HOUSING IN THE USSR

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79R01141A000800070002-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 80
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 10, 2013
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: July 12, 1957
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
,CIA-R DP79R01141 A000800070002-3
I.VIVI'IUtIV I IHL
HOUSING IN THE USSR
CIA/RR 92
12 July 1957
N? 30
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141 A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141 A000800070002-3
WARNING
This material contains information affecting
the National Defense oY the United States
within the meaning of the espionage laws,
Title 18, USC, Secs. 793 and 794, the trans-
mission or revelation of which in any manner
to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141 A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
ECONOMIC INTELLIGENCE REPORT
HOUSING IN THE USSR
CIA/RR 92
Office of Research and Reports
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
The purpose of this report is to present a quantitative measure
of Soviet housing conditions and of investment in housing. No
attempt is made to describe in detail problems of morale induced by
socialization of "the home," the shortage of space, or other factors.
Nor is an attempt made to describe in detail variations in the quality
or type of construction or to describe problems of management of state
housing. information on these subjects may be found in Timothy
Sosnovy, The Housing Problem in the Soviet Union, 1954; in Joseph
Berliner, Urban Residential Building in the USSR, 1955; in a series
of articles in Soviet Studies by Alexander Block; and by a study of
Soviet housing law. These unmeasurable factors have been considered,
however,'in ascertaining the housing conditions under which the Soviet
people live and in estimating future Soviet policy regarding housing.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3 ,
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141 A000800070002-3
Summary 1
I. Background 2
II. Construction 4
A. Statistics 4
1. Urban Construction 4
2. Urban Housing Space 5
3. Rural Housing Space 5
B. State Construction 9
1. Responsibility for Constructior, and Management. 9
2. Location and Type of State Housing Construction
in Urban Areas 10
3. Shortcomings of Construction Organizations
in Housebuilding 11
C. Private Construction 13
i
D. Urban Housing Construction, 1917-45 14
1.
Before 1929.
2.
1929-32
3.
1933-37
4.
1938 -July
1941
5.
1942-45
14
15
15
.. 16
16
E. Urban and Rural Housing Construction in the
Postwar Period 17
1. 1946-50 ... 18
2. 1951-55 18
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-RDP79R01141A000800070002-3 '
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
F. Housing in the Sixth Five Year Plan (1956-60) 20
1. The Plan 20
2. Prospects of Fulfillment 22
III. Financing of Housing Construction and Repairs 23
A. State Housing 23
1. Construction 23
2. Repairs 25
B. Private Housing 26
1. Construction 26
2. Repairs .. 28
C. Expenditures for Housing, 1917-55 28
1. 1917-28 28
2. First Five Year Plan (1928-32) 28
3. Second Five Year Plan (1933-37) 29
4. Third Five Year Plan (1938-42) 29
5. War Years (1942-45) 29
6. Fourth Five Year Plan (1946-50) 31
7. Fifth Five Year Plan (1951-55) 32
D. State Investment for Housing as a Percent of Total
State Capital Investment 33
N. Housing Conditions 37
A. Urban 37
1. General 37
2. Living Space in Urban Housing 39
3? Cost of Rent and Utilities 42
B. Rural 43
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Appendix A. Urban Housing Construction and Reconstruction
in the USSR, 1917-56
Appendix C. Housing Construction and Investment in the USSR,
by Selected Ministries and Sectors
Appendix D. Retirement of Housing in the USSR
Appendix E. Cost of Housing in.the USSR
45
63
67
71
1.
Urban Housing Construction in the USSR, Selected
Periods, 1924-60
6
2.
Urban Housing Space in the USSR, Selected Years, 1926-55
7
3.
Rural Housing Space and Construction of Rural Housing
in the USSR, 1943-55 ...
8
4.
Housing Investment in the USSR, 1924-56
30
5.
Investment in Housing as a Percent of Total State Capital
Investment in the USSR, 1924-55
34
6.
Expenditures for Urban Housing Construction and Repair
in the USSR, 1924-55
36
7.
Living Space Per Capita in Urban Areas o? the USSR,
Selected Years, 1917-55
41
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
8,
Living Space Per Capita in Rural Areas of the USSR,
1946 - 5 5
44
9.
Housing Constructed by Major Sectors of the Economy in
the USSR, Selected Periods, 1924-55
63
10.
Capital Investment for Housing in the USSR, by Selected
Ministries and Sectors, 1933-37 and 1946-50
63
11.
State and Private Housing Construction in the USSR, by
Selected Ministries, 1946-60 ...
64
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
CIA~RR 92 C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
(ORR Project 14.622)
Although the Soviet regime inherited a poverty of housing from pre-
revolutionary Russia, the history of Soviet housing since that time has
been dominated by an increasing shortage. This condition has developed
from a series of factors, the most basic being the low priority of
housing in the National Economic Plan. Rapid urbanization, heavy war
destruction, and discouragement of private building have accentuated
the shortage.
Housing in the USSR is divided sharply between urban housing and
rural housing. Action by the state has been the vital factor in the
field of urban housing. At the present time, urban housing is 65 per-
cent state owned, whereas rural housing is almost entirely privately
owned and privately built. Of all housing in the USSR, urban and rural,
the state owns only about 30 percent. Measured in terms of living
space available to each person, conditions in urban housing grew contin-
ually worse from 1917 to the outbreak of World War II. In the postwar
period the rates of urbanization and of housebuilding have been approx-
imately the same; conditions in 1956 were no better than at the end of
World War II and are still well below those of 1917. Rural housing
conditions today differ little from prerevolutionary conditions. It
is planned that .between 1956 and 1960 the total amount of urban housing
space will be increased by 50 percent. To achieve this, radical
changes have been made in housebuilding design, techniques, and materials.
The allocations planned for housing construction t'or the Sixth Five
Year Plan are not adequate, however, to achieve the goal outlined. State
expenditures on housing investment have claimed only a small portion of
total state capital investment. State investment in housing during the
1930's averaged only 9 percent of total state capital investment, in-
creased to about 12 percent in the Fourth Five Year Plan, and rose to
about 14 percent in the Fifth Five Year Plan. This postwar investment
has been concentrated primarily on houses for industrial workers built
by the industrial ministries. In the US, investment in housing, except
for the depression and war years, has averaged over 20 percent of total
~ The estimates and conclusions contained in this report represent the
best ,judgment of CIA as of 15 December 1956.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
capital investments. Investment in state housing, planned to constitute
approximately 14 percent of total state capital investment in the next
5-year period would not increase standards rapidly or appreciably. It
would take many years of investment at twice this level to provide the
Russians with standards approaching those in Western countries.
Rural and urban housing in the USSR are differentiated by one
significant factor -- ownership. Since the Revolution in 1917, rural
housing has remained almost entirely privately owned, whereas about
65 percent of urban housing in the USSR is owned by the state.
State ownership of rural housing, estimated at less than 5 percent
of total rural housing, is limited to housing built on machine tractor
stations (MTS's) and sovkhozes. Nonprivate dwellings on kolkhozes in-
clude those of the managers, agronomists, and other technicians and
belong to the farm. 1~*-~ State urban housing is built and owned by
ministries, state organizations, and municipalities (local soviets).
Today ministries and state organizations control 60 percent of state ur-
ban housing, and municipalities control 40 percent. 2~
The Revolution brought an end to all private ownership of land in
the USSR. In cities with populations of over 10,000, the larger houses
and all apartment buildings were nationalized. Housing which had been
attached to industry became state property when the industry itself
was nationalized. State organizations and administrations took over
part of the nationalized housing for dwellings and office space. Muni-
cipalities were made responsible for the remainder of state housing. 3~
After 1923, by which time about 47 percent of existing urban housing
space had been taken over by the state,- 4~ there was little further
nationalization, and the remainder of urban housing as well as all rural
housing remained in private ownership on land leased from the state.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
The dominant role in state housing construction was assumed and
retained by industrial ministries. These ministries have always had
priority over construction materials and labor and have received the
lion's share of investment ilznds.
Although municipalities originally were given responsibility for
most of the nationalized housing as well as for all utilities, cultural
services, and city planning and development, they never assumed a domi-
nant role in Soviet housing construction, because they were accorded low
priority on materials and labor and lacked practical authority to imple-
ment,a broad housing program. Only in large cities such as Moscow and
Leningrad have municipalities been dominant in housing construction.
Cooperative housing associations came into existence in urban areas
during the early 1920's. These cooperatives did some building with
state aid, but usually they leased existing housing from municipalities
and assumed the responsibility of management and maintenance. By the
mid-1930's they were managing almost all municipally owned housing
or about 40 percent of all state housing. 5~ In 1937, however, these
cooperatives were abolished and their housing was turned back to the
municipalities or to other state organizations, 6~ ostensibly because
of irresponsible maintenance but in fact because the state had no
control over the appointment of management or allocation of space.
olution, and up to the beginning of the First Five Year Plan
(1928-32)
private living space built actually exceeded state building.
During the
lg3o's, however, the private sector was discouraged by lack of con-
struction materials and loan funds and by discriminating taxes. After
World War II the official attitude toward private housing construction
changed, and since that time a number of acts have been passed to
Almost no change in rural housing in the USSR occurred after the
Revolution. Throughout the Soviet period the peasants have continued
to build their dwellings on land leased from the state. The state has
built a few houses for MTS and sovkhoz workers, but most of these
workers have built their own houses. In recent years the state has
taken a more active role in rural housing construction, but this interest
is limited almost entirely to the "new lands."
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
II. Construction.
A. Statistics.
1. Urban Construction.
From the beginning of the Soviet period to 1948, housing
data were measured in terms of square meters of living space (zhilaya
ploshchad'), which excludes baths, kitchens, corridors, closets, and
hallways. 7~ Since 1947, official announcements have been made in terms
of total or basic space (obshchaya ploshchad'),~ which represents the
total area within the walls of a residence _~ and averages 54 percent
greater than living space.
The National Economy of the USSR, 9~ a statistical compi-
lation published in 195 and hereafter referred to as the handbook, con-
tains a new series of historical data on Soviet urban housing construc-
tion in terms of total space, with 5-year data for prewar construction
and annual data for postwar construction.
It is necessary to have data in terms of both living space
and total space. Living space is used in the determination of rent, in
the allocation of space, and in the calculation of housing construction
costs. At the local level, all planning and accounting are done in
terms of living space. All planning and accounting data released are in
terms of living space. On the state and republic levels, however, plan
and fulfillment data on housing construction are now released in terms
of total space.
The newly released data in the handbook agree substantially
with previously released construction statistics. (PQinor differences
are-presented in Appendix'A.) Released Soviet data on war losses, how-
ever, previously stated to have been 70 million sq~,are meters of living
space, now indicate them at 40 million to 45 million square meters of
living space. Also, previous calculation of the increased urban living;
space from newly acquired territories in 1938-40 was two-thirds of the
figure derived from statistics in t'ne handbook. The basis for these
changes is found in the total housing fund figures released for 1940 and
1950, both of which are higher than previously estimated. Although
* The term obshchaya ploshchad' refers to all space within the apart-
ment. It excludes areas outside the apartment, such as elevator space,
stairways, and basements. Another term with the same meaning is
poleznaya ploshchad'.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
certain data in the handbook disagree with data previously published,
an arbitrary decision has been made to use the handbook figures in all
cases where they apply, with proper notation of inconsistencies and
disagreements.
A summary of urban housing construction in the USSR for
selected periods, 1924-60, is given in Table 1.*? A summary of urban
housing space in the USSR for selected years, 1917-5$, is given in
Table 2.~*
Censuses or estimates of both state and private urban
housing were made in 1~
Actual
8.8
4.6
3.8
21.3 J
30.4 y/
27.2 ,
30.8
Actual (percent of Plan)
23
46
178
Total state and private
Plan
.62.5
72.2
45.0
84.4
134.0
Actual
15.5
28.1
30.6
66.2 J
102.8
Actual (percent of Plan)
45
42
78.4
77
State
4j
$4
88
70
71
73
Private
57
16
12
30
29
z7
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10: CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10: CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
Urban Housing Space in the USSR
Selected Years, 1926-55
a. A discussion of the methodology used to derive the data in this table is presented in Appendix B, p. 53,
below.
b. 27/
c. 2~
d. All figures aze estimated.
e.
f. 30/
-7-
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10: CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Table 3
Rural Housing Space and Construction of Rural Housing
in the USSR a/
1943-55
a. Data on num er of houses uilt are computed from unroun ed ata.
State agricultural housing in worker settlements is included in urban
housing.
b. Depreciated at 1 percent. See Appendix D.
c. Total space in square meters has been estimated on the basis of
37.5 square meters of space per dwelling. It is assumed that all
space is living space.
d. .Estimated. Reconstruction as well as new construction is in-
cluded.
e. 31/
f. 32/
g? 33/
h . 3T+/
i. 35/
j. 3S/
k. 37/
1. 38/
End of Year
Number of Houses
Built
(Thousands)
Total
Number of Houses b/
(Millions)
Total Space
(Million
Square Meters)
c/
1943
40o a/
1944
50o a/
1945
60o a/
21.8
817
1946
40o e/
22.0
823
1947
50o a/
22.2
834
1948
70o a/
22.7
.
