NYC Facades

View to the northwest

See a post on my personal blog for more on this (and why I care about it).

View to the southwest

View from Water Street of Coenties slip.

The building's least attractive side, from the south

The steel cross-bracing is common, although occasionally missing. Why is that?

Edit: An anonymous source gave the following answer to the “why” above.

Regarding the cross-beams at the back of the Park Row building, and your question as to why some buildings don’t have them: its all a question of bulk and engineering. Obviously the cross-beams create a “box” while still allowing an air shaft for more windows: this serves both the engineering and commercial needs.

All buildings must handle the horizontal load generated by a maximum value of wind stress, which becomes much greater as the height increases. Pre-war buildings used steel behind the brick or stone facade, but probably still relied on the sheer weight of the masonry component. My guess is that the tools used to calculate those stresses were not terribly sophisticated, so out of an excess of caution they added cross-beams. Take a look at the back side of the Woolworth building: it too has them.

By contrast, the Twin Towers were a marvel of engineering precisely because they defied the wind: two straight towers, 110 stories, with no setbacks and no visible bracing beams (either externally or internally). The trick was to closely space the exterior columns, so that they acted like tubes, to handle both vertical and horizontal loads. This solved the dual load problem for tall buildings in a very elegant fashion, because it allowed for lightweight floors with no internal columns except for the central core.

You might find it interesting to research the design philosophy of the architect (Minoro Yamasaki) and his earlier buildings–much like Roebling, he first tried out his signature concept out of town. Say what you may about why these design decisions contributed to the buildings’ collapse on 9/11; but at the time they were built, they represented a very dramatic and novel way to solve the problem. By contrast, the Hancock Tower in Chicago relies on giant exterior cross beams.

According to wikipedia, this was the tallest office building in the world for 9 years at the turn of the century. I also recommend the contemporary perspectives quoted on wikipedia; some of them are rather funny.

Tacky

I just wanted to include this for completeness. The most amazing thing may be how crowded it was (I couldn’t get a decent picture). This is from 2005.

Top cornice on the building

This is a little pipsqueak of a building flanked by much larger ones on 57 street with some great details (and apparently it dates to the 1890s). It makes me wonder – in particular on major thoroughfares, such as 57 street – why squat little buildings exist when much larger ones surround them. I am told it is partly a function of the way in which leasing works in New York; someone might lease the land for 100 years, which means improvements made at the end of the lease probably will not benefit the leaseholder, who is also the person who will build the building.

Was the building expanded on one side only? (Note: the curving facade is an artifact of the panorama stitching)

I like how The Home Depot fits with the building style. Look at the seal! The "S" is for "Stern" -- see below.

Some buildings I see details I like a lot, and some I am blown away by. This was the latter. It just had such great detail and scale. The facade was finished the entire height, and it even had a mystery: why is there a modern extension on the eastern side that does not match that on the western? Was there a patio there? Was it destroyed in an accident and rebuilt in a time without style?

EDIT: New York Architecture has a page about this building (with a slightly different address?). As the author says on that site about the extension,

W.M. Schickel’s typically 19th century addition tripled the dimensions of the original structure on the eastern portion of the site. The tall central section of this addition animates the long and delicately detailed facade. The company’s monogram is located above a central arch.

I do think Home Depot does a great job here with respecting the building (although they could have done with less orange). See also 28 West 23rd.

From left: The Knickerbocker Trust Company in 1904; in 1952, after its 1921 enlargement; and as it looks today.

From an article in the real estate section of the New York Times, March 5, 2009. Wikipedia also has an article on the building (there is a great period advertisement linked from there as well).

The article gives a history of the bulding, but it is hard to imagine from the building’s appearance today — not a trace of original facade remainds — what was there to begin with. Look inside the article also for a picture of original interior.

Pitched roof, rounded windows

This building has some very interesting featurse. Of course, the pitched roof and dormer windows are quite unusual. I also find the shape of the arch on the top floor middle window to be quite unique; normally the arches I see are extremely vertical or rounded, but not so oblong.