
retail merchant
retail firms have trouble
conceals
for about
to
than three
the
of
some of
two-
finding a location
whereas only one-quarter to one-third of the businesses
employing less
the
also occurs
large numbers
respondents
that
firm increases.
the location, but not
same degree.
the
from one-
persons made this
denotation.
59
Wholesale firms
as
locations
suitable
and of
had problems
difficulty in
found the most
about
they had
that
indicated
one-half
the values
not yet mentioned
the others
ranged from one-quarter
finding
to a third.
that of
The most frequently checked problem area was
this
category and about
indicated that
is
no
esting to note that
whereas
the firms under
the problem of a suitable
locations
encountered high rents
does not of course
too difficult to
It was not
revealed that
about two-thirds
excess
information was
of
checked it
third.
The fact the
search for new
in their
that
of the
former
for
in
available had sustained increases
The
rent for about
two-fifths
over fifty percent.
Among these were licensing and
about 1/10 of
retail trade tended
enough time
they
106 respondents
Other minor problems were denoted by some of
fected
them.
they paid
the new rents with the
twenty-five percent.
increased by
that
felt
location came in a poor
check the increases
A comparison of
inter-
is
employees
confirm that
finally paid.
which
firm but it
four
and a
second with between one-quarter
relocatees
of
problem for about
their most important
this was
size
There
difficulty.
they had encountered this
deviation by
significant
the retail respondents
of
three-fifths
checked
the firms
of all
About
unreasonable or high rents.
to
the retail
zoning restrictions
firms.
to be concerned
that
find a decent location.
The
firms.
the
that
services
they did not
Approximately
af-
and
receive
one-fifth
60
of
the wholesale and retail trade
concerns
indicated
less
than one-
they had
faced financing problems and
tenth of
the
complained
firms
Most of the
different
they had serious problems
wholesale
plaints
of businesses
registered
a wide variety of problems
encountered among
services.
the
felt that
in one area or another.
and retail trade were
for
leasing problems. 7
of any
types
that
This
and
In
com-
the most
the fewest were
is undoubtedly due
to the high percentage of professional and business
service
firms
recalled that
answering the
the percentage of
returns are skewed,
then
number of
these firms
been on the increase and
category has
years,
questionnaire.
one would expect,
as
this would seemingly account
responses in this
category.
do not have
the relocation problems
many of the
others.
the words
since
in
the
toward
the
services
survey
the
later
for many of
These
that are
The case becomes
It will be
quite
firms
the high
apparent y
typical of so
evident through
of one CPA:
I have partially completed the form,
(the questionnaire) but, as accountants,
the relocation really was of minor consequence to us, other than the inconvenience of time lost preparing to move
The relocation agency paid
and moving.
the cost of the mover, and beyond this
we had very little to do with them.
Businessmen
actually find
the
typically
use
a new location and
simple method of
finding
about
five major ways
foremost among
to
these is
a location by oneself -
presumably
by getting
in a car and driving around or checking out
this method which they sometimes
means such
asking friends
as
than five percent.
for less
were
or working through other
they
could
the
that
for their
inadequate
shown was
the words "worthless"
"relocation agency"
after the spot entitled
noted
they were
space
relocation
business
at
and
rentals
ill afford. 8
Some of the answers
given in
the
survey,
a few of which
of the decisions
have already been quoted, indicate that not all
facing
or even con-
the businessmen were met objectively
sidered
important.
have on a particular
exist among the
Certainly preconceptions
community as
business
to
the effects
area and, often
going to
renewal is
acting
in the face
uncertainty, they buy or purchase space and make
on the basis
of
Clearly some of
however
and
the
inadequate information
that
and
landlords were going
to
technical assistance.
supply of building space would
many instances, many
came
to hasty
impair
to up
of
decisions
them develop an emotional attitude
understandable, still serves
Many felt
credit
they had used to find
a new location, simply penciled in
while others
one-
Some businessmen, when. they
requested to check the means
and "no help"
abbut
agency was given
the relocation
of them and
quarter
combined with some other
Realtors apparently helped
business men.
used
relocatees
one-half of the
About
listings.
newspaper
their
their
judgement.
rental prices
dwindle and
decisions.
that,
thus,
Professor
in
Zimmer,
62
to the dislocatees
of information available
lack of it,
or
basis,
the
the
site, of
building space
the vacancy length,
rentals and
concern over
and were therefore unable or did not study
look for other
alternatives.
Zimmer
vacancy;
about
that
one in every
2/5
did not
previous occupant went out
at
failed
to attempt
of business.
the previous
of
length
the previous
1/5 simply knew
that
the
In addition many
conditions
the market
to evaluate
of
the new location or estimate the potential volume
generated at
business that might be
three-quarters
the previous
businesses
ation
to
to one-half
categories
the merits of
itself may
the
two-thirds of
space,
the -move and
the
all
the
consider-
locations. 1 0
include the remodeling,
acquired
fell into
or any
to give adequate
alternate
About
the new location.
the businesses
of all
and about
generally failed
The planning of
of
the
four did not know why
occupant moved and that about
had
know of
a con-
that
found
siderable minority had but limited knowledge of
occupancy;
of
the previous history
occupant, of
and that many had acted in
etc.,
and
former
9
findings were that a high
portion acted without knowledge of
the
and on what
decisions had actually been made.
the most significant
Probably
the amount
attempted to check
through in-depth interviews,
purchase
the making of
the move
renovation and alteration
of
new. equipment
installation of both new and old equipment,
and
and
the
the staging
63
of
the move
so as
interruption.
cern finds
It is
to determine just what may
be compensated and to
The businessmen
law.
the
On
they should be
that
and attempt
the move
compensated for
advantage -of the
feel
the
other hand
authority
can only compensate for expenses
under the
law.
It must be obvious
after
of
the business
the move, the
of the
at its new
character of
change in employees and
in
the chapters
of
the changes
of
the
on the
sales
and on
city
information deals with the
deal of
occurs
information is
and carried out by
is
question of the
the
firms.
impact
impact
However, most
of the
consequences
direct
follows;
available,
the harmful
effects
The
further discussed
carried through
effect that the majority of
decisions
location.
transition period that
basic assumption has been
allowed
that are
the new location, the
that deal with the
move and not the
a great
opens
full
renewal
A great many
for change would already have been made
the time
take
to
that a period of adjustment
the move has been completed.
amount
a certain
the relocation
and
of misunderstanding between the firms
adequately
for
The period
grants.
communication and
a lack of
fraught with
and may not
assure proper and prompt payment
and moving expenses and
property losses
officials.
the
that it must establish a liaison with
renewal authority
is
that the business con-
time
this
at
of business
amount
the
to minimize
at
this
indeed, not
time.
the thesis
One
to the
and beneficial
64
due to
consequences
forced dislocation will become evident
near the period of highest
assumption would appear
of information on this
are,
There
The
probably
a valid one
to be
the
the most difficult,
the businesses
for
must really be considered as new business
liquidation rates
are high
about
survey, which
covered all the years,
could not be
the percentages were surprisingly
Kinnaird
years.,
Haven,
that
of the firms
actually liquidated due to reasons
The
how typical
the high degree of change.
the number
employees on displacement available.
about
18%
although admittedly
low for
the
completing
first
few
Information was
of
is
concerns
that presumably
The
the move
associated with
that data may be
carry-over effects
when we examine
the
of
either liquidated or
second point to be emphasized
ment to the
of
found, during studies in depth in New
about 15%
tion process -
and though
the magnitude
the mail,
reached through
The
ventures.
Furthermore,
were in bankruptcy proceedings.
are
starting at
the respondents
five percent of
liquidations,
stressed.
circumstances
for young businesses
had no way of checking on
the author
the lack
after displacement
and under a changed set of
new locations
thus
that should be
two years
first
and
too critical.
not
period is
The
the move itself.
however, two points
that
first is
stress -
reloca-
unknown. 1
2
tha adjustresult
importance of this
firms gaining or
the
is
from
evident
losing
one area in which some data is
sufficient
for only about
161
65
respondents
total.
of the
two-thirds
or about
only one-quarter neither lost nor gained
but
of course
employee
However,
thus an undeniably
and
as
larger
firms with about
overall effect appears
three-fifths
to be
among these
about
firms
found
invovles many problems
a business
control, introduces problems that
anticipated, and that
zero however,
the size
employees appears
to
the process
of
relocating
that the businessman
he is
unable
to
cannot
or has
not
require decision making beyond his
Among
reach.
these
the following:
1.
to
for
The
gaining. 1 3
experience and information beyond his
are
smaller
than the
so indicating.
losing
for the number of firms
In conclusion, we have
The
change.
took more losses
a category, apparently
firms,
compensate
employees
approximately one-third lost
large portion experienced some sort of
losses
a lack of
adjustment and employee
two-fifths gained employees
of the
employees,
there was
does not indicate
turnover necessitating
training.
and
this
Of these
The loss of sales,
the move
customers and
income prior
that effects between one-third and
a quarter
of
the relocatees.
2.
A high degree of emotional
in the business,
an involvement
3.
and therefore
that can hinder
in the
and economic involvement
relocation process
rational decision making.
An unfamiliarity with real estate
transactions,
-
66
negotiations,
and financing procedures
coupled with a
natural reluctance to hire high-priced attorneys.
4.
Licensing and zoning problems.
5.
The inability to
control the
time
of the move,
uncertainty and hinders re-
a problem that creates
location planning.
6.
formation
The
to
lack of
sufficient
consider alternatives
size of building space,
and
the
8.
The adjustment period after
employees.
in-
location, type and
financing and staging.
The age and stamina of
the
to
as
7.
adequate interim financing,
will -
time, knowledge a:d
the
owner.
the move that
requires
re-establishment of good
clientele relationship, and
the
retraining of
67
FOOTNOTES
RELOCATION PROCESS
W.
N.
Dislocation
Kinnard and Z.
from
S. Malinowski, The Impact
Urban Renewal
(Connecticut, 1960),
pp.
Areas
on
Small
of
Business
39-40.
2
Appendix, p.
3Appendix,
4Appendix,
4Appendix,
Appendix,
51.
p.
92.
p.
100-102.
p.
105.
p.
106.
7Appendix,
pp.
94-99.
8
Appendix, p. 93 and Basil Zimmer, Rebuilding Cities The Effects of Displacement and Relocation on Small Business.
(Chicago, 1964), pp. 97-98.
9
Zimmer, p.
104.
10
Zimmer, pp.
11
Appendix, pp.
109-110.
34-35.
2W. N. Kinnard, Statement to the Select Committee
on
Real Property Acquisition
1 3
Appendix, pp.
(Connecticut, 1964),
108-110.
pp.
9-10.
CHAPTER V
IMPACT
ON THE FIRMS
chapter
The previous
This
process.
First we
location.
these:
raised are
of
the
areas
the
all
they
be
able
rate
The
it
gives
of
expected
market
for
firm,
age
for
time
size
sub-
take
of
advantage
If
is
so,
there
the
under which
conditions
actually
firms
relocated
under
themselves
as
of
the
to
is
it
a
reflection
statistics
for
firm
discontinuances
may
be
a
forced
and
of
firms
the
risks
operating
ranges
rates
is
of
also
forced
to
doing
under normal
available
vary
by
low
type
The
in business.
from a
of
effects
have been
the
of years
failures
prime importance
of
discontinuances
expected
and number
is
detrimental
the nation
throughout
and as
firms
of
discontinuances
conditions
some
or
the
certain number of
A
Rate
business.
firms marginal
overnight?
the
Might
some measure
displacement.
be
die
improve
upgrade
and
renewal
the
Second, we shall see whether
of jobs?
to
in
consequently
and
so high
situation?
displacement
for
and
the
of
been
have
rate
is
why
programs
many
Are
improve
to
that
liquidation rates
doing business.
were
high
the
able
relocatees were
the
Why are
and spring up
a negligible loss
dis-
consideration
into
further
forced
questions
character
rentals
cheap
of
the
goveinment
relocation
carried
of
higbest?
in
marginal
consequences
the
take
shall
Some
rate.
liquidation
and
few of
a
the
is
discussion
of
and
the problems
during
firms
the
line
general
examining
here by
by
encountered
difficulties
some of
outlines
of
of
percent-
69
approximately six percent for
the
in business
displaced
failures occur
in the first
after the establishment of the business
five years
percent.2
all
account for only about
over.ten years
As we have seen,
the
in business. 1
firm and the number of years
fifty-eight percent of
Over
(for
inversely with the
The rate varies
manufacturing firms.
to a high
eleven percent for
specified categories) of
four previously
size of
service firms
and
firms
twenty
the liquidation rate for all
firms in Boston is about twenty-two percent as high as
"normal" for
the
value over three
times
firms category.
The rate for wholesale
firms was
the all
about
two-
and-one-half timesnormal and the retail rate over four times
the norm.
service
The
establishments had
times
the norm whereas
firms
discontinued at
the norm of six.
firms
of
for personal
service category split and
of about
to
six
service
a rate of only eight percent versus
for manufacturing
The high rate
norm of eleven percent.
discontinuances for
five to
professionals and business
The seven percent rate
was below the
category take us
a high rate
all
firms
the heart of
and the variations by
the controversial
issues
surrounding forced non-residential dislocations.
It might be well
the
liquidation rates
are
atypical.
low side.
the
to pause for a moment
and ask whether
that have just been mentioned for Boston
They would
appear to be
and
they are on
Displacements from urban renewal areas
country have taken place at over
7000 firms
the
throughout
per year. The
70
rate of discontinuance has
the Boston rate,
for renewal projects,
Although the
has been about 65%
the national figure.
is
the highest in the renewal program of
the
rates
discontinuances
of
rate
of
assisted projects,
all federally
US Army
a combined rate of
Many
reasons
doubtedly exist
tion has
the main causes
of several
they do give some
late summer of
report
listed retirement as
liquidations
fell into
this
and wanted
displaced from renewal pro-
classification.
of 32%.
including
Approximately
time
to
other
interested in
to dispose of their business
some kind of
The
of the
as
to be devoting
find a suitable location.
listed
the reasons
1964 quantified
interests and 28% were either not
relocating
listing
to the problem.
the main reason
owners were reported
the
are viewed as
represented a discontinuance rate
this
of the
this
over simplifica-
to quantify
insight
198 businesses
jects;
were
Some
factors.
the studies which do
for liquidation for
un-
liquidation is
and most probably a single
in the
A URA study
unable to
31.1 percent.
undoubtably occurred in attempts
reasons but if
business
over 3,300 discontinu-
for the high number of liquidations
indeed a combination
1/5
about 10,900 displactements
assisted programs,
occurred per year accompanied by
ances at
federal
For all
percent.
Engineers varies between 21 and 26
have
low
for the highway program,
rent housing, General Services Administration and
and federally
thus
been thirty-five percent;
A variety of
legal action as
or were
other reasons
bankruptcy
71
or
The
a position
is
last
taverns or businesses operating with a liquor
often taken by
license
license who hold the
are
others planned
and still
(liquidation statistical)
to re-establish at a later date.
who
of chain
to acquisition, deceased, branch
ceased prior
operation
operations
employment in another business,
tax liens,
or businesses
for future use,
in an interim period and
trying to swing a deal or
financing, etc.
An unknown category typically
those businesses
that
appeared because
they were illegal.
could not be contacted or simply dis-
a category entitled "due
cover
also
a myriad
summary
interesting
It is
that
or "unknown" -
to displacement"
to
It is
of other reasons, were not listed.
that the classifications are not mutually
fairly obvious
exclusive.
includes
The BRA uses
a less
(page 51)
appendix table
complicated
enumerates
listing and a
the reasons.
The listings have only been maintained from 1961 and so if
the data
of
for the West End project is
are attributed
the liquidations
ranging
that
liquor
ability
licenses,
of space
of
It
the
classification "Due
the
to Displacement."
the unavailThe
of 64%
retail and manu-
interesting to note
liquidations have been
and
from a high
to retirement varies
is
total indicate
remainder.
and lows of 30-31% for
firms
facturing firms.
one percent
to re-establish
account for most of
percentage attributed
for wholesale
plans
Values
to retirement.
fifteen percent of the
from twelve to
then about 40%
excluded,
that
only about
attributed to the
72
The problem of
the elderly business man appears
Some peripheral information tends
be a very
real one.
reinforce
this conclusion.
employees
under four
60%
firms,
5
It
the
It seems
firms
the size of the
significant
a fair
proportion of
and time
in operation, that
firms
the liquidating
were not
are probably
forced to dislocate
and the owners
loss of capital.
One survey respondent put'it quite bluntly,
It
can be a very difficult
elderly business man;
also
meaningful work.
to
he losses not only
and access
a sense of responsibility
The problem is
the businessman.
that his
One priest
apartment was broken
required to go
relocation procedure that
endowed with a high measure of risk and
semi-retire".
these
continued on indefinitely if they
through a difficult and strenuous
is
a
are operated
no indication that
There is, however,
businesses might not have
suggests
conclusion from information as
by the elderly of which a high proportion
proprietors.
this
in operation for
had been
liquidated businesses
over twenty
of the amount
thus
to 2/3 and
that over
for the liquidated
if available, would show a decrease
some time.
to
firms indicated
statistics
seems unlikely that
of time in business over
that
the usual 1/5.
versus
liquidates
to
of all businesses
about
the respondents had been in business
of
years.
First,
the survey of relocated
Secondly,
to
not
"I was
forced
to
time for the
a livelihood but
to useful and
even confined solely
(Ukranian Orthodox)wrote
into and
extensive damage
done
73
as a part
of
started.
A social worker who had helped him fill out
the neighborhood deterioration after
questionnaire enclosed
the
"renewal"
the
following comments:
"Herewith enclosed is the questionnaire
from.......Mission, Which I helped its priest
fill out.
(I am a social worker he met
many years ago when he was helping to resettle displaced persons).
His move forced
him to close.......Mission entirely.
He
might have had to reduce activities in any
event because he is now close to 80 years
of age.
But not reflected in the questionnaire, perhaps, is the fact he lost a muchused little recreation room for teenagers and
his entire little congregation was dispersed."
The high discontinuance rate
has
of
often brought the
suggestions
and conclusions
areas
are specifically
mental conditions,
The very
fact
selected on the basis
in contrast
undoubtedly accounts
to perhaps
for some of
It has been extremely difficult
the marginal business
analysis of
attempted
income and
to document
the conditions
dition, the
business,
the
(i.e.,
the rates.
proportion
load for
Most
ideally
through an
studies have
the exterior appearances
of the establishments
rent structure
and the
from
the
the highway program,
in the relocation
to draw conclusions
that
the difference in
loss statements.
sub-
of poor environ-
this would mean developing a picture of each firm
of
that many
the businesses to be found in renewal areas were
marginal or marginal in character.
of
for renewal projects
-
the physical con-
overhead),
size and
type
of
turnover rate.
A Baltimore report published in 1958 was
among
the first
74
to
conclude that:
Establishments requiring little skill,
experience or capital investment will
spring up almost overnight in an area
with a high vacancy rate of commercial
facilities.6
URA
A
87%
of
analysis
48+%
of
came
that service
finding
up
report
the
and
all
retail
trade
of
all
together
and
rooming
liquidations.
The
houses
of
all
its
in
accounted
for
drinking and
discontinued
classifications:
houses,
report
made
establishments
Retail
48+%
the
conclusion after
173 businesses
rooming
comprised
and:that
drinking
of
services.
discontinued
establishments
trade
load
and
that hotels
same
the
much
retail
and
displacement
eating
eating,
to
constituted
continued
over
40%
follows:
as
In conclusion, and as alluded to at the
hearings on June 7, a substantial but
unknown proportion of the small business
displaced from urban renewal clearance
project areas are marginal or even submarSuch businesses can only
ginal in nature.
exist in areas where overhead costs or
rents are low if they are to operate at
Therefore, for example, when businessall.
men of this nature attribute their failure
to relocate to their inability to find a
"suitable" new location, it may well be that
satisfactory new locations do, in fact, exist
but the marginal or submarginal businessman
cannot- afford to assume normal overhead
For them as
costs or pay normal rents.
individuals their displacement may be
tragic, indeed, and good public policy
requires
possible.
that
they be
This
assisted
is URA policy.
as
At
much
as
the
same time their situation should not obscure
the fact that approximately two-thirds of
the displaced businesses do successfully
relocate.7
75
is and how valid
mean
to how typical
question arises as
The
that
the
the losses
through
to the
When compared
atypical in that
rooming houses.
establishments
Together
the
the
of
1900
displaced businesses
made up
only
the
service and
retail trade
55%
of the
and of retail
taverna, restaurants
time it is
to
loans
make
It
of the
of
the
it is
and
comprised
is now current policy
owners at about
and
thus reAt
licenses.
the
issued far more
a situation that is
left
over
to purchase liquor
It is
$10,000.
also
Small Business Administration not to
If we examine the reasons
retail businesses
liquidations are
condition that is
among
those
for these businesscs.
for liquidating
23%
account
The restaurants
Boston has
felt that
licenses back from the
the policy
did
and rooming houses
the discussion.
than it needs;
the war.
from
load
These businesses bring some
total liquidations.8
location is often dependent upon
licenses
the URA
the study area used by
generally must have liquor licenses
present
in
it had a high proportion of hotels and
In Boston,
peculiar problems
taverns
in turn
forty-two percent of the discontinuances.
for a high,
27%
Would this
the eating and drinking establishments
trade,
URA study
discontinuances are insignificant?
Boston, it would appear that
was
are.
conclusions
the
due
that ab'out
it may be seen
to liquor licenses
responsible for over 40%
of the
the eating and drinking establishments.9
-
a
liquidations
Some of
these
76
businesses probably do manage to
re-establish and
discontinuances in retail trade
the
proportion
ever succeed in
rooming houses and in Boston an
problem is largely one of
Some
the problem of
insignificant number of
Suffice it to say
encountered.
a significant
actually re-establishing.
already occurred in regards
discussion has
hotels were
are assigned this
doubtful however that
It is
classification.
of
17%
real estate
the
that
and dwelling units.
Many rooming houses are run in converted large homes which
generally of
are
age and probably in a state of dis-
the purchase of
another
managing of a property, is dependent upon
find
a new structure
leased or rented;
it is
the usual relocation
public sector
it is
business it was
a situation quite different
task.
probably through
the
loss
of
encounter problems unique
business.
The question as
businesses
are or in what proportion to
to how marginal these
unanswered.
type
of
as we have
taverns
to the
the
the
the
of the
restaurants,
to
substandard.
therefore marginal in nature but
remains
from
If any real loss accrues
a significant proportion of
rooming houses
ability
that can be profitably bought or
The URA report inferred that because
they may be,
the
the owners
dwelling units which may or may not have been
seen
The
existing building.
this residential real estate business,
relocation of
to
is
The only really feasible way of "relocating"
repair.
then
some
and
type of
or other
total load
In an attempt
to shed
77
at least some
business we
light on the characteristics
shall take a closer look at
of the
liquidated
them by size and
rentals.
The size of
some measure as
a firm gives
to
the amount
of capital invested in the business venture and therefore
size of
some measure of the
firms
the
risk involved.
the
too, have probably started out as proprietorships
and although the data for Boston was not
variable, other studies
displaced businesses
The size
of
the
concerns
for
available
this
indicate that a high peicentage of
are proprietorships and partnerships.
firm also suggests
probably exists with
most
Many of
the amount of
that a direct relationship
as
time in business
As has
attempt to expand and grow over time.
been previously stated
the liquidation rate normally tends
to vary inversely with the
size of the business
and with
the time in business.
The discontinuance rate
inversely with the
downward shift
for renewal firms does vary
size of the business;
in the rate
however, a significant
does not occur until a large
proprtion of the businesses have been included.
of all businesses in
liquidate and 20%
persons
categories
of
the under
of all displaced business
that
in the
If we realize
falls within this
the rate
About
25%
persons classifications
those businesses
liquidate.
then we must concede
four
10
four to
that
eight
about 80%
classification
is quite uniformly high.
occur by the
Significant variations
for wholesale firms decline distinctly with an increase
rates
in size and
that
for
to three persons
two
five persons is
is
one-eighth.
standards,
one-fifth and
does
category
person
40% for
drops
those
to
rates in
are over
of the
that
employing
rate
six
with eight
four
approximately eight
rates
until the firms
to
to
twenty employees.
The
a reduced
load, for
discontinue than
the firms
that time
86%
The manufacturing dis-
covered.
two to
the
the purposes
of
5%
and 8%
The highest liquid-
three person firms.
exception of
comprise but 1/10
businesses, by
level.
fairly uniform until
conclude that, with
the
at
the same general
employees but by
concurs with
to over
then
are quite uniform at between
sale businesses which
majority of
is
some-
and
employ over 20 persons.
ation rate of 11%
fair
dif-
five
to seven persons
trade-only
the rate
to
increases
then
of the one-person-firms
firms have been
placement
The
for retail
and then
continuance
seems
those in the
liquidate.
firms
A higher number
any other
is quite
three persons and
the service classification follow
pattern as
seven persons
Over one-third
the rate drop below 16%.
for firms
23%
firms
for four
until the firms are very large, by renewal
than one-third of
less
for six to
that
the retail establishments under
what
that
is one-quarter;
The pattern for retail
for not
ferent
is one third;
for one-person-firms
the rate
to
of
The
of basiness.
type
the
of
the
It
the whole-
total
argument, the
disvast
type of business, liquidate
79
size.11
surprisingly uniformly according to distribution by
that a business pays should in some measure
The rentals
reflect
the amount of
the business is able to
overhead that
an indicator,
carry and therefore it presumably is
crude, of the marginality of
admittedly
firm.
the
though
There
are generally few "prime" rentals paid by businesses
renewal
the usual assumption is made that
porting
half of
already been conceded that
is generally
areas
in renewal
the displaced firms
the business
concerns
this down by
then break
may
what variations
The
the
to whether
We shall
so
as
for all
One level provides
90%
to
ascertain
occur.
for those very
Approximately
there-
entire dislocation load and
firms and by
firm have been displayed on tables according to
two others
those
often than
discontinued more
type of business
rental structures
cation levels.
about one-
than $1.00 per square
paying higher rates.
case for
fore examine the
sup-
the rental structure
low and in Boston
paid less
rental rates
the lower
'
the liquidations
the real test would be as
foot per year, but
paying
is
low
the marginal establishment.
can be imputed to
It has
desire
this
that
that a high proportion of
evidence
therefore
the businesses
thus follows
the conclusion
rentals and
and
has already been made clear
as
areas
in
a receptacle
type of
nine classififor unknowns and
low rentals below $.25/sq.
of the business
concerns
ft.
fall quite uniformly
80
rentals below
firms paying
in
to 17%,
and 24%
where the rate
ft.,
the other
for all
apparent reduction
with no
rate corresponding with an increase in the amount
in the
foot.12
per square
paid
With the exception
apparent.
the discontinuance rates
categories vary between 18
those
very little variation
ft.,
$.12/sq.
category of over $3.00/sq.
of the highest
drops
is
liquidation rate
the
exception of
With the
six categories.
the other
into
Approximately sixteen percent of all wholesale firms
discontinue operations
the
firms
but
the
five
rental levels between
fall in the
rate
liquidation
percent,
and eleven
for
these
values
is some
occur
at both extremes of the
occur
there.
and $1.00
$.25
between
varies
for the
scale
correspond
rates
rates of
with the
rates
two highest
rental levels
the rental level;
discontinuance
the one
and increase,
that was
is
similar to
the
for the
generally, with
therefore that is
expected.
The pattern of relationships between rates
of service firms
The
thirty-seven percent
a condition occurs
directly opposite to
dis-
twenty-five and eighteen percent.
from twenty-seven to
seven highest
norm.
the two
the fact
for retail trade are even more interesting.
rates vary
the
highest values
The correlation between rental levels and
rates
of all
are well below
that
Most notable however, is
rental
continuance
firms
60%
indication that higher discontinuance
There
highest
About
on dislocation.
one already
and rentals
described for
81
the rental scale.
The
drops
up sharply,
those
service firms,
of all
38%
and vary between eighteen and
for
twenty-five percent but
about
fairly uniform over the
rates are
the scale
major portion of
paying over $3.00,
concerns
rate instead of swinging
the
to a low of eight percent.
from the patterns
to the lower values and quite different
types of businesses with the possible
the other
liquidation rate
The highest
exception of wholesale
trade.
of fourteen-percent is
associated with rents
and by volume accounts
for
Three quarters
firms.
that and
above
directly
of
the
jecture on
this
There is
point quite
businesses
theory.
survey,
relocated
indicated
with
total,
as
to make con-
is
tends
to
that was
contradict
Eighty-nine percent or more
firms by the
typical
for
apparently an unfounded one.
time in business
mentioned for relocated firms
turnover
rates
level but the volume of
that high turnover rates
length of
for the
arbitrary. 1 3
in renewal areas is
The very high
a tendency
levels
fluctuate
the discontinuance rates
so small, sixteen in
The charge
in the four
concerns are
to drop with an increase in rental
is
of $.12-.25/sq.ft.
11 percent of the manufacturing
from four to nine percent.
liquidations
structure skewed
a rental
Manufacturing industries have
established by
of
extreme variations at the ends
firms with the
wholesale
the exception of the service
the high
of all
four major business
that they had been in business
already
the
categories,
over eight years and
category of which only 40%
82
the remainder had been
It
difficult
is
to believe that a significant portion of the
Data published by Dun
ten years.
over
studies
firms
is
indicate that there was
over five years
of age,
The conclusion above is
was
report indicated that
over five years
about
in a group
ceased
of firms
firms
was reported
median was
carried on indefinitely.
confirmed by other
the
The
in depth for
study undertaken in
N. Kinnard
all the
revealed that,
firms that
three-quarters were less
to be 2.9
3.2 years.
studies.
typical firm in his report
not dislocated, of
the
that those
apparently includes
could have
direction of W.
The median age of
old.
this
and
An additional
to operate, about
years
a high probability
old and the study was done
300 businesses.
Hartford under the
the maximum of
These mortality
trade.
for retail
the bulk of dislocated firms,
Zimmer
and
too
is
five year rates
fifty percent for wholesale firms
sixty-five percent
in businessare not
type of business
Variations by
significant for the minimum for the
about
the
and that
of age or less
occur among firms
the closings
only one-fifth of
of
under normal circumstances happen
are of five years
the concerns
when
that 58%
and Bradstreet shows
firms
for all
than five years.
less
discontinued firms had been in business
liquidations
of time. 1 4
for that pariod
in business
of
over two-thirds
twenty years,
had been in business over
closings
years and for
For those business
than five
for the smaller
all firms
concerns
the
that had
twenty percent.
to under
conditions at
old locations.16
listed:
complete the
costs,
the request
form entirely,
possible preference
that
they compare their
parking, access, merchandise
Most
layout.
and
about
of the survey
did not
although some
a 94%
listing of 1428 was
of a total
response
obtained.
be expected from the information already presented
the different types
of
ing and wholesale industries
quite
for all the
favorable for
that conditions had
noted that
complacent and
about
the manufactur-
reacted quite favorably.
groups taken together was
about one-quarter of
remained the same
they had improved.
As might
the retail firms were the most
firms,
disgruntled, the service firms
The response
the
Six categories for comparison were
and working space and
responded to
their new site,
the request
general business,
handling,
their general
the relocatees moved and
questionnaire made
new and
firms
into which
to business
reactions
survey
changed. 1 5
to gain some information on the environmental
In an effort
conditions
conclusions that would
firms but the
the
from the figures is not
be drawn
from
value differs
75%
The high
rate dropped
liquidation
figure and might be accounted for by
the Dun & Bradstreet
the smallness of
the
five years,
been in business over
The
the responses indicated
and nearly fifty percent
ratio
of the
responses that
indicated that the new location was better in comparison to
old was positive
and over
1.7:1 for every
category except
the
that of
improvements in methods of
for
satisfaction was noted
About
the respective ratios were
22%
given by
the replies
of
for
all
is
attitude
where
of new to old was
that general business was
those who
thought
the ratio
was
The
and
about
ratio
that parking and
The businessmen who
it was better
at their old
for working space and
layout
service firms were much more neutral to relocation
40%
apparently experienced
little change.
1 to
of new to old for all categories was
access, besides
to
the
that of costs,
improved as had
but generally
their working space and
two-thirds
the move, for about
favored
the new location and only about
of
improved or was
the
the
They
felt
that business
layout.
to greatly improve conditions
through
About four-fifths
1.