851
1949
70o f/
23.2
86g
1950
40o g/
233
875
1951
40o h/
23.5
881
1952
370 ~/
23.6
886
1953
400 ~/
23.8
892
1954
47o k/
24.0
900
1955
600 1/
24.4
914
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
1. Responsibility for Construction and Management.
State housing construction is part of the national economic
plan. Of state housing built since the war, about 70 percent has been
built by industry, 10 percent by transport, 10 percent by municipalities
(local soviets), and the remainder by other ministries and state organ-
izations:~ Ministries build and maintain houses for their employees
in cities and workers' settlements in the vicinity of plents of the min-
istry. This construction may be for the purpose of providing additional
housing for employees of an existing plant, or the housing construction
ma;/ be an integral part of a construction program involving the erection
of a new plant. The ministries provide utilities and cultural facilities
if municipal facilities are not available. Housing is also constructed
and administered by municipalities, which are responsible as well for
the construction and operation of urban water, electricity, sewerage
and gas services, public baths, transportation within the city, laundries,
hotels, and other services. There is also a small amount of housing
built under the direction of regional and republic governments.
The building and management of state urban housing has always
been considerably confused by a multiplicity of authority and a lack of
coordination. Although municipalities are responsible for city planning
and development and for most utilities and services, they often do not
determine the location and planning of ministerial housing and utilities
within urban areas. As a result, city planning becomes difficult, util-
ities are not adequately provided, and space is allocated arbitrarily. 39~
The large number of construction organizations involved in urban building
creates a problem. Municipalities and ministries building in an area
have their own construction organizations, and there is a complete lack
of coordination among these builders. 40~ As a typical example, in
Krasnoyarsk approximately 40 small residential settlements are being
built by separate industrial enterprises. Most of them are building their
own schools and hospitals and clubs. The sewers in each of these settle-
ments are built independently without reference to a central sewerage
system so that sewage cannot be disposed of outside of the city. There
are 51 independent designing organizations involved in the planning of
houses and services within the city. 41~
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Within the past few years, municipalities have been given
more precise authority in city planning and a larger share of state
housebuilding funds. In.three cities -- Moscow, Leningrad, and
Kiev -- all housing construction trusts have been combined under a
single authority, and this procedure is to be extended to other large
cities and certain regions. Republic ministries of urban and rural
construction have been formed to centralize authority over municipal
housing and service construction. Arguments have been put forth to
concentrate all authority for urban building in the hands of municipal-
ities, allowing industry to build and own housing only outside of cities
in workers' settlements. It is estimated, however, that industry will
not willingly relinquish any of its rights to build and manage employee
housing. 42/
2. Location and Type of State Housing Construction
in Urban Areas.
In the haste of reconstruction following World War II,
many single-unit and small dwellings of 1 or 2 stories were constructed
in urban areas. One- and two-story buildings comprised 75 to 90 per-
cent of new construction in medium- and srrall-sized towns in the Fourth
Five Year Plan. 43/ During the Fifth Five Year Plan the direction of
urban building was toward the construction of centrally located multi-
story apartment buildings. 44/ Although the initial construction cost
was generally higher than in the case of smaller units, it was argued
that economies in management and maintenance as well as in provision of
utilities and transport facilities would outweigh the higher construction
cost. 45/ For the Sixth Five Year Plan, most of the state housing to be
built will be 3- and 5-story apartment houses located in so-called satel-
lite areas around cities and a certain distance from them. Small 1- and
2-story residences will continue to be built in small towns. 46/
US housing delegates made several general comments regarding
city planning in the USSR. There was unanimous opinion that the Russians
are not taking advantage of the unique opportunity for over-all long-term
urban planning offered a totalitarian state. There is a lack of dynamics
in planning, big cities having a master plan which is being followed to
a certain extent, but there is no planning beyond 10 years ahead. Future
needs for shop and service space are, not being provided, and no allow-
ances are being made for increased use of automobiles. On the other
hand, members of the delegation were impressed by the number of parks
and green areas as well as the general layouts of the new satellite
developments. 47/
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3 _ _
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Most of the one-story wood houses in the USSR are privately
owned. The remainder -- two-story and over, nonwood structures -- belong
to the state. During the next 5 years, it is planned that most state
housing construction will be 3- to 5-story structures, implying a drop
in the share of 2-story and over-5-story dwellings. As private con-
struction is to increase at the same rate as state construction, the
share of one-story houses constructed of wood will not decline. The type
of material used in state construction during the Sixth Five Year Plan,
however, will change the current material composition of state housing
appreciably. Most of the existing housing in the material 6ategory
"brick, stone, and concrete" is brick or stone, whereas during the next
5 years most of the housing built in the state category will utilize
prefabricated reinforced concrete components. The plan for utilization
of prefabricated reinforced concrete in building, particularly house-
building, was first outlined in the fall of 1954. A series of confer-
ences and decrees followed, resulting in a considerable increase in the
size and scope of the original program. Fulfillment of the Sixth Five
Year Plan for housing depends overwhelmingly on the success of this pro-
gram. Members of the housing delegation were told that the Russians
want city centers eventually to have 85 percent multistory prefabricated
(mainly concrete) residences, whereas at present about 40 percent of
state urban housing construction is so composed. 49~
3. Shortcomings of Construction Organizations in Housebuilding.
Housebuilding has always had low priority in the total con-
struction program and in the quality of materials and workmanship. 50~
There is no known year in the Soviet period in which the program for
state housing construction has been fulfilled.*
~ Although the original Fifth Five Year Plan was fulfilled, revised
goals were not fulfilled. No annual plans were fulfilled in the Fifth
Five Year Plan.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Among the criticisms directed toward builders, the following
are frequently noted:
a. Poor quality of construction. 51~ The workmanship and
quality of materials used in housebuilding are vastly inferior to those
used in industrial construction. Members of the US housing delegation
were shocked to note the use of poor materials such as green lumber,
warped frames, rusty hardware, wrought iron pipe for water and sewerage
lines (embedded in concrete in the new prefabs) which will deteriorate
in 3 to 6 years, concrete containing excess sand, and peeling plaster in
new buildings. As for workmanship, the finishing work is so poor that
buildings are in need of repair before they are completed, with tilting
floors, frames that do not fit, and leaking ceilings. Although the
basic structures are generally sound, in some cases even technical
standards are violated, causing foundations to give way and, walls,
ceilings, and balconies to collapse. 52~
~ -
b. Poor scheduling of construction. 53~ Year after year
state housing construction is started so late in the year that over
60 percent of the work must be finished in the last 3 months of the year.
This gives rise to inferior-quality construction work and necessitates
a concentration of construction resources at the end of the year. For
example, the amount of housing finished in the first 6 months of 1956 is
less than one-fourth of the total planned for the year.. 54~
c. Failure to complete housing before it is turned over for
occupancy. 55~ This often occurs because the new tenants. want to move
in and the builders and local soviets want to meet acceptance schedules.
d. Excessive housing starts and lack of housing finishes.
For example, on 1 January 1956 in cities of the RSFSR, excluding Moscow,
25 billion rubles worth of housing and service construction was under
way. Yet during the whole of 1955 the cost of projects completed was
only 7.5 billion rubles. Thus 70 percent of all capital investment in
housing was incompleted construction. 56~ Yet in 1956 many projects
have been started and many incc?npleted projects left unattended. The
reason is that fulfillment of the plan is measured in terms of
rubles spent. In housing construction the first stages produce a rapid
expenditure of expensive materials, whereas the finishing work of a
residence requires "unprofitable" labor inputs and proceeds slowly. 57~
e. Neglect of housing in Favor of other construction. This
criticism is infrequently noted because housing is of secondary importance
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
in 6 ministry's building program. It is, however, the major cause of.
underfulfillment of the housing construction plan.
f. Iiigh cost of construction. In every known year in the
Soviet period the cost of housebuilding has exceeded estimated costs.
g. Architectural and building excesses. 58~ Architectural
excesses in the form of costly decorations, ostentatious facades, towers,
wasted space, and lack of standardization add to the cost of housebuilding
in the USSR. At the Builders Conference in the fall of 1954, examples
were given of housing which cost over 3,000 rubles per square meter of
living space, or double the national average; of apartment houses built
with decorated towers costing several million rubles; and of residences
with living space comprising only 30 to 40 percent of total space.
All of these shortcomings have been registered continually
throughout the postwar period, but not until 1954 were they given serious
attention. Drastic changes have occurred in the housing construction
field for the Sixth Five Year Plan period. These are discussed in F,
below.
C. Private Construction.
Except for the few houses which are built by industry for sale
to employees, almost all private urban building is done by the owners.*-
The main problem faced by the individual housebuilder is the acquisition
of construction materials. The Ministry of Trade has outlets in urban
areas, and industrial ministries have outlets for materials, tools,
and hardware. In the prewar period the state made no effort to make
materials available. In the postwar period the state has lowered the
retail price of building materials each year since 1947, and since 1954
a serious effort has been made to furnish the market with adequate
supplies. At present the availability of supplies rather than their
price continues to restrict private construction. Bank funds available
for private loans are seldan used up, and land is not difficult to
acquire. 59 Land for building is granted by the executive committee
of the rayon or the city soviet. Plots, ranging from 300 to 600 square
meters, are leased in perpetuity with payment of an annual property tax
* Recent visitors to the USSR have reported that certain elite groups.
such as scientists and doctors and teachers have been allowed to build
cooperative apartment houses. It has also been reported that a few
hired laborers are available for private construction.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
of about 100 rubles. 60 The only restrictions on this land are
those limiting the size of the dwelling and the maximum time the land
can be held before construction is begun. 61~ The city soviet sets
aside areas for private housing on the outskirts of towns. Although
the municipalities are responsible for providing utilities to these
areas, in fact they do so only occasionally. Industrial ministries
are supposed to assist their workers in acquiring blueprints and
drawings and to provide technical assistance in building, in trans-
portation of materials and in provision of utilities and services.
In rural areas, kolkhozniki build on their private plots.
State agricultural workers occupy lots granted by the rayon soviet.
These lots vary, in size from 700 to 1200 square meters. 62~ S:~ecial
stores in the cooperative trade network sell construction materials in
villages and other rural areas.
Until the inauguration of the new lands program the only
evidence that the state has engaged in kolkhoz housing construction
was the agrogorods (agricultural cities) built in 1950. These proved
very costly in labor and materials and were resisted by the peasants.
The state builds an unknown share of the housing of sovkhoz and MTS
workers.
A crude type of construction prevails in both urban and
rural private housing. The labor is unskilled, all kinds of scraps
are used for materials, and utilities are generally lacking. This is
particularly true in rural areas, where the same materials and structure
types prevail as in prerevolutionary times. It is noteworthy that
although numerous requests were made, members of the US housing dele-
gation to the USSR were not allowed to see any private housing.
D. Urban Housing Construction, 1917-45.
1. Before 1929. -
From the Revolution to 1924 there was little housing con-
struction. There was general confusion regarding what housing had been
nationalized and who was responsible for its upkeep. Widespread de-
struction and ruin resulted from the Civil War, with mass wrecking of
whole blocks of buildings to obtain fuel, and neglect as large segments
of the urban population fled to the country to avoid starvation. 63~
Between 1917 and 1923 the urban population declined from 20 million to
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
17 million 64~ and, although there was a certain amount of new building,
there was a net loss in total living space because of destruction and
dilapidation. 65~ Housing construction recommenced on a large scale in
1923, and between 1923 and 1929 a total of 16.6 million square meters of
living space was built, including 7 million in the state sector and
9.6 million in the private sector.* This is the only period since the
Revolution in which private building exceeded state building. In terms
of total space the state sector built more, but less than 40 percent of
this was living space.
2. 1929-32?
The First Five Year Plan for urban housing construction was
based on the estimated increase in the urban population, but the plan
stated that outlays would fall short of providing adequate housing. 66~
The plan was fulfilled by only 45 percent, and a total of 28.1 million
square meters of living space was provided. At the same time the urban
population increased by 13 million so that the new space per new urban
dweller was only about 2.2 square meters -- less than 25 square feet.
Whereas the state sector fulfilled the plan by 55 percent, the private
sector built only 23 percent of housing planned for this period. This
was because of a series of government regulations in 1929-30 which
virtually halted private construction. Loans and lots were no longer
available, and materials and blueprints could not be purchased. An
example of this policy is a law which was in force during the First
Five Year Plan under which the income tax on home owners with an income
of 6,000 rubles was 16 percent whereas the income tax on tenants with
Lhe same income was only 4 percent. 67~ As a result of the discourage-
ment of private building and the low priority of housing in the total
state construction program, housing needs were deferred, and average
space declined continually during the 1930'x.
3? 1933-37?
The period from 1933 to 1937 was the worst in the peacetime
history of Soviet housing. The urban population increased by about 16
million, and the amount of housing built was not sufficient to provide
room for abed for each new urban resident. The Second Five Year Plan
called for the construction of 72.2 million square meters of urban space,
including 64 million square meters of state construction and 8.2 million
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
square meters of private construction. The plan was fulfilled by 42
percent, and the amount of living space constructed exceeded that of
the First Five Year Plan by only about 2.5 million square meters.
Space built by the private sector declined in comparison with the
previous period.
4. 1938 - July 1841.
By 1938, urban housing conditions were far worse than they
had been before the plan periods. The urban population had increased
by about 25 million from 1928 to 1938, and in this same period the
total amount of construction amounted to about 60 million square meters
of living space, less than half of the housing needed to maintain the
1928 average of space per capita.
The Third Five Year Plan was met more successfully than the
first two Five Year Plans. In 32 years, over half of the total plan
was fulfilled and almost as much space was built as in each of the two
previous Five Year Plan periods. The plan had called for the construc-
tion of 45 million square meters of living space, 35 million by state
construction and 10 million by private construction. By July of 1941
the state had constructed 21 million square meters and private builders
had constructed 5 million square meters.
There was very little urban housing construction during
World War II, and conditions became even more crowded as large numbers
of industrial workers migrated eastward and as western cities were razed
by both the Germans and the retreating Russians. A certain amount of
temporary construction necessarily took place in the new industrial cen-
ters of the east where the population rose by 5 million between 1938 and
1943. But most of the construction from the beginning of the war through
1945 occurred after the liberation, in areas previously occupied. 68~
During 1942-45 a total of 29 million square meters of urban
living space was built or restored, an amount greater than that built in
any of the three prewar Five Year Plans. A large share of the construc-
tion figures for this period as well as for the period of the Fourth Five
Year Plan include reconstruction and restoration of existing housing.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
million people homeless in the country. In areas which had been
occupied by the enemy, it was reported that almost half of the urban
living space -- 70 million square meters -- had been destroyed and
30 percent of rural housing -- 3.5 million dwellings -- had been
wrecked. 69/ These reports of war losses are exaggerated. It appears
that net 'urban losses were actually about 45 million square meters,
and the extent of actual rural losses is unknown.
With the end of the war the official attitude toward
housing c:zanged. The postwar period brought a marked increase in both
state and private housing construction. State housing has received a
greater share of total construction resources, and private housing
has benefited from a number of acts which have been passed to encourage
private construction and ownership. The distaste for private ownership
in the Soviet legal system apparently was overcome by the realization
that the state could not supply the housing required for its urban
population.
A series of decrees and decisions published between 1943 and
1945 to promote private reconstruction of war-damaged and destroyed
housing includes an increase in the amount which could be borrowed from
banks from 7,000 to 10,000 rubles, exemption from payment of land taxes,
allocation of more building materials to the retail market, and per-
mission for kolkhozniki to obtain timber from certain state forests. 70/
In 1946 a decree was issued under which workers in most areas of the
USSR were allowed to buy houses built by ministries for sale to their
employees, and this concession was extended to t-he rest of the country
in 1949. This decree offered private citizens the first opportunity to
own skillfully built houses. And because banks and purchasers financed
these houses, there was no financial cost to the industry building the
houses. 71/
A decree published in 1948 legalizing the purchase and owner-
ship of private dwellings received a great deal of publicity. This
decree guaranteed for the first time that the land on which private
houses were built was leased in perpetuity rather than for a specific
number of years, thus giving official assurance that the house would not
be subject to seizure by the state. This decree was limiting as well as
* For discussion of exaggerated war losses in urban areas, see Appendix B.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
liberalizing, however. It set a limit on the size of lots and re-
stricted the number of rooms in a private house to a maximum of five,
thus eliminating the possibility of private construction of large
houses with extra rooms for rent. Although private construction and
ownership of dwellings had continued throughout the plan periods, with-
out confiscation by the state, legalizing the existing situation gave
the owner the benefit of recourse to the law in certain disputes. 72~
1. 1946-50.
The Fourth Five Year Plan for housing called for the con-
struction and restoration of 84.4 million square meters of living space
in urban areas, including 65 million square meters by ministries and
state organizations. 7.4 million square meters by municipalities, and
12 million square meters by private builders. Of this total, 41.6
million square meters were planned for areas occupied by the Germans
during the war. This plan appears to have been designed to stabilize
the number of privately owned urban dwellings at the prewar level and
increase the number of state-owned dwellings, which had regained its pre-
war level by 1946, to meet expected urban population increases. 73~ In
rural areas, construction was planned at 3.4 million dwellings of which
1.7 million were designated to be in occupied areas. 74~ After 2 years
the Five Year Plan for urban construction had been fulfilled by 27 per-
cent, 21 percent in the state sector and 68 percent in the private sec-
tor. At the end of 1948, in order to conceal the fact that state
housing construction plans were greatly underfulfilled (33 percent of
the Five Year Plan was completed in 3 years) and that private construc-
tion was overfulfilled (the Five Year Plan was achieved in less than 3
years), the USSR changed its methods of announcing figures for housing
construction. Figures for state and private construction were combined,
and the unit of space was changed from living space to total space.
Living space, which is estimated at 62 percent of total space in the
state sector and 70 percent of total space in the private sector, had
always been the unit of measure of Soviet housing construction and was
the measure employed in the plan. In terms of living space, the state
sector fulfilled the Fourth Five Year Plan by 62 percent, the private
sector by 178 percent. In rural areas, only 2.7 million dwellings
were completed against a plan of 3.4 million.
2. 1951-55?
The Fifth Five Year Plan called for the construction of 105
million square meters of total state housing space (68 million square
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
meters of living space), an increase of approximately 50 percent over
that built between 1946 and 1950, a task magnified by the large role
of reconstruction in the Fourth Five Year Plan figures. This plan for
state housing construction was not intended to improve housing con-
ditions appreciably, because almost all of this housing was scheduled
to be absorbed by increases in urban population. Therefore, a net
increase in the amount of space per capita was possible only if the
.amount of private building was also considered. The plan for private
construction was not announced.
In 1951 and 1952 the level of urban housing construction
remained at approximately the 1950 level. There were constant official
complaints about the lack of progress in housing construction during
this time, and Malenkov stated at the 19th Party Congress in October
1952 that the plan was behind schedule. When the new consumer welfare
program was announced in 1953, there was no mention of increased goals
for housing construction. Plan fulfillment announced for 1953 was only
slightly above that of the 2 previous years. A revised figure for 1953,
which is about 5 percent higher, was presented in the handbook.
In 1954, housing goals for the Fifth Five Year Plan were
revised for both urban and rural areas. Total urban space planned for
1954 was 30 percent more than that built in 1953, an increase from 29
million square meters to 37.8 million square meters. 75/ The plan for
rural housing was announced to be 400,000 houses, the same number that
had been built in each of the years from 1948 through 1953. 76 It
was evident, however, that the plan for rural construction had been re-
vised. In the new lands alone, about 600,000 square meters of housing
was built in 1954 by state workers, and this was less than planned. 77/
In 1954 a number of measures were taken both to fulfill the current
plan and to establish abase for the Sixth Five Year Plan, including
high priorities on construction materials for housebuilding, organi-
zation of the Ministry of Urban and Rural Building, initiation of the
prefab concrete program, and liberalization of land policy for private
builders in the new lands. 78/ The 1954 plan for urban construction was
fulfilled by 82 percent. The scheduling of housing construction under this
plan was poor. Construction got under way late in the year, and a great
deal of housing remained incomplete at the end of 1954 to be counted in
the total for 1955. 79/ It was announced that 470,000 houses were
built in rural areas~80/
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Although construction plans for 1955 were not annoL:nced,
planned expenditures on state urban housing were given, indicating an
increase in spending of about 7 percent. Completed total urban housing
space rose by only 4 percent whereas 600,000 houses were built by
kolkhozniki and rural intelligentsia. It appears that with the exception
of construction in the new lands, the remainder of the housing program
was designed to complete housing begun in previous years and lay the
groundwork for the next perioii. The Fifth Five Year Plan for state
housing, before revision, was the first Five Year Plan to be fulfilled
in Soviet history. 81~ A change in coverage of figures, however, may
have made this possible.~-
F. Housing in the Sixth Five Year Plan (1856-60).
The Sixth Five Year Plan for housing construction is domi-
nated by the tasks of increasing the rate of growth of housing construc-
tions beyond that of the Fifth Five Year Plan program and beyond the
rate of growth of the total construction program without raising the
priority of housing in the total construction program and with a minimum
utilization of scarce materials; especially metals.
The major physical features of this program are as follows:
State urban housing construction is planned at 205 million square meters
of total space, an increase of 95 percent over that built by the state
during the Fifth Five Year Plan.~*- 82~ Private urban housing construc-
tion is planned to be approximately double that of the Fifth Five Year
Plan period when it amounted to 38.8 million square meters of total
space, or 27 percent of urban housing construction. 83~ Unplanned state
housing construction, which amounted to about 10 million square meters
of total s ace in 1 51-55 will also be approximately doubled,
Thus total urban housing construction
planned for the Sixth Five Year Plan period is about 300 million square
* It is estimated that's change in coverage of figures for urban and
rural construction occured in 1954. Before 1954, part of sovkhoz and MTS
housing was counted as rural. Current statements suggest that all MTS
and sovkhoz housing, including that built by the workers, is included in
urban figures.
*-x Includes construction of state housing for sovkhoz and MTS workers
in rural areas.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
meters (200 million square meters of living space) which is equal to
one-half the total urban housing in 1955? It is not known how much
rural housebuilding is contemplated.
The major financial features of this program as announced
are as follows: Total expenditures on state housing construction are
planned to increase by about 55 percent over expenditures in the
previous 5-year period, amounting to approximately 135 billion rubles
(1 July 1955 Prices).- In order to achieve an increase in total space
of 95 percent while at the same time increasing expenditures by only
55 Percent, a reduction in the cost of housing construction of at
least 20 percent is required. 85~ It is planned that the cost per
square meter of living space will fall from 1,500 to 1,800 rubles per
square meter to 1,000 to 1,200 rubles per square meter. 86~ Loans to
private builders in urban areas will be approximately doubled at the
same time that the amount of private construction is planned to be
doubled.
The following measures have been introduced to achieve the
state housing goals of the Sixth Five Year Plan:
s. Standardization and simplification of designs. As from
the second half of 1956 (for seismic regions, from 1957), all apartment
houses are to be constructed according to standard designs with all
architectural excesses and extravagances eliminated. 87
b. Use of prefabricated concrete blocks and sections.
Reinforced concrete components are being introduced on an increasing
scale in housing construction in order to save metals and lumber, re-
duce building time, and reduce the cost of materials. US housing dele-
gates were informed that 40 percent of state urban building currently
employed reinforced concrete. Its utilization will increase as the
state plans to increase the annual output of precast reinforced concrete
structural parts from about 9 million cubic meters in 1956 to 28 million
cubic meters in 1960. 88
c. Combination of housing construction organizations. It is
planned that in many cities and regions the dozens of independent con-
struction trusts engaged in housebuilding will be put under single juris-
dictions which will cut overhead costs, allow greater specialization,
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L ~
and reduce idle time by pooling materials and machinery. The housing
construction trusts of Moscow, Leningrad, and Kiev have already been
combined. 89/
d. Improvements affecting the construction industry as
a whole. In order to increase labor productivity in construction and
improve the quality of work, wages have been raised, work norms have
been changed and simplified to provide incentives, allocations for
provision of housing and recreational facilities of construction
workers have been raised, and production of building machinery is being
accelerated. 90/
Beyond these measures, planning and financial procedures
in construction have been modified and simplified. 91/ Much pressure
has been applied to planning organizations to stop spreading resources
over so many projects. 92/ And the newly created Academy of Building
and Architecture has been given the responsibility of solving technical
problems, introducing foreign construction techniques, and training
personnel. 93/
The construction plan for state housing represents a sub-
stantial increase in the rate of housebuilding, an average of 40 million
square meters of total space a year, against an average of 21 million
square meters a year in the Fifth Five Year Plan and 14.5 million square
meters a year in the Fourth Five Year Plan. The 1956 plan, calling for
only 29 million square meters, is not being met, 94/ and although it has
been stated that "the pace of building will grow with every year," 95/
success of the plan rests heavily on chronically underfulfilled and
unproved factors. The prefab reinforced concrete program is far behind
schedule already. 96/ The techniques of building with prefabricated con-
crete are still in the experimental stages, and building standards are
violated. 97/ There are too many unskilled workers involved. 98/ There
is still emphasis on utilization of local materials and local initi-
ative, 9g/ which has proved unsatisfactory in the past, and there is not
sufficient time to complete standardization of designs within the dead-
line. 100/ The financial plan depends on the success of all aspects of
the construction program. Although the goal for reduction in cost for
the over-all construction program is only 7 percent,* the goal for
* For contract construction. Excludes construction by economic means.
The 20-percent cost reduction for housebuilding includes anticipated re-
ductions in the cost of production of concrete components.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
reduction in cost of housebuilding is well over 20 percent. Fulfill-
ment of the financial plan depends on the success of the cost reduction
plan which is not likely to be fulfilled.
It is already apparent that the stave housing goals for the
Sixth Five Year Plan cannot be met unless further measures are taken.
The only fully effective measure would be to raise the priority of
housing in the total construction program at the expense of other types
of construction. How far Soviet planners are willing to go to meet
housing construction goals is not yet evident.
The plan for private urban building of approximately 75
million square meters of total space against 39 million square meters
in 1951-55 and 30 million square meters in 1946-50 can be met only if
the state increases the sale of materials markedly. It has been stated
that construction materials, tools, prefabricated parts, and prefabri-
cated houses will be marketed on an increased scale. 102 Despite this
intention, it is estimated that the housing goal is too high.
Although the amount of rural housing construction planned
is not known, it will certainly exceed the amount built in 1951-55
because of the new lands program. Khrushchev, speaking at the 20th
Party Congress, indicated that the state would not enter the kolkhoz
housing field in the Sixth Five Year Plan. He outlined various solutions
to the problem of financing kolkhoz housing construction, but these
differ very little from existing methods.
III. Financing of Housing Construction and Repairs.
A. State Housing.
1. Construction.
Housing investments are an integral part of the capital invest-
ment plans of all state ministries, organizations, and administrations.