The
two categories, parking and
Wholesale firms were able
had
felt
1.3:1.
had negative reactions
had
increases
to improve merchandise hand-
1.8:1 and
location was at about
cost
The merchants
off slightly and
that they had been able
ling over
firms indicated
of the negative
1:14.
access had not measurably improved.
felt
retail
a heavy aversion to
explained by
the ratio
Much
1:1.2.
categories was
3.5:1 and 4.3:1.
the ratio of new to
conditions had remained unchanged and
old
and
in working space
handling merchandise and improvements
layout where
The greatest
1:3.2.
negative at
it was
costs where
of the responses
16%
respondents felt
same and the
were neutral.
that
general business
ratio of those
favoring
85
the old was
the new to
in favor
the replies
about
of the
and all other
1:2,
Only in
3:1.
location, by
old
equal to or
the replies
favored
the wholesalers,
the new location, about
least as good,
it was at
new to old,
responses,
category was
and the
was
overall ratio
a ratio of
30%
favorable at
regarded as
having improved as nearly nine-tenths
to old was
the same or better
The three other
2.8:1.
above
and the
ratio
is one measure of
on the
the
the discontinuance
detrimental impact
dislocatees.
It is
of
continuing operations.
unreasonable to
Even so,
high liquidation
of impairment
it does not seem
rates,
Abnormally high
discontinuance
rates
occurred
then some
detrimental effects must have been felt by those
located.
the con-
quite inadequate
conclude that where circumstances
cause abnormally
rate
forced dis-
a measure of
rendering an accurate picture of the degree
that
of new
categories exhibited
clusion of business activity, but remains
to those
reported
3.8:1.
In conclusion, we find that
placement
the
General business was
not greatly improved.
least
indicated
cost
and apparently
1:2.8,
50%
of the
parking had
it was at
about
Once again the
2.1:1.
the only condition that was more
old site with
in
industries were not as
favor of their new locations as
ratios
of
a ratio
categories had ratios
Although manufacturing
the
cost category were
than 7:1.
greater
of
the
that re-
occur among
in
86
all business types and
nearly
the
with the
liquidations varying inversely with the
percentage of the
size of
sizes of firms
firm and with the retail and personal service
establishments
experiencing a proportionately greater number
of liquidations.
The
time in business recorded by most
reasons for liquidation
coupled with the
survey
the
compiled by
support the findings
redevelopment authority
firms
of other studies
that a difficult problem exists in the displacement of firms
operated by
in
Particular problcms arise
elderly businessmen.
financing the move and in the physical
stamina required to make
due
the move
to
and emotional
the age of the
displacee.
It would appear that although a portion of the dislocated
firms
the liquidate firms are undoubtedly marginal in
and
character,
firms
the majority are
Many of
not.
rents
pay average and above average
their numbers are
not confined
fly-by-night operations
and
probability
the
considerable length of
conclusion
the fact
cannot be
time.
that the businesses are
and in all
have been in business a
One is
that the high rate of
associated
for it would appear
the relocated firms
liquidated firms,
In
the high liquidation.rates
normally typical of new businesses
that many, if not most of
for displacees and
lower size categories.
to
addition, the high liquidation rates
with
the liquidated
therefore
led to
discontinuances is
forcibly displaced.
the
due
to
Thus
87
to dismiss the
attempts
supposition
"normal", due to the
as
losses
and high turnover
of a high number of marginal businesses
ratescannot be accepted.
The firms
that were successful in relocating were
improve the physical conditions under
generally able to
which they
of activities,
layout
and the methods of handling merchandise
Improvements in parking con-
were generally seen to improve.
ditions
that
also imply a lessening of congestion and
Many
the move.
accompanied
the retail firms were
of
service firms were generally
the
the above
complacent.
conclusions
implications of the
findings
They are negative because
the
owners
and employees,
and
considered
important,
the
the
losses
city must be
and that
to
of
the firms,
real concern
the present relocation
program cannot be
considered successful until the losses
further reduced.
On the positive side,
the majority
of
the
more than previously
counselling
firms have
thought,
then
are both negative and
positive.
and
comments.
favorable
considered valid,
may be
the
and
Wholesalers
registered particularly
manufacturing firms
and
of improvement
disgruntled and expressed low levels
If
an increase in costs
firms noted
Most
the city.
crowding in
in individual distribu-
improvement
suggesting an
tion practices,
conditions
to the business were also noted;
and access
that besides
space and
the working
General business,
operate.
the
are
data suggests that
considerable vitality, much
and this
services and technical
suggests
that
assistance, if
aid,
properly
88
applied,
could have a considerable impact.
89
FOOTNOTES
THE FIRMS
IMPACT ON
Betty Churchill, "Recent Business Population Movements,"
of Current Business, (January, 1954) pp. 11-16.
Survey
2
The Failure Record, pp.
3Study
of
10-13.
Compensation and Assistance, p.
30.
4
Hearings Before the Subcommittee No. 5 of the Select
Committee on Small Business (Washington, 1965), pp. 41-42.
5
Appendix, p.
91.
6
Area
The Displacement of Small Business from a Slum Clearance
(Baltimore Urban Renewal and Housing Agency, 1958), p. 3.
7
Hearings, p.
43.
8
Appendix, p.
1.
9
Appendix, p.
68.
10Appendix, p.
45.
1
Appendix, pp.
60,
1 2
Appendix, pp.
46.
13
Appendix, pp.
62,
1 4
Appendix, p.
15
W.
16
Appendix, pp.
N.
65,
70,
75,
80
67,
72,
77,
82,
Kinnard, Statement,
pp.
3-5.
and 85.
91.
117-123.
and 87.
CHAPTER VI
IMPACT ON THE CITY
The discussion
complement
to
follows
the discussion of
encountered by
sequences of
that
the
serves as
a necessary
the problems and
individual firms and
forced dislocation.
difficulties
the resulting
Business
con-
dislocation has
generally been considered a "side-effect" of the renewal
program and quite often reduced
to getting
is
simply
the "real"
a submission
outside the
to move
to
to question the
in
the
After all more land
form of
the
sufficiently large
have
Conversely,
has
services
therefore becomes pertinent
It
city.
to
of the
Is
dislocations
the magnitude
cause concern?
the dislocations
accelerated the general decline
city?
that allows
for housing and
importance of the impact
the economic impact -
the
load
local community action groups who work
socio-economic fabric of
of displacement
to or
the dislocation
It can also take the
forward.
to be created somehow.
on the
Most of
area and are thus more vocal about housing needs
than employment.
is
done.
the status of an impediment
determined on a project ad hoc basis
the project
has
job
to
and loss
What
contributed
of employment
the decline affected ease of
dislocation and relocation?
The redevelopment authority estimates that
percent
be
of city employment,
of
four
excluding government workers, will
affected by dislocation within
Different values
about
the
course reflect the
next five years.
impact on different
91
employment
sectors
the service
areas
to be
for
about
and if
the
the
by that
From the
in the city will have been moved
and
6.9%
Nearly 5000 retail
respectively,
jobs
of all wholesale
analysis of the relocation load
firm was smaller
expect,
classifications
firms,
really be placed
and
thus as
the six major business
a group
type
to which we have previously referred.
of the group
firms are impressive.
24.2%
Therefore, as
the dislocated firms must
even as percentages
of displaced
taken under
that the typical
than the norm.
form subcategories within
quarter,
displace-
are correct then over 10%
in a subcategory by size among all
However,
one-half per-
cumulative magnitude of
consideration earlier, it was apparent
they
jobs
industrial
jobs can also be included.2
and service
one would
all
of all retail employment will have been displaced
time and 5.7%
dislocated
1.8%
The manufacturing sector
About four and
above estimates
all manufacturing jobs
over 11%
small amount,
8% of
between the years 1958 and 1972.
or
is heavy in
and retail trade jobs will be affected. 1
conceal
These. figures
ment
occur there.
directly affected.
cent of wholesale
of
to
to be the hardest hit
are
since the city
and a relatively
of displacement is
is
especially
25.3%
the numbers
By 1972 nearly one-
of all the manufacturing
over one-quarter
totals,
of all the retail
firms
and slightly
establishments
92
15%
Approximately
city will have been displaced.
within the
services will
also
truly belong in subcategories,
even
of the wholesale firms and of the
have been affected. 3
That the
as
a group,
firms
can be readily realized from the following
excerpt from a Boston Redevelopment Authority report.
tract study
census
area which, by
the 1960
a 50% non-white population.
at least
characteristic in this
is
issue,
impact of dislocation on a 15
the
The report examined
the
the
The distinguishing
beyond a minority racial
apparently high number
provided by
that are
case,
census, had
firms yet
of low skilled jobs
to be displaced
fact quite consistent with the low rental
-
a
structure men-
tioned previously.
Boston Redevelopment Authority records
indicate that during the period of
1966 through 1972, 13.5% of all the
manufacturing firms in the city will
face relocation due to some form of
Among the types of
public action.
firms most heavily affected will be
apparel (22.3% of all of these firms
in the city), and textile (17.3% of
all of these firms in the city) and
leather (18.9% of all of these firms
These three manuin the city).
facturing operations employ about 35%
of all the residents of the 15 tracts
employed in manufacturing, or about
labor force of the
10% of the total
area.4
The
full treatment of
the
consequences
ment by such subcategories is beyond
thesis,
but the above
report
the
of displace-
scope of
this
does suggest a fruitful area
93
study of
for the
the
impact on minority groups,
The
impact of the
discontinuances
the displacees have
on
available on approximately one-third
it is
5
only about ten percent of
that
the
to
bility
total losses
exceeded one
concede that the majority of
forced displacement,
that most firms
that
This means
liquidation
500
jobs,
to
the estimated number of
"normal"
liquidated
the firms
there
circumstances.
proba-
existed a high
could have continued indefinitely,
rate might be a few percent
10%.
have indicated
thousand jobs.
then a reasonable assumption for a "normal"
say
remainder
fall within this no
firms
jobs ,that would have been lost under
due
of the liquidated
Other studies
From this value must be subtracted
If we
the
thus it would seem reasonable
employee category and
assume
the
to
figures are
unknown what percentage of the
actually employed no persons.
then
Since
and including 1961.
However, employment
firms.
to
and jobs due
are known to have been lost due
about 890 jobs
firms;
to work.
only be partially
on displacement can
only been available since
demise of 322
firms
the
loss of
Employment figures
estimated.
journey
and the
residence relationships,
in work place -
changes
and retraining programs,
losses
employment
above
the national norm -
that fifty percent,
rate of approximately 20%,
could be said to be due
liquidation
to
of
one-half
the
1961-7
the
total losses,
liquidations
as
a
94
consequence of
The estimated job
displaced.
then about
of the displacees is
continuances
loss due
The job
displacement.
to
losses
firms
1820
The
to dis-
about
610 and
for
assumptions
of
the
characteristics
the
liquidation rate is
in
changes
are
value
that
that
would appear
later
point
Other
in
part of
the
employment losses
displacement and during the
the dispersal of
of
the
city.
The
assumption is
it
causing a
An evaluation of
changes
has been postponed
firms
first
due
to
to business
the relocation process.
on displacement,
losses due
corporate boundaries
beyond the
of these possibilities has
results
experienced
Among
losses after
adjustment period, and
been discussed and the survey
firms
than those
through
losses in employees
to
therefore,
a
chapter.
termination are possible
are
be
there will
that
and
of market
this
and
It is known that the
estimate than might occur.
the possible effects
However,
subject to market changes
of manufacturing firms;
this
the
and that
firms will not change.
the
larger
be slightly
higher percentage
these
latter
firm characteristics.
firms will
a
tbe
1280.
for a total of
percent liquidation rate will be maintained
twenty
higher
jobs/firm
scheduled for displacement an additional
are
jobs may be expected
of 580
loss
.32
date due
continuances on displacement would then be
since
the dis-
to
already
suggested that
changes
although
in employment
a majority of
the
displacement,
the overall balance did not appear
to be
on
95
third possibility- probably accounts
The
disturbed.
to
greater losses
than all
the city
businesses
that relocated about
Most firms
relocate with a
they were
which
with less
losses
value will be
as
labor
that the
likely
then
published
firms
a percentage
left.
figures
for
the number
that were made
and
1961.
relocated since
that
em-
the 11.7%
of manufacturexpected
losses
to
due
earlier still
Using
total labor
is
tracting what might have been
force
the dispersal rate
1030 jobs have left
that about
There
other
for the firms whose
force is unknown, then an estimated
to displacement.
the
in the future.
the liquidated businesses
11.7%, we find
the
Un-
to assume
of displacement is
the same assumptions
of
to leave
that a greater
likely that higher volume of
8,850 was
larger firms,
firms
reasonable
a minimum and since
of
due
find
of the manufacturing
to dispersal may be expected
for
those
that
due to dispersal estimated using
increase, it is
hold
the city.
outside
found
and be most
but it seems
classifications,
If
the
and the manufacturing industries,
the BRA has not
fortunately
firms
all
from the area from
mile
Zimmer
It is not surprising to
percentage, 13.5%
ing
went
thus we would expect
would make the longer moves
ployee
that of
dependence on a localized market tended to move
likely wholesalers
city.
11.7%
to
dislocated.6
the farthest and
most
discontinuances.
the
redevelopment authority found
The
for
the city
an additional problem of suba "normal" rate of departure
96
but the value is unknown and for the
of displacees is
then about
total employment
loss
is about
and
additional
of
2410.
value due
of
.65
to the
double that due to
the
if we include
loss
argument
departure
to the
jobs/firm displaced.
city
The
to date through dispersal
discontinuances,
at 1230 jobs,
scheduled for displacement
firms
noted above
an
for a total
1180 jobs may be expected
of
As was
loss due
The job
it is assumed negligible.
purposes of
this is probably a minimum
changed type
to the expected increased size and
firm displaced.
The impact of employment losses
different
varies
sectors
for about
retail trades,
losses
for
individual
of
50%
the city's
of
all
and dislocation on
economic base undoubtedly
the jobs
lost were in
but it is difficult enough
the city as
sectors.
the
evaluate
to
a whole and even more
so for
the
Fluctuations in employment have
occurred and generally have been in decline in the city
all categories except the
1965
increased by about 16
Wholesale
retail
services which between 1958 and
% or approximately
trade industries lost
trade industries
5,100 jobs
lost about
or
2,100 jobs
the total retail labor force between
largest decrease among the
for
1958 and
8,400 jobs. 7
about 11%
or
2.8%
1965.
four major categories was
the manufacturing industries with
a loss
to a reduction of over 12,300 jobs.
of
13.5%
The heavy
and
of
The
for
equivalent
gains
apparent
97
three
disloction, the
the
other three
to
reas6nable
this category
services
therefore seems
It
subtract
on the services,
from the employment
14%
for but
accounted
sectors over 70%,
ignore the impact
a total and accept
the other
in
through discontinuances
lost
Of all the jobs
sectors.
via forced
and
the trend
service sector thus distort
in the
for the city
figures
as
that will
the slight statistical error
occur.
Employment for Boston,
declined from 315,500
10,500 jobs.
of about
in
less services
and government,
An estimated 840
jobs were
between 1958 and
the dislocations
years
is
1966-67
and thus
approximately
period.
for that
and loss
of
of
employment occurred in the
the estimated
1530 jobs
and 18%
Between 16
1967.
lost
terminations
through forced dislocation by either business
or departures
for a loss
1958 to 305,000 in 1965
or about
loss
of decline has been significantly affected by
'65
decline noted
145 of the
be concluded
It can hardly
'58 -
for
that
the rate
the activities
of the renewal authorities.
The
third possibility
for
employment loss
during the adjustment period and
relocation.
the
In order
after
"successful"
to get some idea of the magnitude of
changes.information was
changes
the time
or gain occurs
requested
through the survey
in employment after relocation.
firms
are in a different stage
after
the move, because the
Even though
of development
and
on
the
adjustment
time period between the move
and
98
questionnaire varies,
time of
the
the
the end of
Approximately 85%
labor force
of 25%
or approximately
after relocation and of
adopted
relocations
remaining
the
for
by about eighty-five employees
from 1958
departures
is
to 1967
again
and from this must
10%
for unsuccessful
from the
The
city.
then have an estimated labor
75%
Thus after a period of
it would appear that
due
estimated that -total
about 470 employees or about
through liquidation.
the losses
is
somewhat arbitrary
1160 firms would
three years
face
It
1480 firms relocated
and 11.7%
force increase of
lost
increased.
.41 employees/relocated firm. 9
then about
subtracted
these
remained the same and the
the same period of- time
If
be
58%
exceeded total losses
gains
ficms volunteered
of the 238 survey
lost employees,
17%
observers
8
information on employee changes
about
should be
time period most
the
the most critical.
to be
feel
and thus
time since displacement
average
two years -
about
fairly sym-
balanced about the year 1964,
metrical, i.e.,
presumably
are
returns
and secondly that the
after 1960
favor.
the respondents were relocated
of
98%
over
that
is
The first
things are in our
Two
the information.
consider
still helpful to
it is
of those
two to
a significant portion of
to discontinuances had been recouped.
In the
of general decline of employment in Boston this would
appear
to be a fairly favorable
may be biased by
situation but
the greater number
of
this
conclusion
survey respondents,
99
recent upturn in business
the
liquidation rate and
consequently a higher growth rate among
growth rate be
city lost
than were lost
thought
to
expected
of
was
acquired a known, six
of floor
fore
from
to the
the question arises
million square feet of
as
be needed in the
space.
Thus
to
of all
might be
city
and there6.5
found. 1 0
seven million square feet will
next five years it is
attempt
10%
liquidated and
to where the remaining
discontinuance rate
of businesses
that
22%
About
feet.
departed from the
an academic question, for the
cause the
total
since 1958
required relocation space was
additional six to
Since an
square
million
that
the
then
acquired from firms
firms
space
size of about
not available
exceed eight
the space was
another 12%
the
through discontinuances.
information as
displacees
atypical of
jobs through departures
twice as many
and one-half million square feet
the
the
In addition, it should be remembered
The redevelopment authority has
and since
the
so might
to be atypical,
only short-term and thus
situation.
the
that
firms
Furthermore, just as
to discontinuances.
due
business upturn is
that
those
to relocate may be only offsetting increased
did manage
general
The upturn has
activity.
been accompanied by a rise in the
losses
during
that have been displaced
firms,
especially service
neither a trivial nor
absence of this
to rise and
to leave
the city
space
could
greater numbers
in search of
the possibility of increasing economic and
100
found.
cannot be
space
of real estate
There is quite a natural turnover
and building space within any
and created.
destroyed
use
replaced and added
It is
ing programs.
in the
changes
or
time.
Furthermore,
form
work.
The
firms
far below the
This means that
space.
these
firms
is
through
by
firms
short of
ft.
$3.00/sq.
is
if space
changes
needs of dislocated
real estate
the
that
the service industries,
paid
for new industrial
to become available to
construction of new space
can afford it who
space to other
land for
firms through
the
the "trickling
that Boston has
service
first
older and
been
commercial and industrial building.
exception to this has been in the
The
that can be occupied
then release
However, most concede
frame-
and their rent
it must generally come via two methods.
less desirable
process".
total
the exception of
and build-
any given period of
the relocation space
to
efforts
to keep track of
and type of space that
are smaller than normal
$2.50
from active
through redevelopment
a submarket within this
is, with
structure
to
a near impossibility
quantities
owners
firms
and relocating.
city clearance
destroyed and rebuilt over
is
the number of
are removed
Buildings
and private and
through fires,
and are
to
also several ways by which space is
there are
Likewise
city due
anew, discontinuing,
establishing
flrms
the necessary
city may.occur if
to the
losses
employment
chronically
The
industries where
one
101
of new space have been constructed
heavy amounts
available to the
The other
professionals and business services.
the past -
or departing from the
firms either
continue at
to
volume, by
the number of
six years,
once
quo
apparently
1961
or
activity in the city
very
the last
close
to the number
thus
96 firms
the Boston economy.
and
is
net
since 1958 there
and
of
the
is
displacements
since
employment losses have
has
This
loss
a loss
of
been
and retail
firms in each sector
a loss of
about
83 firms per year, respectively.11
to be relocated is
about one-third
trade
of employment has
adjusted number of manufacturing firms
losses.
that assume
five years.
also been generally matched by
and
for the next
and departures,
liquidations
occurred in the manufacturing, wholesale
of
estimated
to be displaced
As has been previously noted,
sectors
The
relocatees.
corrections have been made
regards
as
can establish
sufficient to keep pace
a rate
firms
operations
terminating
city faster than others
with the number of estimated
status
an undiminishing volume
on
the decline of commercial
Thus
would have
"method" utilized
through the
that of depending
of space to be vacated by
anew.
of potential
possibility that space needs
relocatees will be met is
in
been
this process has
available through
space made
the
a fair amount of
and it may be assumed that
rise buildings
in high-
74
The estimated
that has been
to one-half of
The number of wholesale firms
firms,
as
or
these
a percentage
102
of net
loss varies between one-qu.arter and one-third and
between approximately
for retail firms
again
and
of space
The decline of
it is
the size
the
three
is
1951 and probably previous
However,
were eliminated during
the
is
or reserves
the demands
to
that
and
important -
on this space have
not been small for about five million square
which occurred prior
not
sectors under consideration
of the backlog
also unknown.
the quantity
for space and thus
to relocatee needs.
goes back to
therefore
once
the reader
opened up through this process
that is
necessarily suitable
actually
demand
type of
the
remind
represent but a subsector
loads
that the relocation
by volume
to
appropriate
It seems
quarters.
three
and
two-thirds
that
feet of space
construction of the
Central Artery
an additional
121 businesses
to 1958 and
were relocated from the New York Streets renewal project
for which data was not
of
The decline
has
not been
thus
term trends.
are at
If
including the
the
liquidation
be more noticeable
generally
entered a prosperous
long-
that have been made
then a corresponding upward
rates
for the
is
It is
probably atypical of
above assumptions
least partly correct
swing in the
services.
then the nation has
upturn is
the
1 2
for in 1964 a definite upswing
evident in all sectors
period and
study.
commercial and industrial businesses
constant
conceeded that since
available for this
should occur that would probably
retail
and service
firms
than the
103
lag behind the
and which would
others
economy.
lows
in 1958 to
in 1961 and 1962,
a period of heavy volume and
after
In
1966
it
is
the rate
climbs and in the
when it
drops sharply due to
firms.
However,
their
that this
been rising but
The rates
1962 and
the rate
sharply in
The
steady until 1965-66
of the
types
two
liquidation rates have
obscured if both
is
fact
the
in 1962 and
of
actually
are
rate for 1967
generally trends
and then
is
up sharply but
The
downward
Although
1965 to
from 1958
rate for
to 1961 and
displacement
are
far from being
rises
again
conclusive,
do present a fairly sympathetic
reaction to both an increase in volume and
in the economy.
load
1967.13
the comparisons
the discontinuance rates
steady
on a very
discontinuance
after a period of heavy
with highs from
are generally
after the heavy displacement
of displacements.
retail firms
firms
for manufacturing
but do increase slightly
1962
for
one.
examined as
low volume
1967
an absence of personal service
separate examination
reveals
service firms
quarter of
quarter of 1967.
firms is
rate for service
just
low in 1965.
to
and then it drops
up again in the first
discontinuance
first
did not really begin until
is generally low until 1964-65
and is
then falls
from
then rises
sizeable dislocations
Any
up quite sharply.
wholesale firms
1966
firms drops
The discontinuance rate for all
early highs
in the
upward swing
The reactions
the upward swing
tend to lag behind the period
104
of heavy
for
the upswing
loads and
retail and service
also most noticeable
an.d are
firms.
that dislocation
we have found
In conclusion then,
activities have affected a surprisingly high percentage of
retail
trade
fifteen percent of the whole-
establishments and
and
the manufacturing
industries
with lower skills
than is
over one employed person
affected by
the
involved, hire more persons
in ten in the
is estimated
-By 1972,
have reached totals
estimated
to be
job
However, it
the
departures of firms
about
jobs per
.65
losses under
employment
-should
the job
losses due
and about
loss to
that after
firm
present and
from discontinuances
appeared
dis-
due to
persons per firm and
for a total
three years a majority of
losses
and market conditions
of 1,280
to departures
3,680 jobs.
ghetto areas will be
the job
city through
the
past relocation practices
of
.32
about
lost to
to outlying areas
2400 due
the city,
displacements.
continuances averages
displaced.
the rest of
typical for
It has been estimated that
number of jobs
and particularly
the firms
Furthermore, because
affected,
in Boston will have been
of all employees
eleven percent
between six
types of firms,
that for the different
estimated
it is-
firm however,
typical
than the
the
Because
salers have been or will be displaced by 1972.
displacees are smaller
the
Twenty-five percent of
community.
the total business
two
the
city
to
to discontinuances
105
had
been made up by growth in the
renewal areas might
compensate for dislocation
further
due to
Although job losses
losses.
negative,
the
favorable
results.
The
total renewal process
factor in
relocation may be
could have positive,
or of terminations
rate of departure
activities for the
space vacated through
appears to provide the bulk of relocation
available is
The rate at which space becomes
and thus
general business activities
business activity
available
and thus
lowers
the
appears
number
of discontinuances
timing
of the relocation
the amount
of business
gpparently a critical
a whole is
city as
successful relocation for the
such activities
appear
created within the
An unknown number of new jobs
firms.
space.
surviving, relocated
to
rate
an upswing in general
at which space becomes
result in an increase in
among dislocatees.
load and
Thus
influencing the
the
the
the magnitude of it,
of absorptive pressure placed
to be variables
due to
i.e.,
upon the market,
discontinuance rate.
1o6
FOOTNOTES
IMPACT ON THE CITY
lndustrial
Relocation,
Commercial Business
and
Table II.
2
are minimums as
unknown number
The totals
Note:
Appendix, p. 36.
zero or an
employed
one-third of all firms
of persons.
3
Appendix, p.
4
A.
Labor Force
of
Olins,
M.
Characteristics
Appendix, p.
6
Olins,
of
Boston's
p.
6-7.
Table IV; James
H.
Saalberg, A Study
50.
p. A-ll,
Dislocation
(Cambridge, 1959) pp.
7
Trends
and
Section D,
(Boston, 1967),
5
Business
36.
Caused by
59-63;
Olins, p. Al-A3.
the
Boston
and Zimmer,
Note:
p.
Central Artery
116.
Additional unpublished data
was also obtained through the aid of the Division of Employment Security of Massachusetts, Boston, Massachusetts.
8
9
10
Kinnard, Statement, p.
33.
180-110.
Appendix, pp.
Appendix, p.
3, also Appendix, p.
37.
1 1
Unpublished data,
Boston, Massachusetts.
Division
of
Employment
1 2
Security,
The amount of space that was
Saalberg, pp. 31-39.
occupied by the displacees was estimated from the data
supplied on the number of firms and employees.
1 3
Appendix, pp.
63,
68,
73,
78,
83 and
88.
CHAPTER VII
RELOCATION PROGRAM
services are
Three different types of
to firms
made
is
the reimbursements and grants
loan program
that was
The
dislocation.
of
by
administered
and
the
a disaster
is
second
Small Business Administration
the
that suffered
to aid businesses
originally set up
that are
and moving expenses
to cover property losses
general hardships
The
the urban renewal program.
dislocated under
of these
first
available
commonly
extended
economic injury due to natural disasters and which was
is
by
technical and managerial
non-cash benefits that may include
far
to Boston firms
four hundred dollars per
specifications
as
Due
$1000.
received under
expenses
thereafter.
varies with the
one might expect
size and
the
type of
$500 and
firms
the median is
about
under
$1000 whereas
for two to
between .000
and $1500
and
43%
all
in 1958-60
For
of
these
three persons
receive
losses
to around
the median payment
firm.
70%
and how much
for property
rose' from about $500
As
of
somewhat more liberalized
to
could be paid, the median disbursement
and moving
45%
could be compensated,
to what
thirty-
of about
However, about
firm.
4.7 million
totaled over
and 1967 with an average
dollars between 1958
$1500
been
the first has
the most useful and effective.
Reimbursements
firms
types,
service
Of the three
assistance.
type of service
third
The
to-cover displaced businesses.
one-person
firms
receive
the median lies
less than
$1000.
The
io8
any
firms
the largest
type of firm with a minimum median for
the smaller
and for
of between $1-1500
firms
$5000 for
firms run
to manufacturing
Disbursements
for
to over
and increases
$3000
is
larger.
are
that
to
$2500
about
to seven person firms
four to five and six
for
median
In contrast to
25,000.
this
is
larger between
the
$10-
the minimum median for the
about
$500
and the
maximum exceeds
smaller
service firms
$2500.
Retail and wholesale trade minimum and maximum
medians
range between these two extremes with
to the wholesale
firms
running larger than those
are generally
steady over
for retail.
expenses and property
for moving
The median payments
losses
the payments
time after
about
1961-62,
with the exception of the manufacturing industries, where
the
is definitely upward -
trend of the payments
of upward trend in the size
expression
Compensation to
provisions
of
of the
an apparent
displacees.
displacees has increased, however, under the
the Small Business Displacement Payment grant
program.
Average amounts of
total payments
and loss,
compensation for expenses
increased for
all types of
wholesalers..
SBDP payments
been made
1964
and
facturing
to
about
45
to
and
firms with
48%
that includes both
the grants,
the exception of
to retail and service
of
the
have
the
firms have
firms'displaced since
about one-third of the wholesale trade and manufirms
have been covered
under the
program.
109
total payments
Average
and
low extremes, ranges
the
trend is
averages range
the
crease
in payments
the manufacturing
to
firm.
$4,200 per
of course
enhanced by SBDP
also
An in-
industries was
the normal compensation program and
noted under
is
to
trend is
establishments where
to retail trade
from $900
firm and
$2,700 per
An upward
definitely upward.
apparent in payments
to
from $500
the high
excluding
to service-firms,
this
trend
grants.
The reader will recall that displaced businesses that
meet certain requirements, particularly
have
totaled over $1,500,
before
taxes
and average
annual net
and including certain wages,
did not exceed a maximum of
or sales must
receipts
firms gross
that specify that the
income limitations
salaries,
$10,000, are eligible
time spent
of employment due
in adjusting
the
of good will, and
a new location or
to
the'author's
costs
loss
knowledge, this particular
law that provides additional
displaced businesses had
House
loss
to a forced discontinuance.
the best of
section of
for receipt
income and profits, monies and
incidental to moving,
generally incurred
To
of
etc.,
This grant was
of a Small Business Displacement Payment.
intended to cover loss
income
compensation to
its origin in a subcommittee of
Committee on Public Works
and was originally
a fixed payment in lieu of reimbursement
The displaced person would have the
the
seen as
for actual expenses.2
option of
accepting the
110
payment which would be equal to
earnings
over a
two year period
returns pertinent
$5,000,
was
whichever
about
less,
tax
Disbursement payments to
that period.
indicate that
firms
Boston
to
or
established by income
to be
the earnings were
and
average annual net
the
of
85%
for moving expenses
received
all firms
and property
losses and
less
than $5000
thus
the adoption of such a procedure would have simplified
immeasurably
is not
the claims process
and supposedly eliminated
receive
losses,
the
long delays in requesting and
that qualify are now eligible
firms
$2,500 in addition
to moving expenses
the payment on the basis of
net
is somewhat
is,
the original proponent
and property
annual income and
Just how simple and
tax return verification was retained.
fast the process
or
Although the fixed payment option was
not introduced and the
to
determining what is
obtaining of three qualified bidders,
compensable, the
receiving payments.
of
questionable and although
of the plan
felt that:
This payment could be made to a displaced business concern within a
week from the time of a move, with
a minimum of red tape and administra.3
tive expense.
the fact
of
remains
these claims
bursements
on quicker,
over
that for
over 60%
of
took over four months
for moving
expenses,
for only 45%
four months!4
of
the
-
firms,
the
once filed,
the firms
the processing
request
for dis-
have been acted
experienced delays
It is unknown whether governmental
ill
administrative expenses are
the payments
after
average
The use of the
to determine the
the grant after
to be
proved
of the Boston
the money became availto the size
type of firm that has experienced the greatest difficulties
and
in relocation.