Sources of funds for planned state housing construction are the same as
*~ Suggestions of increased attention in the second half of 1956 are
found in the appointment of Kaganovich as head of the building materials
industry, in the delegation of responsibility to local party organs for
fulfillment of housing construction plans, 101 and in the increased press
space devoted to housing problems.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
for other state investments and include budget allocations' and own
funds -- amortization deductions, retained profits, mobilization of inter-
nal resources, and receipts from sale of used property. 103
In the annual plan for capital investments of each econ~tic
ministry an average of 15 to 20 percent of total investment funds is
scheduled for housing and cormnunal facility construction for employees.~~
It is noteworthy that the basic and strategic industries and ministries
spend a greater proportion of their total investment funds on housing
construction than do less important ministries. The additional housing
gives these industries the advantage in attracting and retaining labor.
Noneconomic ministries and organizations such as the Ministries of Health,
Culture, Higher Education, Gosplan, and Gosbank finance planned housing
construction for employees entirely from budgetary allocations. These
investment allocations are included in the total budget allocations to
these ministries and organizations. 104 It is estimated that housing
investments comprise 50 percent of the total planned capital invest-
ments of municipalities and regional centers, with public utilities and
services **-~ comprising the remainder. The housing investments of
municipalities are financed from both budget and their own funds. 106
Besides planned capital investments in housing there are also unplanned
investments. These are financed by decentralized or above-plan means.
During the Fifth Five Year Plan, 105.4 million square meters
of housing were built by means of funds allocated by the state plan. In
addition, approximately 10 million square meters were built from "enter-
prise and other decentralized funds." 107 These additional funds form
so-called decentralized or extralimit investments. Availability of
funds depends in most cases on fulfillment or overfulfillment of the plan,
but neither the housing constructed nor the flznds used are included in
the state plan and, unless specified, data on housing exclude these in-
vestments. The sources of such funds are many, including the fol-
lowing: 108
~ Budget allocations for housing investments are channeled through
union, republic, and local budgets to ministries and organizations within
the classification system of other budget allocations.
** See Appendix C for examples of the share of housing in total invest-
ments of various ministries.
Besides housing investments, other municipal investments include
water, sewerage, gas, electricity, baths, laundries, barberships, hotels,
crematoriums, parks, urban transport, and office and shop space for
rent. 105
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
b. Profits from small retail sales outlets for
employees
d. Up to 5 percent of profits of industrial
cooperatives
e. Special above-plan receipts of hotels, rest
homes, and so on
f. Above-plan budget revenues of union-republic
budgets
g. Fifty percent of profits of subsidiary agri-
cultural experimental stations, health resorts,
and experimental schools
Ministries and state organizations have always received most
of the state's housing investment funds, the proportion increasing with
each Five Year Plana 109 Municipalities, receiving about 10 percent
of the total, have recently voiced objection to this division of funds
because city planning, public services, and utilities have suffered
greatly. 110 Members of the US housing delegation to the USSR were in-
formed that municipalities were to receive a larger share of total
planned housing investment funds in the Sixth Five Year Plan; however,
data confirming this have not been released.
2. Repairs.
In Western countries a portion of rental receipts is used
for capital repairs. In the USSR, these receipts are inadequate for cap-
ital repairs because rental rates have not been increased since the 1930's
whereas the cost of repairs has risen sharply. It has therefore been
necessary to provide additional funds for repairs in the USSR. For all
state housing, including that of economic and noneconomic ministries,
municipalities, and state organizations, the sources of financing planned
capital repairs are the same. These include amortization allowances
(part of rental receipts), rental receipts of nonresidential buildings,
option of Housing construction by sector (in square meters),
see A:pendix C. Investment data by sector follow the sane pattern.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
long-term loans from the communal bank, budget allocations, 111 and
several other special sources. Industrial ministries spend less on
repairs than municipalities because industrial housing is newer and the
construction is of better quality than that of municipalities.
A large share of capital repairs to housing is financed
outside the plan as decentralized or extralimit investments, the sources
of funds being the same as for decentralized investments in new housing
construction. It is noteworthy that funds provided by all sources are
inadequate, and Soviet housing is in a deplorable state of disrepair. 112
Private housing construction is financed by private savings
and state loans. The state partially controls the financial resources
for private construction by influencing the volume of total savings
through wage and price control and by exercising its authority over long-
term borrowing.
Terms for borrowers of funds for private construction may be
divided into the following categories:
a. Urban areas: war invalids, widows, and families of
service personnel can borrow up to 10,000 rubles for 7 to 10 years at
2-percent interest per year. 113
b. Urban areas: workers, engineer-technical personnel,
and white collar workers can borrow up to 7,000 rubles for a maximum of
7 years at 2-percent interest per year. The owners must provide at least
50 percent of the cost of construction, which may be provided either in
cash or by their own labor. 114
c. Doctors and teachers may borrow up to 10,000 rubles
for a maximum of 7 years at 2-percent interest per year. The owner
must provide 30 percent of the cost of construction, which may be pro-
vided either in cash or by his own labor. 115
d. Sovkhoz workers may borrow up to 15,000 rubles for
10 years at 2-percent interest per year. 116
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
e. MTS workers may borrow up to 12,000 rubles for 10
years at 2-percent interest per year. 117
f. Kolkhozniki may borrow up to 12,00.0 rubles for 10
years at 2-percent interest per year. 118
g. Dwellers in the new lands can receive loans ranging
from 10,000 to 20,000 rubles depending on the area, including unprece-
dented nonreturnable grants of up to 50 percent on 20,000-ruble
loans. 119
The conditions under which these funds are granted differ
in the various categories. For example, whereas MTS workers, doctors,
and teachers may receive advances of up to 15 percent of loans for the
purchase of materials, other borrowers must fulfill 5 to 10 percent of
construction before they may receive their first payment. 120
For urban dwellers, funds for private construction are
borrowed from the communal bank through the enterprise in which the
worker is employed, under the supervision of the trade union. An
urban dweller also may borrow directly through the local soviet. 121
Rural dwellers and state agricultural workers borrow from the agri-
cultural bank through their management. 122
Besides building their own houses, urban dwellers can pur-
chase houses from their employer ministries, according to a decree of
1946 under which industrial enterprises were authorized to build houses
for sale to their employees. The cost of these houses ranges from
10,000 to 30,000 rubles, and bank loans are available up to 10,000 rubles
for 10 years at 1-percent interest. 123
It is interesting to note that in Moldavia in 1954 an
advertisement appeared for the sale to individuals of 278 houses by the
Kishinev municipal authorities. 124 This is the only time evidence
of sale of housing by municipalities has been noted. A recent develop-
ment in private construction has been the production and sale to the
public of prefabricated 2- to 3-room houses. This was begun in 1854
and is to be expanded in the Sixth Five Year Plan period, particularly
in new agricultural areas. 125
Except for the preplan period, no data are available on
total expenditures for private housing construction. For a few scattered
years, data on loans to rural dwellers are available. Data are available,
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
however, on state loans for private urban construction. From these
data and from other information a rough estimate can be made of total
ruble expenditures on private urban housing construction.* The state's
attitude toward private urban building can be traced by noting the
amount of credit extended to private builders. Loans were very low in
the 1930's. They increased markedly in 1939, when the state changed
its loan policy toward private building. They ceased completely in
the war year 1942 and showed a tremendous increase in the immediate
postwar years. This high rate continued while private housing
destroyed by the war was rebuilt and then slackened off until 1953,
when credit was expanded again.
Loans for private housing repairs are also available in
amounts up to 3,000 rubles. 126 There are no known data on expendi-
tures for repairs to private housing.
Expenditures for housing construction in the USSR for 1924-56
are given in Table 4.~
1. 1917-28.
There are no annual data on ruble expenditures for housing
construction for 1917-24. There was almost no construction during this
period.
From 1924 to 1929 the state invested a total of 1.3 billion
rubles in housing construction and repair, which amounted to 11.6 per-
cent of total state capital investments. Individuals built 57 percent
of the new living space with an investment of 32 percent of total funds
spent on new construction. This is the only period for which data are
available on private housing investments. In subsequent periods the
only figures available are total state loans for private urban building.
2. First Five Year Plan (1928-32)~
The First Five Year Plan called for an investment of 4 billion
rubles in new state housing -- 9 percent of total state investments. 127
*' See Appendix E.
*-~ Table 4 follows on p. 30. Notes to Table 4 are in Appendix B,
p. 56, below.
_2g_
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Although actual expenditures exceeded the plan, the cost of construction
rose considerably, and the plan for increased living space was fulfilled
by less than 50 percent in the state sector. The First Five Year Plan
specified that total private housing investment should total 965 million
rubles, of which 28 million were to be provided by the state in the form
of long-term loans. 128 There is no information on actual expenditures.
It is doubtful that any loans were granted during this time because of
the changed policy toward private building after 1930. On the basis of
the amount of private housing built, it is estimated that during this
time urban dwellers spent about 200 million rubles on private housing.
3. Second Five Year Plan (1933-37)?
The state planned to spend 13.4 billion rubles on housing
construction and repair of municipal housing during the Second Five Year
Plan. 129 Of this amount, 11.5 billion rubles -- 10 percent of total
state investment -- was for new construction, and 1.8 billion rubles was
for repair of municipal housing. 130 Actual expenditures totaled almost
this amount, but the plan for the amount of space to be built was greatly
underfulfilled, an indication of further inflation in construction costs.
During the previous plan period the state had built almost as much living
space with less than half the expenditures of the Second Five Year Plan.
Loans for private building were negligible during this time.
The Third Five Year Plan for housing investment was more
realistic than the two preceding Plans. An investment of 15.5 billion
rubles in state housing was planned -- 7.3 percent of total state invest-
ment. 131 Funds allocated were 35 percent greater than those expended
in the previous period. This was planned to provide housing space only
31 percent greater than that built in the previous period. Actual expend-
itures for state construction and municipal repair for 32 years have been
estimated at 15.5 billion rubles, an amount equivalent to the total
planned for the 5-year period.
5. war Years (1942-45).
There is no information on expenditures for housing construc-
tion in the war period. Total state investments for the period from July
1941 to June 1945 amounted to 108.6 billion rubles, and it is estimated
that housing investments were about 9 percent of the total, or 10 billion
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Housing Investment in the USSR
1924-56
Year
Expenditures
on
State
Construction
State
Loans for
Private
Urban Construction b/
1824
0.031 J
1925
0.113
1926
0.171 J
1827
0.222
1928
0.318
1928 (4th quarter) 0.079
1929
0.508
1930
0.775
1931
1.115 k/
1932
1.594 1/
1933
1.3 m/
1934
1.7 n/
0.020-0.025
1935
l.y p/
0.020-0.025
g/
1936
2.4 r/
0.020-0.025
1937
3.5 t/
0.037
1938
N.A.
0.04
1939
N.A.
0.119
1940
3.2 w/
0.189
1941
4.1 t/
0.050
1942
N.A.
0
1943
N.A. ~
0.060
1944
N.A.
0.128
1945
(1950 prices)
3.6 t/
0.270
b~
1946
1850 prices)
5.6 t/
1.006
cc
.
1947
1950 prices)
6.5 t/
1.014
1948
(1950 prices)
8.9 t/
1.569
t
1948
(1950 prices)
11.2 ~
0.691
ee,/
1950
(1950 prices)
13.2 t/
0.720
ff
1951
(1950 prices)
15.9 t/
0.300
t
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Housing Investment in the USSR
1924-56
(Continued)
Billion Rubles J
Year
Expenditures
or,
State
Construction
State
Loans for
Private
Urban Construction b/
1952
(1950 prices)
17.5 t/
0.353 t/
1953
(1950 prices)
19.4 gg/
0.714
1954
(1950 prices)
23.1 ~
0.960 ii/
1955
(1950 prices)
23.0 t/
0.850 /
1956 Plan 1950 prices)
26.0 t/
I.o i~ 11/
1956 Plan 1955 Prices)
23.0 t/
s.
b.
For 192 - , figures are in current prices.
All loans are in current prices.
c.
132
1.
141
u.
149/
dd.
158
d.
~133
m.
1 2/
v.
150
ee.
1
e.
134
n.
17+3/
w.
151/
ff.
1
f.
135/
o?
~
x.
152/
gs?
g?
~/
P?
1 5/
Y?
153/
hh.
1~62~
h.
137/
4?
~/
z.
1~5~/
ii.
1~3
i.
1~3
r.
1717-/
aa.
155
3J?
1 /
rubles. 166/ Loans for private construction during this period were
over 400 million rubles, most of which were granted after the war.
6. Fourth Five Year Plan (1946-50).
The Fourth Five Year Plan stated that a total of 42.3
billion rubles (1945 prices) would be invested in state housing con-
struction. This amounts to 14.5 percent of total state investment of
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
292 billion rubles. 167 The Plan did not state how much of this was
to go to municipalities or ministries and siiate organizations. Nor
did it state the extent of loans planned for individual housing, either
urban or rural.
Total investment in housing repairs of municipalities was
planned to be 5 billion rubles. 168 Actual investment in state housing
is estimated at approximately 12 percent of total state investment,
falling short of the planned share of 14.5 percent. Nevertheless, it
was very much higher than in the prewar period. Private investment in
urban housing also increased considerably, partly because of funds
saved during the war and partly because of the liberal state policy
toward private construction. State loans for private construction in
this period amounted to 5 billion rubles. 169
The only available information on planned housing investment
for 1951-55 is that capital investments in state housing were to be
almost 100 percent greater than in the period of the Fourth Five Year
Plan. 170 At the same time, the state planned to build only 50 percent
more total housing space. Several factors account for the increased
allocation per square meter, the outstanding factor being that whereas
the housing construction planned for the Fifth Five Year Plan was
almost entirely new construction,,the housing of the Fourth Five Year
Plan included the less costly restored and reconstructed housing. Much
of the housing construction of the immediate postwar period was of poor,
cheap quality, and a large share consisted of 1- and 2-story small
structures which were cheaper to build than the taller multiunit apart-
ment houses more evident in the 1951-55 period. These factors may account
for the increased costs of the latter period. Any interpretation made,
however, is subject to certain error because annual data on investments
are available for only ~+ out of 10 postwar years and the data on construc-
tion are confused. Because this is an area of weakness in the economy,
the subject is one on which any published information admits shortcomings.