5
If
ranked according
the top
receiving
eight
that
sixty and
receive
for number of
the highest percentage values
Seventy-six percent of
employed
less
percent employed less
persons and
over three
firm, the
liquidation rates
than those firms
all liquidation rate was
or 15%
as
compared to
firms
all sizes
Those firms
and
tended to be
generally
that
did not
in those
By size
ranged two-thirds
payments and
one-half that of
of
over one-
liquidation rates.
receiving the
30%.
firms
than eight, whereas only
the payments were generally larger with
business categories with lower
or less
the
than four persons
respectively, of
eighty percent,
employing
five
among those
categories would also be
fell into those size limitations.
firms
half
types of businesses were
to the percentage of discontinuances,
received SBDP's
ninety-two
twenty-two
the
receiving the SBDP's.
of
two-fifths
limitation
the payments generally conformed nicely
able and
of
firms.
the grants has
Approximately
displ-acees received
the
annual net earning
recipients of
successful.
quite
exceeded four
the move was made has
for over three-quarters of
months
to receive
actual time
The
less.
the over-
the SBDP recipients
112
and
fairly
compensated for
they
costs
curred in the behalf of the public's
the
loss
of income prior to
feel they have ininterest.
Besides
relocation, the businesses
incur remodeling, renovation, and alteration costs
preparation of newly acquired space.
the actual
liberally
that they should be quite
Most businessmen feel
To
in the
this must be added
cost of moving equipment and inventory,
adver-
the new location, legal
fees for
the leasing or purchas-
ing of new space and a variety
of other
incidentals.
tising
Compensation is not paid
for
a new location,
about
of
for time
a task that took over six months
one half of the relocatees,
time
lost or.spent in searching
in preparation
nor is
it paid
for
for loss
of the move or the period of time
the move.
The
determina-
the business
is inoperable due to
tion of what
can be compensated, even under the area of
property
loss
and the movement of goods,
seemingly arbitrary and requires
the displacee
and the relocation
The trouble
One of these
is
department.
individual firms
that
of building space, a wide variety
and the process
the management had developed to
bureaucracy.
good communication between
the uniqueness of the
different equipment used,
problem area is
sometimes
seems to stem from several different sources.
may involve different kinds
of
is
and means
facilitate the move.
the usual infirmities
that
Another
that surround a
The plaintive cries of red
tape, unreasonable
113
delays,
politics
and even corruption, abound.6
problem can probably be
some of
attributed to the
experience
may
costs and
the problem can be attributed
appear
competency of
lack of business
and an understandable unwillingness
responsibility for moving
of
their
the relocation officials,
to be
than to hire
now has,
and
goods
cheaper
the status quo
in the new store. He
the
move and thus
the problem arises
improvement.
The
problem, that
of
as
However,
the law
allow
the
a consequence of
to what
specific
new shelving
complaints off
the
constitutes an
simple correction of this one
the substitution of
that he
dismantling process,
and will not
improve his property as
would probably take a lot of
to need
the wooden ones
to have them reinstalled.
businessman to
is going
For
and quite correctly
considerable damage in
to maintain
law.
the
to buy new metal shelving
carpenters to tear up
incur
then pay
attempts
that he
the different alternatives
that it would be
for what
the business-
an entirely reasonable action to
shelving on which to display his
finds
Another part
expenses.
man may not necessarily be compensible under
analyzes
to assume
to the law itself
instance, a retail merchant finds
the
Part of
for old,
the relocation
specialists desk.
Some of the problems
as
the question of the
finds
of compensibility
shelves.
What
suitable building space that has
about
are not so simple
the firm that
insufficient
power
114
distribution facilities?
requires secure
structure -
is
and vibration free attachment
structural reinforcement and
mounting compensible?
raised in
What about a neavy machine
The ire
a couple
of
cost of
of the businessman is
an all too often unsuccessful attempt
and "reasonable" answers.
the
to
the
that
soon
to get
fast
The problem was illustrated by
survey respondents:
Once we spoke to. the head of the section
that we were dealing with, the service we
got was satisfactory but we did feel that
the amount of manpower used in surveys,
etc., etc., was about three times more
than necessary (to the chagrin of the
author)
We also felt that the rigidity with which
they were held to cost fund formulae
In other
was, in many cases, ridiculous.
words if you had direct current motors
in your present building, which they would
replace, but you were going to alternating
current, they could not give you alternating
current motors.
We bought new materials
which they would not authorize, so we spent
more money moving old stuff which was not as
satisfactory as the new stuff would have been.
The process
also acts
to
undermine any meaningful
communication that may have developed between the
and
the businessman
authority
-
could have
Probably the best thing that
happened to us was to be forced to move we should have done this years ago... In the
area of our claim for moving expenses one
inspector, let's say the first, paints a
rosy picture about all they will pay for.
Each succeeding one you meet chops away at
what you thought was coming to you and at
the same time adds to the requirements
(paper work, bid qualifications, etc.) to
115
I
get what he thinks is "compensible".
am convinced that this is a planned,
systematic way of discouraging the
small business man from pressing and
coming to
rightfully
pursuing what is
I could go on for an hour........
him.
The problems
are not
confined to remodeling
alteration phase of the move.
In order to validate
of
the move the authority requires
be
obtained for
found that
posed by
are willing
the
that three
This means
the job.
and
the cost
qualified bids
that movers must be
to work within
the
limitations
im-
estimate the costs
system and are willing to
of the move:
(I suggest that you....) eliminate red tape
and the delay in checking outside movers.
The red tape and up to six months it requires
for the Redevelopment to compensate the outside truckers had made all small efficient
truckers refuse to bid on Redevelopment jobs
and left them in the hands of the bigger and
generally more expensive truckers, who can
afford to wait six months before their bills
can be paid.
Another business man had problems
of a slightly different
nature:
Besides the normal traumatic experiences of
moving a business one must contend with a
certain amount of hocus pocus in the BRA
business relocation office, particularly
within the appraisal area, where the decision
of one individual, can cause great anguish
if his assessment of the moving situation
differs from that of your three qualified
bidders.
The
complaints of
A heavy volume of moves
the businessmen are not
is
handled by
about
unfounded.
six or seven moving
-----------
116
and some of the businesses
(hard data unavailable)
firms
are unwilling to
accept the services
feel would be
whose work they
of
that about two-fifths
of the lowest bidder
Survey data indicated
shoddy.
firms experienced what they
the
expenses.
claims
for expenses were in processing by
authorities
four months
for
The survey firms
been able to
the
firms'
the renewal
or more.
were asked whether they would have
remain in business if they had not been reimbursed
-for moving expenses,
in an effort to
the businessmen thought
moral obligation of
determine of what value
the payments were beyond
the government
to pay
for
the
that
firms,
larger payments,
as a group received
felt th'at fewer would have been able
without
the payment
that as
firms,
ly felt
than any other
to remain in business
only
twenty percent
the service
of
and
their
"successful" relocation to
third
of the wholesale
general-
to remain in business
percent of
firms
conclusion.
Also,
group.
that they would have been able
Forty-two
generally
the smallest payments,
a group received
without assistance.
to the
the manufacturing
Thus
the payment received.
simple
renewal costs.
results generally correlate by type of business
median size of
same
of
Approximately two-fifths
moving
The
for
to be excessive delays in receiving reimbursements
felt
the manufacturing
the service firms
the disbursements.
attributed
About
and retail trade businesses reached
Even though the estimates
of
onethe
these businessmen
117
would appear
because of
are able to remain in business
that they
they believe
that
these payments.
8
the
loss
did not
the
also
qualifying
and
for
Those
loans,
the
for other
reasons.
as
72%
the usual
firms
of the
firms
an increase in the
to seven persons had rates
those
in the eight
the usual
rentals revealed
liquidation rates
than
Unrenunerated
of 28%
versus
A check on the
that in the
this
choose to
under four persons
that for
lowest
for
versus.
the smaller
the typical
accompanied by
six
firms employing
the usual 20%
to nineteen category had
11 percent.
course,
smaller than normal with
an increase in size was
rate.
"unknowns"
that were denied payments
the same or lower
firm but
as
that did not
those
those
The
firms,
were excluded,
Unfortunately of
employing
sixty percent.
were about
reimbursed
"prior move-outs',
firm is
The unremunerated
and
took the option of not
that
firms
authority.
as well
funds
total number of
of the
that
firms
for moving expenses
among the remainder
apply for
those
the
therefore
and
that had to be classified
firms
by the redevelopment
still left
20%
about
checked.
also those
about
of
characteristics
receive reimbursements
property losses,
were
discontinuance rates
in reducing the
of jobs,
effect of
check on the
In an additional effort to
payments
still important
somewhat exaggerated, it is
to be
rates of
and
35%
versus
unremunerated firms by
category
the rate was 50%
118
and
of
increase the
does
the payment
for all firms
liquidation rate
increase in rentals,
paying under
firms
25
cent below
and
foot
the
For those
lower.
from
rate ranges
10 and
those
22%
and
locating and
that
than
about
30%
the least
conditions and
two
the liquidato six per-
or five
that might
to be
effect on reducing
for all firms far exceeds
least able to
all
liquid-
The percentage of discontinuances
category has the most
is
for
about
is
Somewhat surprisingly
this category.
category
this
50% higher
this and the most reasonable would seem
ation rates in
firms
service and manufacturing
There are several reasons
the payments have had
other;
rate is
for wholesalers
that
retail firms was
the norm.
for
this
accompanying an
about one-third whereas
about
is
times normal.
tion rate for
that
types
those
and one-half
account
trend
rate fluctuates between
reimbursed
are not
of
the middle rental categories
in
per square
liquidation rate for
The
firms
The
about one-fifth. 9
averages
that
the
$.75,
over
the absence
liquidation rate.
liquidation
to 50% with an average of
paying
for
$.75
respective
the
the unremunerated firm paying
but for
rentals, the
to
suggests
with no
fluctuates between 18 and 24%
the higher
17%,
and
of 40%
firms
for all
values
and when compared
19%
the highest
in
difficult
that
time in re-
improve the quality
location through relocation.
might be the more selective nature of
for any
of working
Another
the type
of
reason
retail firm
119
does
that
retail firms
third of
went unremunerated whereas
all wholesale firms
17%
Only about
not receive payments.
that suggested
the least
contradictory
the
service
affected by the payments.
that
the survey
that
time
had
that
firms had
thus
to
firms
con-
These
survey
the
should be
It should be remembered
"successfully"
a very high percentage of all
liquidated and
Also,
service and manu-
facturing firms went without reimbursements.
clusions are not necessarily
the
approximately one-
received no payment.
between one-fifth and one-quarter of the
results
of all
relocated and by
the retail
firms
a correlation is not particularly
valid.
displaced under
The inclusbn of businesses
aided programs
in a category eligible for disaster
available from the
that was
loans
adjust
federally
loans
Small Business Administration was
originally well conceived.
The
a step
displaced business
should have been valuable in assisting businesses
to
necessary
their new locations by providing the working capital
to
carry the business
the business
versions in
the new property,
and make con-
and by permitting it
replacements and to generally upgrade
Although the
assistance,
technical
through the adjustment period,
to expand or adjust
by allowing
equipment
to
traditional emphasis has been
the Administration is
and managerial services
to make
the business.
on financial
also empowered
as well.10
to provide
Ideally the
120
program would work as
and
ielated
one New Haven renewal official described
that the work of the business
was well supplemented by the SBA and
sent
to project offices.
...
in
He
that experts had been
concluded
Connecticut
the
relocation staff
that:
program
of
the
Small Business Administration is an
important, active service, out in the
field, selling itself to businessmen
who might otherwise be unaware of the
to them. 1 1
opportunities available
It is
unfortunate but
appear to be the
the New Haven experience would
exceptional rather than the
Between 1961 and 1964,
or over
about a three
typical experience.
year period,
the number of displaced business disaster loans was
small and
the nationwide average was
quarter.12
During hearings before
small businesses the
about
very
twenty-three per
a house subcommittee on
following conversation ensued between
Congressman Horton and SBA administrator Foley:
Mr. Horton...Now, I was wondering if, in
your experience, you find that you have
been able to save enough of these businesses
and whether or not it is your
recommendation that this
type of
program be expanded?
Mr. Foley...I cannot recommend expanding the
program until I get more information as to
the needs.
But again, we have made 396
loans under the present program, and of
those 396 I imagine that
at least
half
of
them have gone out of business, if not a
greater percentage.
Mr. Horton...I wonder if this is due to a
failure of promotion.
I am not criticizing
your agency, but - and you will certainly
agree with me - there are many instances in
which people are not aware of these programs.
I know that the urban renewal people are
doing their best to publicize it insofar as
their areas are concerned, but I wonder if
121
you would have a lot more applications
if more information were known about the
various programs.
Mr. Foley.. .That is very likely
true.
Mr. Horton...Are you satisfied with the
number of loans that have been made?
You seem to feel that this is a good
number.
Mr. Foley...I don't know, Mr. Horton.
I think one of the purposes these
hearings will serve is to give a
better picture of whether they are
meeting the need.
I just don't know.
We just have to have more information.
And we don't have that type of data. 1 3
Sometime after
supplement
the hearings
the activities
rendering assistance
SBA now sends
each
of the
SBA was
directed to
renewal authorities
firm a letter describing the
information as, to
of firm names,
type of business
addresses,
from the LPA.
conversation is revealing however, in that
three
years
aware
of the needs
of program operation the
that
was
To
program
is
acquainted with
the
available.
an SBA loan,
underutilized
a figure
because
so
of all Boston relocatees
that would
few have
suggest
taken
the long-term, below market interest rate monies
the firms
after
characteristics of the
to become
date approximately six percent
have received
The
SBA still had not become
of businessmen, the
displaced firm, or even bothered
the
assistance
above
data
in
to the displaced businessman and
available upon receiving lists
and
the
receiving the
loans
about
two-fifths
that the
advantage
available.
occupied
a
of
Of
122
floor area of less
quarter
of
employed less
all displacees
employ less
clude
than 3000
that
than
occupy less
than
four persons,
it
a lower discontinuance
one-half
of
than is
firms
out
of business
the
administration has
small
to which
rate of fifty
due
to the
the program, but
they had
and
that
maneuvering
many
that
if true,
through
financial leverage,
below market
borrow
besides
rate money and
at all.
The fact
suggesting
that
seldom found
in the
14
there
is
undoubtedly
SBA for promoting
to be made
some
red
tape.
that
reluctance
government
the hiring of lawyers
and
In addition,
not realize the benefits,
accrue through
the larger
SBA
go
that
the
borrowing
some are probably reluctant
that
the
loans
firms indeed.
categories.
the program, may
that could
a
estimate
suggests
is the qualification
the bureaucratic
although aware of
con-
then probably only among
interest
requires
to
likely to have
among small businessmen to borrow money from the
through a process
60%
certainly to
the loan program is
financial difficulties,
70%
are probably
the SBA makes
lower rental
lack of
there
firms
percent is
and
The under utilization of
partially
ft.
found a peculiar set of
in the
about
difficult
typical and
after relocation,
firms
Since
is not
to
about one-
The Administrator's
even upon forced displacement
very
only
that is more
rate.
the firms
liquidation
and
3000 sq.
the SBA is making loans
larger, atypical set of
A high
ft.
than four persons.
financially more sound
that
sq.
selectively
to
firms are borrowing,
picks
the
recipients,
123
suggests
also
the
that
larger firms
may have more agressive
and better informed management.
The SBA has adopted one policy that
to one-third
expansion possible upon relocation
space at
in
amount of
of the
floor
old location, the Small Business Administration,
the
an attempt to
has
By limiting the
firm.
the smaller the
regressive
ironically enough is
control flagrant misuse
actually is
adopted a policy that
of the loan program,
detrimental to the smaller
businesses.
nearly
The post-relocation survey data revealed that
firms increased in size over twenty-five percent
40%
of the
and
at least 32%
one-third and
two-fifths
excluded by the
from previous
decreased
fact
this
increased
statements that 65%
qualify
a floor
occupy
foot
For example,
1800 sq.
x 60'.
street
sq.
firms have been
It may be recalled
of all relocated
changes
a firm that
ft.*of
floor
However, only
ft.
either
firms
involved
and not necessarily one
occupies
space
6000
if it is
ft.
sq.
still to
This would provide a useable room of
area over 5000 sq.
1000
thus between
over twenty-five percent -
the heavy
for the loan.
30'
about
and
that a problem of geometry is
suggests
add only
relocated
expansion requirement.15
that may account for
may
of all
or increased in size
of decision.
over 50%
in size
ft.
or less.
about 20%
and
Thus,
nearly
of displacees
occupy
twice that many
a merchant with a twenty
frontage would be allowed to move
from a space
124
that is 20'
and
to one 25'
x 50'
therefore, even though
actual increase is
x 53'
The
the problem of finding a
so small that
amount of space may mean
even "usable"
increase in space may not be
a better
A
comprehensive critical evaluation of
exposure to
the
would re-
relocation process from
within that has not been available to
the author.
However,
are several points that can be fairly made as
extensiveness of
the
application of
degree of communication between the
attitudes
of
in regards
to their relationdlip with the
the
survey
agency.
found
any of
of
the services
twenty percent of
"No".
the
respondents found
and "cooperative"
but
less
the
than
Many
businessmen felt, however,
that was
inclined
rightfully
About
one tenth noted
they had received information and help in
a service
filing claims.
16
that the reimbursement program
theirs-and
thus
probably
to think of the relocation department
helpful in administering it.
Re-
relocation personnel
that
were not
as to
the Business
location Department helpful, simply answered,
"friendly"
respondents
of the survey respondents, when questioned
they
the
renewal agency,and the
and the expressed
Many
to
a program, the
such
relocatee,
whether
of
the non-cash
to dislocatees
services, made available
quire an intimate
was
in terms
functioning business.
benefits,
there
taking
it is needed or not.
that much increase whether
a shop with
x 50'
the
a third,
the increase be
location with about the same
or 27'
x 67'
or 20'
Some of
as
the businessmen replied
125
quite positively
to
the question and
replied, "They were
helpful in advising us on various ways
and another wrote, "The personal attention to
move,"
Some
was very good."
and "they were understanding".
they did not even request
that
to
little had really been done
that
replied,"they tried very hard"
Some simply indicated
problems
tried
businessmen obviously
of the
to feel
be kind yet seemed
and
to make a more efficient
any
assistance from the authority while others were quite vehement
and
attacked the
Many cited problems
agency.
promises made by officials
costs.
"land
There were also
chiseling"
in receiving
the expected
and some simply
compensation for
charges of "politics",
thought the relocation
an accusation that was
-
tape,
that many of the officials were
services were "worthless" and
"errand boys"
red
on which they were later unable
and difficulties
to deliver
of
to hire more qualified personnel -
accompanied by suggestions
a problem that has not
been entirely overlooked by relocation administrators.
businessman
caustically summed up his
relocation process:
class
of people.
However
outbursts
that
they
that
the
of
"We should not waste
Actually,
they were
one may interpret
some of
impressions
the
personnel and relocatees is
tax money on
emotional and
the
assistance, the
communication that is
all
on the entire
this
a hindrance."
the businessmen and
simply received no
One
caustic
feeling by many
fact
remains
necessary between relocation
too often lacking.
Although
126
the statistical information is
to believe
failure
that the
leads
two parties
as
been recorded.
assistance
ment
after 1960 -
of square
on rental rates varied
check on
the
about
for all years.17
around 21-22%
rates,
recalled, have higher liquidation
lacking on 47%
information was
that
rental information was unavailable
This
suggests
redevelopment
the
failure
these
firms
have
on thirty-one percent.
firms
to
contact
also
levels and lack of
contributed to the low level
Wm. Kinnard reported, after
renewal agencies,
and
the
to the
discontinuances.
Personnel problems, salary
services.
that employ-
authority or vice versa, contributes
greater number of
administration
the
of
A
and it will be
showed
of all
ment
that
of employ-
Information
improvement.
that went unremunerated,
firms
20%
statistics being
footage
a considerable
to
of acquiring information
The process
improved over time with
figures and 17%
absent
footage occupied, has never
it possible to provide relocation
lacking?
apparently
the
firms when even basic information as
these
to
their size is
has
How is
to the
as
and on twenty-two percent of
the amount of square
to
the
and business
rates
to higher liquidation
number of persons employed
reason
establish contact between
Information on one-third of the firms
losses.
firms
to
is
inconclusive, there
that
good
of
advisory
surveying a number
of
many agencies were understaffed and
overworked which suggests
that
the
services
they were providing
127
that many agencies were not large
resources.
ployment of
that many
noted
of the relocation
to attract the
low
$7000,
and that some had
estate transactions.
possible site and of course
paid
the salaries
that- salary
the firms,
and real
this meant that
there
a
the businessmen in picking
the inability
technical assistance.
levels were between
no understanding of
Cumulatively,
lack of ability to assist
sort of
that
had never been
or of real estate
labor requirements
the market,
was
"experts"
really qualified people required
to do more than proces claims $5 and
the future de-
former renewal official
and lacked experience;
in business
were too
One local
a research
in a position
or were not
technique or
and evaluate policy,
to stop
indicated
then many
they were,
the funds or personnel
did not have
to have
enough
that
the probability
in
and
division
He further
assistance.
financial
the area of
were in
to
render any
18
Jhe survey firms were questioned about. how they felt
about the way in which their relocation was
if they
felt
that they received
over
time.
relocating
Due to
in the
on improvements in
rather
than
the
and also
adequate compensation
them make a successful move in an
their attitudes toward
handled
attempt
to help
to determine whether
the relocation process had improved
low number of responses
early years
it was
possible only
the later years versus
draw a picture
of
change
from firms
over
to check
the earlier years
the entire
10
years
128
that
the
survey was
Approximately
the-.payments
two-fifths of the
adequately compensated
that
indicated
to have covered.19
whereas over
fifty percent
than that,
of
attitudes
to
the firms as
to
felt that
1963 nearly
1964
generally
to
those firms
the compensation was
of the payments.
answer
con-
that
compensation
wiith
the
introduced.
gave an
adequate and after
attitudes
in which they were
the
changes felt
Ten percent of
the question, but of
third responded
for
concurred.
the way
correlates to
of the
Displacement Payment was
three-fifths
as
than
change in
the
that coincides
An improvement in the subjective
respondents
employing less
and two-thirds and
adequacy
the
1964 only one-third of
evaluation
firms
a distinct break point in
the Small Business
Prior
compensated
between one-quarter and one-half
that occurs between 1963 and
time
the
they had been adequately
the number believing
There is
curred.
those
varied between one-half
larger
firms
all
service and professional
of the
For
felt the same way.
of
20%
Only about
felt they had been adequately
reimbursed
that
about one-half
them and
retail firms
six persons,
felt
they felt the payments were inadequate and
the remainder gave no answer.
firms
firms
survey
relocated
to
the adequacy
the respondents declined to
all those
affirmatively to
as
of the survey
that did,
each of
about one-
the three categories:
129
of
attitude at about
felt positive as
slightly more
this
to
time.
the way
Prior
in which they were relocated
firms,
the most dramatic changes occurred
and manufacturing firms.
quarter
of
Prior
the respondents in both
The- improvement
year
It
attitudes
the
to 1963
as
felt positive.
concurred.
to
made in reference
three-fifths
after that
20
that
due to
their suggestions
to
about
the changes in
the
occurred not only because of the
SBDP but also
relocation process,
or neutral
feeling negative
of the relocatees
In checking the
services.
respondents
the
two-fifths
the firms
introduction of
non-cash
Prior
is possible, but unlikely,
of
than a
felt positive
felt negative
the number of those
felt negative and
only about
among the
in'attitude by wholesalers was very slight,
appears to have declined.
firms
felt by all
less
these firms
time over one-half of
the entire period,
of the
to 1964
categories
but although retailers have generally
over
1963 more
improvement was
Although some
service
that
After
and
felt positive and slightly more than one-
third felt neutral.
and after
1964 about one-fifth
to
than one third felt neutral.
than two-fifths
this
change in
respondents did indicate a significant
the
types of
somewhat arbitrary in
is
the same 1963-64 break point
case,
Although the selection
neutral, and negative.
fine-positive,
the
an improvement
comments
as
of the
to ways
author found most
in
survey
to improve
of the comments
the financial assistance rendered by
the
130
authority and most
renewal
charges
accusingly made
of
the officials
the LPA and even when more information
efforts for
communication with
usually was
in regard to financial
that
to
the significant
the way in which
related to
the LPA were
shift
compensation and the
conclude
as
in attitudes by the relocatees
they were
relocated is
introduction of
the
and better
requested, it
The author cannot but help
the move.
of
red
non-cash benefit
rendered by
timing
and
political expediency
Seldom was mention made of any
tape.
comments made
the courteous and helpful attitude of
dealt with
or
remaining
of the
primarily
the Small Business
placement program and illustrates
the
significant
Disimpact
of the program.
Overall, business
improved
firms receiving payments
payments and grants
by generally
lower liquidation rates.
that about
felt
that
they
the payments,
and the
to dislocated firms,
fact that unremunerated
and
liberal
increasingly
has been accompanied
In view of
this,
the
firms have higher liquidation rates,
one-third of
relocated survey respondents
the
could not have remained in business without
it seems
logical
to
conclude that
firms
for the
the payments
relocation
have not
only- justly compensated
expenses
incurred but have also made a significant
to
the
and the greater coverage by both
over time
numbers of
relocation policy and procedures have
the lowering of
losses.
However,
be noted
that
the
discontinuance rate
in spite
and the
contribution
ensuing job
of the increase payments
the discontinuance rates
in the
retail
it must
trade
131
the
and personal service categories have been recently on
this
is apparently due
acceptable
relocation space.
rise;
that
to a lack of sufficient'and
and businessmen in
the more elderly proprietors
areas may be using the
themselves
to disengage
however,
increased payments
categories of
to
firms.
and the attitudes
at
improvements
the
Payment would appear
compensation received
Its area of
and property losses.
Checks
of
adequacy of compensation
of the
the firms
disclose significant
the time the program was introduced.
presently
The Small Business Disaster Loan program as
applied under
size of business
fails
characteristics of all displacees.
area size increase allowed
the smaller the
lends
firm.
credence to
officials promise
The
conditions would appear
relocation
urban renewal
to be under utilized and therefore
coverage by
the
characteristics of
the
conforms nicely to
liquidated
theory does not
firms.
to be an effective addition
coverage
an opportunity
as
and the
The Small Business Displacement
for moving expenses
these
from their businesses and retire,
supporting data is lacking
take in all
exist
The possibility does
to
loan
conform to the
size
The
recipients
It would
The
ineffective.
one-third maximum floor
of
the loans
appear that
the dislocatees'
redevelopment authority
Adminstration have not adequately
but
and the
regressive
the program simply
complaints
assistance programs
is
that relocation
cannot deliver.
Small Business
attempted to
cope with
the
132
difficulties of the
claims
and
dislocatees.
been done
grants little has
dislocatees, particularly
establishments
the
that as a group
rates, with
informational and
problem has
been apparently
reluctance
market
and
authorities
to become
Beyond
the processing of
to provide most
retail and personal service
exhibit
the highest liquidation
technical assistance.
compounded by
the authority's
actively involved in the
the dislocatees
and to accept
disinclination
advice.
The
to
real estate
trust
the
133
FOOTNOTES
RELOCATION PROGRAM
Appendix, pp.
2
Study of
3
Ibid.,
4
Appendix, p.
5
Appendix,
6
p.
131.
pp.
149-153.
163.
Appendix, pp.
102,
8
9
10
1965),
125.
Appendix, pp.
157-158.
Appendix, pp.
129-130.
Organization and Operation of
Administration
11
130-132.
Compensation, pp.
Appendix, p.
7
124-128.
Hearings
p.
(Washington, 1964),
Before the
3.
Subcommittee No.
Compensation, p.
1 3 Hearings, pp.
15-16.
14
, Appendix, pp.
154-156,
1 5
Appendix,
1 6
Appendix, p.
17
Appendix, pp.
18
John Alevizos,
Businesses
20
p.
5
(Washington,
60.
1 2 Study of
19
the Small Business
p.
100.
and p.
58.
106.
162.
42-47.
An Effective Program
from Urban Renewal Areas
Appendix, pp.
159-161.
Appendix, pp.
164-170.
for
the Relocation of
(Boston, 1963),
pp.
17-22.
CHAPTER VIII
COMMENTS
The
in
man"
may
have
is
that
at
business
the
relocatee
has
program.
In
renewal
forgotten but
been
an
actually
He
of his
the
services
rendered unto
been
private
able
to
for
non-cash benefits
It
project
their
is
the
decisions
below
standard,
the more
to
are
he
appears
and
that
many
in
they
of
of
those
effects
they
that
physical appearance
tend
the
low-skilled
to
consider
urban
jobs
fabric,
that
in
improvements
cumulative
businesses,
given
coming.
many
the
a welcome
are
that
unaware of
been
accountable
and
be
to
grants
that
suffered
has
therefore
has
impression
dislocate
to
the
that
in
expendable pieces
sideration
degree
slow
unattractive
them generally
in
some
have been very
author's
planning
program
SBDP
and
and
given with
non-quantifiable expenses,
known yet
that
sense
been
quantifiable
for
practice
from this
departure
in
the
is
have
the
that
show
gain
publics'
to
occurred
to
able
and
needs,
his
to
receive compensation
Although
items.
part
the
for
loss
the
government
his
him by
Improvements have
the businessman has
in
and
he
labeled marginal,
kind have been
majoiity
reluctance.
that
implies
he
-
misunderstood
it
for
"forgotten
early years
very
is
the
influence have been underestimated,
the
inadequate, unrasponsive
called
is misunderstood
and- potential
hisanumbers
the
now he
improvement
recognized.
least
been
doing
of
consider
and
them one
without
therefore
of
con-
they provide,
in
135
frenzied activities
their
open space
public
The dislocatees
are
conflict with
for their needs
the usual housing interests.
suspect that it was
a Filene's that managed
It is
to protect their
Hamburger Shop
is
planners
the
as well as
develop
a greater
This
that
those providing
considerable
and stay
interests
that found itself moving.
are creating
the
awareness of the
consequences
study will have made its
need to
of their
difficulties
some sympathy and
and problems
the development of better
actions.
contribution if it helps
explains
the relocation
lucidly enough to create an impression on the
that evokes
The point
dislocation loads,
the relocation services,
to replace misconceptions with fact,
process
true
large measure a Jordan Marsh and
in
put and Joe's
that
that may
CBD Project, but even here one
those in Boston's
as
influence
pressure
represented by organized
seldom
the occasional business organization achieves
that
may
and to provide the usual desired amenities.
that can present and agitate
groups
be in
to open up housing opportunities,
an understanding
encountered,
federal and
and if
reader
of the
it
can aid in
local programs
for the
dislocatees.
With the
coming recognition
of
the urban
crisis
the inevitable accompanyment of federal programs
Model
Cities Program prefigures and the
implementation of
that the
increased
degree of
the renewal, highway and other programs
cause dislocation, hopefully will
that are
and
necessary to implement
come the many
that
subprograms
the grand designs.
The business
136
community has
and
in
open job
been called upon to help rebuild
opportunities in
turn should recognize
the government
the impact of its actions
business community, on the
thousands
the ghettoes;
the cities
individual firms,
of persons employed by
the
on the
and on the
dislocatees.
APPENDIX I
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS OVER TIME
A.
Subject
Page -
All Projects
1 -
6
7 -
11
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
B.
Relocation Load by Type of Business
Prior to Displacement
Displacement Load Percentages by
Projects and Type of Business
Average Number of Employees Displaced Per Firm
Average Amount of Floor Space
Occupied Per Firm
Average Amount of Space Used Per
Employee
Average Amount of Total Payments
Per Firm
West End Project
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Number of Businesses
Average Number of Employees Displaced
Average Amount of Floor Space Occupied
Average Amount of Yearly Rent
Average Amount of Total Payments
C.
Government Center Project
12
-
16
D.
Washington Park Project
17
-
21
E.
Waterfront Project
22
-
26
F.
Other Projects
27 -
31
NOTE:
(1) Percentage values calculated by the computer have
been truncated and totals of columns (COL-PCNT) or
rows (ROW-PCNT), etc., may not necessarily equal
100.
(2) Approximate median values on some of the tables
have been calculated from the adjusted totals
and are designated by a "0" encircling a number.
(3) The adjusted totals (ADJ.TOT.) are the actual
totals less "unknowns" or "unknowns and move-outs"appropriate.
whichever is
Series .A
A-1
RELOCATION LOAD BY TYPE OF BUSINESS PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS TYPE
FIRMS
LIQD.
PCNT
WHOLESALE
FOOD
OTHER
64
139
21
13
32
9
RETAIL
HARDWARE, ETC.
DRYGOODS
FOOD
CLOTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EATING
DRINK, LIQUOR
OTHER
50
74
103
63
52
76
83
129
6
24
37
21
4
45
47
26
12
32
35
33
7
59
56
20
STORAGE,
130
18
13
63
5
7
PERSONAL SERVICE
OTHER
BARBER, BEAUTY
147
65
39
27
26
41
BUS.
223
14
6
NONPROFIT
93
8
8
ROOMING HOUSES
71
42
59
60
8
35
134
4
1
2
9
6
12
5
6
38
7
18
DISTRIB
FINANCE, R.E.
SERV,
PROF.
MANUFACTURING
PRINTING
FOOD
FABRC, APPAREL
OTHER
UNKNOWN,
OTHER
TOTAL
1900
A- 2a
Displacement load percentages and total
yearly business loads:
date of displacement
Project
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
97
2
3
98
-98
-40
-21
44
18
12
-
26
-2
57
-34
10
12
23
29
4
5
38
39
5
28
55
58
59
60
100
--
100
--
--
--
--
---
--
--
--
--
ALL BUSINESSES
West End
Govtt Center
Wash. Park
Waterfront
Other
Total
Actual Load
100
100 100
00
100
100
100
100
100
100
137
139
66
465
367
204
224
203
59
--
100
-
--
-
6
9
81
3
3
78
19
36
WHOLESALE BUSINESS
West End
Govit Center
Wash. Park
Waterfront
Other
Total
--
--
--
--
-
--
100
--
--
98
--
-
65
12
-
9
32
--
--
50
-
-
-
-
2
23
9
100
100
100
100
100
1~00
0
8
0
9
50
34
22
Actual Load
-
-
70
30
100 100 100 100
32
37
10
24
8
10
46
17
12
4
21
67
5
15
65
100 100 150 100 100
100
RETAIL BUSINESS
100
100
100
--
--
--
--
--
--
Govit Center
Wash. Park
Waterfront
--
100
99
--
-
-
-
--
5
68
-
-
-
-
Other
--
-
37
24
-
West End
Total
Actual Load
100
73
--
-
-
100 100
59
15
1
TO
38
4
23
56
19
138
156
--
--
41
52
19
STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION BUSINESS
West End
Govrt Center
Wash.
Park
Waterfront
Other
Total
Actual Load
100
67
--
--
--
-
33
100
97
30
7
--
50
--
-
44
-
-
3
21
-
-
-
----
50
20
25
--
12
--
44
--
25
--
43
29
33
67
100
100
100
100
1
100
100
100
100
100
100
13
9
3
8
34
25
10
8
14
3
100
---
--
A-2b
Displacement load percentages and total yearly business loads:
date of displacement
Project
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
51
33
2
17
26
21
17
33
47
12
SERVICES AND PROFESSIONAL BUSINESS
West End
Govit Center
Wash. Park
Waterfront
Other
Total
Actual Load
100
---
100
---
100
--
--
--
--
--
--
100
--
--
98
--
35
45
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
-20
78
15
5
--
-2
43
48
3
5
2
100
100
1000
22
28
5
doO 100 100 TOO TOO
13
92
65
60
91
--
MANUFACTURING BUSINESS FIRlfS
West End
Govtt Center
Wash. Park
Waterfront
Other
Total
Actual Load
100
--
100
--
100
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
100
--
--
--
--
--
52
9
--
--
97
--
--
--
--
--
3
39
16
78
--
--
43
46
1000 10
10
100
28
8
12
20
17
28
40
17
66
100
15
100 100 100
7
2
9
0O
4
75
9
11 --
17
102
31
12
23
25
75
OOO
OTHER, UNKNOWN BUSINESS FIRNS
West End
Gov T t Center
Wash. Park
Waterfront
Other
Total
Actual Load
100
-----
100
-----
100
--
--
--
--
--
--
100
98
28
18
36
----
----
--
37
66
36
--
--
7
21
2
33
9
7
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
14
26
11
9
48
54
44
28
--
100 100
25
6
A-3
NUMBER OF EMPLCYEES DISPLACED,
BY TYPE OF BUSINES S, OVER TIME.
AVERAGE
BUSINESS TYPE
WHOLESALE
58
o
59
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
62 63 64
61
60
65
66
67
-0
0
15
9
9
5
6
11
13
5
8
6
4
2
3
7
9
RETAIL
-0
-0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
-0
-0
-0
1o
1
6
3
1
5
6
SERVICES, PROF.
-0
-0
-0
4
5
3
8
4
6
3
MANUFACTURING
-0
-0
-0
10
11
12
8
12
14
19
-0
-0
-0
14
6
2
1
4
10
5
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
A-4
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE (100'S OF SQ.FT.),
BY TYPE OF BUSINESS, OVER TIME.
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
63 64
60 61 62
58
59
0
51
0
RETAIL
14
13
15
STORAGE, DISTRIB
22
53
16. 70
6
11
BUSINESS TYPE
WHCLESALE
SERVICES, PROF.
65
93
36
69 103 121
39
26
28
23
17
83 261
63 114
25 435
80
27
19
11
4
8
14
19
13
10
28
27 120
57
49
54
57
62
OTHER,
46
32
27
31
29
17
70
23
67
88 137
MANUFACTURING
UNKNOWN
66
105 171
45
12
0
0
SS
0
V
S
U
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF SPACE (100'S OP SQ.FT.). PER EMPLOYEE,
BY TYPE OF BUSINESS.
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
'
BUSINESS TYPE
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
6
15
10
8
11
8
9
RETAIL
0
0
7
1
5
5
10
6
8
11
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
10
68
87
23 1000
15
2
SERVICES, PROF.
0
0
0
1
2
5
1
2
3
3
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
5
4
4
6
5
7
7
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
1
5
11
6
21
4
3
7
A-6
AVERAGE AMCUNT OF TOTAL PAYMENTS (MOVING AND SBDP,1CO'S),
BY TYPE OF BUSINESS, OVER TIME
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
64 65
63
60 61 62
66y
67*
75
67
25
33
42
42
25
8
59
18
70
25
14
12
27
17
37
25
72
68
47
58
85
78
24
14
14
10
10
34
17
25
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
18
0
96
96
86
29
RETAIL
9
9
13
18
40
27
STORAGE, DISTRIB
2
2
5
-0
19
SERVICES, PROF.
5
7
2
6
13
13
30
3
2
1
MANUFACTURING
OTHER, UNKNOWN
*Payments from the first quarter of 1967 and last quarter of 1966
may have been in processing at the time of the study.
0
0
'
r-
0
e
S
0
S
S
S SS
S
S
V
NUMBER DF BUSINBSSES RELOCATED* FROM THE
WEST END PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
61 62 63. 64
60
66
67
TOT
COL PCNT
58
59
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
3
73
59
15
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
148
47
13
9
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24
8
SERVICES,, PROF.
22
28
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
55
18
MANUFACTURING
15
9
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
8
OTHER,
14
26
11
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
52
17
TOTAL 137
139
35
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
313
WHOLESALE
RETAIL
STORAGEI
DISTRIB
UNKNOWN
*Correction:
DISLOCATED
-.3
A-8
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE (100'S OF SQ.FT.)
OCCUPIED BY BUSINESSES IN THE WEST END PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60
61 62
63 64
65
66
67
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
58
59
0
51
0
0
0
0
0
RETAIL
14,
13
15
25
0
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
22
53
16
0
0
6
11
4
0
WHOLESALE
SERVICES,4
PROF.
MANUFACTURING
28
27 120
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
46
32
23
0
0
-0
0
0
0
0
A-9
AVERAGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES DISPLACED, LN THE
WEST END PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
58
'3 -0
WHOLESALE
SERVICES,
0
0
66
67
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
DISTRIB
-0
-0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PROF.
-0
-0
-Do -0
0
0
0
0
0
Q
0
-0
-0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
-0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MANUFACTURING
OTHER,
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60 61
62
63
64
65
-0
RETAIL
STORAGE,
59
UNKNOWN
-o
-0
-0
A-10
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF YEARLY RENT ($0.00/SQ.FT.),
PAID BY BUSINESSES IN THE WEST END PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60
61 62
63 64
65
58
59
0
39
0
0
0
0
0
96
64
99
28
0
0
91
33
18
0
0
SERVICES, PROF.
82
93
112
0
MANUFACTURING
41
23
10
12
29 840
WHOLESALE
RETAIL
STORAGE,
OTHER,
DISTRIB
UNKNOWN
66
61
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
A-ll
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF TOTAL PAYMENTS (MOVING AND SBDP,100'S)l
PA.ID TO BUSINESSES IN THE WEST END PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DI SPLACEMENT
60 61
63
64
62
65
66
67
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
-o
0
0
0
0
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
18
0
0
0
0
RETAIL
9
9
13
5
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
2
2
-0
0
SERVICES,- PROF.
5
7
2
13
13
3
2
MANUFACTURING
OTHER, UNKNOWN
9V 3
Cl
V
V
0V
9
0V
NUMBER OF B.USINESSES RELOCATEYFROM THE
GOVERNMENT CENTER PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
58
59
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
63 64 65
60 61 62
2
1
0
86
10
19 137
58
3
10
4
2
233
27
8
33
13
3
4
1
0
63
7
0
13
90
23
26
71
24
4
251
30
0
0
7
99
16
0
1
3
0
126
15
0
0
0
9
47
15
8
10
3
1
93
11
0
0
1
65 456 147
42
98
36
7
852
0
RETAIL
0
0
0
STORAGE* DISTRIB
0
0
1
0
0
MANUFACTURING
0
OTHER, UNKMOWN
*Correction:
COL PCNT
2
0
TOTAL
TOT
22
0
PROF.
67
50
WHOLESALE
SERVICES,
66
DISLOCATED
9
H
A-13
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE (100'S OF SQ.FT.)
OCCUPIED BY BUSINESSES IN THE GOVERNMENT CENTER PROJECT
BUS-INESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
63
64
62
60 61
66
67
77
-0
0
40
10
8
42 229 155
0
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
88 139 126 107
RETAIL.
0
0
0
16
39
0
0
0
70
87 715
0
-8
15
37
6
6
4
13
STORAGE?
DISTRIB
50 293
SERVICES, PROF.
0
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
57
50
69
0
5
19
0
0
0
0
27
31
41
5
4
74
12
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
A-14
AVERAGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES DISPLACED,
GOVERNMENT CENTER PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
58
WHOLESALE
0
59
IN THE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
63 64
62
60 61
66
67
-0
0
15
9
11
6
11
-o
0
0
8
6
6
8
2
7
3
1
13
3
2
0
RETAIL
-0
-0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
-o
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
4
5
8
3
3
1
2
MANUFACTURING
-0
-3
-0
10
11
17
0
-0
4
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
-0
-0
-0
14
6
3
2
2
24
3
SERVICES,
PROF.
10
-0
A-15
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF YEARLY RENT ($0.00/SQ.FT.);
PAID BY BUSINESSES
IN THE GOVERNMENT CENTER PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
58
59
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
63 64
61 62
60
66
67
-0
WHOLESALE
o
o
0 124
RETAIL
0
0
0 210 193 142
57 256 409
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
61
40 127 309
0
0
0
0
377 388
319
256
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
66
0 134
257
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
o
o
0
94 165 121 263 382 343 362
SERVICESt
PROF.
56
83
94
92
189 233 240
86
93
70
81
0
A-16
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF TOTAL PAYMENTS (MOVING AND SBDP,100'Sb.
PAID TO BUSINESSES IN THE GOVERNMENT CENTER PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DI SPLACEMENT
60
63 64
61
62
65
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
96
96
106
RETAIL
0
0
0
19
40
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
5
-0
SERVICES,, PROF.
0
0
0
MANUFACTURING
0
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
66
67
47 156
-0
0
33
63
49
51
19
8
96
61
-0
6
14
11
17
13
26
-0
0
72
68
58
0
4
7
0
0
14
14
22
4
21
4
-0
26
0
0
0
0V
S
g
gS
S
g
S
a
S
0
S
-
e
S
0
%
NUMBER OF BiUSINESSES RELOCATED*FROM THE
WASHINGTON PARK PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
63 64
60 61 62
66
67
TOT
3
0
0
14
5
38
19
2
1
98
35
3
5
2
3
0
14
5
0
29
Z9
14
1
2
75
27
0
0
3
9
4
0
0
16
6
0
0
0
20
29
10
5
0
64
23
0
0
1
97 117
52
11
3
281
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
0
4
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
38
STORAGE* DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
0
SERVICES,
PROF.
TOTAL
*Correction:
DISLOCATED
7
COL PCNT
H
A-18
AVERAGE AMOUNT
OF
(100 'S OF SQ.FT. )
IN THE WASHINGTON PARK PROJECT
FLOOR SPACE
OCCUPIED BY BUSLNESSES
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
64 65
63
60 61 62
66
67
38
-0
0
12
14 126
16
20
16
41 190
0
0
12
19
14
40
8
0
0
16
65
47
0
0
0
0
18
11 162
12
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
0
98
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
15
DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
12
PROF.
0
0
0
0
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
STORAGE,
SERVICES,
8
OF
A-19
AVERAGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES DISPLACED, IN THE
WASHINGTON
PARK PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
64 65
62 63
60 61
66
67
2
-o
5
2
2
5
1
0
0
14
0
0
2
3
3
18
5
0
0
3
11
3
0
0
0
0
2
I
4
0
0
58
59
0
-0
0
0
0
12
8
-3
0
0
0
5
-0. -o
-0
0
0
SERVICES, PROF.
-0
-3
-0
0
MANUFACTURING
-0
-0
-0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
-0
-0
-0
WHOLESALE
-0
RETAIL
STORAGE,
DISTRIB
A-20
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF: YEARLY RENT ($0.00/SQ.FT.)
PAID BY BUSINESSES IN THE WASHINGTON PARK PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
63 64 65
60
61 62
66
67
0
0
0
0 118 112 118 222
56
0
0
0
10 150
0
0
0
0
0 117 115
76,
0
97
0
0
0
0
0
36
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 126 110 145
25
0
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
0 185
RETAIL
0
0
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
SERVICES,. PROF.
0
MANUFACTURING
OTHE-R,
UNKNOWN
44
76
50
41
48
18
A-21
AVERAGE AMDUNT OF TOTAL PAYMENTS (MOVING AND SBDP,100'S)V"
PAID TO BUSINESSES IN THE WASHINGTON PARK PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
64
65
62 63
60 61
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
-0
71
22
93
-0
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
22
27
40
32
- 0
0
0
0
18
4
4
-0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
36
27
176
25
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
0
16
54
21
0
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
0
0
5
12
44
9
STORAGEi DISTRIB
SERVICES,
PROF.
-0
66
67
0
25
-0
0
0
V 9
0
0
V
0V
V
p
w
V'pr
NUMBER OF BUSINESSES RELOCATED*FROM THE
WATERFRONT PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
58
59
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
63 64
60 61 62
66
67
TOT
COL PCNT
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
26
29
7
73
41
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
7
11
3
23
13
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
6
1
12
6
SERVICES, PROF.
0
0
)
0
a
0
2
5
12
2
21
12
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
18
12
2
33
19
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
6
7
1
17
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
65
77
16
179
TOTAL
*Correction:
DISLOCATED
N)
A-23
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE (100'S OF SQ.FT.)
OCCUPIED BY BUS-INESSES IN THE WATERFRONT PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
63 64
62
60 61
66
67
58
59
WHOLESALE
o
0
0
0
0
0
43
73
97 106
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
82
55
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
0
0
201037
23
-D
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
45
55
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
71
77 185
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
0
0
0
71
7
SERVICES,
PROF.
36
8
0
A-24
AVERAGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES DISPLACED, IN THE
WATERFRONT PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
63
64 65
62
60 61
58
59
0
-0
0
0
0
0
5
RETAIL
-0
-0
0
0
0
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
-0
-0
-0
0
0
0
SERVICES, PROF.
-0
-0
-0
0
MANUFACTURING
-0
-D
-0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
-0o -0
-0
WHOLESALE
66
67
6
12
6
0
7
17
7
0
1
2
1
0
0 300
16
16
5
0
0
0
2
14
17
45
0
0
0
2
7
10
0
A-25
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF YEARLY RENT ($0.00/SQ.FT.),
PAID BY BUSINESSES IN THE WATERFRONT PROJECT
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
63 64
60
61 62
66
67
63
89
66
0
0 216 120
85
0
0
0
36 125
0
0
0
0 240 127 222 211
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 300
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
STORAGEO DI STRIB
0
0
0
0
SERVICES, PROF.
0
0
0
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
57 106 126
63
0
A-26
(MOVING AND SBDP,100'S)i
PAID TO BUSINESSEoS IN THE WATERFR ONT PROJECT
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF TOTAL PAYMENTS
BUSINESS TYPE
58 .59
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60 61 62
63
64 65
66
67
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
66
74
25
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
31
48
17
STORAGE, DISTRIB
O
0
0
0
0
0
4
41
-0
SERVICES,, PROF.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
61
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-0
99 103
38
30
0
-0
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
NUMBER OF BUSINESSES RELOCATED*FROM THE
OTHER PROJECTS
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60 61 62 63 64 65
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
1
8
2
1
RETAIL
0
0
o
0
1
60
13
5
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
2
13
3
0
0
3 - 12
0
0
1
0
0
STORAGE,
DISTRIB
SERVICES, PROF.
0
MANUFACTURING
0
OTHER,
0
UNKNOWN
0
0
66
67
TOT
7
3
22
8
14
128
46
4
2
17
6
1
10
4
33
12
2
0
13
6
36
13
18
4
2
10
4
39
14
8 122
24
9
79
33
275
35
0
TOTAL
*Correction:
0
DISLOCATED
COL PCNT
V
kIp
A-28
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE (100'S OF SQ.FT.)
OCCUPIED BY BUSINESSES IN THE OTHER PROJECTS
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
64 65
63
60 61 62
66
67
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
30
24
15
20 127 146
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
5
16
11
18
STORAGE1 DISTRIB
o
o
0
0
0
16
0
0
58
27
SERVICES,, PROF.
0
0
c
0
3
7
2
12
10
12
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
6
45
41
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
0
4
32
23
60 144
0 167 161
31:
45
13
A-29
AVERAGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES DISPLACED,
OTHER PROJECTS
BUSINESS TYPE
IN THE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
63
64
65
61 62
60
66
67
2
6
6
24
2
3
2
5
11
0
1
0
0
4
9
0
1
1
1
2
4
3
-1
0
3
9
3
0
12
9
-0
0
1
2
1
1
6
7
58
59
0
-0
0
0
2
4
RETAIL
-O
-0
0
0
1
STORAGE, DISTRIB
-0
-0
-3
0
SERVICES,, PROF.
-o
-0
-3
MANUFACTURING
-0
-0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
-o
-0
WHOLESALE
A-30
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF YEARLY RENT ($0.00/SQ.FT.),
PAID BY BUSINESSES IN THE OTHER PROJECTS
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DI SPLACEMENT
63 64
65
60
61
62
58
59
WHOLESALE
o
0
o
o
44
RETAIL
0
0
o
o
57
STORAGE, DISTRI8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0 277
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
52
82
32
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
0 106
126
0
SERVICESt
PROF.
66
67
89 235
0 112
a
157 164
97 238
141
144
144
68
0
0
139 167
0
95 259
0
50
58
0 226
138
A-31
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF TOTAL PAYMENTS (MOVING AND SBDP,100'S)lI
PAID TO BUSINESSES IN THE OTHER PROJECTS
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
61
62 63
64
65
60
58
59
WHOLESALE
O
0
0
0
3
29
44
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
24
46
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
3
0
0
2
0
SERVICES,. PROF.
o
0
0
0
3
4
MANUFACTURI NG
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
OTHiER,
UNKNOWN
-0
66
67
97
26
25
57
39
28
0 127
25
10 104
24
26
42
95
0
60
24
5
1
4
20
25
APPENDIX II
SURVEY CHARACTERISTICS
Page
Subject
of the
A.
Analysis
B.
Analysis of the
Over Time
C.
D.
Survey by
32
Type of Business
Survey by Size of Business
-
33
A Check on Nonforwardables by Group Over
Time
34
A Check on Nonforwardables Survey Return
35
Reason for
A-32
ANALYSIS OF
SURVEY
BUSINESS TYPE
WHOLESALE
FOOC
.OTHER
RETAIL
-HARCWARE, ETC.
DRYGOODS
FOOC
CLOTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EATING
DRINK, LIQUOR
OTHER
STORAGE, DISTRIB
F INANCE , R.E.
PERSONAL SERVICE
OTHER
BARBER, BIEAUTY
BUS. SERV, PROF.
NONPRCFIT
ROOMING HOUSES
RELOC
SURVEY N-DELIV
LOAD
SURVEY AS
(1)
(2),
(3).
43
123
15
26
2
12
41
1l1
36
23
38
41
57
42
46
29
35
93
98
56
6
3
3
5
7
6
2
13
5
16
8
10
16
4
7
4
11
19
22
8
30
31
41
38
39
25
24
74
76
48
20
9
1
13
17
24
8
17
6
33
101
36
203
76
27
16
7
48
9
0
21
5
14
6
5
80
31
189
70
22
20
22
25
12
0
55
6
31
120
26
9
3
7
27
5
7
1
3
10
6
48
5
28
110
20
18
60
25
24
25
1382
238
201
1181
11-3)
PCNT LOAD
MANUFACTURING
PR INTING
FOOC
FABRC, APPAREL
OTHER
UNKNOWN, OTHER
TOTAL
20
A-33
ANALYSIS OF SURVEY BY DATE OF MOVE
SURVEY
NO. EMPLOYEES
RErURNS
AS PERCENT OF ADJUSTED LOAD
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
1 -
1
0
0
0
0
1
3
2
5
3
0
2
-
3
0
0
0
0
0
3
8
3
6
5
4
-
5
0
0
0
2
4
1
2
4
3
5
6
-
7
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
1
5
0
8
-
19
0
0
0
0
5
2
1
4
8
5
20 -
49
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
2
5
2
50 -
1000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0 -
0
6
6
7
5
1
0
1
3
2
2
56
25
31
81
35
46
22
48
14
370 262 158 18-5 163
8 54 46
18
3
4
40 316 216 140 182 159
37
0
37
6
6
7
32
(21)
RELCC. LOAD
NON-DELIVERY
ADJ-LOAD
(1)
(2)
(1)-(2)
TOT - PONT RETURN
8
9
14
11
16
22
A-34
A CHECK
ON NCNFORWARDABLES BY GROUP OVER TIME
BUSINESS TYPE
58
59
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
62 63 64 65
61
60
66
67
TOT
0
4
0
0
4
4
2
0
0
0
14
12
17
3
4
13
24
5
1
0
0
79
STORAGE, DISTRIB
3
0
2
1
5
8
1
0
2
c
22
SERVICES, PROF.
5
10
0
2
9
7
3
2
2
0
40
MANUFACTURING
5
2
0
1
11
1
1
0
0
0
21
0
2
3
0
12
2
6
0
0
0
25
25
35
8
8
54
46
18
3,
4
0
201
RELCC LOAD (R)
90
102
22
62 333 270
159 185 166
41
PERCENTAGE T/R
27
34
36
12
WHOLESALE
RETAIL
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
(T)
14
17
11
1
2
0
A-35
A CHECK
ON NCNFORWARDABLES
BUSINESS TYPE
1
2
7
WHCLESALE
BY GROUP.
REASON FOR RETURN*
6
5
3
4
0
2
2
0
7
TOT
14
RETAIL
32
10
5
14
7
5
6
79
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
11
2
1
3
4
1
0
22
SERVICES, PROF.
17
6
3
8
2
0
2
40
MANUFACTURING
11
4
0
1
3
0
2
21
OTHER, UNKNCWN
11
4
1
2
4
2
1
25
89
27
10
30
22
8
12
201
TOTAL
*REASONS:
1.
Address unknown
2.
Moved and left no forwarding address
3.
Insufficient address
4.
Addressee Unknown
5.
No such street
6.
Other
7.
Not forwardable
8.
Unclaimed
S
e
S
0
4p
S
S
4p
0
BOSTON FIRMS
MAGNITUDE OF DISPIACEMENT
BRA EST.
DISPL
FIRMS
BUSINESS TYPE
S
(1958-67
PCNT DISPL
TOTAL
BOSTON TOT.
of
COL-PCNT
(1967-72)
(1958-72)
1963
BOSTON TOT.
WHOLESALE
203
10.7
286
489
3225
15.2
RETAIL
630
33.2
684
1314
5185
25.3
STORAGE, DISTRIB.
130
SERVICES, PROF.
435
22.9
448
883
6036
14.6
MANUFACTURING
237
12.5
268
505
2087
24.2
OTHER,
265
13.9
1900
100.0
1686
3191
16,533
UNKNOWN
0~
BOSTON EMPLOYEES
MAGNITUDE OF DISPLACEMENT
EMPLOYEES
BRA EST.
DISPL
PCNT DISPL
TOTAL
BOSTON TOT.
of
1963
BOSTON TOT.
BUSINESS TYPE
(1958-67)
(1967-72)
(1958-72)
WHOLESALE
1541
2586
4127
71,906
5.7
RETAIL
2242
2556
4798
42,275
11.3
1819
1976
3795
55,008
6.9
2239
6006
8245
80.127
10.-3
SERVICES,
PROF.
MANUFACTURING
APPENDIX III
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
PRIOR TO
FIRMS
DISPLACEMENT
Page
Subject
A.
Firms
All
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
B.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
47
48 -
58
Magnitude of Displacement
Total Amount of Building Space Removed
from Market
Total Amount of Building Space (Row
Percentages)
Total Number of Employees Affected
Total Number of Employees Affected (Row
Percentages)
Relocation Load by 22 Business Types
Size (Space) of Business by 22 Business
Types
Size (Space) of Business Over Time
Size (Employees) of Business by 22
Business Types
Size (Employees) of Business Over Time
Rentals versus Size of Business by
Employees
Rentals Over Time
Liquidated Firms
1.
-
36
Liquidations by 22 Types of Business
Over Time
Liquidations by 6 Types of Business
Over Time
Liquidations by Number of Employees
Over Time
Reasons for Liquidations
Total Amount of Floor Space Occupies
Average Amount of Floor Space Occupied
Total Number of Employees Displaced
Average Number of Employees Displaced
Average Amount of Rent Paid
Average Amount of Total Payments
Percentage Liquidations by Rentals versus Employees
C.
Wholesale Businesses
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Size by
Size by
Rentals
Rentals
Reason
59 -
63
Space Occupies Over Time
Number, of Employees - Over Time
- Over Time
versus Size of Firm by Employees
for Liquidation - Over Time
D.
Retail Businesses
64 -
68
E.
Storage and Distribution Firms
69
-
73
F.
Service and Professional Firms
74 -
78
G.
Manufacturing Businesses
79 -
83
H.
Other Businesses
84 -
88
9
0 V
a
VV
0
S
V
lilt
"P
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BUILDING SPACE
(1000'S OF SQ.FT.)
REMOVED FROM THE MARKET
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60
61
62
63
58
59
0
20
0
61
644
49
41
15
22
DISTRIB
6
15
1
PROF.
5
20
MANUFACTURING
19
OTHER,
WHOLESALE
RETAIL
STORAGE,
SERVICES,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ROW PCNT
COL PCNT
65
66
261
69
209
362
97 1723
25.6
408
363
147
87
271
206 1609
23.9
35
149
523
15
261
104
5 1115
16.6
2
8
119
119
73
90
75
10
12
22
455
164
69
112
242
14
48
4
8
112
119
55
141
68
93
155
34
156 1887 1549
428
900
1122
405 6729
1.4
2.3
6.4
13.4
16.7
6.0
.1
2.3
28.0 23.0
67
TOT
64
10
521
7.7
85 1190
17.7
571
8.5
2
100.0
:r:.
9
S
V
U
THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF BUILDING SPACE
REMOVED FROM THE MARKET (ROW PERCENTAGES)
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
63
64
61
65
62
58
59
60
WHOLESALE
0
1
0
3
37
15
4
RETAIL
3
2
0
1
25
22
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
0
1
0
3
13
SERVICES, PROF.
1
3
0
1
MANUFACTURING
1
0
1
OTHER,
2
8
0
UNKNOWN
66
67
12
21
5
100
9
5
16
12
100
46
1
23
9
0
100
22
22
13
17
14
2
100
1
38
13
5
9
20
7
100
1
19
20
9
24
11
0
100
I
I.
e
e
w
F]
0
0
S 9 VV SV
TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES AFFECT ED BY DISLOCATION
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60
61
62
63
65
66
67
TOT
256
72
200
392
104
1541
17.9
648
681
140
141
353
184
2242
26.0
10
14
57
3
3
68
20
175
2.0
42
413
231
4 77
329
290
37
1819
21.0
40 1012
360
98
219
371
139
2239
26.0
93
49
89
141
605
7.0
315 2687 1678
8 39
981 1615
9.7
11.4 18.7
59
0
-0
0
90
427
RETAIL
-0
-0
5
90
STORAGE, DISTRIB
-0
-0
-0
SERVICES,
-0
-0
-0
MANUFACTURING
-0
-0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
5
WHOLESALE
PROF.
TOTAL
ROW PCNT
-
-
-
COL-PCNT
64
58
43
3.7
173
31.2
19.5
17
501
8621
100.0
'Jq
V
0
0
0
w
0
0
'II
THE TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
AFFECTED BY CISLOCATION. (ROW PERCENTAGES)
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS-TYPE
67
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
-0
0
5
27
16
4
12
25
6
100
-0
-0
0
4
28
30
6
6
15
8
100
STORAGE, DISTRIB
-0
-0
-0
5
8
32
1
1
38
11
100
SERVICES, PROF.
-0
-0
-0
2
22
12
26
18
15
2
100
MANUFACTURING
-0
-0
1
45
16
4
9
16
6
100
-0
7
28
15
8
14
23
2
100
58
59
0
RETAIL
WHOLESALE
-0o
OTHER,
I
UNKNOWN
-0
I.
0
A-41
TYPE CF BUSINESS RELOCATION LOAD OVER TIME
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS TYPE
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
0
0
1
7
0
0
0
9
4
47
7
27
13
9
15
17
18
19
6
4
10
13
22
7
2
4
5
10
13
2
6
4
16
4
3
6
5
15
9
2
1
0
5
2
2
1
4
0
3
1
0
4
3
1
0
5
4
3
8
0
10
17
9
19
19
18
26
20
34
12
12
15
27
17
11
17
21
36
27
11
5
8
8
2
4
7
4
18
10
11
3
8
6
1
3
7
5
8
9
16
0
3
5
8
7
8
6
15
14
7
3
2
2
2
1
3
3
4
3
1
12
6
4
4
6
16
6
6
6
15
1
2
2
4
6
6
1
6
4
0
38
17
37
17
8
30
15
20
20
22
18
9
33
18
11
16
3
72
10
0
8
2
37
7
3
2
4
6
3
0
0
2
3
10
2
5
0
0
4
3
0
0
1
1
0
3
0
1
3
5
32
1
15
54
11
6
2
8
15
1
0
0
0
12
4
5
1
0
17
2
8
1
6
13
8
1
1
1
5
2
TOTAL 137 139
36
66 465 367 204 224 203
59
1.9
3.5 24.5 19.310.7 11.8 10.7
3.1
WHOLESALE
FOOC
OTHER
RETAIL
ETC.
HARCWARE,
DRYGOODS
FOCC
CLOTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EATING
DRINK, LIQUOR
OTHER
STORAGE, DISTRIB
FINANCE, R.E.
PERSCNAL SERVICE
OTHER
BARBER, BEAUTY
BUS. SERV, PROF.
NONPRCFIT
ROOMING HOUSES
MANUFACTURING
PRINTING
FOCC
FABRC, APPAREL
OTHER
UNKNOWN, OTHER
ROW PCNT
7.2
7.3
A-42
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY SPACE OCCUPIED PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS TYPE
AREA IN SQ.FT.
1K3KUNDER 5005K500 0.9K 2.9K 4.9K 9.9K
WHOLESALE
FOOC
OTHER
RETAIL
HARCWARE, ETC.
ORYGOODS
FOCC
CLOTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EATING
DRINK, LIQUOR
OTHER
STORAGE, DISTRIB
FINANCE, R.E.
PERSONAL SERVICE
OTHER
BARBER, BEAUTY
BUS. SERV, PROF.