Discussion of ruble expenditure on housing investment for
this period in Soviet publications has been limited to general criticisms
of the excessive building costs of state housing, the failure of minis-
tries and municipalities to use up allocations, and the poor management
of loan allocations for private construction.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Estimated investment for 1951-53 indicates that state
housing consumed 13 percent of total state investment. This represents
a slight increase over housing's share in the 1946-50 period. The
1954 plan for state housing construction expenditures of 25.5 billion
rubles -- 15 percent of state investments -- represented a rise in
allocations of 31 percent over the expenditure for 1953. 171/ Invest-
ment in housing in 1954, which rose by only 19 percent, represented
14 percent of state investment. 172/ An increase in state housing
investment of 6.1 percent over actual expenditures of 1954 was planned
for 1955, a drop of 1 billion rubles from the planned expenditures of
1954. 173 This plan was not fulfilled, and it is estimated that
expenditures fell slightly below those of 1854. 174 Total state
housing construction expenditures for the 5-year period are estimated
at 99 billion rubles, an increase of 118 percent over expenditures in
the previous period, compared with a planned increase of about 100
percent.
D. State Investment for Housing as a Percent of Total State Capital
Investment.
State investment for housing has been inadequate in the entire
Soviet period. State expenditures for housing construction during the
first 3 Five Year Plans approximated 9 percent of total state invest-
ment. In the Fourth Five Year Plan, state investment in housing ap-
proximated 12 percent of total state investment, in 1951-53 the share
rose to 13 percent, and in 1954-55 the proportion was almost 14 percent.
In the US, housing investment has remained about 20 percent of total
capital investment except during the depression and World War II years,
when the proportion fell to 13 percent. 175 The share of state housing
investment in total state investment during the Sixth Five Year Plan is
planned to be 13.6 percent. Table 5~ shows state investment for
housing related to total state investment since 1824. Table 6~*
summarizes available data on expenditures for Soviet housing construc-
tion and repair.x-x~
* Table 5 follows on 4. Notes to Table
P? 3 5 are in Appendix'B,
p. 61, below.
*~- Table 6 follows on p. 36.
**~' Continued on p. 37.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10: CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Investment in dousing as a Percent of Total State Capital Investment
in the USSR a/*
1924-55
Total
Investment in State
Housing as a Percent
Year
Investment
in State IIousing
Total State
Capital Investment
of Total State Capital
Investment
1924-28
1.288
11.1 ~
11.6
1929-32
4.492
49.5 J
9.1
1933-37
12.575
137.5 J
9.1
1938-42 Plan
15.5
211.5 ~
7.3
1938 - June 1941
13.1 f/
130.0 ~
10.1
1940
3.2 -
40.1 ~
8.0
1946-50 Plan
42.3
292.0 ~
14.5
1946-50 actual
45.4
384.0 ~
11.8
1951
15.9 f/
121.6 ~
13.1
1952
17.5 f/
134.9 ~
13.0
1953
19.4 -
140.3 ~
13.8
1954 Plan
25.5
169.0 ~
15.1
19'54 actual
23.1 ~
161.3 ~
14.3
1955 Plan
24.5
167.0 J
14.7
1955 actual
23.0 f/
170.9 ~
13.5
1951-55
98.9 ~
729.0 ~
13.6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10: CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Investment in Housing as a Percent of Total State Capital Investment
in the USSR a/
1924-~5
(Continued)
a. Total housing investment including private expenditures bears the same
approximate relation to total capital investment including kolkhoz-and other
nonstate investment as does state housing investment to total state capital
investment. The latter relationship has been indicated because of more com-
plete data. See notes to Table 5', Appendix B, p. 61, below.
b.
176/
c.
177/
d.
17$/
e.
179/
f.
Estunated.
g.
180/
h.
1~1
i.
182/
J?
~/
k.
1 +/
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Expenditures for Urban Housing Construction and Repair
in the USSR a/
1924-55
Period
Total
Expenditures
on State
Housing ~
Construction J
Expenditures
on Repair
of Municip
Dwellings ~
Expenditures
on Private
Urban ,,~
Construction J
1924-28
0.855
0.434 e/
0.406
~92y-32
J
1933-37
10.825
0.750
0.760
1938 - June 1941
13.1 f/
2,5
1,7 f`
1942-45
10.0 f/
N.A.
N.A.
1946-50
45.4 ~
5?o g/
10.7 f/
1951-55
98.9 ~
to .o f/
16.3 f/
a. The data in Table 6 do not comprise total investments in
housing. Estimates of expenditures on repair of total state
housing, repair of private housing, and private rural housing
construction have not been made, because of lack of data.
b. Prices for state investments are indicated in notes to
Table 5, Appendix B, p. 61, below.
c. The estimate of expenditures for repair of municipal
dwellings in 1929-32 is contained in Appendix A. The estimate
for 1951-55 is based on the assumption that known expenditures
for RSFSR of 6 billion rubles 185 are 60 percent of the
total for the USSR.
d. See Appendix E for technique of estimating expenditures
for private urban construction. An average cost of 500 ru-
bles per square meter was used for 1946-50, and an average
cost of 600 rubles per square meter was used for 1951-55?
e. For 1924-28, figures represent total state housing capital
'repairs.
f. Estimated.
g. Plan.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
N . Housing Conditions.
A. Urban.
1. General.
Housing conditions in the USSR have never been comparable
to those of the West in terms of space, utilities, sanitation,~comfort,
or privacy. Before the Revolution, private utilities and separate
iiving and sleeping quarters were available only to a small group, and
since the Revolution these comforts have been available only to high
Party, government, and scientific personnel. The Soviet people are
not honestly informed of 4lestern housing conditions, and conditions
that would not be tolerated by the average US worker are above average
for the Soviet worker. Although the Soviet people are aware that
their housing compares favorably with that of Asiatic countries and
that a vast housebuilding program is currently under way, housing
conditions are not improving at a rate which satisfies the increasing
desires of the workers.
State urban housing generally has central heating,
electricity, and running water. Separate kitchens and toilet facili-
ties are being provided in most units of current construction; in
existing state housing, however, these facilities are generally shared
among families. Many apartments are occupied by several families, and
many families occupy single large rooms. The latter is true even in
recently built housing because a single large roan is cheaper and
faster to build than several smaller roans. The average number of
occupants per room in urban areas of the USSR has been estimated at
2.3 in 1923, 3.9 in 1940, and 4.0 in 1950; the US average has been
less than 1. 186
The state has given very little material or technical
assistance to the private urban sector, which comprises 35 percent of
urban living space. There are great differences in quality between
dwellings built by the state and those built privately. Private
dwellings are built by the owner, and although they are occasionally
provided with electricity and running water, they are usually
without sanitary facilities and central heating. The state provides
community baths, clubs, libraries, theaters, laundries, and the like.
Because the dwellings lack space and facilities, these services are
utilized, and a deemphasis of the "home" has come about.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
There is no technique for measuring the effect of the
housing shortage on worker morale and productivity. Several articles
have been written which state explicitly that productive activities
have been disrupted because of housing shortages and that poor housing
has been responsible for lack of productivity gains. 187 A member of
the US housing delegation to the USSR was told by a plant manager that
the quantity and quality of housing had a definite effect on labor
turnover and that new housing was an excellent attraction for labor
recruitment. 188
Soviet leaders are well aware of the seriousness of the
housing shortage. Housing problems have been discussed in all of the
major speeches of the last few years, numerous building conferences
have been held, delegations have been sent abroad and received at
home, revolutionary housebuilding techniques have been introduced, and
the st;vle of architecture changed.
The basic problem -- that of increasing construction faster
than the urban population growth -- remains, however. The USSR is
trying to stop the influx of population into large cities by placing
strict limitations on the registration of new citizens in Moscow,
Leningrad, and Kiev; 189 by planning new housing construction outside
of cities; and by limiting industrial building in large cities. 190
The rate of urban building planned for the Sixth Five Year Plan is
equal to half the total living space existing in 1955, and that planned
for the Seventh Five Year Plan is to be double that of the Sixth. 191
Much of the housing planned will continue to be absorbed by urban
population increases, however, and the Soviet leaders are not willing
to decrease the rate of growth of the total economy in order to rapidly
improve housing conditions. Members of the US housing delegation to
the USSR reported that housing built under the current program was of
such poor quality that the USSR was facing a "maintenance nightmare"
and that this would be so costly that another deferment of the basic
problem of housing existed.
The USSR will probably continue a policy of gradual increase
in urban housing standards for many years. The encouragement given to
private construction will continue through the Sixth Five Year Plan;
however, after 1960 its role is more difficult to determine. Private
construction has been a vital factor in the improvement of urban space
conditions in the postwar period. Although the cost to the state has
been limited to provision of building materials, private housing causes
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
many headaches to city planners and managers. Often private settle-
ments are in locations desired for other purposes and the housing
cannot be removed until other housing is provided. These settle-
ments are located on the outskirts df towns, where the provision of
utility and transport facilities is costly. Ideologically, private
ownership is excusable as long as there is no profit involved. This
problem was minimized by several decrees prohibiting the subletting
or sale of dwellings and limiting the size of dwellings. As long as
a critical shortage of space remains, private urban construction will
certainly be allowed.
In urban areas of the USSR, state housing space is
allocated by square meters of living space. Living space excludes
kitchens, baths, corridors, hallways, and lobbies. Space is allocated
by living space rather than by rooms or apartments because the extreme
housing shortage requires that large roams be shared by more than 1
person or family. Kitchens and baths are shared by 2 to 5 families.
Living space gives no indication of privacy, type or quantity of
available services. It takes no account of unequal distribution of
housing space. Housing space is not provided in accordance with needs.
Industrial ministries and state organizations allocate housing as a
reward to their most productive workers and as an incentive to attract
or retain skilled workers and technicians. High Party officials and
administrators, teachers, and professional people have much better
housing than the average worker, and people with influence or with
means to purchase rights to housing space fare better than the average
worker. Nevertheless, available space provides the most accurate .
measure available of changing standards. Regional as well as occupa-
tional variations in average space seem to occur. The handbook con-
tains population and housing stock data for large cities of the USSR
for January 1956. Calculating average total space per person in these
cities* and grouping the data by economic region produces the averages
shown in the following tabulation:
~` Kiev, Moscow, and Leningrad are omitted because data are not
comparable.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Table 7~ shows the average amount of living space per
capita in urban areas for selected years, 1917-55? It shows that,
because of rapid urbanization and a very low level of construction,
average space per capita declined continually from 1917 up to 1939?
Acquisition of new territories in 1939-40 raised the average because
housing standards in acquired territories were much higher than in the
USSR. The average was higher in 1845 than before the war because of
large population losses and because of reconstruction in the 1943-45
period. Rapid urban population increases during the Fourth Five Year
Plan caused a decline in standards of space so that the average was
not regained until the end of 1955. The current average is a living-
sleeping space of 13 by 13 feet for a family of four, or a total space
including kitchen, bath, and closets of a little over 16 by 16 feet.
Although most countries measure per capita housing in
terms of numbers of rooms per family, a recent study 192 presents
data on urban housing space of several Western European countries which
has been converted to square meters of total space. These data may be
compared with Soviet statistics.
Country
Year
Housing Space
(Square Meters Per Capita)
Italy
1951
15
ux .
1951
20
West Germany
1954
15
USSR
1951
7
ussR
1854
7
* Table 7 follows on p. 41. Notes to Table 7 are in Appendix B, p. 62,
below.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10: CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C -O-N -F -I -D -E -N =T-I -A -L
a.
See Table 2, p. 7, above.
e.
19
i.
April 195
b.
193
f.
Including annexed territories.
j.
198
c.
19 ~
g.
197
d.
195
h.
Estimated.