NONPRCFIT
ROOMING HOUSES
MANUFACTURING
PRINTING
FOCC
FABRC, APPAREL
OTHER
UNKNCIAN, OTHER
TOTAL
ROW PCNT
10K- 20K+
UN20K
KNOWN
2
5
7
10
16
30
9
14
10
22
6
23
7
17
7
18
4
14
10
9
3
10
1
22
7
20
7
20
18
7
4
12
11
23
12
10
9
16
39
20
9
32
35
31
21
14
6
3
2
5
9
5
8
8
9
2
6
3
2
2
5
5
2
9
13
5
3
2
2
1
7
0
1
1
7
1
4
3
2
0
3
0
1
4
8
1
11
13
28
19
12
12
24
31
53
10
28
37
86
16
0
33
15
43
8
1
40
7
51
19
15
9
1
7
7
14
3
1
7
9
6
1
0
3
0
3
1
0
2
3
1
32
4
27
31
31
4
0
1
4
1
6
0
1
14
3
15
4
12
30
6
10
0
2
20
3
13
0
9
24
1
2
2
2
8
0
2
0
1
11
0
8
2
7
23
24
284
262
471
153
157
75
71
427
1 7 .8
32.0
10.4
5.1
4.8
19.3
10.7
0
lilt
96e
0
0
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY SPACE OCCUPIED PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
FOR ALL BUSINESS FIRMS.
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
AREA IN SQ.FT.
58
UNDER 50
59
60
13
0
61
62
63
64
61
55
43
65
12 (14
2
5
2,999
24
28
8
9 113 124
53
56
-
4,999
1
16
2
8
57
26
14
-
9,999
4
0
0
7
54
28
10,000 -
19,999
0
4
1
1
24
1
0
0
1
81
64
17
24
TOTA L 1 37 139
36
19
500
-
999
1,000
-
3,000
5,000
OVER 20,000
0, UNKNOWN
ADJUSTED TOTAL
56
75
66
67
26
3
TOT COL-PCNT
284
19
(0262
17
41
15
471
31
15
12
2
153
10
8
19
32
5
157
10
11
2
11
18
3
75
5
20
14
6
8
15
6
71
4
87
51
27
25
36
15
427
0
66 465 367 204 224 203
59 1900
100
42 378
44
(9
5
316
38
177
199
167
4:-
- A-44
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY EMPLOYEES PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS TYPE
WHOLESALE
FOCCC
OTHER
RETAIL
HARCIWARE, ETC.
DRYGOODS
FOC C
CLOTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EAT ING
DRI\Ki LIQUOR
OTHER
STORAGE, DISTRIB
FINANCE, R.E.
PERSCAAL SERVICE
OTHER
BAREER, BEAUTY
BUS. SERV. PRO]F.
NONPRCFIT
ROOMING HOUSES
MANUFACTURING
PRI A T I NG
FOCC
FAaRC, APPAR.EL
OTHER
UNKNCAN, OTHE3R
TOTAL
ROW PCNT
1
2-3
4-5
13
6
18
21
21
9
7
5
14
2 fil
8
8
15
11
8
21
7
5
22
35
17
11
45
21
15
12
12
3
12
14
24
28
11
18
35
21
5-)
19
4
1 -^
3
2
6
10)
6-7
7
15
3
50+:
20-
8-
49 OVER OR X
15
4
11
1)
4
18
2
1
J
27
51
0
2
2
2
3
21
24
43
16
41
48
49
23
7
2
7
2
1
2
5
7
10
2
4
4
1
13
2
3
5
3
11
5
3
5
2
4
16
3
1
8
2
1
11
03
4
1
4
9
17
13
3
2
8
2
1
4
17
2
171
2
5
-0
3
10)
1
16
4
0,
19
4
21
1
26
17
19
42
94
13
11
2
6
32
24
8
13
4
27
5
369
389
175
87
148
74
29.1
30.7
13.8
6.9
-11.7
5.8
1
24
1.9
634
0
40
e
tip
w
SIZE CF ALL BUSINESS FIRMS
AS MEASURED BY NO. OF EMPLOYEES
PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
NO. EMPLOYEES
DATE OF DISPt.ACEMENT
62 63 64
60 61
58
59
ONE
a
0
0
2 T0 3
0
0
0
4 TO g
0
0
1
3
6 TO 7
0
0
-
8 TO 19
0
0
20 TC 49
0
50+, CVER
0
11
75 114
60
TOTUIQ
65
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
PONTOLI0.
63
34
12
369
29
98
26
ci72
389
30
97
214
(5
)
4
68
36
14
27
18
8
175
13
35
2#
2
33
15
11
1t
12
3
87
6
18
20f
0
3
46
25
6
23
33
12
148
it
17
0
0
6
26
10
2
10
18
2
74
5
4
0
0
1
6
5
2
1
6
3
24
1
0
137 139
35
31 109
67
44
35
30
7
634
0
151
23
TOTAL 137 139
36
66 465 367 204 224 203
59 1900
100
420
2'
-
35
0, UNKNOWN
ADJUJSTED TOTAL
-
356
300
160
189
173
52
1266
S
4r
V
40
'U
RENTALS, PRICR TO DISPLACEMENT,
VERSUS SIZE FOR ALL BUSINESS FIRMS.
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
0.00 -
0.11
4
2
1
5
2
0
0
14
0.12 -
0.24
5
12
6
2
5
4
0
77
0.25 - 0.49
28
37
22
11
21
17
6
0.50
-
0.74
47
56
25
16
17
(
0.75
-
0.99
29
32
13®
10
2
TOT COL-PCNT TOT-LIQ. PCNT-L IQ
1
11
39
111
7
27
24
94
236
15
44
18
61
235
15
55
23
53
158
10
30
18
28
0~
(20)
11
17
3
1
55
198
13
47
23
82
31
11
26
5
3
41
26C
17
61
23
82
64
34
14
12
6
1
51
264
17
46
17
72
54
23
12
34
20
7
188
41C
0
99
24
TOTAL
369
389
175
87
148
74
24
1CO
420
22
ADJUSTED TOTAL
297
335
152
75
114
54
17
1.00 -
1.49
(41
(so
1.50 -
2.99
61
3.00
9.99
-
UNKNCWN
634 19CC-
RENTS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BY ALL BUSINESS FIRPS
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60
61 62 63
64
65
58
59
3
6
1
0
3
6
5
6
67
3
1
0
28
I
TOT COL-PCNT
O.00 -
0.11
0.12 -
0.24
31
27
4
3
17
13
5
6
4
1
111
7
0.25 -
0.49
25.
30
5
8
60
45
24
19
15
5
236
15
0.50
-
0.74
3
7
81
55
22
11
20
3
235
15
0.75 -
0.99
13
17
17
10
10
2
158
10
1.CC -
1.49
8
9
4
5
74
46
C8)
14
1
8
198
13
1.50
-
2.99
10
5
6
11
71
59
39
27
9
260
17
3.C00 -
9.99
7
2
4
6
69
36
27
76
34
3
264
17
23
27
3
22
45
73
47
62
80
28
410
0
TOTAL 137 139
36
66 465 367 204 224 203
59 1900
100
33
44
31
UNKNCiN
ADJUSTED TOTAL
114
112
4)
4)
420 294
157
162 123
A-48
TYPE OF BUSINESS LIQUIDATIDN LOAD OVER TIME
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS TYPE
WHCLESALE
FCCD
OTHER
RETAIL
HARDWARE, ETC.
DRYGCOCS
FCCD
CLOTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EATING
DRINK, LIQUCR
OTHER
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
FINANCE, R.E.
PERSCNAL SERVICE
CTHER
BARBER, BEAUTY
BUS. SERV, PROF.
NCNPRCFIT
RCCMING HOUSES
MANUFACTURING
PRINTING
FCCD
FABRC, APPAREL
CTHER
UNKNCWN, OTHER
TOTAL
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
7
1
3
6
0
9
0
2
2
2
0
1
5
9
4
0
2
3
4
5
1
0
2
5
1
0
3
2
1
4
1
0
0
3
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
5
2
7
2
7
12
4
2
0
2
5
9
5
1
12
11
6
5
1
0
2
3
1
0
4
3
2
1
2
0
3
4
0
0
6
4
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
7
5
7
1
0
2
2
1
1
0
2
3
0
0
0
4
1
0
2
4
4
2
0
2
7
1
2
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
7
10
2
1
5
12
4
1
1
15
4
3
6
1
5
5
2
1
1
0
1
C
4
0
1
1
3
0
C
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
47
37
14
4
82
97
45
39
37
18
A-49
LIQUICATION BY BUSINESS, OVER TIME
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
64
61 62 63
63
66
67
TOT
2
34
58
59
0
0
0
1
8
4
6
9
4
28
14
6
3
40
51
15
19
23
STORAGE, DISTRIB
5
4
0
0
2
5
1
0
1
0
1.8
SERVICES, PROF.
5
6
3
0
19
17
13
8
5
4
80
MANUFACTURING
1
1
0
0
7
3
1
1
1
I
16
8
12
5
0
6
17
9
2
3
0
62
47
37
14
4
82
97
45
39
37
18
420
103 118
36
31
38
WHOLESALE
RETAIL
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL1
TOTAL LOAD
PERCENTAGE LIQD.
45
1Less unknowns and prior move-outs.
See Appendix, p. 51.
52 452
7
18
359 203 224 200
27
22
17
18
11.
210
55 1802
32
23
LIQUICATIONS BY SIZE FOR ALL BUSINESS FIRMS.
AS MEASURED BY NO. OF EMPLOYEES
PRIOR TO DI SPLACEMENT
NO. EPPLOYEES
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
60
61
62 63
64
58
59
ONE
0
0
0
0
18
34
2 TO 3
0
0
0
0
18
4 TO 5
0
0
0
1
6 TO 7
0
0
0
8 TO 19
0
0
20 TO 49
0
50+, CVER
0, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
TOt COL-4PCNT
TOTtLOAO
PCNT.LtQ.
65
66
67
19
11
9
7
98
36
369
26
30
14
19
13
3
97
36
389
24
14
10
0
5
3
2
35
13
175
2
0
10
3
2
0
1
2
18
6
87
2A
0
1
3
4
2
2
2
3
17
6
148
11
0
0
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
4
1
74
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24
47
37
14
1
17
15
8
2
9
1
151
0
634
2''
47
37
14
4
82
97
45
39
37
18
420
100
1900
2?
0
S
S
a
-
14
4S
W
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
REASCN FOR LIQUIDATION .VS.
FOR ALL BUSINESS FIRMS
IESS
REASON FOR LIQD.
58-60
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
64 65
60 61 62 63
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
COL-PCNT
58
59
RETIREMENT
0
0
0
0
24
40
23
19
17
11
134
31
42
LIQUOR LICENSE
0
0
0
2
12
11
2
5
4
4
40
9
12
OTHER LICENSE
0 -
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
2
0
0
TO RE-ESTABLISH
0 .
0
0
0
8
16
11
7
6-
1
49
11
15
NOT DUE TO DISPL
0
0
0
0
8
6
0
1
6
0
21
5
6
CCNSOLIDATION
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
1
0
5
1
2
1
H
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
SPACE UNAVAIL.
10
0
0
1
18
17
2
1
2
1
42
10
13
OTHER
47
37
14
0
9
4
7
5
0
1
124
29
6
4
0
0
6
3
0
0
0
2
4
(19)
0
30
21
0
8
10
8
1
0
1
0
(79)
0
81
58
14.
18
95 105
46
39
40
22
37
36
-
43
11
3
0
DUE TO DISPL.
PRICR MOVE-OUT
UNKNCWN
TOTAL
518
(420)2
PCNT UNKNOWNS
8
2
1Data unavailable prior to 61.
2Total
:2::.
k-n
liquidations-- 518 less unknowns and move-outs.
A-52
THE TCTAL AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE (1000'S
OCCUPIED BY LIQUIDATED BUSINESS FIRMS.
BUSINESS TYPE
58
WHOLESALE
RETAIL
TOTAL
66,
31
8
151
75
15
26
38
25
293
9 490
0
0
0
0
519
23
9
6
1
4
61
20
27
16
1
39
104
45
43
11
0
8
0
140
5 235 661
63
64
78
11
8
7
5
15
0
0
4
1
0
12
0
0
0
7
26
25
53
-0
8
TOT
31
-0
-0
67
12
O
1
66
3
0
MANUFACTURING
OTHER, UNKNOWN
YEAR OF DLSPLACEMENT
60 61
62 63
64
65
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
SERVICES, PROF.
59
OF SQ.FT.)
83
-0
76 1268
A-53
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE (100'S OF SQ.FT.)
OCCUPIED BY LIQUIDATED BUSINESS FIRMS.
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
62 63 64
60
61
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
RETAIL
9
10
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
26
SERVICES, PRCF.
66
67
-0
95
17
31
34
78
43
15
27
25
17
10
16
21
25
76
0
0
901225
9
0
2
0
12
10
5
0
7
8
8
4
14
MANUFACTURING
10
-0
0
0
34
91 160
12
OTHER, UNKNOWN
70
37
0
90
28
-0
14
16
2
-0 394
80
0
9
9
0
0
9
0S
S
V
V
I.
V
V
THE TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES DISPLACED
FRCM LIQUIDATED BUSINESS FIRMS.
BUSINESS TYPE
WHOLESALE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
61 62 63 64 65
60
58
59
0
0
0
66
67
TOT
COL PCNT
10
18
22
16
6
100
11
34 146 121
28
57
52
35
473
53
6
-0
28
RETAIL
-0
-0
-0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
-0. -0
0
0
-0
52
-0
0
3
0
55
SERVICES, PROF.
-0
-0
-0
0
46
27
19
13
11
12
128
MANUFACTURING
-0
-0
0
0
18
18
11
2
5
10
64
7
:3~
OTHER, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
19
10
1
-0
0
66
34 274 247
86
95
87
63
886
0
36
7
A-55
AVERAGE
NUMBER
DISPLACED
OF EMPLOYEES
FRCM LIQUIDATED BUSINESS FIRMS.
YEAR OF DI SPLACEMENT
BUSINESS TYPE
WHCLESALE
58
59
60
0
0
o
RETAIL
-0
-0
STGRAGE, DISTRIB
-0
-0
SERVICES, PROF.
-0
-0
MANUFACTURING
-0
-0
-0
-0
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
-0
0
-0
0
-0
62
63
64
65
66
67
-0
3
2
6
2
5
3
11
4
2
1
3
2
3
13
-0
0
3
0
61
0
-0
0
2
1
1
1
2
4
0
3
6
11
2
5
10
0
12
1
1
1
-0
0
A-56
AVERAGE
AMOUNT
0 F RENT
PAID BY LIQUIDATED BUSINESS FIRMS.
BUSINESS TYPE
WHOLESALE
58
59
0
0
75
RETAIL
54
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
64 65
62 63
60 61
0
112
33
0
SERVICES, PROF.
150
108
83
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
59 142
0
67
0 368 117
78 247 248 127 136 145 276 1C9
STORAGE, DISTRIB
MANUFACTURING
0
66
0
53
0 268
56
0
0 150
0
89 235 201 264 259
69
0
0
0
49
80
.75
0
0
6
35
0
0
50
60 139 362
0
0
22
A-57
AVERAGE AMOUNT OF TOTAL PAYMENTS
PAID TO LIQUIDATED BUSINESSES.
BUSINESS TYPE
(MOVING
AND SBDP,100*S),
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
64 65
63
60 61 62
66
67
24
26
25
22
36
34
24
19
7
0
27
0
10
16
13
19
40
26
0
23
11
45
6
17
25
0
13
8
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
-0
22
10
-0
RETAIL
8
8
10
20
16
17
STORAGE, DISTRIB
3
-0
0
0
-0
SERVICES, PROF.
22
10
3
0
MANUFACTURING
-0
8
0
2
1
OTHER, UNKNOWN
3
18
-0
-0
0
A-58
PERCENTAGE LIQUICATIONS BY RENTALS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT,
VERSUS SIZE FOR ALL BUSINESS FIRMS.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
0OLLARS/SQ.FT.
1
2-3
4-5
819
6-7
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
0.00 -
0.11
75
50
100
20
5G
0
0
28
0.12 -
0.24
60
33
16
50
20
0
0
22
0.25 -
0.49
17
10
18
18
4
11
0
27
0.50 -
0.74
27
25
16
12
0
0
0
36
0.75 -
C.99
31
18
7
20
7
20
C
18
1.00 -
1.49
26
34
25
9
11
0
0
20
1.50 -
2.99
14
34
29
18
19
0
0
19
3.00 -
9.99
17
14
17
35
8
0
0
21
43
25
17
25
14
0
0
22
UNKNCWN
V
V
0
V
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY SPACE OCCUPIED PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS FIRMS.
BY WHCLESALE
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
AREA IN SQ.FT.
58
UNDER 500
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
0
0
0
7
3.
0
0
1
1
5
5
3
2
0
17
9
13
5
7ID
8
7
2
46
25
0
23
12
500
-
999
0
1,000
-
2,999
0
3,000
-
4,999
0
1
0
0
5,000
-
9,999
0
0
0
2
8
5
3
7
4
3
32
17
10,0CC -
19,999
0
1
0
0
9
3
1
5
9
1
29
16
OVER 20,000
0
0
0
1
8
4
1
2
6
2
24
0, UNKNOWN
0
4
0
2
4
6
3
2
2
2
25
0
0
8
0
9
51
34
22
32
37
10
203
100
0 T
4
0
7 47
28
19
29
35
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
0Q
0
8
'~0
S
g
S
g
09
S
w
S.
0.
Ve
S
e
BUSINESSES
SIZE CF WHOLESALE
AS VEASURED BY NO. CF EMPLCYEES
PRICR TO DISPLACEMENT
NO. EPLOYEES
DATE CF DISPLACEMENT
64
62 63
61
60
65
66
67
58
59
ONE
c
c
0
2 TC 3
C
C
1
rl
4 TC
5
C
r.
0)
1
6
-1
c
I0
0 10
6
T
TOT COtL-PCNT
TOT.LIQ.
PCNT.LIC.
34
6
5
3
5
4
0
26
15
9
8
6
(D
7
7
3
34
20
9
4
2
5
2
0
27
16
5
03
4
6 ()
22
13
3
22
3
8
0
(i)
0 0
0
0
2
6
2
7
13
2
38
0
0
0
1
6
2
0
2
4
0
15
C
0
0
1
1
1
0
c
1
1
5
2
0
0
8
0
3
5
7
8
0
3
2
36
0
5
TOTAL
c
8
0
9
51
34
22
32
37
10
203
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL
0
0
0
6
46
37
14
32
34
8 TC 19
21
TC 49
52+, CVER
0,
tNI<NOWN
7
a'%
0
8 267
34
16
9
V
V
V
0S
0S
0V
S
a
0
V
0
0
V
w
RENTS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BY WHCLESALE
BUSINESS FIRMS
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
0.00 -
D.11
0
1
0
0
2
2
0
0
1
0
6
4
0.12 -
0.24
0
2
0
1
3
2
1
2
1
1
13
8
0.25 -
0.49
0Q
3
2
Q
6
1
39
26
0.50
-
0.74
0
1
0
0
10
34
22
0.75 -
0.99
0
2
0
0
5
3
1.00 -
1.49
0
0
0
1
5
1.50 -
2.99
0
0
0
1
3.00
9.99
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ADJ TOTAL
0
2
(j
3
2
3
0
18
12
3
0
2
2
0
13
8
8
2
1
1
2
1
16
10
1
3
5
0
0
2
0
11
7
0
2
0
5
13
16
12
5
53
0
8
0
9
51
34
22
32
37
10
203
100
8
0
7
51
29
9
16
25
5
0~
H
V
V
w
V
w
S
p
I
gI
L:j
RENTALS, PRICR TO DISPLACEMENT, VERSUS SIZE OF FIRM
BUSINESS FIRMS.
FOR WHOLESALE
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
COLLARS/SQ.FT.
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT TCT-LIC. PCNT-LIQ
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
0.00 - 0.11
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
3
6
4
0
0
0.12 - 0.24
3
2
1
1
1
1
0
4
13
8
2
15
0.25 - 0.49
4
5
7
5
7
5
1
5
39
26
2
5
0.50 - 0.74
4
7
9
3
4
3
1
3
34
22
3
8
0.75 -
0.99
1
1
0
4
7
1
0
4
18
12
2
11
1.00 -
1.49
0
3
2
2
5
0
0
1
13
8
1
7
1.50 -
2.99
3
5
1
0
3
1
1
2
16
10
4
25
3.CO -
9.99
2
2
2
0
1
0
0
4
11
7
2
18
9
9
5
5
9
4
2
10
53
0
18
33
26
34
27
22
38
15
5
36
203
100
UNKNCWN
TOTAL
.34
16
C'
g
S
LIQUICATIONS BY
WHOLESALE
S.
0S
0S
0S
0
S
0
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
67
TOT COL-PCNT
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
RETIREMENT
LIQUOR LICENSE
OTHER LICENSE
TO RE-ESTABLISH
NOT OLE TO DISPL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
22
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
5
0
DUE TC DISPL.
SPACE UNAVAIL.
OTHER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
1
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
CONSOLIDATION
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
8
0
0
0
1
0
2
8
4
6
9
5
2
37
100
-0
1
8
4
6
9
4
2
UNKNO %N
TOTAL
w
FIRMS
REASON FOR LIQD.
PRIOR MOVE-OUT
S
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
ADJUSTED TOTAL..
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND VCVE-OUTS)
-0
TOTAL LOAD
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND VCVE-OUTS)
-0
7
-0
8
51
34
22
32
36
10
ADJ. TOT./LOAD
-0
-0
-0
12
15
11
27
28
11
20
-0
64
2
0
2
14
a'N
S
0
S
S
S
0
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY SPACE OCCUPIED PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS FIRMS.
BY RETAIL
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
AREA IN SQ.FT.
UNDER 500
500
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
12
5
1
3
13
16
9
5
7
2
73
0
1
1
14
31
(17
11
6
6
102
21
191:
39
999
-
1,000
2 ,999
15
16
3,000
-
4 ,999
0
1
5,C00
-
9 ,999
0
0
10,000 -
19 ,999
0
18
_
Q
(
TOT COL-PCNT
15
3
19
11
6
1
2
2
46
9
0
0
13
10
0
3
8
0
34
7
0
0
7
3
0
2
3
1
17
3
0
4
4
2
0
4
2
17
3
7
34
20
4
3
9
2
150
0
56
41
52
20
630
100
52
38
43
18
0
OVER 20,000
0, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
1
0
38
28
5
73
59
15
20 138 156
35
31
10
13 103
136
0'N
-P*
0
V
0
w
0
0
fe
0
OUSINESSES
SIZE CF RETAIL
EMPLOYEES
CF
NO.
BY
VEASURED
AS
PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
NO. EPPLOYEES
- 5e
0
ONE
DATE CF DISPLACEMENT
64
62 63
60 61
59
65
66
67
21
10
8
7
0
0
TC
3-
r
4 TO
5
0
0
1
6 TC
7
c
0
0
0
"
2
0
19
45
0 0
TOT COL-PCNT
TOT. L l.
PCNT.LIr.
110
26
40
36
150
36
58
3P
26
21
7
8
5
2
72
17
21
1
12
6
0
0
2
2
23
5
10
0
1
13
11
2
1
7
3
38
9
9
2
0
0
2
3
3
0
1
2
1
12
2
2
16
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
1
6
1
0
73
59
14
9
35
17
3
2
7
C
219
0
70
TOTAL
73
59
15
20 138 156
56
41
52
20
630
100
2170
ADJUSTED TOTAL
0
0
1
11
53
39
45
20
8
TO 19
29 TC 49
50+,
0,
CVER
NKNCWN
103
139
31
33
0
9
0 S0
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
9
9
0
S
V
L71
V
RENTS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BY RETAIL
BUSINESS FIRMS
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
0.00 - 0.11
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60
63 64 65
61
62
58
59
0
3
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
5
0
15
9
1
1
5
4
0
1
0
0
36
6
3
3
10
19
7
4
2
3
81
15
1
0
27
22
9
4
7
1
89
L7
18
3
3
3
0
57
10
86
16
3
97
18
0.12 -
0.24
0.25 -
0.49
0.50 -
0.74
0.75 -
0.99
6
9
1.00
-
1.49
7
7
2
13
1.50
-
2.99
4
1
3
3
19
33
16
6
3.00 - 9.99
4
0
2
2
30
15
1
6
12
0
72
13
11
8
0
8
14
23
8
9
17
9
107
0
TOTAL
73
59
15
20 138 1 56
56
41
52
20
630
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL
62
51
15
12
32
35
11
UNKN40N
11
7
2
124
133
48
I~
0rN
0
SS
U
S
w
0
0
V
U
S S
S
RENTALS, PRICR TO DISPLACEMENT, VERSUS SIZE OF FIRM
FOR RETAIL
BUSINESS FIRMS.
NO.
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
1
2-3
OF EMPLOYEES
6-7
4-5
819
0.00 - 0.11
1
0.12 - 0.24
20-
50+
0,
TOT COL-PCNT TOT-LIQ.
PCNT-LIQ
49 OVER OR X
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
5
0
3
60
3
3
0
1
1
0
27
36
6
10
27
0.25 -
0.49
13
12
3
1
7
2
1
42
81
15
22
27
0.50 -
0.74
18
25
8
3
5
0
2
28
89
17
28
31
0.75 - 0.99
12
14
7
0
2
3
0
19
57
10
12
21
-N)
-
1.49
15
27
10
3
7
1
0
23
86
16
33
38
1.50 -
2.99
15
36
17
5
9
1
0
14
97
18
35
36
3.00 -
9.99
12
16
16
8
5
C
1
14
72
13
27
37
23
17
7
3
2
4
2
49
107
0
40
37
72
23
38
12
6
219
630
1.00
UNKNCWN
TOTAL
110
150
iC
2
210
33
LIQUICATIONS BY
RETAIL
w
w
0
Sl
S
FIRMS
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
REASON FOR LIQD.
LESS (58-6o)
TOT COL-PCNT
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
RETIREMENT
LIQUOR LICENSE
OTHER LICENSE
TO RE-ESTABLISH
NOT OLE TO DISPL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
7
11
0
5
2
15
10
0
9
3
4
2
0
5
0
7
5
0
5
1
9
4
1
4
3
6
4
0
0
0
48
38
1,
28
9
CONSCLIDATION
a
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
28
1
16
0
0
14
0
7
0
0
6
0
0
1
0
0
4
3
1
8
5
2
4
0
10
2
0
1
0
2
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
24
57
8
31
0
13
4
1
0
11
27
0
0
TOTAL
45
21
6
10
46
52
15
19
23
12
249
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL..
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND PCVE-OUTS)
28
14
6
3
40
51
15
19
23
11
TOTAL LOAD
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND PCVE-OUTS)
56
52
15
13 132 155
56
41
52
19
ADJ. TOT./LOAD
50
26
40
23
32
26
46
44
57
DUE TC DISPL.
SPACE UNAVAIL.
OTHER
PRIOR MOVE-OUT
UNKNCWN
V
30
22
18
COL PCNT
30
23
0
17
6
2
1
15
6
00
100
0
0
S
0V
V
V
V
V
V
LA
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY SPACE OCCUPIED PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BY STCRAGE, DISTRIB BUSINESS FIRMS.
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
AREA IN SQ.FT.
UNDER 500
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
1
6
2
0
1
0I
(D
0
6
Q
500
-
999
0
1,000
-
2,999
(D
TOT COL-PCNT
7
9
12
0
21
27
1
0
9
11
2
1
13
16
1
3,000
4,999
1
0
0
2
( D3
1
1
5,000
9,999
0
0
0
(ID
4
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
0
7
9
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
3
1
0
8
10
10
6
2
3
16
7
4
3
1
1
53
0
13
9
3
8
34
27
10
9
14
3
130
100
3
3
1
5
18
20
6
6
13
2
10,000 -
19,999
OVER 20,000
0, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
0
)
U'N
10
V
V
V9
9S
0
9
w
TOT.LIQL
PCNT.LI10.
BUSINESSES
SIZE CF STORAGE, DISTRIB
LCYEES
EMP
CF
AS YEASURED BY NO.
PRICR TO DISPLACEMENT
ENPLCYEES
NO.
58
ONE
DATE CF D ISPLACEMENT
64
63
62
6") 61
59
C
C
~)
0
~D ~
'~
(i)
67
TOT COL-PCNT
65
66
0
5
1
1T
47
1
(1)
0
11
30
2
1
2
0
2 TC
2
C
0
0
c
4
1
4 TC
5
0
0
0
0
02
0
2
C
'2(1)
6 TC
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
C
2
5
0
TC
19
C
0
o (j)
0
1
0
0
C
1
3
8
1
2
0
0
C C
1
0
0
1
0
2
5
0
0
0
0 C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
9
3
7
26
I
9
7
2
0
94
0
13
13
9
3
8
34
27
10
9
14
3
130
100
18
0
0
0
1
8
9
1
2
12
3
8
21 TC
49
5)+, CVER
0,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ADJSTED TOTAL
1
#1
5m
31
0
0
13
9
40
w
a
0
Li
v
e
RENTS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BY STCRAGE, DISTRIB BUSINESS FIRMS
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60 61
62 63 64 65
58
59
0.00 - 0.11
1
1
0
0
0,
1
0
0.12 -0.24
3
1
0j
0
3
3
0
0
1
2
5
0.25
-
0.49
0.50
-
0.74
2
2
0
0.75 -
0.99
1
0
0
1
4
1.00 -
1.49
0
0
0
1
1.50 -
2.99
2
0
1
3.00 -
9.99
1
0
2
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
UNKNO %N
0
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
1
0
0
4
4
1
0
0
12
13
2
0
21
22
0
0
0
0
16
17
1
0
0
0
0
7
7
6
6
0
1
1
17T
18
0
4
0
0
.0
4
0
11
11
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
4
4
2
1
4
9
4
5
4
5
2
38
0
13
9
3
8
34
27
10
9
14
3
130
100
11
7
2
4
25
23
5
5
9
1
H
0
V
U
*
0S
V
S
S
S*
RENTALS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT, VERSUS SIZE OF FIRM
FOR STORAGE, DISTRIB BUSINESS FIRMS.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT TOT-LIQ. PCNT-LIQ
0.00 - 0.11
0
0
1
0
0
3
4
4
2
50
0.12
-
0.24
0
0
c
0
0
12
12
13
0
0
0.25 -
0.49
2
0
0
1
0
16
21
22
4
19
0.50 - 0.74
2
0
0
0
0
Ic
16
17
6
37
0.75 - 0.99
0
0
0
0
0
4
7
7
0
0
1.00 -
1.49
2
0
0
0
0
10
17
18
1
5
1.50 -
2.99
3
1
0
0
0
6
11
11
2
18
3.00 -
9.99
1
0
0
0
0
3
4
4
0
0
1
1
2
1
0
30
38
0
3
7
2
3
2
0
94
130
iCo
18
13
UNKNCWN
TCTAL
17
11
1
N~
______L __
0
SS S
0
LIQUICATIONS BY
STORAGE, DISTRIB
6
S
FIRMS
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
REASON FOR.LIQD.
66
67
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0(
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
1
0
2
5
1
33
26
10
9
14
3
6
19
10
-O
7
-0
64
65
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
58
59
60
61
62
63
DUE TC DISPL.
SPACE UNAVAIL.
OTHER
PRIOR MOVE-OUT
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
1
UNKNOkN
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
10
9
0
2
3
ADJUSTED TOTAL..
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND MCVE-OUTS)
5
4
TOTAL LOAD
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND MCVE-OUTS)
8
4
3
62 100
-0
RETIREMENT
LIQUCR LICENSE
OTHER LICENSE
TO RE-ESTABLISH
NOT OLE TO DISPL
CONSCLIDATION
TOTAL
ADJ.
TOT./LOAD
LA
S
v
V
-0
-0
6
-0
-0
TOT COLwPCNT
3
0
0
0
2
1
10
2
12
16
0
0
11
5
0
5
5
55
0
0
1
0
32
100
1
-0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
V
0V
----------
0
V
05
V0
w
w
0
e
g
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY SPACE OCCUPIED PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS FIRMS.
BY SERVICES, PROF.
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
AREA IN SQ.FT.
UNDER
500
58
59
2
8
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
®
28
27
23
39
13
1
039
D1O
TOT COL-PCNT
151
40
0D
88
23
1
2
(20)
5
0
1
23
16
16
22
8
5
98
26
0
2
0
1
4
3
1
4
2
0
1T
4
9,9999
0
0
0
0
3
1
2
2
3
0
11.
2
19,999
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
2
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
3
0
14
10
0
3
12
4
4
4
9
3
63
0
22
28
5
13
92
65
60
91
47
12
435
100
8
18
5
10
80
61
56
87
38
9
500
-
999
1,000
-
2,999
2
3,000
-
4,999
5,000
-
10,000
-
T
I
OVER 20,000
0, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
v
0
V
wV
9
V
V
BUSINESSES
SIZE CF SERVICES, PROF.
EM
PLCYEES
CF
NO.
BY
AS YEASURED
PRICR TO DISPLACEMENT
NO. ENPLOYEES
58
DATE OF 0 ISPLACEMENT
64
63
62
61
59 60
65
66
67
37
15
4
ONE
C
C
0
Q
2 TC 3
C
0
0
3
4
5
0
:0
0
10
4
3
10
3
6 TC
-7
C
0
0
1
0
2
5
4
8
19
C
C
0
c
6
0
1
C
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
22
28
5
3
TOTAL
22
28
5
ADJUSTED TOTAL
0
0
0
20
TC
TC
TC 49
51+, CVER
0,
UNkNOWN
TOT CCL-PCNT
TOT .LIQ** PCNT.Lle.
146
43
32
106
31
18
2
32
9
5
0
1
13
3
3
22
8
5
1
21
6
1
1;
2
3
2
0
12
3
0
1
1
C
2
0
5
1
0
12
5
6
14
4
1
100
0
21
13
92
65
60
91
47
12
435
100'
10
80
60
54
77
43
11
335
24
26
18
80
21
18
V
V
*
vV
SV
0
V
V
w
RENTS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS FIRMS
BY SERVICES, PROF.
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
58
59
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
62 63 64
60 61
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
0.00 -
0.11
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
4
1
0.12 -
0.24
4
6
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
14
3
0.25 -
0.49
5
1D
0
3
3
4
2
1
0
24
6
0.50
-
0.74
2
0
2
9
7
5
3
2
0
32
8
0.75 -
0.99
2
2
1
4
7
6
1
2
1
28
7
1.,00
-
1.49
0
2
0
1
18
5
2
3
0
44
11
1.50
-
2.99
3
4
1
10
8
83
22
9.99
0
2
0
2
2
146
38
5
5
0
2
TOTAL
22
28
5
13
ADJUSTED TOTAL
17
23
5
11
3.0
UO
UNKNON
15
27
12
24
6
3
10
16
5
60
0
92
65
60
91
47
12
435
100
84
59
57
81
31
7
8
ON,
S
0
S
e
S
e
gS
0S
v
w
0
RENTALS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT, VERSUS SIZE OF FIRM
BUSINESS FIRMS.
FOR SERVICES, PROF.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
0OLLARS/SQ.FT.
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT TOT-LIQ.
PCNT-LIQ
0.00 -
0.11
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
4
1
4
100
0.12 -
0.24
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
10
14
3
5
35
0.25 -
0.49
5
1
0
1
1
2
1
13
24
6
5
20
0.50 -
0.74
10
10
2
2
0
2
1
5
32
8
6
18
0.75 -
0.99
11
7
2
0
1
1
0
6
28
7
7
25
1.00 -
1.49
13
13
3
2
1
0
0
12
44
11
10
22
1.50 -
2.99
26
21
10
3
8
3
1
11
83
22
18
21
3.00 -
9.99
63
41
10
4
4
3
0
21
146
38
13
8
16
10
4
0
6
1
2
21
60
0
146
106
32
13
21
12
5
100
435
100
UNKNCWN
TOTAL
-12
20
80
18
LIQUICATIONS BY
SERVICES, PROF.
0
0
0
0
SS
S
S
U
S
FIRMS
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
REASON FOR LIQD.
65
66
67
TOT COL-PGNT
LESS (58-6o)
COL PCNT
58
59
60
61
62
63
RETIREMENT
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
8
3
4
it
+
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
3
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
11
1
46
0
1
13
1
56
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
LIQUOR LICENSE
OTHER LICENSE
TO RE-ESTABLISH
NOT OLE TO DISPL
CONSCLIDATION
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
DUE TC DISPL.
SPACE UNAVAIL.
OTHER
0
0
5
0
4
0
0
6
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
7
2
0
1
2
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
2
3
1
0
1
0
0
8
22
0
15
0
10
27
0
0
0
12
12
0
0
TOTAL
9
8
3
2
21
20
14
8
6
4
95
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL..
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND VCVE-OUTS)
5
6
3
-0
19
17
13
8
5
4
TOTAL LOAD
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND PCVE-OUTS)
18
26
5
11
90
62
59
91
46
12
ADJ. TOT./LOAD
27
23
60
-0
21
27
22
8
10
33
PRIOR MOVE-OUT
UNKNCAN
S
64
37t
0
2
17
2
00,
S
w
w
S
S
S
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY SPACE OCCUPIED PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS FIRMS.
BY MANUFACTURING
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
AREA IN SQ.FT.
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
2
0
9
4
1
0
0
1
11
1
3
2
2
0
21
10
1
0
0
27
3
1
61'
30
0
0
0
0
32
16
1
46
23
UNDER 500
999
500
-
1,000
-
2,999
3,000
-
4,999
0
5,000
-
9,999
2
0
0
(5)20
10,00C
-
19,999
0
0
1
0
OVER 20,000
0
0
0
0, UNKNOWN
8
5
15
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
TOT COL-PCNT
58
0
7
3
2
2
2
5
4
2
1
3
2
(D
14
7
0
4
3
1
1
3
2
14
7
1
3
9
1
0
5
5
3
40
0
9
2
7 102
31
12
23
28
8
237
100
4
1
4
30
12
18
23
5
93
V
w
U
w
V
V
U
U
U
U
BUSINESSES
SIZE CF MANUFACTURING
AS NEASURED RY NO. CF EMPLCYEES
TO DISPLACEMENT
PRICR
DATE
NO. ENPLCYEES
CF DISPLACEMENT
64
62 .63
61
65
66
67
0
2
2
0
28
15
2
5
4
1
42
22
5
4
0
24
12
2
1
(f)
c
18
9
1
1
4
6
4
0
3
7
3
1
1
1
11
2
1
2
7 102
31
0
4
29
58
59
r
0
0
3
c
C
0
TC 5
C
C
0
6 TC I
C
c
0
(0
10
3
2
8 TC 19
C
0
0
1
19
5
20 TC 49
ri
.
0
1
iC
50+,
C
0
0
15
9
2
3
15
9
0
0
ONE
2 T
4
0,
CVER
UNK<NOWN
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL"
60
0
13
9
22
4
30
0
91
1
TOT COL-PCNT
TOT.LIQL
40
21
3
1
26
13
0
1
1
8
4
0
5
2
1
51
10
3
12
23
28
8
237
11
18
26
7
100
16
PCNTL Ir.
11
0
6
00
v
.v
RENTS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS FIRMS
BY MANUFACTURING
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
58
0.00
59
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
62 63 64 65
61
60
66
67
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
6
1
2
1
2
0
21
11
(DO 0 0
22
9
4
2
1
1
46
24
U
6
2
(9
2
0
43
23
0
16
2
2
4
31
16
0
1
16
2
0
1
2
2
25
13
0
0
0
5
4
0
0
3
0
12
6
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
1
0
5
2
0
1
0
3
7
6
1
13
16
4
51
0
15
9
2
7 102
31
12
23
28
8
237
2
4
25
11
10
12
4
0.11
0
0.12 -
0.24
5
0.25 -
0.49
-
0.74
2
0
0
()
0.75 -
0.99
3
2
0
1.00 -
1.49
1
0
1.50 -
2.99
0
3.00 -
9.99
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
3
0
o0
-
0.50
TOT COL-PCNT
2
1
95
(
(j
1
1ot
00
H
SV
a
v
V
RENTALS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT, VERSUS SIZE OF FIRM
FOR MANUFACTURING
BUSINESS FIRMS.
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
0.00 - 0.11
0
0
0
2
C
0
0
1
3
0.12
-
0.24
0
4
1
1
3
2
0
10
21
0.25
-
0.49
3
9
10
2
6
5
3
8
0.50 -
0.74
9
7
4
7
8
4
0
0.75 -
0.99
0
9
3
0
4
4
1.00 -
1.49
7
4
1
4
4
1.50 -
2.99
4
2
0
0
3.00 -
9.99
1
0
2
4
7
28
42
2050+
0,
49 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT TOT-LIQ.
PCNT-LIQ
0
0
11
3
14
46
24
3
6
4
43
23
4
9
2
9
31
16
3
9
2
1
2
25
13
1
3
0
1
2
12
6
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
5
2
0
0
3
2
12
8
1
14
51
c
2
3
24
18
4C
26
8
51
237
100
16
6
I
00
r\)
UNKNCWN
TCTAL
40
U
LIQUICATIONS BY
MANUFACTURING
FIRMS
REASON FOR LIQOD..
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
58
59
60
61
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
6
1
0
0
ADJUSTED TOTAL..
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND VCVE-OUTS)
1
1
TOTAL LOAD
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND VCVE-OUTS)
10
9
ADJ. TOT./LOAD
10
11
RETIREMENT
LIQUCR LICENSE
OTHER LICENSE
TO RE-ESTABLISH
NOT CLE TO DISPL
CONSCLIDATION
DUE TC DISPL.
SPACE
UNAVAIL.
OTHER
PRIOR MOVE-OUT
UNKN hN
w
-0
2
-0
62
63
64
65
66
67
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
7
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
3
6
1
1
3
25
1
1
1
1
29
12
23
28
6
10
8
4
3
16
0
0
0
5
1
7
3
7 102
-0
6
5
0
0
3
11
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
-0
0
TOT COL-PCNT
0
31
0
0
18
6
0
0
18
25
100
0
0
I
00
'A
fa
e
0
op
0
SIZE CF BUSINESS, BY SPACE OCCUPIED PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BY OTFER, UNKNOWN
BUSINESS FIRMS.
AREA IN SQ.FT.
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
0
0
1
1
12
5
9
8
1
0
37
21
999
0
2
0
0
2
2
cii)
2
0
22
13
2,999
1
3
0
0
54
31
4,999
0
1
2
3
15
9,999
2
0
0
0
19,999
0
1
0
0
0
11
UNDER 500
500
-
1, 000
3,000
-
5,U00
10,000
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
OVER 20,000
0, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
0
TOT COL-PCNT
7
4
4
4
3
0
0
26
6
9
0
0
4
0
21
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
1
0
1
2
1
0
5
2
11
9
6
12
13
12
8
10
4
96
0
14
26
11
9
48
54
44
28
25
6
265
too
3
15
2
3
36
41
32
20
15
2
(
0
4-
v
40
SIZE CF OTHER, tNKNCWN
BUSINESSES
AS VEASURED BY NO. CF EMPLOYEES
PRICR TO DISPLACEMENT
DATE
NO. ENPLCYEES
CF DISPLACEPENT
61
62
63
64
58
59
60
ONE
C
0
0
2 TO 3
c
c
0
4
TC
5
C
C
0
0
6
TC
7
C
C
0
0
8
TC 19
O
C
0
49
0
0
CVER
0
2:)
TC
50+,
0, UNFNOWN
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
1
7
14
12
6
65
66
67
TOT C1L-PCNT
8
0
C
42
32
14
0
2
1
46
35
5
1
19
14
2
TOT.LIQ.
PCNT.L I.
4
1
2
5
1
0
0
3
0
9
6
1
0
0
2
0
3
2
1
8
6
0
0
1
3
0
0
1
2
C
7
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
0
0
0
0
14
26
11
6
20
18
17
7
12
3
134
39
29
14
26
11
9
48
54
44
28
25
6
265
62
23
0
0
3
28
36
27
21
13
131
0
@
100
1!
14
RENTS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT
BY OTHER, UNKNOWN
BUSINESS FIRMS
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
58
59
1
1
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
65
62 63 64
60 61
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
6
3
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
15
9
1
1
1
8
6
2
2
3
25
15
0
4
2
4
1
1
21
12
1
2
0
17
10
0
13
7
60 1
41
25
0.00
-
0.11
0.12
-
0.24
0.25
-
0.49
1
0.50
-
0.74
0.75
-
0.99
2 .0
0
6
3
0
2
2
0
-
1.49
0
0
1.53
-
2.99
1
0
1
2
13
5
11
3.00
-
9.99
1
0
2
1
6
2
2
8
3
26
15
5
11
2
3
7
29
17
10
14
101
0
265
100
UNKNOiAN
TOTAL
14
26
11
9
48
54
44
28
25
ADJUSTED TOTAL
9
15
9
6
41
25
27
18
11
0c%
0
S
e
0
RENTALS, PRIOR TO DISPLACEMENT, VERSUS SIZE OF FIRM
FOR OTHER, UNKNOWN
BUSINESS FIRMS.
DOLLARS/SQ.FT.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
2050+
0,
49 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT TOT-LIQ. PCNT-LIQ
0.00 -
0.11
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
6
3
2
33
0.12 -
0.24
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
14
15
9
7
46
0.25 -
0.49
1
8
2
2
0
2
0
10
25
15
8
32
0.50 -
0.74
2
5
2
1
0
0
0
11
21
12
8
38
0.75 -
0.99
2
1
1
1
0
1
0
11
17
10
6
35
1.00 -
1.49
2
1
3
0
0
0
0
7
13
7
1
7
1.50 -
2.99
12
15
3
2
3
0
0
6
41
25
2
4
3.00 - 9.99
4
4
4
2
2
2
0
8
26
15
4
15
17
10
4
1
3
2
0
64
101
0
24
23
42
46
19
9
8
7
0
134
265
100
62
23
UNKNCWN
TOTAL
:roa
S
S
aS
LICUICATIONS
w
U
40
V
41
V
BY
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
REASCN
FO.R LIQD.
FIRMS
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEPENT
LESS (58-60)
58
59
RETIREMENT
LICUCR
OTHER
LICENSE
LICENSE
TO RE-ESTABLISH
NOT CLE TO DISPL
CONSCLIDATION
DUE IC DISPL.
SPACE
OTHER
PRICR
UNKNC
UNAVAIL.
0
a
8
8
1
1
'2
2
0
0
4)
0
12
MOVE-OUT
N
6
602
61
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(2
0
0
0
0
0
0 ' 11
62
63
64
2
1
11
5
0
1
2
3
C
31
1
1
3
0
0
65
66
1I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
c
0
2
1
0
0
0
1
c
0
C)
0
C)
ci
1
3
1
1
0
0
10
18
9
2
4
6
17
9
2
3
0
67
I)
a
a
0
1
TOTAL
11
18
5
ADJUST ED TOTAL..
(LESS UNKNOWNS
AND NC VE-OUTS)
8
12
5
11
20
11
7
44
53
44
28
24
5
72
60
45
-0
13
32
20
7
12
-0
TOTAL LOAD
(LESS
2
-0
-0
UNKNOWNS
AND VCVE-OUTS)
ADJ.
TOT./LOAD
TCT COL-PCNT
19
1
0
4
4
2
30
1
0
6
6
3
COL PCNT
51
3
0
11
11
I
5
0
6
11
4
28
5
13
45
0
0
80
100
07
4-
100
oo
APPENDIX IV
SURVEY DATA:
A.
Subject
Page
Trading Areas
89 -
1.
2.
B.
C.
92
d.
e.
to Relocation
103
Layout of Working Space
in Product, Line
or Type of Business
G.
Percentage Change on Displacement of
Area Occupied
the
Percentage Change on Displacement of
Rent Paid
the
Changes
1.
2.
3.
-
104
-
110
Improved to Increase Efficiency
Unimproved
Changes
I.
102
100
By Business Type
By Size of Business
Percentages of Total Possible Response
F.
H.
99
By Business Type
By Size of Business
Percentages of Total Possible
Response
Suitable Building Space
Unreasonable or High Rents
Difficulties Experienced Due
1.
2.
-
Time Required to Find a New Location
Means Used to Find a New Location
Problems in Finding a New Location
a.
b.
c.
E.
91
in Business
.Location
1.
2.
3.
90
By Business Type
By Size of Business
Length of Time
1.
2.
3.
D.
RELOCATION PROCESS
in
105
106
Employees
On Displacement by Size of Firms
After Displacement by Size of Firm
After Displacement - Over Time
107
108
J.
Percentage
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
K.
111
-
116
117
-
123
By Size of Firm
By Type, for those Very Satisfied with
Location
their
By Type, for those Satisfied with their
Location
By Type, for those Very Dissatisfied
Location
with their
Versus Changes in Employees on Displacement
Versus Changes in Employees after Displacement
Subjective
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Change in Sales
Comparison of
the New and Locations
All Firms
Retail Businesses
Retail Businesses
Storage and Distribution Firms
Service and Professional Firms
Manufacturing Firms
Other Firms
A-89
TRADING AREA
BUSINESS TYPE
LOCAL BOSTON
MET RO N-ENG.
U.S. I-NAT.
WHOLESALE
0
3
8
26
4
0
RETAIL
4
11
18
9
1
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
2
2
0
0
SERVICES, PROF.
7
11
30
17
MANUFACTURING
0
6
1::,
17
4
2
OTHER, UNKNOWN
3
9
6
9
1
0
14
40
79
80
TOTAL
0
11
2
A-90
TRADING AREA
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
LOCAL BOSTON
ONE
2
2 TO 3
5
4 TO5
10
METRO N-ENG.
U.S. I-NAT.
11
.1
0
0
9
12
11
2
0
1
6
13
16
0
0
6 TO 7
1
3
7
8
1
0
8 TO 19
1
4
15
22
3
2
20 TO 49
0
3
10
9
4
0
50+,
0
0
.3
3
1
0
4
5
8
10
0
0
14
40
79
80
11
2
0,
CVER
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
e
S eS
V
S
LA
S
S
w
w
U
LENGTH OF TIME IN BUSINESS PRIOR TO THE MOVE
BUSINESS TYPE
1
2-3
4-5
YEARS
6-7
819
20-
50+-
49 OVER
WHOLESALE
0
1
I
1
6
22
9
RETAIL
0
2
0
2
10
19
10
2
0
0,
OR X
0
PERCENTAGE
OVER 8
OVER 20
93
78
91
67
89
42
0
STORAGE-1
DISTRIB
0
0
0
1
SERVICES,
PROF.
0
1
5
1
32
23
4
MANUFACTURING
1
0
0
2
9
18
11
0
93
71
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
1
2
0
6
13
5
0
89
67
1
5
8
7
64
97
39
1
.02
.04
.03
.29
.44
.18
I
TOTAL
ROW PCNT
-
H
V
S
V
e
S
e
V
e
V
to
V
op
S 0V
0
TIME REQUIRED TO FIND A NEW LOCATION
BUSINESS TYPE
TIME IN MONTHS
0
1
2
3
4
5
610
6
0
2
2
1
0
12
11
2
2
5
1
0
9
1
0
1
2
0
1
0
13
10
9
11.
6
1
MANUFACTURING
7
2
4
5
2
OTHER, UNKNOWN
4
5
3
4
42
19
21
18
8
9
WHOLESALE
RETAIL
STORAGE, DISTRIB
SERVICES,
PROF.
TOTAL
ROW PCNT
112625 OVER
UNDER
6 MO.
6 MO.&
OVER
9
27
73
5
47
53
1
0
100
9
9
3
70
30
1
10
8
7
46
54
2
1
8
2
1
66
.34
29
12
4
48
38
25
12
5
2
20
16
11
9
ic
(100)
A-93
THE NEANS USED TO FIND A NEW LOCATION.
1
2
3
4
5
6
TOT
WHOLESALE
22
8
2
15
3
0
50
RETAIL
21
4
5
13
6
1
50
2
1
2
0
0
0
5
SERVICES, PROF.
46
9
4
16
2
1
(8
MANUFACTURING
21
10
9
22
2
0
64
OTHER, UNKNOWN
17
5
3
8
1
0
34
TOTAL 129
37
25
74
14
2
281
13
9
26
5
1
BUSINESS TYPE
STORAGE, DISTRIB
ROW PCNT
1 - Located by self
2 - Through friends
3
- Other businessmen
4
- Real Estate agent
5 - Relocation agency
6 - Other
46
A-94
;JEA4
I
LUC AT IU$a
T3ALJ7 F.)4
BUSINESS TYPE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
WHOLESALE
2
2
19
21
2
6
4
9
15
21
1
RETAIL
5
4
15
26
11
5
3
9
13
19
5
STORAGE, DISTRIB
1
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
SERVICES,
1
0
17
33
8
14
5
8
13
17
2
MANUFACTURING
3
2
27
24
3
5
2
5
8
15
3
OTHER,
0
1
9
10
5
1
0
1
4
8
0
12
9
90 115
29
31
14
32
53
81
11
PROF.
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
S
to
S
0
S
w
0S
S0S
PRCBLEMS IN FINCING A NEW LOCATICN
PROBLEMS
5
6
NO. CF EMPL OYEES
1
2
3
4
0N E
C
0)
5
15
4
2 TO 3
2
3
12
19
4 TO
5
2
2
13
6 TC
-1
0 0
8
19
3
7
8
9
10
1
2
1
3
8
4
5
5
4
9
13
13
3
20
5
4
0
6
6
12
1
7
8
0
1
2
0
2
6
0
2
25
25
7
12
4
5
12
23
2
2
0
14
8
3
4
2
6
'12
5)+, CVER
I
0
5
3
0
1
2
2
2
0
0,
3
2
9
17
5
3
7
9
5
1
12
9
9, 115
29
31
32
53
81
11
2,)
TO
TC
49
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
14
14
11
The problems were as follows:
1.
Zoning restrictions.
7.
Leasing problems.
2.
Licensing problems.
8.
Financing problems.
3.
Unsuitable building space.
9.
Costs.
4.
Unreasonable rents.
10.
Unsuitable location.
5.
Hurried, not enough time.
11.
Liquidated after the move.
6.
Delays or the time consumed.
S
V
w
A-96,7
PROBLEMS IN FINDING A NEW
LOCATION
PERCENTAGES OF THE TOTAL POSSIBLE SURVEY
RESPONSE BY BUSINESS TYPE AND SIZE
INDICATING EACH PROBLEM
Business
Problems
Type
Wholesale
Retail
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10.
11
5
5
46
51
5
15
10
22
37
51
2
11
9
33
58
24
11
7
20
29
42
11
Services
1
-
24
46
11
20
7
11
18
24
3
Manufacturing
7
4
59
52
7
13
4
13
17
33
7
Other
-
3
30
33
17
3
3
13
27
-
All Types
5
4
38
48
12
13
6
13
22
34
5
-
-
17
52
14
3
7
3
10
28
-
Employees
No.
One
14
2 to
3
5
7
29
45
12
12
10
21
31
31
7
4
to
5
5
5
35
54
14
11
-
16
16
32
3
6
to
7
-
-
35
40
-
5
10
-
10
30
-
19
6
4
51
51
14
24
8
10
24
47
4
8
-
54
31
12
33
-
8
67
46
-
as
follows:
8 to
20
to
49
*
The
problems
were
restrictions.
1
Zoning
2
Licensing problems.
3
Unsuitable building space.
4
Unreasonable
rents.
5
Hurried, not
enough
6
Delays
7
Leasing problems.
8
Financing
9
Costs.
10
Unsuitable
location.
11
Liquidated
after
or
the
time
time.
consumed.
problems.
the
move.
SS
9
S
S
0S
S
0
V
V
0
SURVEY FIRMS EXPRESSING DIFFICULTIES
IN FINDING SUITABLE alUILDING SPACE.
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60 61
62 63 64
65
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
D
0
1
5
2
1
RETAIL
0
1
0
0
6
3
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
0
SERVICES,. PROF.
o
0
0
0
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
o
0
0
TOTAL
PERCENT OF TOTAL
YEARLY SURVEY
RESPONSE
-
66
67
TOT
4
6
(
19
1
2
2
0
15
0
0
0
2
1
3
4
3
2
2
5
1
17
0
11
3
2
5
5
1
27
1
0
0
2
2
1
2
1
9
1
1
1
26
13
8
14
22
4
90
-
-
-
25
59
54
36
35
43
50
I"
w
S
V
V
V
V
v
w
SURVEY FIRMS ENCOUNTERING UNREASONABLE OR HIGH RENTS.
BUSINESS TYPE
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
60
61 62 63 64
65
58
59
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
2
3
2
3
RETAIL
0
1
0
0
11
5
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
0
SERVICES,, PROF.
1
0
0
1
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
1
-
66
67
TOT
5
4
2
21
2
3
4
0
26
0
0
0
0
1
1
6
4
4
9
7
1
33
0
11
4
1
2
6
0
24
1
0
3
1
2
0
2
1
10
1
1
3
34
16
12
19
23
5
115
-
-
-
77
67
55
48
45
63
'0
TOTAL
PERCENT OF TOTAL YEARLY
SURVEY REPONSE
A-100
DIFFICULTIES EXPERIENCED DUE TO RELOCATION
1
2
3
4
5
WHOLESALE
22
11
8
13
13
RETAIL
22
23
25
33
-25
3
1
0
0
0
SERVICES,, PROF.
29
27
14
17
21
MANUFACTURING
20
13
8
11
7
7
4
5
6
4
103
79
60
80
70
BUSINESS TYPE
STORAGE, DISTRIB
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
The difficulties are as follows:
1.
Delays in receiving relocation payments.
2.
Business interruption.
3.
Loss of income prior to the property taking.
4.
Loss of customers.
5.
Unreasonable time lag between the project announcement
and the property taking.
A-101
DIFFICULTIES EXPERIENCED DUE TO RELOCATION
1
2
3
4
5
12
12
6
9
7
-
14
16
7
14
11
4 TO 5
17
9
11
13
10
6 TC 7
8
6
5
6
6
26
17
12
13
18
17
7
4
8
7
1
1
1
2
1
8
11
14
15
10
113
79
60
83
70
NO.
CF
EMPLOYEES
ONE
2 TO
8
2)
TO
TC 49
5+,
0,
19
CVER
UJNKNOWN
TOTAL
A-102
DIFFICULTIES EXPERIENCED DUE
TO RELOCATION
PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL POSSIBLE SURVEY
RE-
SPONSE, BY BUSINESS TYPE AND SIZE
INDICATING EACH DIFFICULTY
Business
Dif ficulties
Type
*
4
5
20
32
32
51
56
51
56
41
38
20
24
30
Manufacturing
43
28
17
24
15
Other
23
13
17
20
13
All Types
43
33
25
34
30
41
41
21
31
24
1
2
Wholesale
54
27
Retail
49
Services
3
Employees
No.
One
2
to
3
33
38
17
33
26
4
to
5
46
24
30
35
27
6
to 7
40
30
25
30
30
8
to
53
35
24
27
37
65
27
15
31
27
20
to
19
49
*
The difficulties
are as
follows:
1
Delays in receiving relocation payments.
2
Business
3
Loss on income prior
4
Loss
5
Unreasonable
interruption.
to
the property
taking.
of customers.
time lag between the project
announcement and the
property taking.
Li
0 V
0
v
V
V
V
9
V V
V
e
IMPROVED
LAYCUT CF WORKING SPACE
TO INCREASE EFFICIENCY.
THE ARRAY SHCWS THE NUMBER OF SURVEY FIRMS
THAT EXPERIENCED LABOR CHANGES ON DISPLACEMENT.
LOSS
-4- -2- -1-
BUSINESS TYPE
-11
OVER -10
-1
-3
C0
11
23
GAIN
411
10 OVER
SUMMARY
LOSS
GAIN
WHCLESALE
4
2
5
2
5
6
7
0
2
13
15
RETAIL
0
2
1
4
8
1
3
3
C
7
7
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
SERVICES, PRCF.
1
1
2
5
7
7
7
6
0
9
20
MANUFACTURING
3
3
1
2
9
3
3
6
3
9
15
OTHER, UNKNOWN
2
2
1
2
5
2
0
0
0
7
2
TOTAL
11
11
10
15
34
20
20
15
5
PERCENT (100)
P
8
7
10
24
14
14
11
4
P
47
60
141
9
V
w
0V
V
w
99
0U
'3
V
V
LAYCUT OF WORKING SPACE UNIMPROVED.
THE ARRAY SHCWS THE NUMBER OF SURVEY FIRMS
THAT EXPERIENCED LABOR CHANGES ON DISPLACEMENT.
LOSS
-2-1-3
-1
BUSINESS TYPE
-11 -4OVER -10
GAIN
00
11
23
4-
11
10 OVER
SUMRY
GAIN
LOSS
WHCLESALE
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
l
1
RETAIL
0
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
i
1
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SERVICES,
0
1
0
0
3
2
0
0
1
1
3
MANUFACTURING
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
OTHER, UNKNOWN
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
-
2
0
3
0
2
7
5
1
0
2
5
8
PRCF.
TCTAL
20
H
0
4:-
SURVEY
RESPONSE...
CHANGES
IN PRODUCT,
BUSINESS
TYPE
LINE, 01R TYPE OF
METHOD OF
OPERAT ION
WHOLESALE
TYPE OF
BUSINESS
BUSINESS
DROP OR ADD ANY
% MAX.
LINE, SERV.,PROD.
OF TOTAL
SURVEY
TOTAL
41
45
3
13
3
17
45
STORAGE, DISTkIB
1
0
0
5
SERVICES, PROF.
8
3
7
11
71'
MANUFACTURING
8
0
7
17
46
OTHER, UNKNOWN
1
(03
5
17
30
RETA IL
TOTAL
46
1t
48
H
0
PERCENTAGE CHANGE ON DISPLACBMENT
OF THE AREA OCCUPIED BY ALL BUSINESS FIRMS
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
60 61
62 63 64 65
58
59
NEG.-CVER 51
0
0
0
0
7
4
2
26 TO 50
0
0
0
0
4
2
11 TO 25
0
1
0
0
6
5 TO 10
0
0
0
0
1 TO
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
24 TO 10
66
67
TOT
4
7
0
24
16
4
5
3
0
18
12
2
1
1
3
0
14
9
1
0
0
2
2
0
5
3
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
1
0
0
1
2
2
4
5
0
14
9
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
4
3
0
0
0
0
3
1
2
2
5
0
13
8
49 TO 25
0
0
0
0
3
1
1
2
3
0
10
7
POS.-CVER 50
0
0
0
0
11
5
4
8
17
3
48
32
0
1
0
1
37
17
17
30
46
3
t52
5
4 TO 0
9 TO
TOTAL
COL-PCNT
0
g
V
PERCENTAGE CHANGE CN DISPLACEMENT
OF THE RENT PAID BY ALL BUSINESS FIRMS
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
60 61
62 63
64 65
58
59
NEG.-CVER 51
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
26 TO 50
0
0
0
1
0
0
11 TO 25
0
0
0
0
5
5 TO 10
0
0
0
0
1 TO
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
24 TO 10
66
6T
TOT
COL PCNT
1
2
0
5
5
0
1
1
a
3
3
1
1
0
2
0
9
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
2
4
2
2
1
14
13
49 TO 25
0
0
0
0
7
3
4
3
2
1
20
19
POS.-CVER 50
0
1
0
0
12
9
4
11
10
1
48
45
0
1
0
1
32
16
14
19
20
3
106
100
5
4 TO 0
9 TO
TOTAL
w
gS
9
9
S
9
V
CHANGES IN EMPLOYEES ON DISPLACEMENT
BY SIZE OF BUSINESS FIRM.
LOSS
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
GAIN
-4- -2- -1-
-11
-3
OVER -10
00
-1
1~- 21
3
4-
11
10 OVER
SUMMARY
LOSS
GAIN
ONE
0
0
0
1
22
1
0
0
1
2
0
2 TO 3
o
0
1
5
23
2
3
0
0
13
9
4 TO 5
0
0
2
1
19
8
3
1
0
6
19
6 TO 7
0
1
1
1
12
2
3
0
0
7
10
8 TO 19
0
3
6
2
24
2
2
3
0
18
14
20 TO 49
1
2
3
1
10
0
0
6
2
4
12
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
2
2
4
0
1
2
2
9
5
1
0
2
1
7
15
14 120
20
12
12
7
7
9
6
25
16
13
9
4
50+,
CVER
0, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ROW PCNT
11
52
H
0
00
9
9
9
nU
eU
*
@
CHANGES IN EMPLOYEES AFTER DISPLACEMENT
BY SI'ZE OF BUSINBSS FIRM.
NO.
CF EMPLOYEES
-11
-4-
OVER -10
LOSS
-2-3
-1
0-
SUMMARY
GAIN
LOSS
GAIN
0
1'- 23
1
4-
11
10 OVER
ONE
0
0
0
1
22
1
0
0
1
2 TO 3
0
0
1
5
23
2
3
0
0
6
5
4 TO go
0
0
2
1
19
8
3
1
0
3
12
6 TO 7
0
1
1
1
12
2'
3
0
0
3
5
8 TO 19
0
3
6
2
24
2
2
3
0
11
7
20 TC 49
1
2
3
1
10
0
0
6
2
50+, CVER
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
2
0,
0
1
2
2
9
5
1
0
2
1
7
15
14 120
20
12
12
7
-
3
7
7 58
10
6
6
3
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ROW PCNT (100)
2
7
5
8
5
208
I
0
9
V
r7l
S
a
9
SURVEY RESPONSE...