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10: CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
3. Cost of Rent and Utilities.
Rent comprises a smaller percentage of a worker's budget
in the USSR than in the US. In 1955, municipal rental charges averaged
3z to 4 percent of the family budget, 19g/ utilities costing an
additional 4 percent. 200/ This compares with a US average of 13 to
18 percent for rent and utilities. 201/
Monthly rental charges, which are fixed by law and range
from a minimum of 44 kopeks to a maximum of 1.32 rubles per square
meter of living space, are based on a number of factors. These
include location, condition of the dwelling, profession of the tenant,
and number of dependents. Earnings of the tenant exert the greatest
influence on the rate. Starting with the minimum of 44 kopeks per
square meter for every 100 rubles of monthly earnings over 145 rubles,
there is an additional charge of 33 kopeks per square meter, so that
almost all Soviet workers pay the maximum rate. 202/ When unusual
additional features are provided, such as refrigeration or built-in
closets, the rate may exceed 1.32 rubles per square meter. 203/
The Soviet press contains many examples of illegal rental
practices which indicate that there is a considerable black market
in housing space rights. Examples of such practices include acquisi-
tion of housing for the purpose of subletting at higher rates, private
construction of housing for rent or sale instead of occupancy, and
failure to notify the authorities when moving and subletting at
exorbitant rates. 204
Rental charges are not determined by maintenance or replace-
ment costs. Charges are not adequate to meet these costs. Although
costs have risen considerably, the antiquated laws dating from the 1~30's
governing rental and service charges have remained unaltered. 205/
Because housing facilities remain poor, an increase in rentals would
arouse strong resentment. Also Soviet leaders use rentals for propa-
ganda, comparing the low rentals in the USSR with rentals in the US,
which "take up to 25 to 40 percent of the worker's earnings." 206/
This US percentage, so often quoted in Soviet literature, includes not
only rentals and utilities but all household costs such as applicances,
furnishings, and alterations. 207
In order to estimate total rental and utility charges for a
single year, the following technique may be used:
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10:
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
a. Total state urban living space x 1.32 rubles
(maximum legal rate per square meter of living space) x 2 (utilities
cost about the same as rent) x 12 (months in year).
b. Total :orivate urban living space x 2~3 (1.32
rubles) x 2 x 12. It is estimated that explicit rent of owner-occupied
housing is approximately 2~3 that of state urban housing. The quality
of private housing is lower, and few utilities are available; however,
private dwellers have more privacy and gardens, and must pay an annual
land tax of about 100 rubles. 208
c. Total rural housing space x 1~2 (1.32) x 12. It
is estimated that combined ex licit rent and utility charges of rural
dwellers are approximately 1~ urban state rental charges.
Rural housing conditions are much worse than urban housing
conditions. The average rural dwelling is constructed very much like
that constructed before the Revolution, except that electrlcity is
occasionally available. The typical rural dwelling occupied by a single
family coASists of 1 or 2 rooms. It is lighted by kerosine lamps or
by electricity. It is heated by a Franklin-type stove and does not
have inside water. The rural dweller often has no access to cormunal
facilities such as baths, laundries, theaters, and libraries: Rural
dwellers fare better than urban dwellers only to the extent that each
family has a separate dwelling and available land for a garden. An
estimate of average space per capita in rural areas for postwar years
is shown in Table 8.*
The figures in Table 8 indicate that after 1849 when reconstruc-
tion was completed, rural construction dropped to a level which provided
almost no improvement in conditions.
In the last few years the state has increased investments in
sovkhoz and MTS housing, particularly in the new lands. Most of the
housing of these workers, however, continues to be privately built and
owned. It is doubtful that the state will enter the field of kolkhoz
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Living Space Per Capita in Rural Areas of 'the USSR
1946-55
Total Space a~
Space Per Capita
Year
(Million Square Meters)
Population b~
(Square Meters)
1946
823
113
7.3
1947
834
113
7.4
1948
851
112
7.6
1949
869
112 ~
7.8
1950
875
112
7.8
1951
881
112
7.9
1952
886
112
7.g
1953
892
112
8.0
1954
901
112
8.0
1955
914
113
8.1
a. See Table 3, p. , above. All'space is estimated to be
living space.
b. Population statistics are estimated on the basis of urban
estimates and total population figures presented in~the handbook.
housing construction as long as urban conditions remain so poor. It
is estimated, however, that the development of the new lands will
cause an improvement in rural housing conditions, because without
much better housing the state will not be able to attract and retain
the 1.5 million to 2 million agricultural workers needed.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
URBAN HOUSING C~ISTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION IN THE USSR
1917-5
For the prewar period the handbook, The National Economy of the
USSR, contains data on total urban space constructed in the 3 prewar
5-year periods for both the state and the private sectors. From pre-
vious publications, data are also available for living space on both
a 5-year and an annual basis for most years.
For the postwar period the handbook contains annual data for total,
state and total private urban housing construction. Annual postwar
data in terms of living space are available for 1946 and 1947 only,
after which time all announcements were made in terms of total space.
It has therefore been necessary to estimate the relationship between
living and total space for most of the postwar period in order to
determine the amount of living space constructed. The data tabulated
below are in terms of both living and total space for the Soviet period.
State- Privately
Year Total Built Built
1917-22
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
Total d/ 42.9 23.7 1g.2
Total
State-
Built
Privately
Built
1.4 b/
1.4 b/
0
1.1 b/
0.3 b/
0.8
1.2 b/
0.4 b/
.0.8 b/
1.8 b/
0.7 b/
1.1 b/
3.2 b/
1.4 b/
1.8 b/
4.4 b/
1.9 b/
2.5 b/
4.9 b/
2.3 b/
2.6 c/
18.0 ?/
8.4 e/
9.6 e/
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Year
Total
State-
Built
Privately
Built
Total
State-
Built
Privately
Built
1929
6.8 f/
3.8 ~/
3?o g/
1930
6.7 n/
6.o g/
0.7 n/
1931
6.9 n/
6.4 g/
0.5 n/
1932
7.7 ~
7.3 ~/
0.4 h/
Total
38.7
32.6
6.1
28.1
23.5 i/
4.6 ~/
1933
7.2 k/
1934
6.0 1/
1935
1936
1937
Total
42.2
37.2
5.0
30.6 h/
26.8 "_'/
3.8 h/
1938
9.9 ~
8.3 h/
1.6 h/
6.o h/
. 5.o h/
1.0 h/
1939
9.1 h/
7.5 ~
1.6 h/
5.5 n/
4.5 n/
l.o n/
1940
15.8 ~
12.8 h/
3.0 ,
9.7 h/
7.7 ~
2.0 h/
1941 (January
-
-/
to July)
7.2 h/
5.8 ~
1.4 ~
4.4 h/
3.5 h/
0.9 h/
Total
42.0
34:4"
7_6
25.6 h/
20.7 h/
4.9
July 1941-45
49.8
41.3
8.5
29.0 ~
23.9 J
5.1
1946
17.4
12.6
4.8
11.5 ~
7.8 J
3.7
1947
18.2
11.8
6.4
11.7 ~
7.3 ~
4:4 J
1948
21.1
14.7
6.4
13.5 ~
9.1 17
4.4
1949
21.9
15.5
6.4
14.0 ~
9.6 iz
4.4
1950
24.2
17.8
6.4
15.5 iz
11.1 ~
4.4 i7
Total
102.8
Z2_4
3a?4
66.2 !'/
44.9 h/
21.3 h/
1951
26.0
18.7
7.3
16.8 J
11.6 h/
5.2 h/
1952
25.8
18.4
7.4
16.6 ~
11.4 h/
5.2
1953
29.0
21.4
7.6
18.5 ~
13.2 h/
5.3 h/
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
a. All figures on~total space are from the
h.
Estimated.
handbook.
i.
214
b.
209
j.
215
c.
210
k?
d?
Total does not include data for 1917.
1.
217
218
e .
211
m .
f.
212
n.
219
g.
21~
1917-28
Published annual data on living space constructed were used for
each year in this period. There is some question, however, as to whether
the same original data were used in the compilations of the handbook.
The handbook reports that the state sector built more total space than
the private sector, whereas previously published figures indicate that
the private sector built more living space. If the same original data
were used, of housing built in 1917-28, 50 percent of privately built
total space was living space; only 35 percent of state-built total space
was living space.
Several points regarding conflicting data on living space are
as follows: Zaslavskiy 220 presents a figure stated to cover 1924-2ti
which actually covers the period 1917-28 according to annual data.
Sosnovy includes reconstruction as well as new construction in his data
for private housing construction 1923-2tS. Reconstruction is not in-
cluded in prewar data presented in this report. Filatov 221 presents a
figure of 7 million square meters for state construction in 1917-2tt and
a figure of 9.7 million square meters for private construction in the
same period. These figures do not fit annual data. Maslakov 222 pre-
sents the same data as Filatov.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Annual data are available for construction of living space in
the state sector. A total figure for the 4-year period and for 1929 are
available for private construction. The other years are estimated.
During this period, living space constructed in the state sector
was 72 percent of total space; in the private sector, 75 percent; and
for the combined total, 72.6 percent. Zaslavskiy presents a figure for
state construction in 1929-32 which has been rejected in favor of the
official fulfillment figure.
A 5-year. Figure for constructioh of living space in the state
sector is available. Annual figures were not released, however, probably
because of the decrease in housing construction after 1934.
The relationship between living and total space constructed in
this period by the state sector is 72 percent. The estimate for private
living space constructed is obtained by taking 75 percent of total
private space constructed, the relationship during the First Five Year
Plan.
1938 - June 1941
This period contains conflicting data on construction. The
handbook presents figures of 34.4 million square meters of total space
for state construction, 7.6 million square meters for private construc-
tion, a total of 42 million square meters. If the relationship between
total and living space in the first two Five Year Plans is used,
living space constructed was as follows: state sector, 24.8 million
square meters; private sector, 5,7 million square meters; and total, 30.5
million square meters.
Broner 223 Presents a figure of 30 million square meters of
living space referring to "the total increase in housing space" (state
only) during the period 1938-42. Bol'shaya Sovetskaya entsiklopediya 224
indicates a figure of 30 million square meters as being state construe
tion for 193tt-Ntay 1941. Another figure for state construction exists --
20.7 million square meters for the period 1938-May 1941, with 17.2 million
square meters for 1938-40 (Yunik 225) and 3.5 million square meters for
the first half of 1941 (Sosnovy 22
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
It is estimated that living space constructed during this
periods including construction in newly occupied areas, totaled
25.6 million square meters -- 20.7 in the state sector and 4.9 in the
private sector. A check on the reliability of the 1938-41 estimate
for living space built is found in a.recent statement 227 that urban
living space increased more than 85 million square meters during
1928-41 (beginning of war as a result of new construction. Estimates
of the increase in the urban living space for this period, based on
construction during the period, total 84 million square meters.
State living space constructed is estimated at 60 percent of
total space, private living space at 64 percent, and the combined
total at 61 percent.
Annual estimates of living space for state construction are
based on the figures for 1938-40 and the first half of 1941 presented
above, and a total figure for state construction in 1927-39 of
64 million square meters. 228 Annual estimates for private construc-
tion are based on the figure for total space for the 3'-z-year period
presented in the handbook, with consideration of the increased terri-
tory in 1940 and 1941.
If it were assumed that the relationship between living and
total space existing during the first two Five Year Plan periods
continued into the period under consideration, the resulting figure
for 1941 would be unrealistically high in comparison with annual
construction in 1938-40.
July 1941 - 1945
During this and subsequent periods, reconstruction as well as
new construction is included in Soviet housing construction data.
According to the handbook, total construction and reconstruction
during this period amounted to 49.8 million square meters of total
space -.- 41.3 million in the state sector and 8.5 million in the private
sector. The only data available in terms of living space for this
period. are as follows: .
State sector, July 1941 - May 1945 17.9 million square meters 229/
State sector, 1943-44 liberated
areas 12.7 million square meters 230
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
A high estimate for state construction of living space for June to
December 1945 totals 5 million square meters with a total for July
1841 - 1845 of 23.g million. For the private sector, a control figure
of 19 million square meters for living space constructed during the
entire plan period up to 1945 (Goldenberg, 231/) provides an estimate
of 5.1 million square meters for the private sector for the period
under consideration, with a total of 29 million square meters of
living space for the combined total. This is only 58 percent of
total space claimed for the period -- 57.9 percent in the state sector
and 60 percent in the private sector. This relationship is con-
sidered reasonable for the period under consideration.
1946-55 and 1956
As previously stated, after 1947, over-all housing construction
data were released in terms of total space and no longer in terms of
living space. For 1946-47, figures are available in terms of both
living and total space. State space built was 62 percent of total
state-built space. A member of the US housing delegation was informed
by an official of the Central Statistical Administration that, on the
average, living space built is 62 percent of total space. This rela-
tionship has been used in postwar statistics on state construction to
convert total space to living space. For the private sector, living
space constructed has been estimated at 70 percent of total space. There
is less auxiliary space in private housing because private housing
usually has no hallways or stairways and often no inside toilet facilities.
It is of interest to note that data released annually disagree
slightly with figures presented in the handbook, as shown in the tabu-
lation below. This probably occurs because of incomplete data at the
time of release of annual plan fulfillment results.
Total Space Constructed Total Space Constructed
As Previously Announced According to the Handbook 232/
Year (Million Square Meters) (Million Square Meters)
1946-48
/
1849
22
2~3+
22
1950
28
235
24
1951
27
23 /
26
1952
27
237/
26
1953
28
238/
29
1954
32
239/
31
1955
35
~/
32
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
A fairly reliable technique exists for determining the amount of
private housing construction each year. This has been useful in. the
past because until the publication of the handbook, separate data for
private construction did not exist; only data on total urban construction
were released.
The only statistic on private construction gathered and announced
annually is that of construction of private housing with the aid of state
loans. It appears that approximately one-half of private building
utilizes state loans, as shown in the following tabulation:
Private Construction
Private Construction
Space Built with Aid of State Loans Amount of
Space Built According
db
k
Announced Annually State-Aided Space
to the Han
oo
(Million Square Meters) Multiplied by Factor of 2
(Million Square Meters)
Year Typ
e of Space
Amount
1946-5o
Total
15.0 241
30.0
30.4
1946-49
Living
8.4 2 2
16.a
16.9
1951
Living
2.8 2. 3/
5.6
5.2
1952
Living
2.5 ~
4
1953
Living
2.4 2 5
.8
8
5.3
6
1953
Total
3.g ~
7.
4
8
7.
8
1
1954
Total
4.2 2 7
.
8
0
.
8
4
1955
Total
4.0 ~
.
.
1956 (plan)
Total
4.7 2 9
9.4
9.0
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
APPENDIX B
METHODOLOGY FOR TABLES 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7
~ A. Notes to Table 2.
1926
Both living and total space are available from the 1926 census.
State living space was 70.2 percent of total space; private living
space, 72.3 percent of total space; and the combined space, 71.3.
percent.
Figures for living space, state and private, are available. Using
the 1926 relationship between total and living space, total space was
derived for 1928.
Total space and living space constructed in 1929-3~ were added to
1928 figures to obtain 1932 estimates. No allowance was made for re-
tirements.
Total space and living space constructed in 1933-37 were added to 1932
figures. No allowance was made for retirements.
1937 (Adjusted)
An estimate of state urban housing was made in 1937, the first
since 1926. D.L. Broner 250 presents a figure for state urban living
space in 1937, probably from the 1937 estimate, which necessitates an
upward adjustment of derived figures. This increase in the balance of
state urban housing space may have resulted from a failure to collect
complete state housing construction data during the intervening years
since 1926. It may have resulted from a change in status of housing in
populated areas from rural housing to urban housing. The increase may
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
have been the result of nationalization of private housing after 1926,
particularly cooperative housing. This third possibility has been
rejected because no evidence has been seen of nationalization of
private housing after 1926 and because it is doubtful if the private
housing construction figures reflected cooperative housing.
Housing constructed during 1938 was added to 1937 stock figures
to obtain the balance of space at the end of 1938. No allowance was
made for retirements.
Total urban housing space, state and private, is presented in
the handbook. Total space constructed in 1939-40 was added to space
existing at the end of 1938. This was subtracted from figures pre-
sented in the handbook for 1940 to obtain figures on acquired total
urban housing space from new territories,*~ amounting to 70.5 million
square meters. To obtain urban living space, urban living space con-
structed in 1939-40 was added to space existing at the end of 1938?
D.L. Broner 251 presents a figure for state urban living space in
1940, exclusive of newly acquired housing which agrees with the
estimates presented. To obtain living space acquired from new terri-
tories, 42 percent of total space estimated to have been acquired was
added.
Approximately 30 million square meters of urban living space was
estimated to have been added in 1939-40. The total urban population
in these areas was about 3 million. The space per person, estimated
at about 10 square meters, in these areas was and still is appreciably
higher than in other areas of the USSR.*-*- T. Sosnovy estimates ac-
quired space at 26 million square meters.
* Including Western Belorussia and the Ukraine, Bessarabia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Estonia, and Northern Bukovina.
x'~ Note the higher average space per person in the Baltic republic
cities as found in statistics presented in the handbook.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
The USSR claimed that losses during the war amounted to 70
million square meters of living spaces (over 100 million square
meters of total space). 252 Net actual losses derived from data
in handbook are naw presented as having been about two-thirds of
this claim as follows:
Total space in urban areas, 1950
(from handbook) 513 million square meters
Total space in urban areas, 1940
(from handbook) 421 million square meters
Net gain from 1940 to 1950 92 million square meters
Gross construction and recon-
struction 1941-50 (from
handbook) 160 million square meters
Net loss 68 million square meters
The maximum net war loss possible, assuming no retirements during this
period except for war losses, was 68 million square meters of total
space or 40 million to 45 million square meters of living space. In
order to determine war losses in terms of living space, the same
technique was used as in the case of total space. In applying this
technique, living space in 1950 was assumed to be 65 percent of total
space, 62 percent in the state sector and 70 percent in the private
sector.
1945
The 1945 estimates for total and living space were derived by
subtracting construction and reconstruction in 1946-50 from the 1950
stock figures. An allowance was made for retirements in 1946-55 at
about 0.6 percent per annum for total space, and about 0.55 percent
per annum for living space. Annual figures were obtained by adding
construction for each year and deducting retirement allowances.
*- There is same question as to whether the figure of 70 million
square meters included housing retired in unoccupied areas during the
war. Although most authors have stated that the 70 million square
meters referred to war-destroyed and partially ruined housing only,
Voznesenskiy claimed that the state would have to rebuild 60 million
square meters of housing in order to restore war losses.
~-~- See Appendix D,for discussion of retirement rates.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
The handbook presents figures on the stock of total urban
housing space in 1955? In order to estimate the stock of living
space, 65 percent of total space was assumed to be living space, 62
percent in the state sector and 70 percent in the private sector.
In March of 1956 it was announced in a foreign broadcast that the
total amount of living space in urban areas of the USSR was 400
million square meters. 253/ The same announcement, however, said
that the increase in space planned of 205 million square meters would
raise urban space by 50 percent, which implies a reference to total
state housing space only. If the 400 million square meters actually
refers to living space, the estimate presented herein of 414 million
square meters of living space in 1955 is given additional weight.
B. Notes to Table 3.
The estimate for total rural housing existing in 1945 is based
on a statement by Voznesenskiy 254 that of the 12 million prewar
rural dwellings existing in territory occupied by the energy, 3.5
million were destroyed. On the basis of a statement of M. Arkadiyev 255
that 839,000 rural dwellings were rebuilt in occupied areas during
1943-44, it is estimated that about 1.5 million houses were built duri.,.
1943-45. The estimates for 1847 and 1948 are based on a total for the
2 years of 1.2 million houses. 256 It was announced that 2.3 million
houses were built by kolkhozniki and rural intelligentsia in 1951-55. 257
Annually announced figures total 2.2 million, probably because of rounding.
C. Notes to Table 4.
1924-28
There are many contradictory figures on housing investments for this
period. The data most frequently quoted in Soviet literature are from
Veselovskiy 258 (1951), who presents a figure for state investments
1928/24-1928 3d quarter) of 1.9 billion rubles. This disagrees with
his own statement on another page.of the same text 259/ that the state
invested 806 billion rubles in new housing in the period 1924-28. In
the first instance he was referring to total capital investments by the
state and private sectors in new housing and housing repair. Other
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
authors, however, have not corrected his error. The annual figures
presented below combine data from Bol'shaya Sovetskaya entsiklopediya
(1932), from Maslakov, Veselovskiy, Zaslavskiy, and Broner. Housing
investments and total investments included capital repairs during this
period. Loans for private construction during this time were negligible.
Investment in Urban Rousing
1924-28
Investment
Investment
Investment
Investment
Investment
Investment
in New
in
In Nev
in
In Nev
in
Year
Housing
Repair
Total
Housing
Repair's
Total>
ftwaing
Repeirw
Total+~
1924
0.057
0.079
0.136
0.031
0.050
0.081
0.026
0.029
0.055
1925
0.160
0.119
0.279
0.113
0.080
0.193
0.047
0.039
0.086
1926
0.254
0.187
0.441
0.171
0.104
0.275
0.083
0.083
0.166
1927
0.359
0.134
0.493
0.222
0.099
0.321
0.137
0.035
o.17z
1928
0.431.
0.152
0.583
0.318
0.101
0.419
0.113
0.051
0.164
Totn1
1.261
0.671
1.932
o.B55
0.434
1.289
0.406
0.237
0.643
1929-32
There are many inconsistencies in the available data. The figures
in the following tabulation are most commonly used:
Investment in State Urban Housing
Selected Periods, 1928-32
Period
otal
New Construction
Repair of
Local Soviets
1928-32
4.9
4.3
0.569
1928 4th quarter-1932
4.9
4.3
0.569
1928 4th quarter-1932
4.6
4.071
0.569
1929-32
3.992
The second line of data on new construction has been discarded. It has
been assumed that the figure 0.569 billion rubles refers to the period
from the 4th quarter of 1928 through 1932. For this period total in-
vestments included capital repairs. Housing investments included only
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
repairs of local soviets but not repairs of housing by other state
organizations. Loans for private construction during this period were
negligible -- probably less than 10 million rubles.
1933-37
Investment in State Urban Housing
1933-37
Year
Construction
of State Housing
Repair
of Local Soviets
Total
1933
1.3
0.185
1934
1.7
0.268
1935
1.9
0.335
1936
2.4
0.418
1937 (residual)
3.5*
0.561
Total by addition
10.8
1.767
12.567
Total stated
10.825
1.750
12.575
Annual data are available for all years except 1937? There is disagreement,
however, on the total for the 5-year period. A number of sources give a
total of 10.825 billion rubles for new construction for the 5 years. Other
sources give a total of 9.580 billion rubles. The larger figure is in
current rubles, the smaller in constant rubles. 260 The annual figure for
repairs of local soviet housing for the 5-year period were derived by Norman
Kaplan 261 from percentage increases given by Kobalevskiy. During this
period, total state investments included capital repairs; housing invest-
ments included only capitol repairs by local soviets.
1938-42
The figure most frequently noted for investments in housing during
this period is 15.5 billion rubles. This is the Plan figure for in-
vestments in new state housing construction and repairs of local soviets
for the 5 years. 262 This figure has also been seen representing the
planned investment in new state housing only, 263 actual investments for
the period in new state housing only, 264 and actual investments ii. new
housing and repairs of local soviets. 2 5 A figure of 2.5 billion
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
rubles is generally given to represent both planned and actual expend-
itures for repairs of local soviets. 266/ A figure of 15.5 billion
rubles for expenditures on new construction and repairs of local 'soviets
for the perio3 1938 to June 1941 is estimated to be correct. The basis
for this assumption is indicated below:
a. Kobalevskiy specifically states that the figure 15.5
billion rubles includes repairs. Also several sources indicate the
relationship of investment in housing to total investment for this
period, and, with total investment known, housing investment totals
about 13.5 billion rubles.
b. With total space built in 1938-41 and total allocations for
2 out of 4 years in this period known, this estimate appears reasonable.
The figure for planned investment in new state housing for 1941 is taken
from Norman Kaplan. Loans for private construction are estimated for
1938, when they are assumed to have been about the same as 1937, and for
1941, when they are estimated at half the plan figure of 100 million
rubles. 267/ For this period total state capital investments and housing
investments e;:clude capital repairs.
1946-50
The only annual .figures available for this period on investments in
state housing construction are for 1946 and 1947, 6 billion rubles in
1946 and 7 billion rubles in 1947. 268 Annual increases in the volume
of state capital investments in housing were announced each year,`
however, and a ruble series for 1946-50 was constructed, using 1946 as
a base. Total expenditures in 1846-50 obtained by this procedure amount
to 49 billion rubles. Converted from 1946 to 1945 prices, this totals
48 billion rubles. As will be indicated below,,these figures cannot be
used.
It was announced in 1954 that investments in state housing in 1951-54
were 80 billion rubles, or 1.8 times investments in 1946-50. 269/ This
indicates that housing investments in 1946-50 in 1950 rubles were 45 billion
rubles. This may be checked by using the 1953 actual housing investment
figure (in 1950 rubles) as abase and applying the volume of housing
investment series, as announced, back to 1946 to obtain annual invest-
ments in 1946-50 in 1950 rubles. This totals 45.1 billion rubles, with
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
1946 totaling 5.6 billion rubles and 1947,,6.5 billion rubles.
Construction prices in 1950 were at least 20 percent above 1945 con-
struction prices. Yet the total for 1946-50 in 1945 prices is higher
than the total in 1950 prices.
An examination of a broad sample of costs per square meter for
housing construction indicates that there was little movement in housing
construction costs during the Fourth Five Year Plan. A partial expla-
nation for this may be that the cost of housing was not kept artificially
low by subsidies in the immediate postwar years as was the cost of
other types of construction. It is possible that the volume series for
housing investment was not calculated in constant prices. It is also
possible that the cost of housing construction in the immediate postwar
period was higher than over-all construction costs. Regarding the
loans for private construction, the 1948 figure is a residual from a
known total for 1946-50 270/ and known figures for the other 4 years.
1951-55 and 1956
All investment figures for the period 1951-55 were announced in
1 July 1950 rubles. The estimates for 1951, 1952, and 1954 were based
on announced increases in the volume of state housing investments, using
the announced 1953 figure as a base. As stated above, it was indicated
in November of 1954-that expenditures on state housing investments in
1951-54 totaled 80 billion rubles. Annual figures obtained using volume
increases for 1951 and 1952, actual investment$ for 1953, and planned
investments for 1954 total 77.3 billion rubles. Differences in rounding
probably account for the discrepancy. Because of a change in statistical
reporting procedure, there is no comparable volume figure for 1955. It
has been assumed that expenditures in 1955 were approximately the same
as in 1954 and that the plan of 24.5 billion rubles was fulfilled by
approximately 94 percent.
The 1956 plan for investments in state housing calls for a 14-percent
increase over 1955. Since this is approximately the same percentage as
the price differential between 1950 and 1955 Prices, the expenditures
will remain at about the same level. 271
The figures for loans to the private sector for 1951 and 1952 are
based on a known figure for 1939-53 272/ snd on known totals for 1939-50
and 1953?
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Both housing and total capital investments for figures for 1924-28,
1929-32, 1933-37 are in current prices and include extralimit invest-
ments and capital repairs.
Both housing and total capital investments for figures for 1928-42
plan, 1938 - Jt:ne 1941, and 1940 are in 1936-37 prices and include extra-
limit investments but exclude capital repairs.
1946-5o plan figures for housing and total investments are
in 1945 prices, and include extralimit investments but exclude capital
repairs.
Figures for 1946-5o actual and for 1951-55 are in July 1950
prices and exclude both extralimit investments and capital repairs.