CHANGES IN EMPLOYEES AFTER OISPLACEMENT.
FOR ALL SURVEY BUSINESS F IRMS.
EM PL 0 YE ES
YEAR OF DISPLACEMENT
58
OVER
LOSS
-0-
GAIN
11
59
60
61
b2
63
64
65
66
o
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
1
1
1
7
0
7
0
1
0
6
0
15
0
14
4 -
10
0
1
2 -
3
0
1
1 - 1
0
0
0
1
3
4
5
.0
1
0
0
1
0
18
21
15
26
36
0-0
67 TOT
3 120
1 -
1
0
0
0
0
5
3
2
5
4
1
20
2 -
3
1
0
0
0
4
2
0
2
3
0
12
4 -
10
0
0
0
1
5
1
0
3
0
2
12
0
1
0
0
1
1
2
1
1
0
7
TOTAL
1
3
1
3
46
32
25
38
52
7 208
TOTAL CHANGE
1
3
0
3
28
11
10
12
16
4
53
64
40
92
50
75
OVER
11
(M)RATIO:
GAIN TO LOSS
GROUP
TOTAL
37
PERCENT
17
120
51
120
I
H
H
0
25
9
PERCENTAGE
CHANGE
IN SALES (PER YEAR SINCE DISPLACEMENT)
BY SIZE OF BUSINESS FIRM.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
51 , 26OVER
50
LOSS
61125
10
GAIN
25- 50,
24 49 OVER TOT
5- 10-
15
04
9
SUMMARY
LOSS
GAIN
ONE
0
0
0
0
3
4
1
0
0
0
8
3
2 TO 3
0
0
0
0
4
6
0
1
1
1
13
4
3
4 TO 5
0
0
0
0
3
6
2
0
0
0
11
3
2
6 TO 7
0
0
0
1
1
2
2
1
0
0
7
2
3
8 TO 19
0
0
0
0
2
15
0
0
0
0
17
2
20 TO 49
0
0
0
0
0
10
1
1
0
0
12
2
50+,
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
1
0
5
2
0
0
0
2
0
6
0
0
0
2
10
2
2
0
0
0
3
13
52
6
4
2
3
83
20
18
-
4
16
63
7
5
2
4 101
0,
CVER
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
PERCENT
H
H
H
101
A-112
SALES BY TYPE OF BUSINESS FOR THOSE VERY SATISFIED
WITH THEIR PRESENT LOCATION
BUSINESS TYPE
PERCENTAGE CHANGE/YEAR
LOSS
GAIN
651, 26- 111- 31- 5- 10- 25- 50,
50 25
10
9 24 49 OVER
OVER
5
4
WHOLESALE
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
RETA 11
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
1
STORAGE-4 DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
SERVICES, PROF.
0
0
0
0
1
8
1
0
0
0
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
2
1
0
OTHER,
4
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
22
4
4
2
1
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
A-113
SALES BY TYPE OF BUSINESS FOR THOSE SATI.SFIED
WITH THEIR PRESENT LOCATION
BUSINESS TYPE
PERCENTAGE CHANGE/YEAR
LOSS
GA IN
51, 26- 1161- 05- 10- 25- 50,
9
4
50
OVER
10
5
49 OVER
25
24
WHOLESALE
O
0
0
1
1
9
0
0
0
0
RETAIL
0
0
0
1
1
6
0
0
0
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
29
0
0
0
0
SERVICES,
PROF.
MANUFACTURI.NG
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
A-l4
SALES BY TYPE OF BUSINESS FOR THOSE VERY DISSATISFIED
WITH THEIR PRESENT LOCATION
BUSINESS TYPE
PERCENTAGE CHANGE/YEAR
GAIN
LOSS
65- 10- 25- 50,
51, 26- 1101
9
4
49 OVER
OVER
50
25
10
24
WHOLESALE
0 -
RETAIL
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
STORAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
0
0
0
SERVICES, PROF.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
MANUFACTURING
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
TOTAL
S
S
a
S
w
0
0
PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN SALES VERSUS
CHANGES IN EMPLOYEES ON DISPLACEMENT.
LOSS
EMPLOYEE CFG.
51, 26-
LOSS
-0-
GAIN
11-
(SALES)
1- 04
5
GAIN
5- 10- 259 24 49
509
OVER
OVER
50
25
610
OVER 11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4 -
10
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2-
3
0
0
0
0
2
6
2
0
0
1
11
1 - 1
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
1
6
0-0
0
0
0
0
7
24
0
1
1
0
33
TOT
1 -
1
0
0
0
1
0
7
0
0
0
0
8
2 -
3
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
5
4 -
10
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
1
0
0
0
2
12
50
5
4
-
-
-
3
15
64
6
5
OVER 11
TOTAL
PERCENT
TOT
%
18
23
33
42
SUMMARY
GAIN
LOSS
2
3
3
1
7
2
H
H
'%J1
-
3
8
--
1
1
6
-
4
2
3
78
3
4
27
35
14
14
V
5
S
V
v'p
V
V
S
V
0
PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN SALES VERSUS
CHANGES IN EMPLOYEES AFTER DISPLACEMENT.
EPPLOYEE CHG.
LOSS
-0-
GAIN
LOSS
51, 26- 1125
50
OVER
GAIN
(SALES)
610
1-
0-
5
4
50 10- 25- 50t
9 24 49 OVER TOT
TOT
%
SUMMARY
LOSS
GAIN
OVER 11
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
4
-
2
4 -
10
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
C
7
-
2
2-
3
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
3
1 - 1
0
0
0
1
3
4
0
0
1
0
9
4
1
0-0
0
0
0
0
4
11
1
1
0
0
17
4
2
1-1
0
0
0
0
3
4
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
9
1
1
0
0
11
4 - 10
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
OVER 11
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
12
44
5
4
2
17
64
2 -
3
TOTAL
PERCENT
23
17
33
25
HN
3
-
2
5
1
-
0
6
1
2
1
69
12
10
29
42
cl
0
SURVEY RESPONSE TO A REQUEST TO ALL BUSINESS FIRMS
TO COMPARE THEIR NEW AND OLD LOCATIONS.
NEW BETTER
CONDITIONS.
SAME
OLD BETTER
RATIO:
NEW
vs
OLD
GENERAL BUSINESS
94
91
53
COSTS
41
49
133
PARKING
104
71
57
ACCESS
108
69
50
2.2
MERCHANDISE HANDLING
106
50
30
3.5
:
1
WORKING SPACE AND LAYOUT
164
28
38
4.3
:
1
4
0
2
621
358
363
46
27
27
OTHER
TOTAL
PER CENT
1.7
3.2
:1
1.7
H
H
L-
S
V
S
S
S
SURVEY RESPONSE TO A REQUEST TO WHOLESALE
TO COMPARE THEIR NEW AND OLD LOCATIONS.
FIRMS
SAME
OLD BETTER
NEW
3
NEW BETTER
CONDITIONS.
GENERAL BUSINESS
18
13
6
COSTS
11
4
20
PARKING
28
6
4
ACCeSS
24
8
3
MERCHANDISE HANDLING
29
3
4
7
WORKING SPACE AND LAYOUT
35
2
1
35
1
0
1
146
36
39
66
16
18
OTHER
TOTAL
PER CENT
RATIO:
vs.
OLD
1
2
1
7
:1
3.4
1'
HJ
H0
:1
-~~~~4
--
;---
--
FIRMS
SURVEY RESPONSE TO A REQUEST TO RETAIL
TO COMPARE THEIR NEW AND OLD LOCATIONS.
CONDITIONS.
NEW BETTER
SAME
V
- 0
OLD BETTER
NEW
RATIO:
Vs.
1
OLD
13
7
17
2
2
28
PARKING
11
13
11
1
1
ACCESS
13
8
12
1.1
1
MERCHANDISE HANDLING
17
10
9
WORKING SPACE AND LAYOUT
16
6
12
2
0
0
74
46
89
35
22
43
GENERAL BUSINESS
COSTS
TOTAL
PER CENT
1.3
14
1.3
:
1
1
1
-
:
1.2
H
H
.40
SURVEY RESPONSE TO A REQUEST TO STORAGE,, DISTRIB FIRMS
TO CCPPARE THEIR NEW AND OLD LOCATIONS.
OLD BETTER
NEW BETTER
SAME
GENERAL BUSINESS
2
2
0
COSTS
1
0
3
PARKING
3
0
1
ACCESS
2
0
MERCHANDISE HANDLING
2
3
0
WORKING SPACE AND LAYOUT
3
0
0
OTHER
0
0
0
13
2
5
CONDIT12NS.
TOTAL
H
R)
0
0
SS
0
0S
SURVEY RESPONSE TO A REQUEST TO SERVICESi PROF.
TO COMPARE THEIR NEW AND OLD LOCATIONS.
CONDITIONS.
NEW BETTER
SAME
S
V
0S
0
V
0
0
FIRMS
OLD BETTER
RATIO:
NEW
vs.
OLD
22
28
it
2
:
1
4
21
28
1
:
7
PARKING
11
23
21
1
:
1.9
ACCESS
15
23
18
1
:
1.2
16
5
10
10
GENERAL BUSINESS
COSTS
MERCHANDISE HANDLING
WORKING SPAC8 AND LAYOUT
5
35
3.5.
HJ
OTHER
0
0
0
TOTAL
92
121
93
PERCENT
30
40
30
1
1
V
S
0
0
V
NEW BETTER
SAME
OLD BETTER
NEW
5
2.8
RATIO:
vs.
19
7
12
20
1
PARKING
18
12
11
1.6
:
1
ACCESS
23
13
5
4.6
:
1
MERCHANDISE HANDLING
23
10
5
4.6
:
1
WORKING SPACE AND LAYOUT
30
4
8
3.8
:
1
COSTS
0
OTHER
TOTAL
PERCENT
115
w
OLD
14
GENERAL BUSINESS
V
0
FIRMS
SURVEY R'ESPONSE TO A REQUEST TO MANUFACTURING
TO COMPARE THEIR NEW AND OLD LOCATIONS.
CONDITIONS
V
0
70
54
29
23
2.1
1
H
N
N
V
V
0V
V
V
RATIO:
vs.
OLD
NEW BETTER
SAME
OLD BETTER
NEW
GENERAL BUSINESS
7
9
8
1
COSTS
5
6
14
PARKING
5
11
5
1
1
ACCESS
7
9
8
1
1.1
MERCHANDISE HANDLING
1
8
3
1
:
3
4
6
1.7
:
1
0
0
0
35
47
44
37
35
WORKING SPACE AND LAYOUT
OTHER
TOTAL
PERCENT
10
V
FIRMS
SURVEY RESPONSE TO A REQUEST TO OTHER, UNKNOWN
TO CCMPARE THEIR NEW AND OLD LOCATIONS.
CONDITIONS,
V
:
1.1
H
F')
1
1.2
APPENDIX V
RELOCATION PROGRAM
A.
Reimbursements
1.
b.
c.
d.
e.
b.
c.
Characteristics:
Liquidations
Rentals Versus
Retail Firms
5.
Storage and Distribution Firms
6.
Service
7.
Manufacturing
8.
Other Firms
153
and Professional Firms
Firms
Small Business Displacement Payments
2.
3.
4.
5.
-
Size
Size of Reimbursement Received
Over Time
Size of Reimbursement Versus Size
of Business
Difference Between Amount Requested
and Received
4.
1.
149
Total Amount Paid to Dislocated
Firms
Time Required to Process Claims
Size of Reimbursement Received Over Time
Size of Reimbursement Versus Size
of Business
Difference Between Amount Requested
and Received
Wholesale Firms
a.
B.
148
Unremunerated Firms
a.
b.
3.
-
All Firms
a.
2.
124
Coverage: Number of Recipients and
Magnitude of Payment
Time Required to Process SBDP
Time Required to Receive SBDP
Size and Type of Firm Receiving Payments
Size and Type of Firm not Receiving
Payments
C.
Small Business
Program
1.
2.
3.
D.
Administration Disaster Loan
Survey Data
Reimbursements
a.
b.
2.
-
156
157
-
170
Magnitude by Type of Business
Type Versus Size of Business by
Space Occupied
Type Versus Size of Business by
Employees
Subjective Responses:
1.
154
Critical to Relocation by Type
of Business
Critical to Relocation by Size
of Business
Adequacy of
a.
b.
c.
the
Compensation
Responses Over Time
Responses by Type of Business
Responses by Size of Business
3.
Relocation Help Provided by
4.
Suggestions for
Procedures
5.
Attitudes to
was Handled
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
the LPA
Improvements in Relocation
the Way in Which
Relocation
All Firms
Wholesale Firms
Retail Firms
Storage and Distribution Firms
Service and Professional Firms
Manufacturing Firms
Other Firms
0
0
S
S
V
S S
V
9
S
V
AMOUNT PAID TO ALL DISLOCATED FIRMS (MOVING AND SBDP),
BY TYPE OF BUSINESS, OVER TIME (1000'S OF DOLLARS).
YEAR OF BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
BUSINESS TYPE
67
TOT
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
0
12
0
48
396
259
38
196
135
10 1094
45
46
19
21
472
389
161
163
164
25 1505
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
0
0
0
-0
17
13
29
7
42
2
110
SERVICES, PROF.
6
15
1
5
115
69
139
140
128
12
630
12
12
3
29
647
124
69
153
142
1
4
1
5
46
45
28
68
14
64
89
24
108 1693
899
464
727
625
WHOLESALE
RETAIL
MANUFACTURING
OTHER, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
7 1198
2
214
58 4751
H
N
A-125
TIVE REQUIRED TC
PRCCESS CLAIMS,
BY TYPE OF BUSINESS
IN VCNTHS
TIVE
BUSINESS TYPE
261125 OVER
0
1
2
3
4
5
610
0
3
4
11
7
21
2
14
4
10
5
7
4
2
1
8
1
3
0
5
13
11
9
9
8
9
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
6
1
0
9
WHCLESALE
FCCC
CTFER
RETAIL
HAREWARE, ETC.
DRYCOODS
17
18
13
7
4
3
6
3
CLCTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EAlING
DRINK, LIQUOR
CT[ER
STCRACE, DISTRIe
FINANCE, R.E.
PERSCNAL SERVICE
CT[ER
3
3
4
6
7
1
5
8
5
8
13
20
9
8
16
1(
16
11
28
11
7
10
7
5
8
13
2
4
4
0
4
9
8
6
1
1
2
1
5
4
1
1
0
1
2
1
3
0
0
7
3
3
1
1
2
6
1
0
0
2
2
2
2
10
22
24
18
4
5
2
6
?
BAREER, BEAUTY
BUS. SERV, PROF.
3
9
12
32
10
35
12
33
3
13
1
13
0
4
0
3
1
0
NONPRCFIT
ROONING HOUSES
2
8
14
20
7
15
10
2
6
(1
1
3
1
0
2
0
1
1
PRINTING
FCCE
0
1
5
0
3
1
9
1
8
1
3
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
FAPRC, APPAREL
1
1
6
8
1
2
1
1
n
CTHER
2
16
12
19
13
6
5
5
2
0
4
2
1
c
0
1
0
0
82
253
278
208
107
68
32
65
25
7.3
22.6
24.9
18.6
9.6
6.1
2.9
5.8
2.2
FCCC
MANUFACTURING
UNKNChN, OTHER
TOTAL
ROW PCNT (100)
A-126
REIMBLRSEMENTS RECEIVED BY
ALL BLSINESS FIRMS.
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
DOLLARS
58
59
60
-500
30
49
10
501-1CO
11
23
7
1001-1500
8
13
0
4
24
1501-2000
5
7
1
3
(3
18
15
2001-2500
14
13
0
3
23
17
2501-3000
0
1
5
2
53
3001-5000
0
0
0
0
5001-10000
0
0
Q
10001-25000
0
0
25000+, OVER
0
62
62
63
64
65
66
67
TOT
85
90
51
69
29
3
441
U4)47
50
21
19
12
2
196
5
0
105
9
0
0
95
5
7
10
1
93
48
19
15
15
0
158
40
18
10
15
6
1
90
3
37
27
12
26
13
0
118
0
3
24
14
5
9
13
0
68
0
0
0
12
2
0
0
0
0
14
33
6
33
90
54
53
46
93
52
522
TOTAL 137 139
36
66 465 367 204 224 203
106
30
33 375
NONE REC'D
ADJUSTED TOTAL
PERCENT
NONE REC'D
75
45.3 23.7
61
11
(9)
q
59 1900
313 151 178 110
16.7 50.0 19.4 14.7 26.0 20.5 45. 8
*PAYMENTS IN THE LAST QUARTER OF 1966 MAY HAVE BEEN
IN PROCESSING AT THE TIME THE STUDY WAS MADE.
x
S
vV
S
REIMBLRS8MENT RECEIVED BY ALL
FIRMS FOR MOVING COSTS
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
DOLLARS
2-3
1
-500
4-5
6-7
819
2050+
0.
49 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PONT
83
15
3
12
3
0
186
441
32
48
13
5
7
0
1
71
196
14
11
4
4
1
0
44
105
7
501-1000
51
1001-1500
18
1501-2000
17
28
12
7
8
3
0
20
95
6
2001-2500
10
21
13
2
6
5
0
36
93
6
2501-3000
19
50
17
3
0
17
158
it
3001-5000
10
26
22
13
10
0
1
8
90
6
5001-10000
2
20
23
14
(30
I
13
118
8
10001-25000
2
3
0
5
23
22
250004, OVER
1:
0
0
1
2
6
3
100
87
33
14
29
16
8
235
522
0
369
389
175
87
148
74
24
634
1900
100
269
307
142
119
58
16
27.1
22.4
18.9
16.1 19.6
9.2
33.3
NONE REC'D
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
PERCENT
NONE RECID
73
3
68
4
1
14
10
37.1
H
REItVLRSEMENTS, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMOUNT REQUESTED
ANC ANOUNT RECEIVED BY ALL FIRMS
DIFFERENCE($)
58
59
6-
61
NONE
96
79
14
25 195 191 123 153 126
38 1040
54
24
27
13
23 147 118
58
49
50
15
524
27
5)1-1C00
6
12
4
3
37
16
13
4
8
1
104
5
10C1- 15 00
3
12
3
2
8
9
1
3
5
0
46
2
1501-2CU0
A
5
1
1
13
6
1
4
5
0
40
2
2001-2 500
c
1
0
3
8
3
2
1
1
1
20
1
2501-3000
1
1
0
1
6
5
0
1
1
1
17
3
2
0
4
29
6
2
3
1
2
52
2
5J1-1C000
0
0
0
1
10
12
3
3
2
0.
31
1
10 01-25 C n 0
C
0
0
1
7
1
1
2
0
1
13
25C0C4,
0
0
1
2
5
0
0
1
4
0
13
137 139
36
OVER
TOTAL
62
63
64
65
67
66 465 367 204 224 203
TOT COL-PCNT
59 1900
1I
o
0
10.0
S
S.
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
V
w
W
CHARACTERISTICS OF BUSINESS FIRMS
NOT BEING REIMBURSED FOR MOVING EXPENSES.
NO.
DCLLARS/SQ.FT.
OF EMPLOYEES
1
2-3
0.00 - 0.11
0
0
0
1
0.12 -
0.24
2
2
1
0
0.25
0.49
5
4.
2
0
-
4-5
6-7
819
0
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT TOT-LIQ. PCNT-LIQ
3
4
1
2
50
18
26
1C
7
26
20
34
14
12
35
20
44
18
16
36
0
10
2C
8
2
10
0
0
13
26
1C
4
15
12
35
14
8
22
0
10
1
I
0.50 -
0.74
11
7
3
0.75 -
0.99
4
3
0
1
1.00 -
1.49
30
0
0
0
1.50 -
2.99
9
7
3
3.00 -
9.99
20
14
5
0
0
2
10
51
21
10
19
20
15
3
2
8
1
56
107
0
34
31
78
55
20
7
14
7
162
347
1CO
95
27
RCW PERCENT
42
30
ll
4
8
8
42
-
ICC
TOTAL LIQD.
19
14
3
2
5
2
0
50
95
PCNT LIQD.
24
25
15
28
35
28
0
30
27
UNKNCWN
TOTAL
0
H
2
'-0
0
w
LIQUIDATICNS BY TYPE OF BUSINESS
FOR THOSE FIRMS NOT BEING REIMBURSED FOR MOVING EXPENSES.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
BUSINESS TYPE
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
8-
20-
0,
50+
19
49 OVER OR
TOT TOT-LOAD PCNT-LIQ
X
WHCLESALE
4
6
1
2
3
0
0
5
21
45
47
RETAIL
1
4
2
0
C
1
0
13
21
71
30
STCRAGE, -DISTRIB
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
11
13
66
20
SERVICES, PRCF.
7
4
0
0
1
0
0
8
20
72
MANUFACTURING
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
3
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
17
19
14
3
2
5
2
0
50
95
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
27
11
66
26
347
27
H
U
S
V
w
V
REIMBURSEMENTS RECEIVED BY
WHOLESALE
FIRMS
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
DOLLARS
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
-500
0
1
0
0
3
5
4
3
2
0
18
13
501-1000
0
0
0
0
5
2
2
2
3
0
14
10
1001-1500
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
4
2
1501-2000
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
6
4
2001-2500
0
4
1
0
1
1
0
2501-3000
0
1
2
1
Q
0
11
3001-5000
0
1
Q1
0
13
9
5001-10000
0
10001-25000
0
25000+, OVER
NONE REC'D
TOT COL-PCNT
8
3
0
1
0
0
4
0
0
0
30
0
0
10
9
3
8
5
0
35
25
0
0
2
6
4
0
4
2
0
18
13
0
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
0
0
6
4
0
1
0
4
10
4
9
8
21
10
67
0
TOTAL
0
8
0
9
51
34
22
32
37
10
203
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL
0
7
0
5
41
30
13
24
16
0
13
-
20
12
41
25
57
x
PERCENT
NONE REC'D
-
0
0
44
H
V
V
w
V
V
REIMBLRSEMENT RECEIVED BY
FIRMS FOR MOVING COSTS
WHOLESALE
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
DOLLARS
1
2-3
8-
6-7
4-5
19
20-
50+
0,
TOT COL-PCNT
49 OVER OR X
-500
6
2
1
0
1
0
0
8
18
13
501-1000
10
4
2
1
2
0
0
1
14
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
2
1001-1500
1501-2000
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
2
6
4
2001-2500
2
1
3
1
1
0
0
3
11
8
2561-3000
2
1
1
0
0
1
11
8
H
~yJ
3
0
0
0
13
9
2
0
3
35
25
1
18
13
2
1
6
4
2
2
13
67
0
15
5
36
203
100
3001-5000
0
3
5001-10000
0
7
7
10001-25000
0
0
1
6
800
25000+, OVER
0
0
0
0
1
2
11
16
6
6
11
26
34
27
22
38
NONE RECID
TOTAL
0
ADJUSTED TOTAL
15
18
21
16
27
13
3
23
PERCENT
NONE REC'D
42
47
22
27
29
13
40
x
V
9
w
S
S
9
9
9
9
9
S
REIVEL RSEMENTS, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMOUNT REQUESTED
FIRMS
AND ANOUNT RECEIVED BY WHCLESALE
DIFFERENCE($)
NONE
58
59
C
2
-500
1
501-1CO0
2
1
2) b01- 2 500
0
0
1- 1500
15C1-200'0
60
0
C
0
c
0
250 1-20CO
62
63
64
65
66
67
TOT
COL-PONT
1
14
13
14
17
25
6
92
45
4
23
12
7
9
4
1
61
30
0
3
1
1
1
2
0
10
4
0
C
1
0
0
1
C
5
2
1I
1
1
0
2
2
0
7
3
2
1
0
0
1
1
1
6
2
0
1
2
0
0
:1
1
5
2
0
5
2
0
4
1
1
4
1
1
c
0)
0
C
0
0
0
0C
307 01-5C0
61
2
0
0
01
0
50-1- 1C001
0
0
10'C 1- 25000
253004,
OVER
TOTAL
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
1
0
0
29
0
0
1
1
0
4
34
22
32
37
10
203
0
0
8
0
9
51
1
100r
H
REIMBURSEMENTS RECEIVED BY
FIRMS
RETAIL
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
DOLLARS
TOT COL-PCNT
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
-500
19
19
5
3
18
29
10
3
4
2
112
22
501-1000
0
05
2
15
18
5
5
5
2
74
14
8
15
3
4
0
0
49
9
5
1
1
0
34
6
g
1001-1500
6
11
0
1501-2000
5
3
1
0
2001-2500
9
6
0
2®
2501-3000
0
0
4
2
29
3001-5000
0
0
0
0
5001-10000
0
0
0
10001-25000
0
0
25000+, OVER
0
7
0
0
0
0
39
T
33
14
11
12
0
105
20
13
8
3
4
1
1
30
5
1
9
14
5
6
4
0
39
7
0
0
7
6
1
0
2
0
16
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
27
10
0
8
21
14
9
5
20
15
129
0
73
59
15
20 138 156
56
41
52
20
630
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL
46
49
15
12 117
142
47
36
32
PERCENT
NONE REC'D
37
17
-
40
15
4
16
12
38
8
H
NONE REC'D
TOTAL
x
REIMBURSEMENT
RETAIL
RECEIVED BY
FIRMS FOR MOVING COSTS
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
DOLLARS
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
-500
34
14
2
0
2
2
0
58
112
22
501-1000
@
14
8
0
2
0
0
32
74
14
1001-1500
8
13
1
2
1
0
0
24
49
9
1501-2000
5
13
5
1
0
0
0
10
34
6
2001-2500
4
2
0
2
0
18
39
7
2501-3000
12
40
0
0
10
105
20
3001-5000
7
9
9
2
0
1
1
30
5
5001-10000
0
11
11
2
8
2
4
39
7
10001-25000
0
1
0
0
9
2
3
1
16
3
25000+, OVER
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
3
0
21
25
10
4
5
2
1
61
129
0
TOTAL
110
150
72
23
38
12
6
219
630
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL
89
125
62
19
33
10
5
-
19
17
14
17
13
17
17
x
NONE REC'D
8
0
PERCENT
NONE REC 'D
S
S
0
S0S
S
S
S
0
S
V
REU'Et.RSEMENTS, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APOUNT REQUESTED
FIRPS
AND ANOUNT RECEIVED BY RETAIL
DIFFERENCE($)
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
TOT COL-PCNT
NONE
57
34
4
9
63
74
30
24
33
13
341
54
9
12
6
7
40
52
19
12
18
5
180
28
501-1000
2
3
2
1
11
9
4
0
1
1
34
5
1001-1500
1
7
2
1
6
5
1
2
0
0
25
3
1501-2C00
2
1
0
r
3
0
1
0
0
8
1
0
3
0
4
0
18
2
0
13
2
4
0
20C1-2 500
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
7
3
1
1
0
6
7
29
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
138 156
56
41
52
20
630
100
2501-2C000
0
301-5000
2
2
0
0
5001-10000
0
10C001-25000
0
c
1
0
25(.f2?4,
CVER
TOTAL
73
0
0
59
15
20
U'
REIMBURSEMENTS RECEIVED BY
STORAGE, DISTRIB FIRMS
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
DOLLARS
TOT COL-PCNT
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
-500
3
1
0
0
4
8
2
2
4
0
24
53
501-1000
0
0
1
0
0
6
1
1
0
0
9
20
1001-1500
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
4
1501-2000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2001-2500
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
2501-3000
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
3
6
3001-5000
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
4
5001-10000
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
10001-25000
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
6
250004, OVER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
8
2
8
25
11
5
5
8
3
85
0
13
9
3
8
34
27
10
9
14
3
130
100
NONE REC'D
TOTAL
S
V
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
w
..
V
REIMBLRSEMENT RECEIVED BY
STORAGE, DISTRIB FIRMS FOR MOVING COSTS
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
DOLLARS
819
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT
1
2-3
-500
2
4
1
0
0
0
17
24
53
501-1000
1
1
0
0
0
0
7
9
20
1001-1500
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
4
1501-2000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2001-2500
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
2501-3000
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
3
6
3001-5000
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
4
5001-10000
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
10001-25000
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
3
6
25000+, OVER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
4
0
2
2
0
64
85
0
17
11
2
3
2
0
94
130
100
77
89
100
74
41
50
56
x
NONE REC'D
TOTAL
4-5
6-7
00
PERCENT
NONE REC'D
67
9
9
9
6
S9
0
0
V
U
w
REiUetRSEMENTS, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APOUNT REQUESTED
ANC ApCUNT RECEIVED BY STCRAGE, DISTRIB FIRPS
DIFFERENCE($)
NONE
58
59
11
5
62
63
64
65
66
67
13
20
6
6
10
2
77
59
4
2
3
2
1
28
21
3
0
1
0
1
0
6
4
0
C
0
0
0
1
0
3
2
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
3
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
c
4
3
1I
1
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
3
61
TOT CCL-PCNT
1
1
2
2
1
501-1C00
ic
0
1001-1500
0
0
15L1- 2000
20 C1-25 00
I
0
0
C,
0
0
25C1-2000
0
HJ
0
0
0
0C
0
0
5001-1C0000
0
0,
0
10C01-25000
0
25C004, OVER
0C
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
4
9
3
8
34
27
10
9
14
3
130
TOTAL
13
0
11104
S
S
S
P
P
5
5
Up
U
P
REIOBLRSEMENTS RECEIVED BY
F IRMS
SERVICES, PROF.
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
DOLLARS
58
59
-500
80
501-1000
3
1001-1500
0
1501-2000
9
61
62
63
64
300
36
16
19
60
TOT COL-PCNT
66
67
15
1
159
47
@0510 0
0
67
19
65
1
2
1
0
0
5
7
5
3
2
0
23
6
0
3
0
2
7
3
5
7
4
0
31
9
2001-2500
1
1
0
0
3
3
3
2
4
0
17
5
2501-3000
0
0
0
0
3
7
1
2
0
0
13
3
0
0
0
5
2
3
1
2
0
13
3
3001-5000
5001-10000
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
3
0
0
9
2
10001-25000
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
2
0
5
1
250004, OVER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
7
1
5
11
11
12
15
15
11
98
0
22
28
5
13
92
65
60
91
47
12
435
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL
12
21
4
8
81
54
48
76
32
PERCENT
NONE REC'D
45
25
20
38
12
17
20
16
32
NONE REC'D
TOTAL
x
:3:.
H
0
REIMBLRSEMENT RECEIVED BY
FIRMS FOR MOVING COSTS
SERVICES, PROF.
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
DOLLARS
1
-500
531-1000
0,
50+
2049 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
35
7
2
5
1
0
39
159
47
1
2
2
0
1
19
67
19
5
1
1
0
4
23
6
2
0
5
31
9
0
2
17
5
23
1001-1500
8
3
1501-2000
5
12
2001-2500
1
5
6
2501-3000
2
3
1
3
3
0
0
1
13
3
3001-5000
0
4
4
2
0
0
0
3
13
3
5001-10000
2
3
0
1
0
2
0
1
9
2
10001-25000
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
0
5
1
250004, OVER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
35
22
5
1
5
2
2
26
98
0
TOTAL
146
106
32
13
21
12
5
100
435
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL
111
84
27
12
16
10
3
24
21
16
8
24
17
40
NONE REC'D
0
4
0
PERCENT
NONE RECID
a
U
V
VS
S V
S
V
REIMeLRSEMENTS, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMCUNT REQUESTED
F IRMS
AND ANOUNT RECEIVED BY SERVICES, PROF
67
TOT
CCE-PCNT
9
260
59
13
2
128
29
2
0
C
16
3
0
0
2
0
5
1
1
1
0
0
7
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
6
1
0
0
1
1
12
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
3
0
DIFFERENCE{$)
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
NONE
1C
15
1
5
45
31
38
75
9
7
2
7
30
28
17
13
50 1-1000O
2
3
1
0
3
2
3
13C1-1500
C
0
1
0
0
2
1501-2000
0
2
0
0
3
2001-2 500
0
0
0
0
2501-MC00
0
0
0
30C01- 500
1
1
501-1CO0
66
01-25000
100
C
C
0
n.
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
25C0C4, CVER
C
C
0
0
C
0
0
0
0
0
-0
TOTAL
22
28
5
13.
92
65
60
91
47
12
435
H
N
n
10e
e
V
S
V
V
0
9
V
V
REIMBURSEMENTS RECEIVED BY
FIRMS
MANUFACTURING
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
DOLLARS
TOT COL--PCNT
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
-500
3
1
0
1
8
3
0
3
2
0
21
11
501-1000
0
0
0
6
3
2
1
1
0
18
9
0
0
O
6
1
2
0
0
0
12
6
0
0
0
11
3
(ID
0
1
0
17
8
0
0
7
03
0
1
1
1
20
10
1
0
0
5
1-
1
0
18
9
0
0
0
19
2
3
0 0
0
26
13
1001-1500
1501-2000
0
2001-2500
4
0
2501-3000
0
3001-5000
H
5001-10000
0
0
0
1
14
3
0
7
4
0
29
15
10001-25000
0
0
0
1
9
3
2
4
5
0
24
12
25000+, OVER
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
NONE REC'D
6
0
1
3
8
5
0
5
12
7
47
0
15
9
2
7 102
31
12
23
28
8
237
100
9
9
1
4
94 26
12
18
16
x
40
-
50
43
--
22
43
x
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
PERCENT
NONE REC'D
8
16
~j.
e p
p
6
p
[A
6
6
0
e
V
V
REIMBLRSEMENT RECEIVED BY
FIRMS FOR MOVING COSTS
MANUFACTURING
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
DOLLARS
1
2-3
4-5
8-
6-7
19
20-
50+
0,
TOT COL+PCNT
49 OVER OR X
-500
8
5
0
0
2
0
0
6
21
11
501-1000
2
8
1
1
1
0
C
5
18
9
1001-1500
0
2
1
1
0
0
4
12
6
3
3
3
4
0
0
0
17
8
20
10
1501-2000
0
2001-2500
3
3
1
0
2
0
0
11
2501-3000
2
3
0
2
4
1
0
3
18
9
30U1-5000
2
6
6
0
0
2
26
13
5001-10000
0
2
4
4
9
7
0
3
29
15
10001-25000
1
1
0
2
7
G
0
24
12
25000+, OVER
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
0
5
2
NONE REC'.D
6
7
4
0
4
6
3
17
47
0
28
42
24
18
40
26
8
51
237
100
ADJUSTED TOTAL
22
35
20
18
36
20
5
PERCENT
NONE RECID
21
17
17
10
23
26
TOTAL
-
H,
S
S
S
S
0
S
S
REI'PLRSEMENTS, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMOUNT REQUESTED
FIRMS
ANC ANOUNT RECEIVED BY MANLFACTURING
DIFFERENCE($)
58
NONE
59
60
5
0
-5>2
2
1
2
501-1000
1
2
0
r0
0
1
0
1001-1500
15 1-200
I
201-25500
0
63
64
65
66
67
2
32
12
5
10
12
6
94
39
2
38
13
4
6
8
2
78
32
12
2
1
1
2
0
22
9
1
0
0
1
C
4
1
5
0
0
2
0
9
3
2
2
0
c
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
25k 1-200
30C1-5
1
TOT COL-PCNT
62
61
0
1
0
0
0
5
2
10
4
0
1
6
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
2
0
6
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
a
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
3
1
7 102
31
12
23
28
8
C
C
0
10'01-25000
VE
02
250CC0+,
OVER
TOTAL
0
15
9
2
23T7
100
H
\J1
REIMBURSEMENTS RECEIVED BY
FIRMS
OTHER, UNKNOWN
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
DOLLARS
-501
58
59
G
R
60
61
62
63
64
65
TOT COL-PCNT
66
67
2
0
107
63
0
0
14
8
0
15
8
501-1000
1
1
0
0
2
6
4
0
1001-1500
0
0
0
0
3
4
3
2
1501-2000
0
0
0
0
3
1
2
0
1
0
7
4
2001-2500
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
5
2
2501-3000
0
0
0
0
6
1
1
0
0
0
8
4
3001-5000
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
1
0
6
3
5001-10000
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
0
0
5
2
10001-25000
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
1
25000+, OVER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NONE REC'D
9
7
2
5
15
9
18
8
17
6
96
0
14
26
11
9
48
54
44
28
25
6
265
-100
5
19
9
4
33
45
26
20
8
-
64
27
18
56
31
17
41
29
68
x
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
PERCENT
NONE RECID
9
REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED 'BY
FIRMS FOR MOVING COSTS
OTHER, UNKNOWN
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
DOLLARS
1
-500
9
2-3
(
0,
20- 50+
49 OVER OR X
TOT COL-PCNT
4-5
6-7
819
5
0
2
0
0
58
107
63
1
0
0
0
7
14
8
0
0
8
15
8
501-ICOD
3
2
1001-1500
1
2
3
0
1501-2000
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
7
4
2001-2500
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
2
5
2
2501-3000
0
2
1
0
1
8
4
3001-5000
1
3
0
1
1
0
0
0
6
3
5001-10000
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
1
5
2
10001-25000
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
1
25000+, OVER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
13
7
3
2
2
0
54
96
0
42
46
19
9
8
7
0
134
265
100
27
33
12
6
6
5
36
28
37
33
25
29
NONE REC'D
TOTAL
ADJUSTED TOTAL
0
PERCENT
NONE RECID
v
REIMEtRSEMENTS, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMOUNT REQUESTED
FIR 'S
AND ANOUNT RECEIVED BY OTHER, UNKNCWN
64
65
66
5
28
41
30
21
15
2
176
66
2
1
6
9
6
5
4
49
18
16
60
8
18
8
4
-5 L 0
TOT COL-PCNT
63
59
NONE
67
62
DIFFERENCEt $) 58
61
9
6
5)1-1CO0
1
1
1
1
5
3
0
2
01
1901-1500
1
'1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
4
1
15)i-2c00
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
6
2
20'1-2500
1
0
0
0
0
5
1
25 0i1-3000
0
0
0
0
1
3 01-5000
0
0
0
3
1
1
2
0
2
0
Ho
0
1
I
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
a
0
2
0
5)C1-C000
00
0
0
100CC 1-25000
c
9)
0,
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
25CCC4, OVER
TOTAL
1,4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
26
11
9
48
54
44
28
25
6
265
100
A-149
SMALL BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT PAYMENTS BUSINESS TYPE
WHOLESALE
FOOC
OTHER
RETAIL
HARCWARE, ETC.
DRYGOODS
FOOC
CLOTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EATING
DRINK, LIQUOR
OTHER
STORAGE, DISTRIB
FINANCE, R.E.
PERSCNAL SERVICE
OTHER
BARBER, BEAUTY
BUS. SERV, PROF.
NONPRCFIT
ROOMING HOUSES
MANUFACTURING
PRINTING
F00C
FABRC, APPAREL
OTHER
UNKNOIAN, OTHER
TOTAL
1967
PERCENT
64-67
2500* OF LOAD
LOAD
PAYMENTS
1500
1964 -
5
5
8
13
- 25
36
51
49
2
4
8
2
3
3
4
8
2
9
2
6
2
3
4
12
5
8
3
3
36
47
52
38
53
60
60
39
13
34
11
21
19
13
13
25
15
41
36
35
13
7
37
0
2
5
6
23
1
0
45
76
41
2
16
40
17
143
36
12
1
0
0
9
1
1
0
0
10
2
14
0
0
42
18
14
3
7
45
16
36
662
125
117
A-150
TIME REQUIRED TO PROCESS CLAIMS, BY TYPE OF BUSINESS
BUSINESS TYPE
WHOLESALE
FOOC
OTHER
RETAIL
HARCWARE, ETC.
DRYGOODS
FClOC
CLOTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EATING
DRINK, LIQUOR
OTHER
STORAGE, DISTRIB
FINANCE, R.E.
PERSONAL SERVICE
OTHER
BARBER, BEAUTY
BUS. SERV, PROF.
NONPRCFIT
ROOMING HOUSES
MANUFACTURING
PRINTING
FOCC
FABRC, APPAREL
OTHER
UNKNOhN, OTHER
TOTAL
ROW PCNT (100)
TIME IN MONTHS
112625 OVER
0
1
2
3
4
5
610
0
3
4
11
7
21
2
14
4
10
5
7
4
2
1
8
1
3
0
5
9
3
3
4
6
7
1
5
13
11
17
8
5
8
13
20
9
8
9
9
18
16
10
16
11
28
11
7
8
9
13
10
7
5
8
13
2
4
3
2
7
4
0
4
9
8
6
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
5
4
1
1
1
1
3
0
1
2
1
3
0
0
2
6
6
7
3
3
1
1
2
6
1
0
3
1
0
0
2
2
2
2
10
3
9
2
8
22
12
32
14
20
24
10
35
7
15
18
12
33
10
2
4
3
13
6
0
5
1
13
1
3
2
0
4
1
0
6
0
3
2
0
2
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
2
0
5
0
1
16
.4
3
1
6
12
2
9
1
8
19
1
8
1
1
13
0
3
1
2
6
0
0
0
1
5
1
2
0
1
5
0
1
0
0
2
0
82
253
278
208
107
68
32
65
25
1
10
14
13
21
22
11
7
0
A-151
TIME RECUIRED TO RECEIVE SBDP, BY TYPE OF BUSINESS
TIME IN MONTHS
BUSINESS TYPE
261125 OVER
0
1
2
3
4
5
610
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
3
0
2
1
0
2
0
3
2
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
C
0
1
C
0
1
0
1
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
C
1
2
1
3
1
4
2
1
4
2
2
4
2
6
1
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
1
0
6
0
0
C
0
1
0
C
1
0
4
1
0
3
0
6
0
0
2
4
18
C
C
8
5
11
0
2
PRINTING
FCCD
FABRC, APPAREL
CTHER
UNKNCWN, OTHER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
C
0
2
C
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
C
0
4
0
0
0
0
4
1
TCTAL
0
3
14
18
9
14
17
50
66
WHCLESALE
FCCo
CTHER
RETAIL
HARDWARE, ETC.
DRYGCOCS
FCCO
CLCTHING
APPLN., FURN.
EATING
DRINK, LIQUCR
CTHER
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
FINANCE, R.E.
PERSCNAL SERVICE
CTHER
BARBER, BEAUTY
BUS. SERV, PROF.
NCNPRCFIT
RCCMING HOUSES
MANUFACTURING
NMRER
RECEIVED
PRIOR
TO MOVING
..
1
SIZE CF FIRMS RECEIVING (SBDP),
SMALL BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT PAY MENTS
1
(1964-t967*.
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
RETAIL
STORAGE, DISTRIB
SERVICESt PROF.
MANUFACTURING
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL LOAD
ROW PERCENTAGES
TOTAL LIQD.
PERCENTAGE LIQD.
9
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
BUSINESS TYPE
WHOLESALB
9
6
9
9
V
S
S
20-
50+
0.
TOT TOT-LIQ. PCNT-LIQ
49 OVER OR X
9
8
7
2
2
1
0
2
31
8
25
25
34
11
1
3
0
0
2
76
41
53
t
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
5
1
20
50
16
10
3
2
0
0
1.0
91
16
17
4
11
2
0
2
1
0
1
21
2
9
4
8
2
0
1
0
0
3
18
4
22
93
78
35
28
35
33
14
7
21
6
2
2
33
10
4
3
30
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
242
100
72
29
72.
29
41
28
30
H
PU
0
4
20
p
S
S
S
SIZE CF FIRMS NCT RECEIVING (SBDP),
SMALL BUSINESS CISPLACEMENT PAYPENTS
(1964-1967).
NC. OF EPPLOYEES
BUSINESS TYPE
0;,
2050+
49 OVER OR X
TCT
2
10
69
4
3
10
82
1
1
0
16
31
7
12
7
3
15
109
5
5
11
10
4
8
48
15
6
3
5
3
0
35
81
95
32
31
9
420
100
19
3
3
20
9
9
8
12
3
0
0
94
9
61
18
5
3:,
29
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
819
3
12
4
11
22
5
16
27
9
3
10
STURAGE, DISTRIP
6
5
0
2
SERVICES, PROF.
26
31
8
0
5
OTHER, UNKNOWN
14
TOTAL LOAD
65
19
WHCLESALE
RETA IL
MANUFACTURING
ROW PERCENTAGES
TOTAL LIQOD.
PERCENTAGE
LIQO.
5
5
5
5
5
14
21
9
0
0
20
21,
64
15
H
'Ji
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
SBA LOANS, BY TYPE OF BUSINESS
BUSINESS TYPE
SBA LOANS
OVER
UNDER
15,000 15,000
EFFECTIVE
RELOCATION
PERCENT
LOAD*
COVERAGE
WHOLESALE
I
8
156
5.7
RE TAI L
7
12
300
6.3
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
-1
1
89
2.2
SERVICES, PROF.
3
1I
300
1.3
MANUFACTURING
5
6
190
5.8
OTHER, UNKNOWN
1
1
165
1.2
18
29
1200
3.9
TOTAL
*ESTIMATED RELOCATION LOAD SINCE JUNE 30, 1961
H
A-155
LOANS
BY SIZE OF BUS INESS AS MEASURED BY
SPACE PRIOR TO 0ISPL ACEMENT
NUMBER OF SBA
AREA IN SQ.FT
BUSINESS TYPE
UN5K- 10K- 20K+
3K1KUNDER 500KNOWN
20K
500 0.9K 2.9K 4.9K 9.9K
WHOLESALE
0
1
0
0
1
3
4
RETAIL
0
2
8
6
1
1
0
1
STORAGE,
DISTRIB
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
SERVICES,
PROF.
O
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
MANUFACTURING
0
0
3
4
1
1
2
0
OTHER, UNKNOWN
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
4
14
11
3
5
6
2
4.3
8.5
30.0
23.4
6.4
10.6
12.8
4.3
TOTAL
ROW PCNT (100)
A-156
NUMBER OF SBA LOANS
AS MEASURED BY
EMPLOYEES PRI OR TO DISPLACEMENT
BY SIZE OF BU SINESS
BUSINESS TYPE
1
WHOLESALE
o
RETAIL
1
2-3
O
4-5
6-7
20-
50+
0,
19
49
OVER
x
8-
TOT
2
0
3
3
1
0
9
6
2
3
0
0
1
19
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
SERVICES, PROF.
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
4
MANUFACTURING
o
2
2
1
3
1
2
0
11
OTHER, UNKNOWN
o
0
0
0
0
0
C
2
47
STORAGE,
DISTRIB
TOTAL
ROW PCNT (100)
1
11
12
4
9
4
3
3
2
23
25
9
19
9
6
6
A-157
WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REMAIN IN BUSINESS
WITHOUT A REIMBURSEMENT FOR RELOCATION EXPENSES.
YES
NO
WHOLESALE
24
13
RETAIL
25
14
BUSINESS TYPE:
NO RESPONSE
TOTAL
3
1
40
3
3
42
NONE REC'D
2
1
1
1
4
SERVICES,. PROF.
47
13
5
6
65
MANUFACTUR I.NG
21
18
4
3
43
4
26
STORAGE, DISTRIB
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
17
5
4
136
64
20
18
PERCENTAGES:
YES
NO
WHOLESALE
60
33
RETAIL
60
33
7
72'
20
8
MANUFACTURING
49
42
8
OTHER, UNKNOWN
65
.19
16
62
29
8
BUSINESS TYPE
STORAGE,
DISTRIB
SERVICES,
PROF.
TOTAL
NONE RECID
7
NO RESPONSE
220
A-158
WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REMAIN IN BUSINESS
WITHCUT A REIMBURSEMENT FOR RELOCATION EXPENSES.
NO RESPONSE
TOTAL LESS
NO RESPONSE
1
4
25
13
2
5
37
23
10
3
1
36
6 TO 7
14
5
1
0
20
8 TO 19
29
3
1
20 TO 49
15
5
2
4
5
2
0
0,
12
5
8
3
136
64
20
18
ONE
64
32
4
2 TO 3
59
35
6
4 TO 5
64
28
8
6 TO 7
70
25
5
8 TO 19
60
33
7
20 TO 49
68
23
9
50+, OVER
71
29
0, UNKNOWN
48
20
32
62
29
9
YES
NO
ONE
16
8
2 TO. 3
22
4 TO 5
NO.
OF EMPLOYEES
CVER
50+,
0, UNKNOWN
TOTAL
16
NONE REC'D
PERCENTAGES
TOTAL
22
7
25
S
SS
S
g
S
Sg
SURVEY FIRMS RESPONSE TO QUESTION
CONCERNING THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION RECEIVED.
RESPONSE
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
TOT
ADEQUA TE
0
0
0
0
18
11
15
23
30
4
101
INADEQUATE
2
3
1
4
34
19
11
20
22
3
119
NO RESPONSE
0
0
0
0
3
3
2
3
5
2
18
TOTAL
2
3
1
4
55
33
28
46
57
9
23a
-
-
-
23
14
12
19
24
4
ROW PCNT (10C ) -
H
PRIOR 64
PCNT
TOT
AFTER 63
PCNT
TOT
ADEQUATE
29
32
72
56
INADQUATE
63
68
56
44
NO RESPONSE
6
TOTAL
98
12
100
140
100
A-160
SUBJECTIVE RESPCNSE TO- THE ADEQUACY
OF THE COMPENSATION RECEIVED.*
BUSINESS TYPE
INADEQUATE
N/A
TOTAL
16
23
2
41
RETAIL
9
34
2
45
STCRAGE, DISTRIB
2
2
1
5
SERVICES, PROF.
38
27
6
71
MANUFACTURING
22
20
4
46
OTHER, UNKNOWN
14
13
3
30
101
119
18
238
ADEQUATE
WHOLESALE
TOTAL
PERCENTAGES
SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE TO THE ADEQUACY
OF THE COMPENSATION RECEIVED.*
ADEQUATE
INADEQUATE
N/A
TOTAL
WHCLESALE
39
56
4
100
RETAIL
20
75
4
100
STORAGE, DISTRIB
40
40
20
100
SERVICES, PROF.
53
38
8
100
MANUFACTURING
47
43
8
100
46
43
10
100
42
50
7
100
BUSINESS TYPE
OTHER,
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
**QUESTICN= CO YOU FEEL THAT YOU RECEIVED ADEQUATE
COMPENSATION TO HELP YOU MAKE A SUCCESSFUL MOVE.
S
0
S
S
S9
V
V
0
0
0
SUBJECTIVE RBSPONSE TO THE ADEQUACY
OF THE COMPENSATION RECEIVED.*
PERCENTAGES
NO. ENPLOYEES
ADEQUATE
INADEQUATE
N/A TOTAL
ADEQUATE
INADEQUATE
ONE
18
9
2
29
67
33
2 TO 3
19
20
3
42
49
51
4 TO 5
17
15
5
37
53
47
6 TO 7
9
11
0
20
45
55
23
22
4
49
51
49
6
19
1
26
24
76
3
3
1
7
50
50
6
20
2
28
23
77
101
119
18
238
46
54
8 TO 19
20 TO 49
50+,
CVER
0, UNKNOWN
TO TAt
**QUESTION=; DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU RECEIVED ADEQUATE
COMPENSATION TO HELP YOU MAKE A SUCCESSFUL MOVE.
N/A TOTAL
H
H
A-162
SURVEY RESPONSE...
RELCCATICN
HELP
BUSINESS TYPE
PROVIDED
FRIENCLY,
CO-OPERAT 1IVE
SERVICES,
DISTRls3
PROF.
MANUF AC TUR ING
OTHER,
UNKNCOWN
TOTAL
LPA
INFORMATION ON
CLAIMS
LOAN'S,
FOUND
LOCATION
0
3
1
0
0
0
19
8
0
4
1
0
9
5
0
53
21
1
12
RETAIL
THE
4
9
WHOLESALE
STORAGE,
"Y
A-163
SURVEY RESPONSE...
SUGGE STIONS
FOR
IMPROVEME1TS
BUSINESS TYPE
I
0
WHOLESALE
IN RELOCATION PROCEEDURES
SUGG
3
ST IONS
4
5
6
7
4
2
1
0
0
4
1
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
37
0
RETA IL
STORA;E,
SERVICES,
DISTRIB
0
PROF.
0
5
2
1
1
0
6
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
23
5
MANUFACTUI NG
0
UNKNOWN
OTHER,
-
TOT AL
SUGGESTIONS:
1 - More money
2 - Less red tape
3
- Keep out politics and corruption
4
- a. Estimate date closer to taking
b. Too little time
c. Too much time
5
- Make payments on account
6
- Pay for good will
7
- Information, advice
0
6
2
i,
A-164
SUBJECTIVE RESPCNSE
TO THE WAY IN WHICH RELOCATION WAS HANDLED.
ATTITUDES
1
2-3
NO. OF EMPLOYEES
0,
50+
206-7
84-5
19
49 OVER OR X
TOT
7
4
4
71
7
3
10
81
0
12
62
2
0
2
24
49
26
7
28
238
35
31
29
57
35
30
38
29
43
25
26
35
31
42
0
100
100
100
100
100
100
13
7
13
(12
11
11
(s
NEGATIVE
2
9
9
7
13
NO RESPONSE
4
6
3
0
7
29
42
37
20
FINE - POSITIVE
48
31
38
NEUTRAL
44
44
6
100
FINE -
POSITIVE
NEUTRAL
TOTAL
06C6
PERCENTAGES
NEGATIVE
TOTAL
33
-
38
29
-
100
0
SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE
TO THE WAY IN WHICH RELOCATION
WAS HANDLED.
BUSINESS FIRMS
WHOLESALE
ATTITUDES
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
61 62 63 64
60
TOT
65
66
1
5
58
59
0
0
0
1
NEUTRAL
0
0
0
1
NEGATIVE
0
0
0
1
3
1
0
2
NO RESPCNSE
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
3
9
4
3
FINE -
POSITIVE
TOTAL
3
1
0
COL PCNT
67
0
11
29
1
15
39
4
1
12
32
1
0
0
3
6
14
*2
41
00
-H
100
a'
0
9
Lj
U
9
99
V
w
SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE =
TO THE WAY IN WHICH RELOCATION WAS HANDLED.
RETAIL
BUSINESS FIRMS
TOT
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
ATTITUDES
COL PCNT
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
1
6
15
NEUTRAL
1
0
0
0
0
13
33
NEGATIVE
0
2
0
0
7
4
3
2
3
0
21
52
NO RESPONSE
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
1
0
5
1
2
0
0
14
9
6
5
7
1
45
FINE -
POSITIVE
TOTAL
00
0
100
Hj
c7%
9
9 U
U
U
U
S
U
U
U
0V
SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE =
TO THE WAY IN WHICH RELOCATION WAS HANDLED.
STCRAGE, DISTRIB BUSINESS FIRMS
ATTITUDES
58
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
63
64
61
62
59
60
TOT
65
66
0
0
1
1
2
1
1
0
2
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NEUTRAL
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
NEGATIVE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NO RESPCNSE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
FINE -
POSITIVE
67
H
TOTAL
0
9
Ll
SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE =
TO THE WAY IN WHICH RELOCATION WAS HANDLED.
SERVICES, PROF.
BUSINESS FIRMS
ATTITUDES
58
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
62 63 64
59
60 61
65
3
07)
0
0
0
0
2
NEUTRAL
1
0
0
0
2
NEGATIVE
0
1
0
1
NO RESPCNSE
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
FINE -
POSITIVE
TOTAL
1
66
TOT
COL PCNT
1
28
40
67
7
5
1
25
2
1
2
1
0
13
1
2
1
1
0
0
5
10
9
10
22
15
2
71
20
100
1
9
90
Ll
0
0
S
0
0
0
SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE =
TO THE WAY IN WHICH RELOCATION WAS HANDLED.
MANUFACTURING
BUSINESS FIRMS
58
59
aO
61
62
63
0
0
0
0
2
1
NEUTRAL
0
0
0
0
5
NEGATIVE
0
0
0
0
NO RESPONSE
0
0
0
0
FINE -
TO T
COL PCNT
1
17
40
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
ATTI TUDES
POSITIVE
2
64
65
66
67
0
1
3
1
14
34
1
1
1
2
0
11
26
0
1
1
0
0
4
H
TOTAL
0
0
0
0
15
6
4
8
11
2
46
100
41
&
0
w
6
0
SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE =
TO THE WAY IN WHICH RELOCATION WAS HANDLED.
OTHER, UNKNOWN
BUSINESS FIRMS
ATTITUDES
DATE OF DISPLACEMENT
64
62
63
60
61
58
59
o
0
0
0
NEUTRAL
0
0
1
0
NEGATIVE
0
0
0
0
1
0
NO RESPONSE
o
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
7
FINE -
POSITIVE
TOTAL
1
2
TOT
65
66
0
COL PCNT
67
0
9
36
2
1
0
13
52
1
0
1
C
3
12
0
1
0
1
1
5
5
5
4
7
1
30
100
0
w
APPENDIX VI
EXHIBITS
Form
A.
Survey
B.
Letter of Transmittal
171
POST RELOCATION SURVEY
FIRM NO.
Space for comments has been provided at the end of the questionnaire.
If it is insufficient, please feel free to use the back of the sheet.
1. How do you feel about the way in which your relocation was handled?
Please check: (Fine-positive
)(Neutral
)(Negative
)
2. Did you experience any of the following: Please check them.
delays in receiving relocation payments
business interruption
loss of income prior to property taking
loss of customers ...........................
unreasonable time lag between the project
announcement and the property taking ......
3. Do you feel that you received adequate compensation to help you make
a successful move?
(Yes
)
)(No
4. Would you have been able to remain in business without a reimbursement
for relocation expenses?
(Yes
)(No
)(None received
)
5. What were your major problems in finding a new location: Please check.
zoning restrictions ......
licensing problems
delays or time consummed
leasing ........
financing ..............
costsable.l.......
unsuitable location ....
unsuitable building space
unreasonable rents
hurried, not enough time
other
6. How long did it take you to find a new location?
7. What means did you use to find a new location?
months.
Please check them.
located by self
real estate agent
through friends
relocation agency
other businessmen
other
8. What
is your trading area (where are your customers located)?
(Neighborhood
)(Boston
)(Metro Area
)(New England
)
9. Do
you serve any particular racial or ethnic group? -(Yes
If yes, which?
10. How long have you been in business?
OVER PLEASE
years.
)(No
172
POST RELOCATION SURVEY
11. Are you satisfied with the progress you are making at your new
location? Please check.
*
(Very satisfied
)(Satisfied
)(Very Dissatisfied
)
12. How do you like doing business here rather than at the old location?
Please check the following.
Better herel The same
Old better
general business
costs
parking
access
merchandise handling
working space and layout
other
13.
Upon relocation did you change:
your method of operation
(Please check)
...................
your type of business ................
dropor add any line, services, or products
14. Upon moving did you improve your layout, rearrange equipment, or gen)
)(No
erally make changes to improve operating efficiency? (Yes
15.
How many employees did you have just after moving?
.
16. How many employees do you have now?
17. How much floor space do you now use?
floors?
)(Others
(Ground floor
18. Do you now (own
Sq. Ft., on how many
)
) and your monthly rent is
)(rent
19. Have your gross annual receipts or sales increased? (Yes
(No
).
By what percentage:
) or
%.
20. Did you find any of ther services of the Business Relocation
). If yes, in what ways?
(Yes
)(No
Department helpful?
21. Would you please make any suggestions or comments as to how
relocation activities might be improved?
22
Name and title
of person answering the survey:
TMANK
YOU
173
..
T.
MA SS A C HUS E TT S
OF
IN
ST I TU T E
T E C H N O L O GY
209 West Newton Street
Boston, Massachusetts
March 23, 1967
Gentlemen:
I am writing a graduate thesis on 'Relocation
Services in Urban Renewal' for a masters at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In order
to get the personal reactions of relocatees,
both positive and negative, I have prepared a
series of questions to which your answers will
be very important.
All information which you provide will of course
remain strictly confidential.
It is my hope to
use this information in improving the conditions
under which future business relocation is conducted. The final report should become available
to you, through the M.I.T. libraries, by June of
this year.
This survey is not related to any others in which
you may have participated. I would appreciate it
very much if you would be kind enough to participate and to answer the questionnaire and return
it in the enclosed reply envelope.
If you would
would be exwithin
the
next
few
days
it
do this
tremely helpful.
Sincerely yours,
Joe L. Ward
A-174
BIBLIOGRAPHY
An Effective Program for the Relocation
Alevizos, John P.
(Unpublished
Businesses
from Urban Renewal Areas.
of
report prepared under a URA Demonstration Grant),
Boston, 1963(?).
Churchill, Betty C. "Recent Business Population Movements",
Survey of Current Business, Vol. 34, No. 1, January
1954, pp. 11-16.
The Displacement of Small Business from a Slum Clearance
Area - The Experience in Mount Royal Plaza, Baltimore,
Maryland.
(Baltimore Urban Renewal and Housing Agency),
The Failure Record Through 1960.
New York, 1961.
(Dun and Bradstreet,
Inc.),
Handbook for Participation Loans with the Small Business
Administration.
Small Business Administration,
Washington, 1966.
Harris, Stephen M.
"Business Relocation Programs Would
Benefit from More Intensive Local Efforts within a
Framework of Broader Federal Guidance", Journal of
Housing, Vol. 23, No. 3, March 1966, pp. 147-149.
Hearings Before the Subcommittee No. 5 of the Select
Committee on Small Business, (House of Representatives,
89th Congress, 1st Session, Pursuant to House Res. 13,
Vol. 1), Washington, 1965.
Industrial and Commercial Business Relocation in the City
of Boston, (Boston Redevelopment Authority - Staff
Report), Boston, 1966.
The Impact of
Kinnard, William N., and Malinowski, Zenon S.
Dislocation from Urban Renewal Areas on Small Business.
University of Connecticut, 1960.
Kinnard, William N. Statement to the Select Subcommittee on
Real Property Acquisition, (Committee on Public Works,
United States House of Representatives, Providence,
(1964) reprint, University of Connecticut.
-A-175
Local Public Agency Letter No. 80 (Urban Renewal Administration,
Housing and Home Finance Agency), October 8, 1956.
(Urban Renewal
Local Public Agency Letter No. 134.
Finance Agency),
Home
Administration, Housing and
March 14, 1958.
Local Public Agency Letter No. 362 (Urban Renewal
Administration, Department of Housing and Urban
Development), February 10, 1966.
Olins,
Characteristics and Trends of Boston's Labor
A. M.
Force. (Boston Redevelopment Authority, unpub. MS),
Boston, 1967.
Organization and Operation of the Small Business Administration:
A Report of the Select Committee on Small Business.
(House of Representatives, 88th Congress, 2nd Session,
House Report No. 1935), Washington, 1964.
Platt,
Background Paper No. 1, Changing
Rutherford H.
Congressional Provisions for Small Businesses Displaced
(Center for Urban Studies), Chicago,1966.
by Urban Renewal.
Questions and Answers on Relocation Payments. (Advisory
Bulletin, AB-5-58, HHFA, URA), Washington, 1958.
Unequal Treatment of People and Businesses
Relocation:
Displaced by Government. (Advisory Commission on
Interfovernmental Relations), Washington, 1965.
Report on the Removal and Relocation of
Elevated Rapid Transit Structure.
Boston.
ment Authority),
the Charlestown
(Boston Redevelop-
A Study of Business Dislocation Caused by
Saalberg, James H.
Unpublished M.I.T. City
the Boston Central Artery.
1959.
Planning Thesis, Cambridge,
Schorr, Philip."Relocation 'Bill of Rights'," Journal of
Housing, Vol. 17, -No. 9, October 1960, pp. 367-368.
(Hearings before
Small Business Problems in Urban Areas.
Subcommittee No. 5, 89th Congress, Vol. 4, New York,
1965), Washington, 1966.
Study
of Compensation and Assistance for Persons Affected
by Real Property Acquisition in Federal and Federally
Assisted Programs, (Committee on Public Works, House
of Representatives, 88th Congress, 2nd Session),
Washington, 1964.
A-176
(Small
Success and Failure Factors in Small Business.
1964.
Business Administration), Washington,
(Urban Renewal Administration,
Urban Renewal Manual.
Housing and Home Finance Agency), Washington,
Urban Renewal Plan, Washington Park Renewal Area, Project
(Boston Redevelopment Authority),
No. Mass. R-24.
Boston, January 1963.
Urban
Renewal
Project
Characteristics.
Department
of
Housing and Urban Development, Washington, December,
1965.
A Preliminary Redevelopment Study
West End Project Report:
(Urban Redevelopment
Boston.
of
End
of the West
Boston, 1953.
Authority),
Housing
Division, Boston
Rebuilding Cities - The Effects of
Zimmer, Basil G.
Displacement and Relocation on Small Business.
Quadrangle
Books,
Chicago,
1964.