No attempt can be made within the scope of this report to
describe the procedure used to estimate the state investment figures
for 1946-55. It might be of value to observe the more rapid rate of
increase in the volume of investment in state housing than in the
volume of total capital investment by the state, as seen in the
following tabulation:
Volume of State Volume of Total
Housing Investment State Investment
Year as Percent of Previous Year as Percent of Previous Year
1946
27
155
117
1947
27 /
117
110
1948
275
136
123
1949
27 /
126
120
1950
277/
118
123
1951
27$/
120
112
1952
279/
110
111
1953
~
111
104
1954
2 1/
119
115
1955
~
N.A.
106
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
E. Notes to Table 7.
Urban Population Statistics
For population purposes, in Table 7 the following areas are
classified as urban: (1) cities with an adult population of at least
1,000, of whom not more than 25 percent are engaged in agriculture;
(2) worker settlements with a minimum adult population of 400, 65
percent of whom are engaged in industry; and (3) urban-type settle-
ments, such as health resorts. 283/
According to the above definition, urban population figures
exclude the population of agricultural communities. The urban housing
figures used in this report include state-built housing for sovkhoz
and MTS workers. Therefore, to the extent of the state's participation
in housing construction for agricultural workers, there is a lack of
comparability between the urban population and urban housing. The
degree of error introduced is considered insignificant because in the
past the state has invested very little in housint; for agricultural
workers. Participation by the state will increase in the future,
however, and this will necessitate an adjustment to make the figures
comparable.
Annual urban population estimates for 1945-54 are based on
a statement in Politicheskaya ekonomika 1954 that the urban population
had grown by 3 million a year since the war and a statement frequently
made in 1954 that the urban population had grown by 20 million in
postwar years. Several checks may be applied to these estimates,
including a statement made by Malenkov on 8 August 1953 that the ur-
ban population was over 80 million people and a statement in Izvestiya
on 4 February 1955 that the urban population had grown by 17 million
in the last 5 years.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
APPENDIX C
HOUSING'CONSTRUCTION AND INVESTMENT IN THE USSR
BY SELECTED MINISTRIES AND SECTORS
Housing Constructed by Major Sectors
of the Economy in the USSR
Selected Periods, 1924-55
1924-28
1929-32
1933-37
1941 Plan
1946-50 Plan
1951-55
Municipalities
26.7 b/
14.8 c/
11.3 c/
7.5 d/
10 e /
`
10 d/
Cooperatives
13.7 t/
6.3 c/
4.0 ~
0
0
0
Industry
42.6 c/
63.0 c/
59.0 c/
80.0 d/
70 d/
Transport
9.7 ~
7.9
17.2 ~
6.0 d/
10 d/
~90
Other
Total
7.3 ~
100.0
8.0
100..0
8.5 c/
100.0
6.5 d/
100.0
to d/
100
100
s. Million square meters of living space. d. Estimated.
b. 284 e. 286/
c. 2 5/ f. 28'7/
Table 10
Capital Investment for Housing in the USSR
by Selected Ministries and Sectors ~~*'
1933-37 and 1946-50
Ministry or Sector Percent of Total
1933-37 J
Industry 12.2
Heavy Industry 12.8
Agriculture (state) 6.2
Transport 5.5
Communications 5.9
* Footnotes for Table 10 follow on p. 64.
-63-
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Capital Investment for Housing in the USSR
by Selected Ministries and Sectors
1933-37 and 1946-50
(Continued)
Ministry or Sector Percent of Total.
1946-5o c~
Coal 20.5
Agricultural Machine Building 30.0
Heavy Machine Building 21.2
Aviation 38.5
Timber 17.5 ~
Railroads .6,5
Light 11.0
1947
a. Plan data. f. 291
b. 1933 Plan prices. 288 g. 1950 prices. Actual
c. 1945 prices. data. 292
d. 289 h. 293
e. 290
State and Private Housing Construction in the USSR
by Selected Ministries a~*
1946-60
State
Private
Total
oal
1946-50 actual
6.0 ~
0.5~
6.5 c/
1951-55 actual
6.0 ~
1.5 ~
7.5 -
1956-6o Plan
15,0
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
State and Private Housing Construction in the USSR
by Selected Ministries
1946-60
(Continued)
Construction Materials
1951 Plan
0.28
1952 Plan
0.45
Electric Power Stations
19 -50 actual
1.8 f/
Ferrous Metallurgy
19 -50 Plan
5.8 ~
0.8 g/
6.6
1951-55 Plan
5.0 h/
Nonferrous Metallurgy
1951-55 Plan
3.0 1z
Light Industry
-
5Ti6 0 Plan i/
19
2.3 ~/
1946-5o actual
1.3 k/
1951-53 actual
1.0
Petroleum ?
l~ o actual
1.8
1951-55 Plan
4.5 ~
.
Railroads
19~~Plan
5.5
1946-5o actual
3.0 J
o.8 ,
3.8
1951-55 Plan
4.0 g/
1951-55 actual
3.2 g/
1956-6o Plan
6.5 ?'/
2.5-3.5
9.0-10.0 ~
a.
Million square meters of living space.
b.
294
h.
30o
n.
305
c.
2 5
i.
Textile industry only.
0
30
d.
~
~.
301
P?
307
e.
297
k.
302
q.
3pi
f.
~
1.
303
r.
309
g?
299
m?
3o
s.
?310/
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
RETIREMINT OF HOUSING IN THE USSR
In order to determine the amount of housing existing at any
given time in the USSR it is necessary to estimate loss (retirement)
of housing from dilapidation, fire and flood, abandonment, and
wrecking for purposes of relocation and reconstruction. Despite the
fact that most housing in the USSR is substandard, the rate of retire-
ment is low because of the extreme housing shortage.
The quality of construction is the major determinant of the age
at which a dwelling must be retired because of dilapidation. Resi-
dences are not torn down in the USSR because they are unsafe or
unsanitary. Although the basic structural elements of Soviet house-
building probably are comparable to foreign work, the quality of
finishing work is very poor so that disproportionately large sums
must be spent on capital repair. It is estimated that under current
housing conditions, retirement because of dilapidation is negligible.
Losses from fire are small because of strict fire-prevention regula-
tions and because dwellings are so crowded at all hours that fires
are detected immediately. It is difficult to estimate the extent of
losses from wrecking for purposes of reconstruction and relocation. In
the postwar period there has been considerable replanning of urban
areas involving demolition of small 1- and 2-story dwellings and
replacement by multistory apartment buildings. Members of the US
housing delegation, however, thought that most of these urban develop-
ment schemes were being deferred because of housing shortages. This
view is supported by the fact that most of the state housing to be
constructed during the Sixth Five Year Plan is to be located in new
development areas outside of cities. Although losses of this nature
will become increasingly important in the future, especially in pri-
vate housing, they are not significant at present.
In the early 1930's Soviet housing was retired at a rate of about
0.5 percent per year. 311 Broner discusses several studies of retire-
ment done in the late 1930's in which it appears that the rate ranged
from 0.2 to 0.4 percent per year. 312 From the housing stock figures
presented in the handbook for 1950 and 1955, it is possible to deter-~
mine the rate of retirement during this period. A problem arises,
however, as to whether the above-plan state housing built during this
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
period (about 10 percent of state construction) was included in the
stock figures for 1955? It has been assumed for a number of reasons
that this housing was not included. The rate of retirement used for
state construction was 0.7 percent per year; for private construction,
0.4 percent per year; and for both combined, 0.6 percent per year.
Another indication of the average life of Soviet hous~.ng is found
in a speech of Khrushchev at the All-Union Building Conference in
December 1954 in which he stated that the walls, floors, and ceilings
of current housing construction. are of quality good enough to stand
Por 100 years (a retirement rate of 1 percent) but that finishing work
would not last this long. A life expectancy of 100 years for most
of the housing built in the immediate postwar period and for ali pri-
vate construction is too high because of the inferiority of materials
used. On the other hand, most of the urban housing built before the
Revolution and some of the housing built by industrial ministries in
the postwar period is of excellent quality and probably will last
200 years.
Official amortization rates are 1 percent of replacement cost for
stone houses and 2 percent for wood houses; however, these rates do not
reflect the actual rate of retirement of Soviet housing. 313
In statistics presented herein, the same rate of retirement was
used for the 1946-50 period as that indicated above for the 1951-55
period. This rate applied to total housing space. For living space
a rate of 0.55 percent per year was used during the entire postwar
period. It is estimated that a somewhat higher rate of retirement
should be applied in the future -- 0.8 percent or an average life
expectancy of 125 years. For rural housing a retirement rate of 1 per-
cent has been used. There are no empirical data to support this esti-
mate. Major considerations influencing this estimate are the following:
1. Abandonment of rural housing because of consolidation
of kolkhozes and sovkhozes, movement of rural dwellers to
urban areas, and forced migration of some kolkhozniki ( for
example, Ukrainians after World War II).
2. Dilapidation -- most rural dwellings are wooden or mud
structures which probably stand 50 to 100 years.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 ~ Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Until a census provides more accurate data on the stock of rural
housing, determination of the rate of retirement will remain fairly
academic.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
APPENDIX E
COST OF HOUSING IN THE USSR
It is extremely difficult to estimate an average cost per square
meter for all Soviet housing construction. The following factors cause
the cost variation: (1) the quality and type of material used in
building: the type of material is similar to that used in other countries,
although the quality of material used is inferior to that of Western
countries; (2) the type of dwelling and services included: in the USSR
many houses are built without any facilities, especially in rural areas,
whereas others are fully equipped; (3) geographic location: construction
materials and labor costs in the USSR vary according to price zones; and
(4) the ownership of housing: this causes the most important variation
in housing construction costs in the USSR. Private housing generally
is built by the owner, whose only monetary outlay is for materials.
Even including an allowance for labor, the cost per square meter of pri-
vate housing construction is about one-third the cost of state housing
construction. The relative simplicity of private dwellings and the
absence of profit and overhead in private building account for the
difference. State housing is of higher quality but, as stated above, it
also bears an overhead cost of about 20 percent and profits of the builder.
The quality of housing built by industrial ministries for their employees
varies in direct relation to the desire of the government to retain an
efficient and skilled labor force in a particular industry. Municipal
housing construction invariably is of poorer quality than industrial
housing,conetruction, in which better materials and more skilled labor
are used. 314 The extent of variation in cost of state housing con-
struction can be seen by examining the 1941 plan. The cost per square
meter ranges from 300 rubles for the Ministry of Trade to 2,250 rubles
for the State Bank. Important ministries such as aircraft, munitions,
and the extractive industries received larger allocations per square
meter as well as larger total allocations than the less important
ministries. 315
A general cost average, not the most accurate however, can be esti-
mated by comparing total capital investment expenditures on housing
with the total amount of state housing space built in that period. The
time lag between ruble expenditures and completion of housing should not
seriously affect the general average.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
The following data on the cost of state housing per square meter
for selected periods are obtained by dividing total expenditures on
state construction by total state-built living space.
Cost of State Housing per Square Meter of Living Space
Selected Periods, 1924-55
1924-28
1929-32
1933-37
1938-41
1940 replacement cost (RSFSR)
1946-50 Plan (1945 rubles)
1946-50 actual (1950 rubles ~)
1951-55 actual (1950 rubles -~*-)
127.6
169.9
403.9
632.8
501.0 316
584.0
1,011.0
1,514.0
For state construction in 1956 the average cost per square meter
of living space of state housing construction is planned at 1,500
rubles, although the actual cost is running closer to 1,800 rubles
(material prices and norms of 1956).x- 318/ The goal and designs
for the Sixth Five Year Plan specify a brick 2-story house with con-
crete floor and all facilities at 1,200 rubles per square meter. 319
The following tabulation, giving data on the average cost of housing
construction in Moscow, probably presents an accurate picture of costs
in large cities. 320
~ See Tables 4 and 6, pp. 31 and 36, respectively, above.
-x-x- These averages are stated in terms of estimate prices: The cost per
square meter was lower in the Fourth Five Year Plan because of in-
clusion of reconstruction as well as new construction.
A number of conflicting statements have been seen regarding the
average cost of state housing construction. For example, in Stroitel'-
naya gazeta, 317 it was stated in January 1956 that the average cost
per square meter was then 2,350 rubles. Most statements seen have
given a range between 1,500 and 2,000 rubles.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
There are no known data on the cost per square meter of private
urban construction. A technique for determining the average cost is
presented below, which indicates a cost per square meter of living space
of approximately 600 rubles for postwar years. In the notes to Table 2
it is indicated that about half of private urban building utilizes state
loans. Figures are available each year for the total amount of loans and
the total housing built which utilizes loans. Terms of borrowing specify
that the state will provide 50 to 70 percent of the total cost of the
house, the owner providing the remainder in the form of cash or his own
labor. 321 Because some builders do not borrow the maximum allowed, 50
percent of the cost is assumed to be covered by loans and 50 percent by
own labor. An estimate of cost per square meter is found by doubling
figures announced each year for total loans for private construction a~ri
dividing by the amount of housing built with these loans.`
1946-50
595
1951
420
1952
396
1984
662
1955
607
For rural housing an average cost per dwelling of 10,000 to 12,000
rubles (including labor) is suggested -- approximately 300 rubles per
square meter of total space.
~ For data on space built with the aid of state loans, see p. 24, above.
For data on total .loans, see Table 4, p. 30, above. Figures for 1951
and 1952 were obtained by doubling the figures presented by Yunik for the
amount of loans per square meter of living space built. 322 Estimates
derived from loan figures presented in Table 4 are lower and are probably
incorrect.
-73-
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141A000800070002-3
 I Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/04/10
CIA-R DP79R01141 A000800070002-3